mm® mi ■i » Jens V \* i * /A OF THE UNIVERSITY OF f V OF UNIVE ROMAN SCULPTURE / FRONTISPIECE .— POBTRAIT OF CMS u: Aluaeo Barracco ROMAN SCULPTURE FROM AUGUSTUS TO CONSTANTINE BY Mrs. ARTHUR STRONG, LL.D. ASSOCIATE OF THE BRITISH SCHOOL AT ROME; CORRESPONDING MEMBER OF THE GERMAN IMPERIAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE LONDON: DUCKWORTH AND CO. NEW YORK : CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS 1907 All rights reserved or- Printtd by Ballantvne A* Co. Limited Tavistock Street, London PREFACE Ha in se la luce d'un astro Non i suoi cieli irraggia soli ma il mondo Roma. Gabriele d'Annunzio. These beautiful lines from the Elegie Romane precisely illustrate the point of view I wish to bring forward in regard to the sculpture produced in the Roman world during the three centuries and a half that extend from the close of the Republic to Constantine — from the rise and establishment of the Imperial idea to the victory of Christianity. I have myself long ceased to look upon Rome as the sole or exclusive seat of artistic produc- tion, or even of artistic influence, during that period, but I regard her as the main centre whence radiated the ideas which animated or refashioned art throughout the contemporary civilized world. I venture to deplore, with Riegl, the materialistic distrust of all spiritual factors, which obtains in the modern science of archae- ology.* Not that I would advocate a return to a pre- scientific interest in subjects alone, or to a Ruskinian toleration of bad and poor works of art, for the sake of subjects that appeal to our fancy. But the measure of * " Spatromische Kunstindustrie," p. 107. 33649S vi PREFACE artistic achievement is in proportion to its success in expressing the thoughts and themes which inspire it. This little book, accordingly, attempts to indicate the nature of the impulse which takes its flight from Rome, though I have barely discussed (as I would in a more thorough-going or ambitious work) the local colouring of art in the different countries under Roman sway. During a recent visit to Athens, for instance, I became convinced that a much-needed book could be written on '* Graeco-Roman art " in the true sense of the word : that is, on Roman artistic ideas working through a more distinctly Greek medium than was the case else- where. Yet in the present book I have scarcely tried to differentiate even between the two broad classes (fairly easy to define) of sarcophagi executed in Greece and of those executed in Rome or in Italy. My present pur- pose being to stimulate amongst students interest for a period forgotten and neglected, I have thought it sufficient to point to the leading characteristics which envelop and dominate art wherever the Roman spirit penetrated. The following chapters are based upon a series of lectures delivered at different times during the last seven years. When 1 first lectured on Roman sculpture in May 1900, it was mainly in the form of a running commen- tary on the aesthetic ideas put forward by Wickhoff in the book on Roman art which I was then translating. To some extent this framework is now retained, in spite of the many additions and alterations which new matter and new points of view have forced upon me. I regret PREFACE vii that I have not had time to recast the book more com- pletely, and that it must perforce exhibit the faults peculiar to popular lectures — a loosely compacted and doubtless didactic style, with a tendency to parenthetical remarks. In compensation, it may be that some looseness of structure is not ill adapted to a subject which, though abundantly aired in monographs, has not yet been systematized. Many, indeed, think the time is not yet ripe for a book on Roman art, and that a subject which lends itself to conflicting views is among those " unsafe w to bring before students. I venture to think that in its freshness lies one of its many charms. The student is invited to weigh conclusions and to help in piecing together the body of truth, instead of listening in passive acquiescence to time-honoured and ready-made judgments, not, after all, necessarily true because they have been sententiously uttered ex cathedra for one hundred years, or maybe one thousand. " We reverence grey-headed doctrine, though feeble, decrepit, and within a step of dust 1 ' Yet I write this not without envy of the many scholars who dedicate their learning and trained powers of expression and exposition to the task of reasserting the supremacy of Greece — of proclaiming her achieve- ment in the formative arts, unequalled and unapproach- able, overshadowing all else. The outsider, struggling with accumulations of new material and facts not yet arranged, described, if at all, mainly in foreign tongues, may well admire and envy the comfortable pronounce- ments which, put in a form just sufficiently novel to viii PREFACE arrest attention, are sure of the welcome readily accorded to traditional truisms. I publish this book in full consciousness of its short- comings, and, moreover, when I have little time for the special studies it entails. But I do so because I see no immediate prospect of any other work on Roman sculpture that will advocate the solidarity of artistic endeavour, or will discuss Roman art, as I have tried to discuss it, in view not only of its intrinsic merits, but of the special place it occupies at the psychological moment when the Antique passes from the service of the Pagan State into that of Christianity. The scattered and fragmentary nature of the material, the inadequate bibliographical equipment anywhere outside the great archaeological libraries of Berlin and of the German Institute in Rome, have led me to give fuller footnotes and far more illustrations than is usual in the books of this series. But even some hundred and seventy illustrations scarcely suffice to call up an image as yet so unfamiliar as that of Roman sculpture. So I have described, from end to end, at the risk of being tedious, the sculptures of monuments like the Ara Paris and the column of Trajan. The popular prejudice against Roman art is largely rooted in ignorance of its most obvious manifestations. Much could be done by more accessible and cheaper reproduction, and it is a reproach which our teaching world should aim at effacing that the reliefs of the Trajanic column, for in- stance^ — the delightful picture chronicle which should PREFACE ix be in the hands of every schoolboy — are only known from two costly foreign publications, entirely outside the reach of schools or even of ordinary libraries. Pre- cisely as I revise these lines comes the great news from Rome that Commendatore Boni has had the whole series of sculptures of the Trajanic column photographed for the first time, from the original. This noble achievement marks an era in the study of Roman art. Scarcely less important is the removal to the Museo delle Terme of all the fragments of the Ara Paris discovered, in 1903, under the Palazzo Fiano. This is doubtless an omen that the Italian Government intend to collect at the Terme all the fragments of the Ara scattered in the Museums over which they have control. Were friendly museums to follow suit, we might hope to see in the Terme, at no very distant date, an Augustan altar vieing in beauty and interest with the famous Pergamene altar at Berlin. I have to thank Professor Eugen Petersen, so often quoted in the following pages, for extending to me by correspondence, and by the loan of valuable photographs, the help he freely gave to me in Rome, as to the many English students privileged to use the library of the German Institute ; to Emanuel Loewy, Professor in the University of Rome, and to Signor G. Rizzo, Vice-Director of the Museo delle Terme, for obtain- ing for me photographs of the newly-discovered fragments of the Ara Paris, and for permission to republish them here; to Senator Baron Giovanni Barracco for the gift of beautiful photographs, and the x PREFACE permission to publish for the first time certain Roman portraits in his unique Museum ; to Mr. G. F. Hill, of the British Museum, for guidance in selecting the coins of Emperors given in the chapter on portraiture. For the rest, I will not follow a favourite practice and fill this Preface with a list of names which might serve to shed a borrowed lustre about my work, rather than to evince a student's gratitude, but shall acknowledge, each in its place, the many friendly acts which scholars and workers of every degree so readily show to one another all the world over. Could I claim for this book the merit I once hoped it might possess, I should have liked to dedicate it to the Memory of the First Editor of this Series. He understood, as no one else I have ever known or heard of — as only one or two are beginning to understand it now — that there is historical continuity in art as in all else, and that no one* point can be adequately grasped save in relation to the whole. Like Renan, he admitted that history has its sad days, but none that are sterile or void of interest. Roman art, especially in its later phases, attracted him, for he knew that in every branch of history the great lessons are to be learnt from periods of transition. . . . But this book, the outcome of many reflections made in common, remains without the revision which alone, in my eyes, could have given it real value. EUGENIE STRONG. (n& SELLERS.) The Library, Chatsworth. April 1907. CONTENTS Chronological Table Introduction I. The Augustan Age II. Augustan Decoration III. Augustus to Nero IV. The Flavian Age V. Flavian Relief VI. The Principate of Trajan (98-117 a.d.) VII. The Column of Trajan (113 a.d.) VIII. The Trajan Column (continued) — The Second War ...... IX. The Principate of Trajan (continued) (98-117 a.d.) X. Principate of Hadrian (1 17-138 a.d.) XI. Hadrianic Sarcophagi .... XII. The Antonine Period .... XIII. Severus to Diocletian XIV. The Principate of Constantine (306-337) PAGK xviii-xix 1 25 59 80 102 123 150 166 186 214 232 254 268 297 328 xii CONTENTS CHAP. PAGE XV. Roman Portraiture from Augustus to constantine 347 Appendix 387 Index 397 ERRATA P. 30, n. 1. 2, for "Capitol" read " Conservators " Plate 80, for " Lucillus " read " Lucilius." ERRATA Page 309, line 5 from foot, for " cases " read " traces " Page 360, la3t liae, for " Younger Agrippina " read " Elder Agrippina " Page 401, col. 1, line 3, for "Esquiline" read "Quirinal" Plate XXVIII is after Monuments Plot Plate XXXI is after Furtwangler, Antike Gemmeit 2i. Altar with Plane Leaves. Terme ... 68 22. Silver Cup with Skeletons. Louvre . . .72 23. Altar of " Vicomagistri." Conservatori . 74 24. "Lar" from Altar of "Vicomagistri." Conservatori 75 xii CONTENTS CHAP. PAGE XV. Roman Portraiture from Augustus to CONSTANTINE 347 Appendix 387 ILLUSTRATIONS TO FACE PAGE i . Portrait of Caesar. Museo Barracco . Frontispiece 2. Augustus (the Blacas Cameo). British Museum . i 3. The Augustus of Prima Porta. Vatican . . 25 4. Dying Adonis. Museo Gregoriano . . 31 5. Sacrificial Scene. Louvre 34 6. Poseidon and Amphitrite. Glyptotkek, Munich . 36 7. The Actian Apollo. Priv. Coll., Munich . 38 8. Two reliefs from Ara Pacts. Villa Medici and Uffisi 42 9. Two reliefs from Ara Pacis. Villa Medici and Terme 45 10. Fragments of relief from Ara Pacis. \ Villa Medici and Terme . .\ between 46 & 47 11. Two reliefs from Ara Pacis. Uffizi .J 12. Two reliefs from Ara Pacis. Vatican and Uffizi . 50 13. Fragments of relief from Ara Pacis. Uffizi and Louvre ....... 52 ♦ 53 54 Villa 56-62 63 • 64 . 68 . 72 74 14. The " Senatus " (Ara Pacis). Terme . 15. Flamines from Ara Pacis. Terme 16-18. Decorative sculptures from Ara Pacis. Medici and Terme .... 19. Altar with Swans. Aries . 20. Lower frieze of Ara Pacis. Terme 21. Altar with Plane Leaves. Terme 22. Silver Cup with Skeletons. Louvre . 23. Altar of " Vicomagistri." Conservatori 24. "Lar" from Altar of "Vicomagistri." Conservatori 75 XIV ILLUSTRATIONS Coll. Ed. de de France. Bibliotkeque Lateran . Terme Rome 25. Altar of Amemptus. Louvre 26. Detail from Fountain. Vienna . 27-29. Two Cups from Bosco Reale Rothschild, Paris . . . . . 82- / The " Gemma Augustea." Vienna \ 3 '\ Two Augustan Gems. Devonshire House) 31* Le Grand Camee Nationale 32. Relief from Cervetri. 33. Portrait of Vespasian. 34. Panels from Arch of Titus. 35. The " Rose Pillar." Lateran 36. Sculptured Ornament. Roman Forum 37. Sculptured Pilaster. Crypt of St. Peters 38. Flavian Altar. Vatican 39. Flavian Altar. Lateran 4o\ Eight circular reliefs from Arch of Constantine 41/ Rome ..... between 136 & 42. Flavian Portrait. Vatican . . . 43. Two reliefs. Villa Medici . 44. Sacrifice of a Bull. Uffisi . 45. Reliefs from Balustrade of Rostra. Forum 46. Trajanic Battle. Print by Marc Antonio 47^Trajanic Frieze from Arch of Constantine 48J Rome between 160 49. Roman Soldier and Dacian. Louvre . co. Dacian Swimming the Danube. Villa Medici 51-62. Reliefs of Trajan Column. Rome. . 170-205 63-66. Sculptures of Arch of Trajan. Benevento 216-221 67. Head of Mars. Museo Barracco Barbarian Woman. Florence Eagle and Wreath. SS. Aposloli Hadrianic relief. Chatsworth Three Hadrianic reliefs. Conservators Hadrian passing the Temple of Venus and Roma Terme and Lateran .... 74. Altar from Ostia. Terme , , , 240 68. 69. 70. 72. 73> 77 So 86 83 90 96 102 108 124 126 127 128 I3 1 137 140 142 144 152 156 161 164 165 227 229 230 235 237 238 242 ILLUSTRATIONS xv TO FACE LATE 1'AGE 75. Provinces from Temple of Neptune. Conser- vaton 246 76. Head of the Hadrianic Dionysos. Terme . 248 77. The Antinous Mondragone. Louvre . .250 78. Sarcophagus with Vengeance of Orestes. Lateran 256 79. Sarcophagus with Slaughter of Niobids. JMeran 258 80. Octagonal Ash Chest. Capitol. . . .266 81. Antonine relief. Palazzo Rondanini . . .268 82. The Antonine Basis. Vatican . 270 83-89. Reliefs from Column of Marcus Aurelius. Rome 276-287 90-92. Eleven reliefs from a Monument of Marcus Aurelius. Rome 291-294 93. Relief with Temple of Quirinus (detail). Terme 302 94. The Cone of Emesa. Forum .... 308 95. Mithraic relief. Carlsruhe . . . .310 96. Altar to Sol Sanctissimus. Capitol . . .312 97. Altar of Scipio Orfitus. Capitol . . .314 98. Sarcophagus with Legend of Achilles. Capitol 316 99. Sarcophagus with Achilles and Amazons. Vatican . . . . . . .320 100. Sarcophagus with Battle Scene. Terme . .321 101. " Marcus Curtius " (relief). Conservatori . . 324 102. The Arch of Constantine. Rome . . . 328 103. Sculptures from Arch of Constantine. Rome . 323 104. Sculptures from Arch of Constantine. Rome . 333 105. The Barberini Ivory. Louvre .... 344 106. Portrait of Old Man. Vatican . . . .350 107. 108. Portrait of Boy. Museo Barracco . 354,356 109. Julio- Claudian Portrait. Museo Barracco . 358 no. Plate of Coins. British Museum . . . 360 in. Head of a Girl. Terme 361 112. The Shoemaker. Conservatori. . . . 362 113. Flavian portrait. British Museum . . . 364 114. Portraits from Tomb of Haterii. Lateran . 365 xvi ILLUSTRATIONS PLATE 115. Group of Lady and her Daughter. Chatt worth ....... 116. Flavian old Lady. Terme 117. Two Boys of Trajanic Period. Vatican . 118. Portrait of young Girl. Terme 119. The Elder Faustina. Chatsworth 120. Plate of Coins. British Museum T2i. Commodus as Hercules. Conservatori 122. Antonine portrait. Athens 123. Portrait of Caracallus. Berlin. 124. Portrait of Pupienus. Vatican 125. Portrait of Philip the Arabian. Vatican . 126. Plate of Coins. British Museum 127. Head of an old Man. Capitol 128. Portrait of Third Century. Chatsworth . 129. Three Statues of Fourth Century. Conservatori and Terme ...... 130. Constantine the Great. Conservatori 366 367 37o 37i 372 373 374 376 377 378 379 380 382 383 384 386 * # * Plates 51, 52, 55, 56, 57, 60, and 61 are reproduced, by per- mission of Messrs. G. Reimer of Berlin, after Cichorius, die Trajans- saiile. Plates 85, 86 and 88 are reproduced, by permission of Messrs. Bruckmann, of Munich, after Petersen and von Domaszewski, die Marcussaiile. By permission of the same firm Plates 6 and 7 are reproduced from Arndt-Brunn-Bruckmann, Denkmaler Griechischer und Rdmischer Sculpiur, and Plate 127 after Arndt's Griechische und Romische Portrats. Every effort has been made to acknowledge— in the text and at the foot of the plates — the sources of the illustrations, but the author and the publishers will be glad to receive notice of any inadvertent omission. CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE < U 3 c o c X w e r- < < % c u e3 a 2. fl a o p ^•2 cs S 9 1 a € II a .2 k S .© 00 03 P 1 "3 ? 02 P M 9 > H go B 1 3 o W V. P to .2 era << IT 02 5 I LtiXANDKR=0 a Mamaea) s the Thracian ■— i B CP 1 I H II i— i 0Q 02 Pi MS t i- i o 9 O +3 CO O w so .2 a _ B CD E & 02 P 1 to : < ; to c pq ; w B B 4 s gg 1 a P P. 1-3 «M < o ■< o 2b3§ Sis* to < 3 9 M to — 02 02 to to - £ 5 to Hi s 02 P (U M 3 02 & to 4> 9 02 <5 s OO &. X N iy> oo « a i_ ro N r*5 <^ "T * VO LO N N N N 7 7 N N ts N CO 1 r>. ■~c 00 N >r) M 00 * 9 hL 0> M n m M CO T * 1<~, N N M N N N N N N N N ct Jh .5 0) 2 D N CJ 0) ^5 I 9 I •-3 CJ Ul PLATE If To f itci p. l AUGUSTUS The filacai Cameo lirithlt Mwtenm INTRODUCTION Neglect of Roman Art by Modern Archaeologists — The Revival — Its Leaders : Wickhoff, Riegl, and Strzygowski — Roman Archaeology in Germany, France, Italy, and England — The British School at Rome Roman art is only now, in the twentieth century, gradually taking a distinctive place as a subject of aesthetic study. The very term is still something of an anomaly to the ordinary educated public. With all their admiration for the Romans as great administrators, great soldiers, and even great writers, most people now- adays conceive of the Romans as aliens within the sphere of the formative arts, confining achievement there to imitation, or at most to adaptation, of Greek models. The Romans themselves may be partially responsible for this judgment, for we are apt to take people at their own valuation ; and has not the greatest of Roman poets in a famous and familiar passage, disclaimed artistic fame for his countrymen ? Excudent alii spirantia mollius aera Tu regere imperio populos, Romane, memento. Moreover, the great Latin writers — Cicero, Petronius, and Pliny amongst them — indulging in that rhetorical %■ SOMAN SCULPTURE laudatio temporis acti which is so characteristic of Roman literature, lament the decay of art in their time, and praise past achievement at the expense of present en- deavour. So we echo their j udgment, and blame Roman art because it is not Greek, as in turn we are apt to criticise modern art for lacking the antique quality. This attitude, still so prevalent, is characteristic of the nineteenth century, and of the last three, rather than of earlier, generations. Indeed, many may think it paradoxical to speak of Roman art as only now coming to its own, and will conceive the subject as one out of date rather than novel, an antiquated and somewhat barbarian taste of our forefathers, who filled collections with statues — or compiled volumes of engravings after monuments — which we, in our fastidious search for the Greek original, pass by with weary indifference. This taste of our forefathers was, however, no love for Roman art as such, still less an appreciative sense of its individual quality, but rather an uncritical esteem for " the Antique," without distinction of Greek and Roman. The tendency was to see all ancient sculpture as of equal merit, worthy of the praise traditionally accorded to the work of Pheidias or Praxiteles. In the eighteenth century, that " golden age of classic dilettantism," as Michaelis * happily calls it, when the English flocked to Italy, and Rome was cosmopolitan as now, no man of rank and fashion could think of re- turning from the Grand Tour, or from a sojourn in the Eternal City, without some spoil of ancient art to * "Ancient Marbles in Great Britain," ii. INTRODUCTION 3 adorn his English home. The fashion spread far beyond the few men of taste who led it, and purchasers were often satisfied not only with any genuine antique, whether Greek or Roman, original or replica, but also with many a statue — so it had but head and arms — whose chief provenance was the restorer's studio or antiquity-dealer's workshop. The large preponderance of Roman work among the antiques brought to England during this period is the result of no considered preference, but of the accidental fact that the search — contrasting in this with the earlier exploring activity of the seventeenth century, which could furnish collections like the Arundel with marbles from Greece* — was carried on almost exclusively in the actual soil, or in the near vicinity of Rome. In so far as his attitude is based on more discernment, the modern connoisseur is justified in holding it an advance. Another class of by- gone enthusiasm, however, has to be taken more seriously into account. There are deliberate opinions of artists and critics for which it is not so easy to justify our scorn. To take the most familiar of Roman monu- ments, the Trajan column alone, Bernini — at once sculptor, architect, and historian of art — used to say of its reliefs that they were the source whence all the great men had derived the force and grandeur of their draw- ing. And he records that Michelangelo, on first seeing the Danae of Titian, exclaimed that had the Venetians only known how to draw, no one would look at the works of the Roman school ; but that, on the other hand, * Michaelis, ib. p. 9 ff. 4 ROMAN SCULPTURE it was only at Rome they had such a model as the Trajan column.* Raphael and his pupils studied the column repeatedly, and sketched its reliefs. Moreover, prints of these reliefs, such as those executed by Santi Bartoli, show how well the Renaissance understood not only their antiquarian value, but their aesthetic intention. At the beginning of last century, Henri Beyle, better known as Stendhal, whose penetrative powers of ob- servation give his criticism a far higher value than usually attaches to the rhetorical appreciations still in fashion in 1820, asserts in his " Promenades dans Rome 11 that only the bas-reliefs of the Elgin marbles in London seem to him superior to those of the Trajan column ; he noticed in particular the attachments of the limbs as being treated a in a grandiose manner almost worthy of Pheidias." f Yet even those archaeologists who have been most deeply interested in the reliefs as illustrative of history, comment severely on the "shocking disproportion and * " Le Cavalier a dit que c'avait ete la source d'ou tous les grands horames avaient tire" la force et la grandeur de leur dessin. II a repete ce qu'avait dit Michel-Ange quand il vit la Danae du Titien que si ces hommes la (parlant des Venitiens) eussent su dessiner, Ton ne [regarderait pas leurs ouvrages a eux, mais aussi qu'il n'y avait qu'a Rome oil il y eut une colonne Trajane." — Ludovic Lalanne, "Journal du Voyage du Cavalier Bernin en France," par M. de Chantelou, publie* d'apres e manuscrit de l'lnstitut, Paris, 1 885. The passage is quoted by S. Reinach, ' ' La Colonne Trajane, ' * 1886, p. 20. f Vol. ii. p. 61 (ed. of 1898). Stendhal himself gives an excel- lent rule for artistic criticism : " II faut d'abord ^carter toutes les phrases vides de sens emprunt^esa Platon, a Kant, et a leur ecole," i. p. 241. INTRODUCTION 5 defective perspective in landscape and architecture," and lament the distance that separates the Trajanic reliefs " from the grand style of Greek bas-relief.' 1 * The ad- miration of Raphael and Michelangelo they hold due to the fact " that they did not yet know the Parthenon and the freer light of Attic art." Are we really to believe that because the light of Greece was hid, Raphael and Michelangelo were blind ? Or, if not, how can it be explained that, apart from the antiquaries who have exploited the remains of Roman art for purposes of illustration, three generations have claimed the right to neglect and to condemn works that once inspired the enthusiasm of the greatest masters of the Renaissance ? In part, at any rate, the explanation is afforded by the course of modern archaeological study and discovery. To the last hundred years was reserved the actual disclosure of the art treasures of Greece — the realisation that is of the dream of centuries. It is little wonder if the effect has been dazzling rather than illuminating,andif archaeo- logists, always inept to see two beauties at once, have found all dark outside the circle upon which their eyes were fixed. A brief retrospect of events will make this readily intelligible. The men of the Renaissance, however impressed with the beauty of extant monuments, were already haunted by the image of a more perfect perished beauty whose * S. Reinach, "La Colonne Trajane," p. 36. This otherwise admirable little book was, however, written twenty years ago. There is less excuse for the violent and perverse condemnation of the art of the Trajan column in Courbaud, " Le Bas Relief Romain a Representations Historiques " (Paris, 1899), p. 162. 6 ROMAN SCULPTURE home was Greece. In the eighteenth century, Winckel- mann, the father of the^modern science of archaeology as distinguished from the learned antiquarianism of the humanists, gave clearer form to this image, by divining that Greek originals lay behind those countless statues of gods or of idealised mortals made by Greek and Roman craftsmen for the Roman market. In his " History of Ancient Art," of which the first edition appeared in 1764, Winckelmann gave to the study of the antique an impulse along a line which it has never wholly deserted ; his theory of the "beautiful " as mani- fested even in these Graeco-Roman copies to which his imagination often added too freely the missing artistic beauty, still colours our modern phraseology when we speak of ancient art. But not even Winckelmann lived Lo enter the promised land. He was murdered, in 1768, nearly half a century before the purchase of the marbles of the Parthenon, by the British Museum in 1816, revealed to modern Europe the flower of Greek sculpture. Four years previously, in 1812, the marbles from the Temple of Athena at ^Egina had been pur- chased by the Crown Prince Ludwig of Bavaria. Thus in less than five years the two most significant periods of Hellenic art — that of the fifth century, and the one immediately preceding — were rediscovered, and the second epoch in the era of modern archaeology was initiated. From this time continuous excavation and travel have led not only to the recovery of numerous original works of Greek art, but also of the topographi- cal and architectural features of a number of sites in INTRODUCTION 7 Greece proper, in the Hellenized countries of Asia Minor, and of Southern Italy and Sicily. Not only so, but as the image of Greece rose behind that of Rome, so again, hitherto unknown, or but vaguely surmised, pre-Hellenic civilisations were revealed behind the Greece of history. The Troad, Mycenae, Athens her- self, and more lately Crete and Cyprus, have disclosed the marvels of their legend-enfolded dawn. The magnificence of this field of Hellenic archaeology, with the added charm of being virgin soil, has naturally attracted the best energies of those who study the ancient classical world, and the reconstruction of the humblest Hellenic monument has come to seem of greater value than whole buildings like the Trajan column or the Roman triumphal arches. Rome as an art centre has thus been left to local antiqua- rianism ; at the most were its historical reliefs, and above all its portrait busts, of which no one has ever disputed the realistic merits, used as historical illustrations. Moreover, when students of ancient art did turn to Rome, it was necessarily in order to discredit it, since all that attracted them there were the copies which they prized as echoes of Greek statues, but which they naturally found inferior to the marbles of the Parthenon or of the temples at Olympia. Meanwhile those monuments whereon Roman artists had solved problems other than those which had occupied the Greeks were neglected as works of art, though they form most precious links in the long history of aesthetic endeavour. When compelled to admit artistic achieve- 8 ROMAN SCULPTURE merit on the part of Roman artists, we lightly dismissed it as an imitation of the Greek — in fact, in so far as the modern archaeologist sees art at all in Roman times, he considers it as the decadent anti -climax to the art of Greece. In a recent book on Rome by a living authority we read that " what remains of the artistic decoration of the Forum of Nerva, of the balustrades, of the triumphal arches and columns, corresponds in the main to the Hellenistic art of which the most salient example is to be found in the sculptures from Perga- mon. r> * Such statements require to be qualified, and I hope to show that Roman art, whatever its origins, eventually developed a profoundly original character. Now that the field of Greece has been so abundantly surveyed, it should without losing its brilliancy or pres- tige take its place in a larger whole. It is time for the eye of the critic to relax its concentrated gaze and enlarge its outlook. Our determination to condemn the Trajan and Aurelian columns because they resemble neither the Parthenon nor the sculptures of Olympia recalls the words with which Goethe rebuked the Germans of his day for their indifference to Gothic: " It seems as if the Genius of the ancients, arising from his grave, had cast ours into captivity." f Our English critic, Bisriop Hurd, was attacking similar artistic prejudices when he wrote : "If you judge Gothic architecture by Grecian rules, * E. Petersen, " Vom alten Rom," 3rd ed., 1904, p. 183. f u Hat nicht der seinem Grab entsteigende Genius der Alten, den deinen gefesselt, Welscher ! " Goethe, ** Deutsche Baukunst," in the little volume " Von Deutscher Art und Kunst," by Moser, Herder and Goethe, printed anonymously in 1773. INTRODUCTION 9 you find nothing but deformity, but when you examine it by its own. the result is quite different." * But the attitude of the modern classical scholar and archaeologist is even worse. For he refuses to consider development, which is life, and while preaching that Roman art is only an imitation of the Greek, yet refuses it merit because it departs from " Grecian rules " derived from arbitrary preference for one special period of Greek art Such " orthodox unfairness " is as pernicious to progress in the study of art as in that of literature.f Without being disloyal to the age of Pericles, there are yet times when it is well to be able to say, in the same spirit as Dryden, when he pleaded for the origin- ality of the Roman Satire, " I have at length disengaged myself from these antiquities of Greece." It is obvious that this one-sided attitude, which claims perfection for the art of Greece and denies even merit to that of Rome, has been fostered in England by the narrow curriculum of the older universities, where the word " classical " is restricted to a tithe of the remains of classical antiquity, and subjects of study are called dangerous or unprofitable which have not yet been included among the " subjects * ■■ Letters on Chivalry and Romance," Dublin 1762, Letter viii., p. 36. f See the eloquent protest made by Von Wilamowitz in " Die Griechische und Lateinische Literatur und Sprache" (part vii. of Kultur der Gegenwarl) against the one-sided view of classical Greek literature induced by the exclusive reading of the " Schul- autoren." Orthodox unfairness is Mr. Percy Ure's excellent para- phrase of Wilamowitz's ** Umgekehrte Ungerechtigkeit " (op. cit. p. 4), see Classical Review, vol. xx, 1906, p. 401. io ROMAN SCULPTURE of examination." Such a scheme is not likely to find a place for Roman art, which only becomes of paramount importance in the historic chain in the second century after Christ — that is, some hundred years after the period which to the Oxford and Cambridge " don " marks the utmost limit to which classical studies may be carried with advantage. Abroad, however, the interest of the subject — which was at no time as completely eclipsed as here — has of late years received ample vindication at the hands of three leading writers upon art. Foremost is a Viennese scholar, Professor Wickhoff, who, in the epoch-making Preface to his publication of the miniatures of the Book of Genesis in Vienna,* applied to the Antique the same canons and methods of criticism that are current for later and modern periods, and did not hesitate to compare the " illusionism " of the sculptures of the Arch of Titus to the " impressionism " of Velasquez. He established the individuality and independence of Roman imperial art, and examined its relation to the art of Greece proper, to later Hellenism, to native Italian and Etruscan effort, and to Mediaeval art. We owe it to him that the imperial art of Rome can no longer be dismissed as an insignificant and imitative episode, dependent during four centuries of active * "Die Wiener Genesis," herausgegeben von Wilhelm, Ritter von Hiirtel, und Franz Wickhoff (Jahrbuch der Kunstsammlungen des A llerhochsten Kaiser Aauses,) Vienna, 1895. The English trans- ation, under the title u Roman Art," appeared in 1900. INTRODUCTION n production upon Pergamene models executed some two hundred years before the foundation of the Empire. Even if some of his results have to be modified, his analysis and appreciation of the actual phenomena before our eyes are among the most precious and vital pages contributed to art criticism at the end of last century. Wickhoff repeatedly appealed to the " Stilfragen " of Alois Riegl (1893) — a remarkable study of antique ornament, in which the author had already indicated that later Roman architecture and decoration mani- fested, not solely decadence, but in a certain measure, distinct progress " along the ascending line." * Close and continued observation of the artistic evidence enabled Riegl to bring forth his views authoritatively in his great work on late Roman industrial art in Austria-Hungary, of which the first volume was pub- lished in 1 90 2. "I" He followed the example set by Wickhoff in the " Wiener Genesis " and devoted his Preface to a difficult but illuminating analysis of the principles which govern the growth of the antique from ancient Egypt to Christian times. With great freshness and originality Riegl not only maintained the * Alois Riegl, " Stilfragen. Grundlegungen zu einer Geschichte der Ornamentik." Berlin 1893, p. 272. The passage is quoted by Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 17. J Alois Riegl, "die Spatromische Kunst-Industrie nach den Funden in Oesterreich-Ungarn, I, im Zusammenhange mit der Gesammtentwicklung der bildenden Kunste bei den Mittelmeer- volkern," Vienna, 190 1. The book has been sharply criticised by J. Strzygow ski, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 1902. p. 263 f. 12 ROMAN SCULPTURE importance of the Roman episode, but attributed to the period of Constantine, which we are taught to look upon as one of entire decadence, the discovery of certain optic and spatial effects previously unknown. In an essay on grouping in Dutch portraiture,* which is full of suggestive remarks on the interrelation of figures in the portraiture of all countries and periods, Riegl touched once again on the optic laws he had observed in Roman art. His death in 1905, at the comparatively early age of forty-eight, is an irreparable loss to the special study of Roman archaeology as well as to the aesthetic and historic criticism of art. The position taken up by Wickhoff and Riegl has been vigorously attacked by Josef Strzygowski, the brilliant leader of what has been wittily called the " los-von-Rom " movement of archaeology, f Strzy- gowski, who approaches the subject with an unrivalled knowledge of oriental and mediaeval, as well as of ancient, archaeology, is not concerned with the old antithesis between Greece and Rome. In fact, for him Roman art as an independent episode scarcely exists ; it is barely a phase of later Hellenism which he repre- sents as succumbing by slow degrees to the insidious advance of Oriental influences destined to obtain final ascendency in the period of Constantine : " Hellenism sets in with a preponderance of the Greek element, and ends with the victory of the Orient " (" Schicksale des * " Das Hollandische Gruppen Portrat," in the Vienna Jahrbiicher des Allerhochsten Kaiserhauses for 1902, Heft 3 and 4. * J. P. Richter in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 1902, p. 562. INTRODUCTION 13 Hellenismus in der Bildenden Kunst," * p. 21) or, as he picturesquely puts it elsewhere, " Hellas and Rome are smothered in the Orient's embrace.'" f According to Strzygowski, the Orient emerges vic- torious, but not before it has assimilated to itself the classical influences that emanated from the great Hel- lenic centres of Asia Minor, chief among which he reckons Seleukia, " the inner- Asiatic metropolis of the greatest Kingdom of the Diadochoi, situated where the Euphrates and the Tigris converge, the descendant of ancient »Babylon and the precursor of Baghdad," a thesis eloquently summed up by Miss Gertrude Bell, in her review of Strzygowski's " Mschatta." " In the flux and reflux of civilisation, Seleukia has been fixed upon as the crucible into which East and West alike threw their gold — the fertile mint from which a coinage of artistic forms and conceptions flowed to the furthest limits of Asia and Europe." J Antioch on the Orontes — Orientis apex pulcher § — the brilliant capital of the Seleukid Kingdom of Syria, a city which ranked as the third of the world after Rome and Alexandria, would naturally be a powerful centre of Graeco-Oriental in- fluence ; and Strzygowski has lately shown what its role * Neue Jahrbucher fiir das Klassische Altertum, Geschichte und Deutsche Literatur, vol. xv., 1905. f " Hellas und Rom ersticken in des Orients Umarmung." See the Supplement (Beilage) to the Munchener Allgemene Zeitung, 40, 41, Febr. 18 and 19, 1902. X Rivue Arch&ologique, v, 1905, p. 431. For Strzygowski's precise view, see his " Mschatta," p. 261. § Ammianus Maicellinus, xxii, 9, 14. 14 ROMAN SCULPTURE was by the side of Seleukia, namely, that it dominated Syria and the parts between Taurus and Euphrates, as Seleukia did Mesopotamia.* These views are now becoming familiar from a dazzling series of books and monographs, among which we may mention — as having a special bearing on the present subject — " Orient oder Rom," f the book on Asia Minor as a " new domain in the history of art," J and the stimulating essay on the ornamentation of the facade of Mschatta already alluded to.§ Indeed, no writer on ancient or mediaeval art so arrests the imagination as does Strzygowski. Whether in the end we entirely agree or not, we find ourselves following him spellbound as he traces the great art currents that flow from Antioch or Seleukia, from Egypt and Persia, from Mesopotamia and remote China, towards Byzantium and Ravenna, towards Longobardic Milan, and German Aachen, to distant Gaul and Britain. Where Wickhoff had tried to show that Rome was the centre whence art types flowed back * See in Journal of Hellenic Studies for 1907, Strzygowski's paper on a " Sarcophagus of the Sidamara type in the Cook collection at Richmond." t J. Strzygowski " Orient oder Rom, Beitrage fur Geschichte der Spatantiken und Friihchristlichen Kunst," Leipzig, 1901. A very able risutne of this difficult book by W. E. Crum will be found in the Classical Review, xv, 1901, p. 232 ff. I " Kleinasien, Ein Neuland der Kunstgeschichte : Kirchenauf- nahmen von J. W. Crowfoot und J. I. Smirnov . . . bearbeitet von Josef Strzygowski," Leipzig, 1903. The admirable article by Gabriel Millet in Revue ArcHologiq.ue 1905, p. 93-109 is an analysis not only of this book but of Strzygowski's main theories. § In the Jahrbuch der Koniglich Preussischen Kunst sammlungen f Berlin, 1904. INTRODUCTION 15 to the East in post- classical times, Strzygowski main- tains that there was no question of flowing back, since the East had continued steadily and uninter- ruptedly to feed Western artistic endeavour with its forms and its types. He introduces his attack on the ill-judged restoration of the cathedral of Aachen by explaining that the actual source of " Romanic " art is neither Roman, nor even, as is frequently main- tained, Byzantine art, " but firstly, the basis of both these, the Hellenistic art of the Mediterranean," and secondly, the " forward movement of the Orient in the wake of Christianity."* Thus, in the opinion of Strzygowski, Hellenism and the Orient are the main factors in the subsequent development of Christian and mediaeval art, and — as an influence — he leaves Rome practically out of the question. In a recent article he pictures Rome as " the seat of the Court and centre of authority, like Byzan- tium and Baghdad, sucking the strength from all parts of the empire, and resembling — especially in the sphere of the formative arts — a polyp which stretches its im- prisoning arms now this way and now that." f But to this huge emporium for all the art products of the world, this "mart of nations, 11 as Isaiah called Phoenicia (xxiii. 3), Strzygowski refuses the supreme merit of creative power — of the true vital instinct • " Der Dom zu Aachen und seine Entstellung," 1904, p. 6. These views are approved by F. Cumont in " Les Religions Orien tales daus le Paganisme Romain," 1907, p. 9 ; p. 256, note 9. t Gottinqische Gekhrte Anzeige, 1906, pp. 907-914/ 1 6 ROMAN SCULPTURE which alone can inspire the present or influence the future. It is because StrzygowskTs theories, though directed in the main to the question of post-classical influence only, must yet indirectly affect our estimate of earlier Roman art, that I have dealt with them at greater length than would at first seem necessary in studies that stop with the period of Constantine. Strzygowski entirely ignores the Roman art of pre- Augustan times, and only touches incidentally on that of the early Empire, but scattered judgments,* and his strongly worded approval of C. Gurlitfs contention,f that this Imperial art was in all its phases the direct outcome of Graeco- Oriental influence, leaves us in no doubt as to his real views. As a fact, this great scholar, to whom our debt for the light he pours on the art of the Hellenised East increases daily, is, at the present stage of his inquiries, solely occupied with origins, and therefore does not take into account the mature phenomena. We do not refuse to call the beautiful art which developed in France under the Valois, French, because the shaping influence was largely Italian. Nor is Christopher Wren's St. Paul's any the less a powerful original creation because * E.g., in "Hellas in des Orients Umarmung," i, p. 314, he says in criticism of Wickhoff" dagegen muss nach meiner Ueberzeugung Rom aus dem Spiele bleiben ; denn die Flavisch- Traianische Kunst ist meines Erachtens nichts als eine Nachbluthe jener grossen Barockzeit der Griechen." t Cornelius Gurlitt, " Geschichte der Kunst," Stuttgart 1902, (see especially pp. 306-326, "die Kunst der Romischen Kaiser.") Strzygowski's review appeared, Byxantinische Zeitschrift, 1902, p. 570 f. INTRODUCTION 17 the domed church is not a type native to England, but is borrowed from abroad. So. too, we claim the right to discuss Roman art as an independent episode, although its forms may have been taken over from Greece, and been repeatedly enriched by contact with the East. We can admit the artistic debt of Rome, and yet desire to know more of the great schools working within the sphere of her influence. The sculptures of the Asia- Minor sarcophagi, for instance, where certain traditional figures of Praxitelean art are so transmuted as to suggest to Strzygowski himself comparison with Giotto and Donatello, cannot be explained on the sole theory of copying or imitation. If Hellas and the East itself continued artistically active, it was owing to the inspiriting forces of Roman subjects and ideas. For Rome, by proposing new subjects to Hellenistic art, gave it new life and new chances of development at a time when it had lost its old significance. It seems doubtful whether in any Hellenic city of the first century B.C., art could have received sufficient stimulus from without to enable it to pass into fresh phases of activity. The steady decay of national glory and of political life was little calculated to arouse artists to new expressive treatment. However delicate the forms of late Hellenistic art, however skilful and har- monious the disposition of the lines, or complicated and learned the design, the composition yet often strikes us as empty and meaningless, whether the task essayed be a simple wreath of flowers round an altar, or a dra- matic composition on the scale of the " Laocoon," or b 1 8 ROMAN SCULPTURE the u Dirce," These somewhat emasculate forms were invigorated by contact with Rome, into whose service they now passed — and art entered upon a new phase of normal development, which took a first splendid form in the Augustan age, and culminated in the masterpieces of the Flavio-Trajanic period. Nor should it be forgotten — as it too often is by all schools of archaeology — that the old native Etrusco- Roman art upon which the later Hellenism was grafted remained a factor to be reckoned with. Roman Imperial art is not a mere continuation of Hellenic or Hellenistic art — it is Roman art plus the new Hellenistic influence.* It was probably this genuine Roman element that kept art in the third and fourth centuries from complete de- generacy, and helped it to resist the threatening oriental influences. Strzygowski pictures as follows the decline of Hellenism, a term which with him is made to cover Rome : " The human form, originally dominant, first surrenders to ornament a great portion of the surface, and finally disappears altogether ; the Hellenic mode of expression yields to ornament.'"! This may be, and doubtless is, true of Hellenism in the East, but it is eminently untrue of Hellenism in the West, i.e., in Rome, a fact which Strzygowski himself admits, by a curious contradiction of his own terms. Interest in the human form flagged somewhat in Rome towards the Constantinian epoch, partly because artists were attracted by new problems of ornament and by new * Wickhoff has made this point clear in his first chapter, f " Schicksale des Htllenismus," p. 21. INTRODUCTION 19 specific effects, partly also under religious influences which, like Christianity, directly discouraged and dis- countenanced the imitation of living objects. But so strong were the anthropomorphic tendencies of the antique that we shall find them emerging triumphant from a period of ordeal, capturing Christianity itself, and then moving forward once more under the stimulus of new ideas. One claim of Roman art upon the gratitude of posterity is that it preserved the human form as the central and dominating idea of art, and was sufficiently powerful to impose it upon a religion of its essence hostile to such representations. Fortunately our estimate of Roman art need no longer depend upon caprices of taste or upon our observation of affinities between it and the art of other countries. Since the discoveries by Lange and Loewy * of the laws which govern the evolution of the expressive arts, it has become possible to gauge exactly the place of Rome in the development of the antique. Greek art — art, that is, in the Hellenic and Hellenistic phases — has triumphantly solved the rendering of the * Julius Lange, " Darstellung des Menschen in der alteren Griechischen Kunst," German translation, with Preface by A. Furt- wangler, 1899; Emanuel Loewy, "Die Naturwiedergabe in der alteren Griechischen Kunst," Rome, 1900. These two books only treat of Greek art up to the beginning of the fifth century, but it 'is easy to push their conclusions to the logical end. Loewy's book has been admirably translated by J. S. Fothergill — "The Interpre- tation of Nature in Earlier Greek Art " — and a short risumiol its main doctrines is given by Percy Gardner in his " Grammar of Greek Art," p. 56 f. 20 ROMAN SCULPTURE single figure in the round, but in compositions involving more than one figure it had never entirely freed itself of the trammels of " frontality," * and conse- quently failed to apprehend or convey the relations of objects to one another in space. Now it is the peculiar merit of Roman artists — or of artists working under Roman influence — to have approached and par- tially solved the tridimensional or spatial problem, thus creating what Wickhoff has happily named the "illu- sionist style.' , Therefore whatever feelings of pleasure or the reverse Roman art may rouse in us as individuals, we can no longer ignore it as serious students if we wish to understand how near the antique came to realising the most vital aim of all artistic endeavour. It must be borne in mind that what is now claimed for Roman art is an aesthetic advance — a power, that is, of con- veying to the spectator effects which the Greeks (simply because they came first in the historic chain) had not yet attempted or realised. It is to Wickhoff that we owe the searching criticism which first made the modern world aware of the sig- nificance of the different phases of art under Augustus, Domitian and Trajan. His definition and analysis of the " continuous style " of narrative in art have a novelty and importance which no theories as to the origin or ultimate fate of this style can alter. With Trajan and the introduction and victory of the * By which the artist can only apprehend one view of his subject at the time ; failing to conceive it organically as a whole, he also fails to co-ordinate its parts harmoniously or naturally. INTRODUCTION 21 " continuous style," the researches of Professor Wickhoff practically close. He was concerned to show the rise of a method which was afterwards the main vehicle for con- veying Christian doctrine and legend ; but he did not follow out the phases through which it had to pass before it adapted itself to new spiritual content. He has little to say of the Antonine and Aurelian periods, or of the century from Septimius Severus to Diocletian and Constantine. Here it is that the student groping for the light welcomes the great work of Riegl. For Riegl, who is concerned with discovering and fixing the place of late Roman art in the history of artistic endeavour, takes up the subject at this period, hitherto held unattractive and almost repugnant. Those familiar with his " Stilfragen" — could not be altogether surprised to find Riegl championing the art of the epoch whose architectural significance he had already proclaimed.* Yet even they perhaps were unprepared for the assertion that the decadent art of the third and fourth centuries evolved new optic tendencies which give it an indisputable aesthetic importance, irrespective of origins. To the " illusionism * of the Augustan period and the " impressionism " of the Flavian, Riegl now added the triumphs obtained in the third and fourth centuries by the new colouristic effects of light and dark which supplanted the chiaroscuro, or light and shade, of earlier art. In the process, it is true, the figure itself — more and more isolated in its dark niche — crystallised, to use Riegl's own word, and returned once more to that * See, for example, " Stilfragen," p. 272. 22 ROMAN SCULPTURE " frontal " phase, from which previous generations had attempted, and nearly achieved, emancipation. In- spired by the new subjects imposed by Christianity, Constantinian art — hitherto regarded as representing only decay — will be seen to grow and develop, as had Augustan art out of the meagre leavings of later Hel- lenism, or as, centuries before, Greek art itself had sprung from the stiff frontal images, as yet only roughly imitated from Egyptian and Oriental models. I have tried to indicate the trend of the pioneers in the new criticism of Roman art. A word remains to be said concerning a few of the more recent special con- tributions to our subject. The controversy over the date of the monument at Adamklissi in the Dobrudscha raged till lately with unabated vigour. It is carried on in the good old style, the two protagonists, Furt- wangler and Studniczka, attacking one another at close intervals in what is each time an epoch-making monograph on Roman architecture and decoration.* The two great publications, of the reliefs of the column of Marcus Aurelius, undertaken in 1893 at the cost of the German Emperor ; and of the reliefs of the Trajan column, carried out by Cichorius for the Saxon Ministry of Education, are works of the first * Furtw'angler, •• Das Tropaion von Adamklissi und Provinzial- romische Kunst," 1903. Studniczka, " Tropaeum Traiani," 1904. Furtwangler's last manifesto, " Zum Tropaion von Adamklissi," appeared in the Transactions of the Bavarian Academy for 1904. In these works abundant references will be found to preceding con- troversy. INTRODUCTION 23 order of importance. C. Robert's monumental publica- tion, "DieAntiken Sarkophagreliefs " begun in 1893, and not yet completed, is a mine of information for the relief sculpture of the Antonine and later periods. In the new " Antike Denkmaler " and the " Griechische und Romische Portrats," Arndt and his contributors add constantly to our knowledge of Roman portraiture and sculpture. Among those who are reconstructing Roman archaeology, Eugen Petersen takes a foremost rank, though he has but scant sympathy for its artistic side. But, as we shall presently see, there is scarcely a monument of ancient Rome which, during his long residence on theCapitol, he has not either rediscovered, put together, or else presented fin a new light. The increasing space assigned to Roman subjects in the various German and Austrian archaeological publica- tions, testify to the interest taken by the rising genera- tion of German scholars in special branches of Roman art. An added stimulus is imparted by the series of successful excavations on famous Roman or Romanized sites in Asia — as at Baalbek in Syria excavated under the auspices of the German Emperor — or at Ephesos, where the later splendid Graeco-Roman city was laid bare by Austrian explorers. The French, long the pioneers of Roman archaeological enterprise, have of late years been more occupied studying their magnificent Gallo-Roman art* than classical Roman art proper, • In England also, we are at last turning our attention to our own British-Roman art. See the chapters on the Roman period of Britain contributed by F. Haverfield to the new "Victoria 24 ROMAN SCULPTURE yet scattered articles and, above all, the masterly reviews and summaries in the "Revue Archeologique " by S. Reinach and his collaborators show that the leading French scholars are fully alive to the importance of the Roman movement. The Italians, like the ancient Romans, have been slow to recognize the aesthetic value of their own antique art, but they too have at length turned to its study and have begun adequately to publish great monuments like the Arches of Bene- vento and of Susa. Finally, among the most hope- ful signs of this " revival," are the contributions of English archaeologists connected with the British school in Rome.* The work of these scholars from Oxford and Cambridge will, it is reasonable to anticipate, at length introduce the subject of Roman art even into the English Universities. History of the Counties of England," and especially the descrip- tion of the magnificent bearded Gorgon from the temple of Minerva Sul at Bath, " Somerset," p. 236 ; cf. the same author's 41 Romanisation of Britain," p. 17. * It is sufficient to refer to Mr. Stuart Jones's recent brilliant summary of modern Roman archaeology (Quarterly Review, January 1906), and to the series of papers in which he and Mr. Wace, a student of the school, have redoubled our knowledge of Flavian, Trajanic and Antonine sculpture. PLATETII"! To far, />. 21 T1IK AUGUSTUS OF UHIMA l'(il!T\ Braccto Kuovo — Vatican I >!<)\ AM) AMI'HITRITE To face p. 36 Munich THE AUGUSTAN AGE 37 appealed more strongly to the artist's imagination than the somewhat worn-out theme of Tritons and Nereids. These decorated friezes present in sharp and almost crude contrast the historic and allegorical methods of commemorating events. On the three sides covered by the Munich slabs the triumphant choir of sea deities is allegorical, without doubt, of the naval exploits of Domitius, while on the fourth frieze we find ourselves confronted by a scene from the actual life of the Impe- rator and his army. Mythology and allegory, however, are not here juxtaposed for the first time, nor are we in presence, as might be urged, of contrasting Greek and Roman methods of thought. If the older periods of Hellenic art viewed events only through the medium of mythology, the sculptures of the Parthenon already combine the real and the imaginary, and on the frieze of the little Temple of Athena Nike, erected in b.c. 424, fights between actual Greeks and Persians are portrayed. At Pergamon, while the great altar allegorized the battles of the Attalids under the semblance of the battles of gods and giants, the votive reliefs of Attalus near by, to judge from the copies that have come down to us, represented with great accuracy the Gaulish foes of Per- gamon. In Roman art there will be an ever growing tendency to combine in one frame divine and human elements to the gradual subordination and eventual ex- tinction of the former. At the same time it would be a mistake to call Roman art historic in the usual modern sense of the word. Our conception of historic art 38 ROMAN SCULPTURE remained unknown to the Romans as it had been to the Greeks and the Egyptians before them. Their object is not to represent the episodes of the past, but to emphasize the glories of the present. In time they created a great narrative style, of which the column of Trajan offers the supreme example. But the narrative was always of recent exploit. What each generation in turn desired was to send down to posterity a memorial of their res gestae, centering more and more, as we shall see, about the person of the Emperor, as in Egypt such representation had centered about that of the King. In this respect Roman like Egyptian art answers the descrip- tion of the writer who asserts that " the great works of commemoration are all monuments of boasting." * The altar of Domitius shows these influences already at work. The next monument in point of time affords an example of their growing importance. Frieze commemorative of the Battle of Actium (b.c. 31). — A fragment of great beauty, in a private collection in Munich (Plate VII), shows clearly the impulse given to art by the great events that immediately preceded the establishment of the Empire. In the centre is Apollo with his lyre, seated on a basis or rock which supports a tripod against which he leans. He faces to the right where two ships are seen drawn up on the shore. The attitude of the god is full of grace and nobility. The left knee, which is the furthest from the spectator, is raised, so that the drapery disposed between the legs and round the body * Yrjo Him, "The Origins of Art," p. 181. \L DLi UNIVERSITY OF C/ THE AUGUSTAN AGE 39 fills up and enriches.the outline of the figure. From the left three men in Roman costume are seen advancing processionally — the first holds a spear in his extended left hand, the next is a tubicen or trumpeter, such as we have already seen in the " Sacrifice of Domitius " ; the action of the third Roman as he looks back from the centre is uncertain, owing to the fragmentary condition of the figure. There can be no doubt that this scene has been in the main rightly interpreted by Dr. Sieveking * as the thanksgiving of Octavianus to the Actian Apollo, before whose eyes the battle of Actium was fought (b.c. 31). The German interpreter of the sub- ject appositely quotes Cassius Dio, li, i, where it is narrated that Octavianus dedicated an open-air shrine (?o\>c vTraiOptov) to Apollo on the hill where had stood his general's tent and adorned it with the beaks of the captured ships. Whereas in the " Sacrifice of Domi- tius " the human element was, as we have seen, severely divided off from the divine, in the " Thanksgiving of Octavianus" the two are mingled within one scene, as on the frieze of the Parthenon, and the invisible god is represented in visible form receiving his worshippers. The two reliefs are nearly contemporary, but the more Hellenic conception of the Munich relief well accords with the personal predilections of Octavianus. The Ara Pacts Augustce. — According to the monu- * Who publishes the fragment in Arndt-Burckmann's "Denk- maler," Plate 595. See Petersen's remarks in Ntue Jahrbucher fur das Klassische Alterthum 1906, p. 522. 4 o ROMAN SCULPTURE ment of Ancyra, i.e., to the inscription or testament in which Augustus himself recorded the events, the res gestae, of his reign, it was in the year b.c. 13 that the Senate set up, in honour of the Emperor's victorious return from a double campaign in Spain and in Gaul, the great altar of the Augustan, or Imperial Peace — the Ara Paris Augustce, as the official inscription calls it. In the words of the Emperor himself: "On my return to Rome from Spain and Gaul, under the consul- ship of Tiberius Nero and P. Quinctilius, after complete success in these provinces, the Senate decreed in thanks- giving for my safe return, to dedicate an altar to the goddess of the Peace of Augustus on the field of Mars, at which officials, priests, and the Vestal Virgins should every year make a sacrificial offering.'"* The altar occupied, in the Field of Mars, a space to the left — that is, to the west of the modern Corso as one goes towards the Porta del Popolo, on the site of the modern Palazzo Ottoboni-Fiano/close, therefore, to the little church of San Lorenzo in Lucina, dear to old- fashioned tourists for its Crucifixion by Guido Reni, and to the more modern-minded because, as Baedeker re- minds us, it was the scene of Pompilia , s marriage in Browning's " The Ring and the Book.y Fragments of * Th. Mommsen, " Monumentum Ancyranum," second ed.,p. 48. The Latin text (restored with help of the Greek text) is as follows : Cum ex Hispania Galliaque, rebus in his provinciis prospere gestis, Romam redii Ti. Nerone P. Quinctilio consulibus, aram Pacis Augustae Senatus pro reditu meo consacrari censuit ad campum Martium in qua magistratus et sacerdotes et Virgines Vestales anniversarium sacrificium facere iussit. THE AUGUSTAN AGE 41 the decorative sculptures of the altar have been found scattered — in the Palazzo Fiano itself, in the Vatican? in the Villa Medici, in the Uffizi, in the Louvre and in Vienna.;* professor von Duhn had the signal merit of discovering that these fragments belonged together and had once decorated the famous altar. Professor Petersen works unweariedly at its reconstruction, and has em- bodied the results of his earlier labours in an interesting monograph published in 1902)* The excavations undertaken in 1903 on the site of the Palazzo Fiano f with a view to finding further remains of the altar, showed, however, that Petersen's conclu- sions needed revision in essential points. J Instead of a high-walled enclosure with only one entrance, the ex- cavations revealed that there were two doors in the same axis, which aptly suggests to Petersen a comparison with the two doors of the temple of Janus, the opening or closing of which announced peace or war. The walled enclosure measured roughly 11 m. 50 along the entrance fronts, and 10 m. 50 along each side. It was about 6 m. § in height with the supporting basis, and was decorated both outside and in with bands of relief. On the interior a band of fluted marble was divided by a rich meander pattern from an * Eugen Petersen, "Ara Pacis Augustae," Sonderschrift des Oesterreichischen Archoeologischen Instituts in Wien % 1902. f A. Pasqui, " Scavi dell, Ara Pacis Augustae," in Notizie degli Scavi, 1903. % "Romische Mittheilungen," vol. xviii., 1903, pp. 164-176; pp. 33°-333- and more especially the article stating his latest views in Oesterr. Jahresheften, 1905, pp. 248-315. § Roughly 21 feet. 42 ROMAN SCULPTURE upper frieze adorned with garlands suspended from boukrania. At each angle of the enclosure, as on both sides of each entrance, were finely sculptured pilasters. On the exterior, above a frieze of conventional floral scrolls and palmettes, were disposed the great reliefs representing the procession in honour of the goddess. The actual procession adorned the lateral walls on the north and south sides. On the west wall — the one look- ing in the direction of the Vatican — was an allegorical group of Tellus — Mother Earth — with attendant di- vinities, framed by pillars and divided by the recently discovered door from a sacrificial scene. Flanking the second entrance in the east wall were further scenes of sacrifice, taking place, apparently, in presence of the tutelary gods of the city (Plates VIII., IX.).* r tpie allegorical relief with Tellus, or Terra Mater, is preserved in the Uffizi of Florence, and has long been known, f A woman of gracious mien sits on a rock ; the delicate under-drapery leaves the right shoulder bare and outlines the richly modelled breasts. The back of her head is covered by an ample veil, which is then drawn round her from waist to ankles. On her lap is abundance of fruit — apples, grapes, and nuts ; on the left knee, which is raised, sits a little child whom she holds with her left hand ; while a somewhat bigger child scrambles up on her right. This Tellus is a very different imper- sonation from that of the Greek Ge, the Earth-Mother, * Except where otherwise specified, these platesare from original photographs kindly lent by Professor Petersen. f Amelung, M Ftihrer du-rch die Antiken in Florenz," No. 159. PLATE VIII Vienna (Left side missing) SACRIFICE OF A BULL. Right side of East Entrance Villa Medici / , fP To face p. 42 TERRA MATER. Left side of Wert Entrance ARA PACIS. Friezes of Entrance Walls r,ii:i TY OF ?NIA THE AUGUSTAN AGE 43 as we know her from Greek vases, and from ths friezes of Pergamon in Berlin, and of Priene at the British Museum, where Ge is seen rising to the waist out of the ground to implore the gods to spare the life of her own offspring, the giants. It is a new conception we have before us. This Roman Terra is not so much akin to the fierce primitive Ge, as to the Christian Caritas ; she is not the foe of gods but the nurse of men, the sensible embodiment of that goddess Tellus to whdm Horace prayed in the beautiful Sapphics of the Carmen Sceadare (v. 29 fF.) : Fertilis frugum pecorisque Tellus Spicea donet Cererem corona ; Nutriant fetus et aquae salubres Et Jovis aurae. May Earth, fertile in fruits and flocks, present Ceres with her garland of ears of corn ; may the healthful showers and gales of Jove nurse the springing plants. Far from being a goddess rebellious to the will of the gods, her blessings are dependent on peace, as sings another Roman : Interea Pax arva colat. Pax Candida primum Duxit araturos sub juga curva boves. (Tirullus, Eleg. i. 10, 45.) Meanwhile let Peace till the fields. Fair Peace first brought the oxen beneath the curved yoke to draw the plough. 44 ROMAN SCULPTURE Intentional emphasis is laid on the material blessings of peace. On the armour of the statue of Augustus, found in the villa of Livia at Prima Porta and now in the Vatican,* we meet with the same idea (Plate III.). On the cuirass, below the allegory of the victory over the Parthians, is seen the Earth with the children and the horn of plenty, enjoying the blessings of the Emperor's reign, while above are the fertiliz ing sky (Ccelus) with the Sun in his chariot on the left, and on the right the group of a winged maiden with her vase carrying an older woman with her torch, the two being emblematic of Dawn and the Dew, the tempering forces of the Sun. Terra exalat auram atque auroram umidam. (Pacuvius.) The Earth breathes forth vapours and the dews of dawn. Apart from their artistic beauty, these allegories are well worthy of our attention as embodying what to Augustus and the Roman rulers appeared an essential truth — that material prosperity is the only sound basis for artistic or intellectual achievement. This idea is the burden and the refrain of all that laudatory imperial poetry which Horace so typically represents : Tua, Caesar, aetas Fruges et agris rettulit uberes. Thy age, O Caesar, has also given back to the fields abundant crops. Thus this Goddess Earth, sung by Horace and Tibullus, * In the Braccio Nuovo, No. 14; Helbig, No. 5; Amelung- Holtzinger, " Museums and Ruins of Rome," p. 32, and Fig. 18. PLATE IX Terme (Right side) missing) BULL LED TO SACRIFICE. Left side of East Entrance Villa Mitir,,» pp. 46 £ 47 £/#?*» ARCHITECTURAL DEPARTMENT LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA THE AUGUSTAN AGE 47 art of the people who form the audience, as well as the actual ceremonial : passing in front is the charming figure of a camillus or boy attendant carrying in his left hand, and supporting against his shoulder, one of the two Imperial lares or household gods ; * in the gap which intervenes between this fragment and the next was doubtless the figure of another camillus carrying the second lar.i Then comes the cynosure of all eyes, Augustus himself, wearing the cap of the Pontifex Maximus, flanked by the two consuls, and with a group of lictors at his back. It is a superb figure, shown squarely facing the spectator, with splendid ample throw of the toga, and head turned in three-quarters to the right. Next comes a block with six figures, lately removed to the Terme (Plate XV.)4 Here we see on the right two members of the Sacred College of Jlamines, with the cap tied under their chin by its leather thongs, and over it the disc and apex ; they are accompanied by another group of lictors. Next follows a long processional row preserved, appa- rently in its entirety, on two slabs in the Uffizi.§ First two move Jlamines ) || and behind them a beautiful young * For the importance of the Lares under Augustus and in Augustan art see p. 73. f For two fragments belonging to this gap, see Petersen, Rom. MWkeil, 1903, p. 331. X Here reproduced by courteous permission of the Afinisterodi Istruzione Pubblica. The photograph shows the block at the time of the excavations under the palace. § See Amelung, " Fuhrer," under No. 166. || The fragment of shoulder and drapery, immediately in front of 48 ROMAN SCULPTURE figure, with drapery drawn over the head ; he is the bearer of the sacena, the " official " axe borne as a symbol of sacrifice, though not actually for use.* Behind again comes a stately middle-aged personage, to whose drapery clings a small boy. A lady in the background places her right hand on the child's head as he looks back at a stately matron. This second lady, like the Augustus, fronts the spectator and turns in three- quarters to the left as the Emperor does to the right. For this reason — because the two figures so evidently balance each other — the lady can be no other than the Empress Li via herself, f The identifications of other personages are of a more uncertain nature, and will be glanced at further on. Behind Livia come two young men followed (on the second Uffizi slab) by a lady holding by the hand a small boy cumbersomely draped in the toga. She turns to look back at a young man, presumably her husband. In the background between the heads of the two is seen the charming full face of a woman raising her left forefinger to her lips with the gesture of the favete linguis.% Holding on to the young man's cloak comes another boy (head restored), somewhat older than the preceding child, and behind, a girl older than either, looks smilingly down at him. these two figures, belongs to the flamen on the right of the block lately found in the Palazzo Fiano. The four flamines are presumably those of Jupiter, of Mars, of Quirinus and of the Divus Julius. * Petersen, " Ara Pads," p. 96. f This seems also Petersen's opinion, M Ara Pads," p. 107. t Petersen, "Ara Pads," p. 92, who attributes the interpretation of the gesture to F. von Duhn. THE AUGUSTAN AGE 49 To the right of the children are two more women, and this part of the procession closes with three male figures. Besides these main personages there are a number of figures in the background — probably de- pendants and attendants — all wearing festal wreaths. The family (for the presence of so many children marks it as such), who follow thus closely upon Augustus and the highest officials and priests, can be no other than that of the Emperor. These person- ages, young and old, have already given rise to conflicting interpretations, which threaten to become formidable in number.* The Empress Li via has already been recognized. The grave middle-aged man who walks at the head of the Imperial group is pro- bably Agrippa, the trusted friend, minister and son-in- law of Augustus, well-nigh his colleague. The child clinging to Agrippa's cloak must be one of his sons, in which case the woman, who lays a motherly hand on the boy's head, is probably Julia, f Behind Li via would come her son Tiberius X (26), followed by the Elder Drusus (31), with his wife the beautiful Antonia (28), leading their boy Germanicus. Von Domas- zewski makes the attractive suggestion that the young * The principal attempts at interpretation are Petersen's, op. cit., p. 105 ff (where reference will be found to earlier theories), E. Reisch, " Zur Ara Pacis Augustae," in Wiener Studien, xxiv. 1902, pp. 424-436. A. von Domaszewski, li Die Familie des Augustus auf der Ara Pacis," in the Oesterr. Tahreshefte, 1903, pp. 57-66. f Petersen inclines to see Julia either in 24 (Li via) or else in 34, already as the wife of Tiberius, with whom he identifies 37. X So Benndorf, quoted by Petersen, note on pp. 108-109. l) 50 ROMAN SCULPTURE couple who so eagerly look at one another are talking, and are therefore admonished to silence by the matron who raises her fingers to her lips. The last couple on this slab (34, 37) may very possibly be the Elder Antonia and her husband Lucius Domitius Aheno- barbus. In the old man (36), one scholar * recognizes the features of Maecenas as known from his portrait on the gem engraved by Dioscorides. We turn from these possibilities of interpretation to what is actually before us. The monotony of a pro- cession is skilfully avoided by breaking up the long line into three groups, each forming a whole in itself, and yet linked to the next. We have first the proces- sion of the Rex Sacrorum, secondly the group of the Emperor and the great civil and religous dignitaries, and, thirdly, the Imperial family, marshalled by the elderly man whom we suppose to be Agrippa. The composition here is greatly enlivened by the varying heights of the children and their lively movements. If we study these trains of priests and officials, of proud youths, of beautiful women and well-bred children, who walk behind the Emperor in long rows, or come for- ward to welcome him, we must confess that there are few works of art which would have rendered with equal success the consciousness of high worth combined with elegance of deportment. It is an historical picture of the first order, which shows us the people, who first conquered the world and were then governing it, united together. (WickhofF, " Roman Art," p. 31, f.) * • R. von Schneider; see Petersen, p. 109 note; cf. S. Reinach '•Pierres Gravdes," PI. 134, p. 164. plate xrr 2.') 2 J S3 tbfacep. 50 11 NORTH FRIEZE OF THE ARA PACTS. Bight half Uffizi ,U D -EHS1TY oF caufc. THE AUGUSTAN AGE 51 The procession of the north side, with its long train of Senators or other high officers of State, is of less interest artistically, and does not call for such a detailed examination. Of its slabs one is in the Vatican,* two are in the Uffizi,f and one in the Louvre, I while a further fragment was discovered in 1903.5 The Vatican and Uffizi slabs are badly mutilated and shamefully restored. The line of procession, though stately, is of singular monotony ; there are no pleasant breaks as in the southern frieze ; the personages move in symmetrical couples, the order being only relieved here and there by the more animated movement of the attendants in the background, who sometimes are seen looking back, or turned full to the front ; between the sixth and eighth figures is a gap disclosing a camillus, who carries in his lowered left hand an empty patera (visible immediately behind the hand of No. 6), and in his raised right hand the acerra or incense-box. Further back, at No. 23, we see a second camillus carrying the j ug which belongs to the cup in his companion's hand. In his left hand he also carries the acerra, which is itself decorated in relief with sacrificial scenes. || At the. left of the second * The first slab is walled in the Cortile del Belvedere of the Vatican (Helbig, "Fuhrer," No. 159). Practically all the heads are restored. f Amelung, Nos. 166 and 162 ; nearly all the heads, and many other parts, restored. % In the " Salle de Mecene." § Pasqui, "Scavi," p. 566, Fig. 11 ; cf. our Plate XIII. || Behind this second camillus, the relief was disgracefully mal- treated in the Renaissance, for the completeness and the continuity of the composition were both ignored, and, instead of uniting the 52 ROMAN SCULPTURE of these Uffizi slabs the severe composition is at last pleasantly relieved by the figure of a very small child clad in a scanty little shirt, who is lifted along by the man holding him by the left hand ; the child evidently feels rather unsteady on his feet, and holds on to the cloak of the man in front of him. The procession is next continued on a slab in the Louvre, on which are conspicuous two couples, accompanied by their children — a graceful boy * with bent head and characteristic " Augustan " hair and features, followed by a prim little maiden, who walks very erect, carrying her nosegay with the self-importance of childhood. Finally, to the north- east corner belongs one of the fragments discovered in 1903, with the figure of a boy wearing the bulla, accom- panied by a woman (Pasqui, Fig. 11). When we try to realize the idea which inspired the composition of these friezes, we are met by grave diffi- culties. The composition has been compared to that of the friezes representing the Panathenaic procession on the Parthenon. The procession on the Ara is in that case conceived as coming from the Via Flaminia, and splitting into two halves which pass respectively along the northern and southern walls in order to re-unite on wo slabs at this point, the right extremity of the one (Amelung, 162) and the left extremity of the other (Amelung, 166) were sawn off, in order to obtain two separate panels of complete effect In themselves. The figure thus wantonly destroyed has fortunately been preserved n a drawing of the period, see Petersen, "Ara Pacis August*," p. 87, Fig. 33. * I do not see why Petersen, "Ara Pacis," p. 89, should think the child is a girl. :;t 2fl Uffizi Palazzo Fin no 43 /.our re To face p. 52 NORTH FRIEZE OF ARA TACIS. Left half tiirauilon Y QF C, ARCHITECTURAL DZ UNIVERSITY OF CAL PLATE XlV T<> / j>. :.:: THE "SEN AT US'* Detail of Wont Frieze of Arn I'.-ins Mliseo (Irlli TrfllK THE AUGUSTAN AGE 53 the east side and so enter the Sanctuary. But while in the Parthenon there is such strict correspondence of the two parts that in effect, when we abstract in our mind the intervening building, the processions at once re-unite naturally, the case is far different in the Ara Pads. Here the heavy official ranks of the northern frieze in no way correspond to the groups of the Imperial procession. Indeed, the exact relation of the two pro- cessions is difficult to establish, and although there does seem to be some sort of intentional balance between the groups with children at the close of the two friezes, it is probable that the procession on the north side is composed of personages of inferior rank, and must be imagined as moving behind that of the south frieze, the artist having simply cut the subject into two halves instead of splitting it, and allotted one half to each side of the altar. We still have to consider the decoration of the west wall, where the entrance is flanked by slabs representing scenes of sacrifice. These two slabs are in the gardens of the Villa Medici, and, like so much else belonging to the Ara, are much restored.* But enough remains to make out the composition of both groups. On the left, in front of an architectural background — presumably a temple — two sacrificial attendants are leading a bull decorated with the sacrificial chaplet. On the slab to the right of the entrance are three lictors and another * Petersen, "Ara Pads," pp. in ff. (where Figs. 35 and 37 show both slabs in their present restored condition) ; Oesterr. Jahreshefte, 1906, p. 304 ff. 54 ROMAN SCULPTURE sacrificial attendant who holds down the bull's head in the attitude typical of the moment in which the axe is to fall upon the beast's neck.* The scene is one of the most familiar in antique art. We shall see it on a silver cup from Bosco Reale (Plate XXIX.), and on the well- known relief in Florence, perhaps from the period of Domitian, which served Raphael as a model for the scene of sacrifice in the cartoon of Paul and Luke at Lystra (Plate XLIV.). Both reliefs are incomplete on the sides towards the entrance. It is supposed that here were groups of gods as invisible spectators of the ceremony; accordingly a head of the Genius Populi Romani, and a bearded head of Mars, both found in the Palazzo Fiano, have been assigned to the left and to the right slabs respectively, t The Ara Pads must be reckoned among those monu- ments of antiquity which gain from being known only in a fragmentary condition. So long as archaeologists could arrange the scattered slabs according to their fancy, our sense of composition was better satisfied than now that we are forced, since the excavations of 1903, to accept the evidence of the monument itself. Filled with the lessons of the Parthenon, we used to point a parallel between these invisible gods of the Ara and the divinities who await the Panathenaic procession as it advances in two streams from either side of the temple ; the sacrifice of the bull is still a fair counterpart to the "Delivery of * Another fragment belonging to the left of this slab is still in the Palazzo Fiano (Pasqui "Scavi," p. 553). On it is seen the Ficus ruminalis, v/ith Faunus (?) leaning against the sacred tree. t Petersen, "Ara Pads," pp, 121 ff. ; see previous note. PLATE XV FLAMIXES o\ THE AKA PACIS. South Frieze '/'<< face p. 54 Miiseo del/e Terme ARCHITECTURAL DZ UNIVERSITY OF C, THE AUGUSTAN AGE 55 the Peplos," but unfortunately, as we have already seen, the procession is not moving in two parallel streams, while, worse still, the evidence of the excavation — the site, that is, where certain blocks were found — compels us to reverse the order of the friezes ; their direction is not towards the east, but towards the west ; they are therefore actually turning their back upon the sacrificial scenes, which, with the divinities, remain outside the composition, awkwardly tacked on to it in order to fill up the panels of the east side.* Nor if we return to the west entrance does the composition of that side strike us as any more satisfactory. The slab with the Tellus is not really skilfully balanced by the slab with the sacrifice of the pig, nor is the spiritual relation of the two to the advancing processions altogether easy to make out. The composition of the frieze as a whole is poor and overrated. If the ordinary view of Augustan art as academic and highly finished be accepted, and this Ara Pacts be " the summit of the Augustan artist's achievement,"" then our use of artistic terms is in need of revision. But the current notion of Augustan art is a learned fallacy, a traditional view refined and strengthened by repetition which, however, will not bear the test of comparison with the actual monuments. * It is true that Petersen, Oesterr. Jahreshefte, 1906, p. 305 f. suggests transposing the slabs of the entrance walls, so that the bulls should be on the West and the Tellus and camilli on the East. But there is little evidence in favour of this arrangement, and, moreover very little to be gained from the point of view of the composition. f Stuart Jones in Contemporary Review, 1906, p. 115. 5 6 ROMAN SCULPTURE The scheme of decoration seen in the Ara is without proper beginning, end, or middle. There is no dominating artistic idea, no visible goal, no pervading motive. In these respects the altar of Domitius is far superior to that of Augustus. If allegory and reality were some- what bluntly juxtaposed, yet each within its cadre offered to the eye a well-planned composition ; the Nereids lead up to the central group of Poseidon and Amphitrite, and in the scene of sacrifice the figures of Domitius and the priest, with the altar between them, reveal both the actual and ideal goal of the scene. Prolonged study of the reliefs of the Ara Pacts tends to show that we are in presence of an embryonic art as yet far from maturity ; the sculptor is heir to the vast experiences of Hellenic art, but he has not yet learnt to select or to condense. He seems overpowered by the novelty and magnificence of his theme, and, in his embarrassment as to what form precisely to clothe it in, essays them all. But the attempt is a brave one, and out of it, after nearly a century of technical schooling, will issue the triumphs of Flavian art. The Augustan artists are neither academics nor decadents, still less are they servile imitators. They are pioneers treading new paths which it will take their successors nearly a hundred years fully to explore. Certain technical and aesthetic innovations remain to be noted. Like the figures of the panels of the Arch of Titus at a later date, those of the friezes of the Ara Paris appear chiselled at varying depths out of the block whose original level is indicated by the projecting upper PLATE XVI To face p. 56 DETAIL OF AKA PACIS Villa Medici r . RSlTY OF CAUFOK^A. THE AUGUSTAN AGE 57 and lower edges. This is also the case in the Munich fragment with the " Thanksgiving of Octavianus." A tridimensional effect of spatial depth has accordingly been attempted. The figures are not merely silhouetted along the surface as in earlier relief, but the notion is to show them in aesthetic relation to the background which, henceforth, tends to lose its old neutral character and to become identified with space, or more properly with what, in Italian, is called the ambiente. Along with this new inter-relation of figures and background we may observe a new psychological inter-relation between the figures themselves. They almost seem to exchange impressions and to communicate their emotions to one another. Within the general processional scheme certain figures appear more closely united together through participation in some mood peculiar to them- selves. These effects are due to a new freedom of move- ment imparted to the glance of the eyes, a fact which Riegl detec;ed and analysed with his customary subtlety. Closer definite attention, the accent imparted to the gaze, is one point in which the sacrificial pomp of the Ara Paris, for instance, differs in degree from the Panathenaic procession of Greek art. In the Panathenaea we have action (Handlung) but its psychical quality (das Psychische) is entirely neglected. Strangely enough, this circumstance has, hitherto, not been duly estimated. It is Roman Imperial art again which recognized the eyes as the organ peculiarly expressive of attention, and which per- fected their rendering in a manner before unknown, 58 ROMAN SCULPTURE and epoch-making for the whole future of art . . . In the Roman Imperial epoch art ventured for the first time to let I the direction of the gaze diverge from that of the head. And, as a consequence, an indepen- dent significance was given to the attention which directs the gaze, parallel to the will which governs the movement of the other parts. (" Das Hollandische-Gruppen Portrait," p. 81.)* The import of these remarks will be fully apparent when we come to study portraiture. * I never aim at giving more than a rough paraphrase of this extraordinarily difficult writer. N Procession Tellus Bull Mars W ARA ] PACIS E Catnilli and Senatus Genius Populi R. Bull Procession of the Emperor S CHAPTER II AUGUSTAN DECORATION The Ara Pads (continued) — The spirals of the lower frieze and kindred decoration on sepulchral altars — The wreaths and boukratiia of the inner wall — Their expressiveness and illusionism — Sarcophagi and altars of the Augustan and following periods, showing similar or derived types of ornament. enaivoi nai to €v8poo~ov t£>v pobcov Kai (prjfxi yeypdf the longer systems decorating the lateral walls. It is continued by Petersen's C.D.E.F. {e) The three fragments discovered in 1903, from the left field of one of the longer systems (Pasqui's Fig. 15). (/) A number of isolated and smaller fragments, among them the remains of a swan (Terme; Petersen, " Ara Pacis," Fig. 16), also the lovely bunch of ivy leaves (Terme ; reproduced by H. Stuart Jones, Quarterly Review, Plate II., Fig. 3.) < < P5 < PS si ^ S3 . « II of r CAUFC AUGUSTAN DECORATION 61 foliage, fan-like palmettes, ragged peonies, broad five- petalled poppies or conventional rosettes. The point where the spiral leaves the parent stem is richly foliated, and from these leaves will often issue, besides the great main spirals, tendrils of the utmost delicacy, or else blossoms suspended by thread-like stalks. From the point whence the lateral stem nearest the central shaft spreads out into spirals there also rises a smaller, straighter shaft ending in a blossom upon which perches a swan with curving neck and outstretched wings. These swans, the divine birds of Apollo, whose cult was so dear to Augustus,* balance one another heraldically ; two appeared on each side of the central design of the longer walls ; while on the shorter walls there was only space for one on either side. A further beautiful detail has been detected by Petersen on the long lateral walls in the remains of a laurel wreath among the spirals but independent of them. From the position of this wreath at the centre of one half of the decoration he has surmised that there were two on each long side, and that they not improbably refer to the double pacification of Gaul and Spain commemorated by the altar, f No words could doj ustice to these floral scrolls of the Ara Paris — to the precision of the design, the imaginative variety of the forms and their startling truth to nature. We realize the different texture of the strong fibrous stem and the rough nervous leaves of the acanthus, the silky transparency of the petals, the pulpiness of the ivy leaves. All this has to be studied * Petersen, " Ara Pacis," p. 29. f Petersen, ib. p. 24. 62 ROMAN SCULPTURE and remembered if we wish to grasp the contributions of Augustan art to the sum of artistic achievement. This rich world of flowers and plants, already so life- like, is further animated by a teeming bird and insect life which can only be studied in its amazing minuteness on the originals. Lizards — virides lacertae — little snakes and scorpions, dart among the flowers, and here and there the birds perch and peck, while amid the foliated spirals of the pillars we even find small owls and an eagle.* As we sit in the cloisters of the Terme studying these details, the sensuous sounds and fragrant warmth of an Italian garden seem to surround us. We remember gardens like that painted on the walls of the Villa of Li via at Prima Porta, or the Virgilian garden of the Fourth Georgic, with the soft hum of the bees among its flowers. Swans and Spirals as Decorations of Altars of the Augustan Period. — The style of decoration which we can thus learn to appreciate on the Ara Pads was reflected in endless minor monuments. The stately Apollinic swans of the acanthus scrolls, and that on which rides the spirit of the Air on the slab with the Terra Mater, are akin, both in meaning and in treatment, to the swans which so often appear in the decoration of this period. f On the beautiful sepulchral altar at Aries (Gonse, " Les Chefs-d'oeuvre des Musees de France," p. 68) the * Cf. Petersen, " Ara Pacis," p. 46. t See the examples cited by Altmann, " Architektur und Ornamentik," p. 68. l'LATE XVIir Jb/aee />. 62 LOWER FRIEZE OF AKA I'M I> Mu to delle Term' ;CTURAL DL • UNIVERSITY OF LATE XIX To far, ALTAR WITH SWANS Ark* AUGUSTAN DECORATION 63 birds stand on small bases projecting from the angles ; they spread out their wings till these meet in the centre panel, while at the sides the wings touch the fan leaves of the palm trees which adorn the angles of the posterior face. The palm trees, like the swans, are part of the fashionable Apollinic stock, even though they have no very direct or precise religious meaning when used thus decoratively. Of the lid of this altar only the lower portion is preserved, adorned with elegant spirals ending in a flower-like rosette like the spirals on the Ara Pacts. The swans support an oak garland between their beaks (if. p. 73), and its rich fluttering ribbons help to fill the space below. (Plate XIX.)* We can trace adaptations and developments of the naturalistic flower spirals of the Ara in many altars of the following period. Spirals springing from a central acanthus fill the border of the well-known tombstone of Atimetus Pamphilus in the Capitol, which serves as basis to the statue of Antinous in the Room of the Dying Gaul (Altmann, No. 131, Fig. 100). Atimetus was a freed man of Tiberius, therefore this monument is con- siderably later in date than the Augustan altar, yet it preserves the characteristic Augustan stem as an in- tegral part of the design, unobscured by the heavy foliature which, towards the period of Claudius, tends to envelop the stem more and more thickly, until by the time of Domitian the leaves sometimes entirely * For the popularity of the swan motive in contemporary Pompeian wall paintings (3rd style) see Altmann, " Grabaltare," p. 287. 64 ROMAN SCULPTURE conceal it. Another altar with similar dainty border is under the Terpsichore in the Sala delle Muse in the Vatican (Altmann, No. 132, Fig. 105. Livia Ephyre); it should be compared with the altar of Claudia Januaria in the fourth cloister of the Terme which — as the name indicates — belongs to the Claudian epoch, and where the heavy foliature which conceals the stem should be especially noticed, as marking a later stage of ornament (Altmann, No. 135, Fig. 101).* Garlands decorating the Inner Wall of the Ar a Pacts. — The floral wonders of the Ara Pads are not yet e xhausted. We still have to penetrate within the festal court. The enclosing wall of the Ara was formed of solid blocks of marble divided both inter- nally and externally into a lower course separated by a narrow band of ornament from an upper frieze. The lower course, which on the outside displayed the great acanthus scrolls, was on the inside simply carved into vertical flutings. The upper frieze, which structurally is merely the reverse of the frieze of the exterior, with its processions and sacrificial scenes, was adorned with garlands suspended between bouk- rania. In the use of garlands of flowers, of flowers and fruit, or merely of foliage, the Romans were not pioneers. Garlands represented naturalistically already appear in Hellenistic art. But owing to the richness, * A good example of the spiral and rosette motive occurs in the frieze of the Temple of Augustus and Roma at Pola, in Istria — phot. Aiinari, 21 193. AUGUSTAN DECORATION 65 the luxuriance and the variety which the Roman artists imparted to the garland motive, and the constancy with which they employed it, it became in their hands as characteristic a feature of Roman art as it later was of Italian. The amazing variety of the flowers and fruit that compose the garlands of the Ara is deserving of study : we find grapes, ears of corn, apples, pears, plums, cherries, figs, pineapples, nuts and olives, acorns, ivy berries, and laurel and poppy heads.* The whole was doubtless brilliantly coloured to imitate life, so that these wreaths of the Altar of Peace must be looked upon as among the most striking pictures of still life.f An impression of the general effect may be formed by combining what we see here with the wreaths painted on the walls of the house at Bosco Reale, or with those that adorn one room in the u House of Germanicus " on the Palatine. J These Roman wreaths do not merely serve the purpose of breaking up and animating the space to be decorated by a more or less conventional pattern, nor are they mere imitations of surface appear- ances ; the artist has realised to the full the possibilities of his subject and conveyed all its aspects : the trail- ing weight of the garland, its rustling, swaying move- ment, the tension of the cord under the strain. A Dutch-like fidelity in the rendering of details is com- bined with the broad artistic treatment which alone can produce the illusion of reality. § As a fact an extremely * Petersen, " Ara Pacis," p. 38. f Cf. Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 34. % lb. Fig. 43. § According to Strzygowski, " illusionism " of technique dis- tinguishes the wreath on a round altar from Pergamon (Gotting. E 66 ROMAN SCULPTURE careful and learned technique is the medium by which this translation of nature into art is effected. The gradations of relief are carefully observed from the maximum projection at the centre of the garland down to the edges, where the flowers and leaves are very slightly modelled or little more than scratched on the background. At first sight the rendering of the varying depths and projections may seem simple and obvious. But we must remember, on the one hand, that in Greek art the design even in the lowest relief was never, as here, allowed to die down into the background, but was clearly cut out with the chisel so as to form a definite outline. The difference between the Augustan and the Hellenistic conception of a wreath becomes clear, if we compare with the wreaths of the Ara Paris those which adorn the round altar of the Theatre of Dionysos at Athens, and which may be dated at about B.C. 130.* Here all the forms — of the wreaths as of the supporting Silenus heads and taeniae — are sharply isolated from one another, and are equally clear-cut. It is the tactile f quality of the subject, rather than its illusionist possibilities, which has attracted the artist. On the other hand, Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1906, p. 912). But even among the wonderful wreaths of the Renaissance, I, at any rate, have utterly failed to find an example that makes the wreaths of the Ara Pads " appear as monotonous as bad copies " (ib.). Is it always neces- sary to praise one thing at the expense of another ? * Altmann, " Architektur und Ornamentik," p. 7$ i. f I use this word in the sense given to it by Riegl who uses tmktisch (tactilis) = 'stofflich' to express material dimension as distinct from the illusion of dimension conveyed by aesthetic means. AUGUSTAN DECORATION 67 the Roman method, which Wickhoff so aptly christens illusionist, was not to last, after all, so very long ; in the course of less than a century it gave way to a new desire for showing — regardless of natural depth or per- spective — all parts of an object with the same clearness and prominence as if equidistant from the spectator's eye. A certain amount of convention mingles, however, with the naturalism of the garlands of the Ara. They are suspended between the boukrania by means of rib- bons twisted round the horns, and the fluttering ends of these ribbons are made to fill the spaces above and below the wreaths ; but for the sake of decorative sym- metry the ends flutter in opposite directions. Yet the technique by which these ribbons are rendered is that of the wreath and the exterior reliefs, and shows the same sensitive attention to variation of depth, with the edges and the delicate ends scarcely raised above the background. These fluttering ribbons are a very fami- liar decoration on Roman monuments of all kinds. But at a later date they lose their breezy " illusionist " quality and are crinkled into harsher, more angular folds. Immediately above the central point of the garland, between the fluttering ribbons, we see another bit of convention in the patera imagined as hanging there merely to fill up the space. The boukrania from which the garlands hang are themselves considerable works of art. Not only is the anatomy of the ox-skull rendered with great truth and 68 ROMAN SCULPTURE its decorative capacity thoroughly mastered, but the treatment of the skull, as we find it first on the Ara Pads and again later on countless Roman monuments, differs totally from the Greek. The Roman boukranion, even in pre- Augustan times, is essentially naturalistic ; the whole bony structure is carefully translated, and the cavities of the eyes and nostrils are rendered in all their somewhat gruesome detail. On the other hand, on monuments which, from their provenance, we know to be Greek, and where the scheme of decoration might at first glance seem to differ in no wise from that of Roman monuments of approximately the same period, the boukranion appears as a highly conventionalised pattern. It is not the rich detailed anatomy of the skull which has attracted the artist so much as the decorative quality of the contour of the head.* Sarcophagi and Altars decorated with Garlands. — Foremost among the monuments which may be grouped about the Ara Pacts — the work, it would seem, of the same hand — is the magnificent sarcophagus with garlands and boukrania in Berlin (Cat. of Sculpt., 843)^ The garlands are not quite so rich as on the Ara; there is less long foliage, so that the flowers and fruit have a more compressed appearance, and the boukranion is somewhat more elongated in shape; but "the more essential points, the relation of relief to background, the *$ee the excellent remarks of Altmann, "Architektur und Ornamentik," &c, p. 63 f. f Altmann, ib., p. 67 f. ; Fig. 25 (Sarcophagus Caffarelli). Ub Y OF CA AUGUSTAN DECORATION 69 technique of the fluttering ribbons, and of the paterae and jugs which fill up the empty spaces, are identical and absolutely Augustan. The same may be said of the fragment of a similar sarcophagus in St. Petersburg,* where, however, the sashes are tied up more ornately, and the boukranion is adorned with fillets of knotted wool ; the wreath here is one of laurel leaves and berries, almost breaking at the centre under its own weight. The points of the leaves at the edges of the wreath pass into the ground in true " illusionist " style. Even so a spectator looking at a wreath hung up in real life, receives the impression not of a definite out- line, but rather of edges melting into the ambient air. This remark applies whether we choose to imagine the Augustan wreaths as actually hanging free in space or as hanging against a wall. The beautiful altar with the plane leaves in the Museo delle Terme, cited by WickhofF f as a triumph of the Augustan illusionist manner, has, in the space above the crossing plane-branches, a boukranion magnificent in its realism (Plate XXI.). A long series of sepulchral altars, which can now be conveniently studied with the help of Altmann's book, display the same or similar motives of garlands or branches and boukrania. On Augustan, as on Hellenistic altars before them, Cupids and Victories often appear in place of the boukrania as supporters of garlands. Later, under Tiberius and under Claudius, heads of rams and * Altmann, ib., Fig. 26. t Wickhoff, " Roman Art," Plate IV. 70 ROMAN SCULPTURE heads of Ammon make their appearance as further variations.* As on the Ara Paris, the space above the hollow of the garland is often discreetly adorned by a patera — by the patera alternating with the libation-jug (sarcophagi of Berlin and St. Petersburg) and other sacrificial im- plements. Later on, Gorgoneia, masks, eagles with spread wings, portrait busts, and tablets with the in- scription, are all found as decorations of this space. In sarcophagi, moreover, as we shall see later on, the space is filled at times with whole subject-scenes, as in the magnificent sarcophagus in the Louvre, where subjects taken from the Legend of Actaeon adorn the hollows above the garlands of the front and sides (Clarac- Reinach, 3,4).f I n the earlier types the space below the garland is left empty, or the ends of the sashes are drawn towards the centre to break the bare surface. Later again, various ornaments are introduced in this space also, while at the angles are placed sphinxes, eagles or other supporting objects to balance the supporters of the garlands at the upper angles. These angle decorations are skilfully placed so as to accentuate by movement towards the sides the tridimensional quality * Altmann, " Die Romischen Grabaltare," p. 70 ; " Architektu und Ornamentik," p. 72. f •* Catalogue Sommaire," 459 ; Froehner, 103. The sarco- phagus is, unfortunately, much restored. The date is probably Julio Claudian rather than Augustan, cf. Altmann, p. 288. It should be noted from the outset that on sarcophagi ornament gives way gradually to figure-subjects, which, by the time of the Antonines, are practically the sole decoration. AUGUSTAN DECORATION 71 of the objects decorated. This aesthetic capability of the angle supporters had, it is true, been perceived as early as the fourth century B.C., by the artist of the Asklepios basis from Epidauros,* but as a rule Greek artists preferred to shirk the tridimensional problem by using the circular form of altar. When they employ the square form their tendency is to isolate the decora- tion of each side. The parts appear materially juxta- posed but not aesthetically connected.^ Garlands are also a favourite motive of decoration for every kind of furniture or utensil, in marble, bronze or silver. The bronze tripod in the Museum of Naples is a good exam pie. J The vertical rim of the tray is adorned with boukrania supporting garlands of bay leaves and berries which recall those of the St. Peters- burg fragment, and the fine scroll-work of the stand has affinities to the scrolls of the Ara Pacts. The winged sphinxes are masterpieces of Augustan plastic art, and stand with as much dainty majesty as the lions by Stevens in the British Museum. A finished instance of the Augustan garland, where, in spite of mutilation, we realize that freshness of modelling which suggests, * Arndt-Bruckmann, " Denkmaler," No. 564 ; the basis is now in the Central Museum, Athens. On the front relief we perceive one wing of the Nike and a portion of drapery. The other wing and draperies appear on the return shorter side. See also "Epidaure," by Defrasse and Lechat, 1895^.87, where Lechat severely criticises the Nike without seizing the sculptor's intention. f Altmann, " Grabaltare," p. 8. I Mau-Kelsy, " Pompeii," Fig. 183 ; see also Altmann, op. cit. Fig. 51. P- 59- 72 ROMAN SCULPTURE to Wickhoff, the quality of work in clay, is seen in those garlands of roses suspended above the skeletons who so pleasantly converse or soliloquize on two of the cups from the famous find at Bosco Reale (Plate XXII.).* * " Le Tresor de Bosco Reale," by Heron de Villefosse in Monuments Piot v., 1899, pp. 58-68 Plates V., VII. and VIII. ; the curious subjects of the vase may be briefly de- scribed. In Illustration 1, Zeno and Epicurus, both inscribed (Tffivwv Adrjvaios, TtiTlicovpos AOrjvaios), face one another, each leaning on his staff. Zeno points with scornful gesture at Epicurus, who, amiably unconcerned, is occupied with a cake placed on a tripod-table. A little pig sniffs eagerly at the cake, above which is inscribed the Epicurean maxim, rb tAoj ySavif) ("the end is pleasure "). Below the handle, and scarcely visible in the picture, the dramatist Moschion (Marx**"" Adyvcuos) holds a torch and a mask, while another skeleton sings the words r^pve {tip aea[v~\T6p, ("rejoice while alive") accompanying himself on the heptachord lyre. On the front of the vase, balancing Moschion at the back, is the solitary skeleton of XwpoKXijs A$tjpcl?os, leaning with dignity on his staff. But the second scene illustrated (2) surpasses all the others in its grim humour ; three skeletons are discovered conversing, unmindful of the dread image on the slender twisted column on the right. It is Fate, KXc£0w, who, herself represented as a draped skeleton, extends her arms towards the three. The central skeleton crowns himself with roses ; he is flanked by two tiny skeletons, the first of whom is inscribed Ttp\f/tt (pleasure), while above the head of the second we read the admonition to enjoy ourselves while in life, for to-morrow is uncertain — fav /AfTaXdjSerw yhp atipiop &8r)\iv £. ?."> ALTAI: OF THE VIC0MAGI8TB1 /.or on atdt jminl AUGUSTAN DECORATION 75 naturalistic rendering of oak and laurel leaves, the dainty pose of the Lares. Two more examples, both in the Vatican, may be mentioned. The first serves as basis to the Apollo in the " Sala delle Muse." On the front face, to the left, appears Augustus, with two Lares on the right ; identical sacrificial scenes are represented on the lateral faces ; and on the back is carved the oak wreath.* The second, which is, however, much the earlier in point of time, stands in the Cortile del Belve- dere, and is cited here for its interesting variation from the usual later type.f On the front face, a Victory between laurel branches holds a large shield in place of the later oak wreath ; the " apotheosis of Caesar " occu- pies the back panel .J On the panel of the left side is the u Omen of the Alban sow " (Virg. Mn. viii. 43). On the panel of the right side is an altar with fruit, flanked on the right by a man, on the left by a woman, each holding small statuettes of Lares. A garland with its ribbons is suspended above this scene, and in the space above appear the sacrificial utensils. The beautiful and favourite motive of the oak wreath could be indefinitely followed up, but for the present illustration of its use in the Augustan age two more monuments must suffice. They are both in that rich Museum of Aries, which also has the * Altmann, "Grabaltare" No. 234; one of the sides is illustrated, ib., Fig. 42. •f Altmann, No. 230. J Caesar in his chariot is borne upwards by winged horses. Above, to the left, is the chariot of the sun, to the right the image of Calus, and between the two an eagle. 76 ROMAN SCULPTURE altar with the swans (Plate XIX.). The first of these altars is of the usual type, but is remarkable for the rich beauty of the wreath (Altmann, Fig. 150J. The well-shaped leaves form a gentle hollow, within which lies the acorn. The play of light and shade on both foliage and fluttering ribbons is the result of a naturalistic treatment which contrasts with the stiffness of the second altar (Altmann, Fig. 151). This second example, dedicated to the Bona Dea, is cited here because of the singularity of the wreath, composed of wild oak or ilex foliage — imitated with dry minuteness. On the interesting altar in the Lateran, dedicated to Caius Manlius, the side panels display Lares holding tall laurel branches ; but the back panel, instead of the oak wreath, has a subject-picture (Fortuna surrounded by three male and three female worshippers) to corre- spond to the elaborate sacrificial scene represented on the front (Lateran, Helbig, No. 681 ; Altmann, No. 235).* Plants appear in Greek art only to be conventionalized into architectural forms ; in Roman art the love of natural form conquers the stylistic tendency. To those who are familiar with the conventional forms of the lotus in Egyptian art or of the acanthus in Greek art, it is almost a surprise that even the political Imperial plants, the symbolic laurel and the oak and the olive were never conventionalized, but showered their shapely leaves and fruit over every space artistically available. • The front of the altar is also reproduced in L'Arte, ii. 1899, Fig. 7a. For the inscription see Des-sau, vol. ii. par. i. p. 624, <, No. 6577. ARCHITECTURAL DEP UNIVERSITY OF PLATE XXV To face p. 77 ALTAI: OF AMKMPTUS Ac////- din union AUGUSTAN DECORATION 77 No finer or more instructive instances exist than the cups and other utensils from the treasure at Bosco Reale, with their olive twigs and berries, or their plane leaves.* Other beautiful examples are the cup, decorated with myrtle branches found at Alise, the ancient Alesiaf (Musee de St. Germain),* and several of the cups of the treasure of Hildesheim at Berlin, notably the one decorated with wreaths of fruit, flowers and leaves hanging from thyrsi which cross under the handles.^ The characteristic qualities of the altars of the Augustan period, and that immediately following, are summed up in the altar of Amemptus in the Louvre (Altmann, ill). Amemptus was, as the inscription tells us, a freedman of the Empress Li via, therefore his sepulchral monument cannot be placed earlier than the reign of Tiberius. Let us stand, if possible, before the exquisite original and try to master its details (Plate XXV.). Lighted torches, resting on beautifully carved boars'' heads, act as angle-supporters ; they are placed corner- wise, at once suggesting the sides of the monument, thus helping the spectator unconsciously to realise the third dimension. From the upper ends of the torches hangs a triple garland, the two shorter ends of which are gathered up below the cornice of the altar where a mask hangs from a nail. The longer piece clears the * Monuments Piot, Plates XVII., XVIII. ■f Monuments Piot, ix. 1902, pi. xvi. ; S. Reinach, "Apollo," Fig. 104. X "Der Hildesheimer Silberfund," by E. Pernice and F Winter, Berlin, 1901, PI. X. 78 ROMAN SCULPTURE corners of the tablet which bears the inscription, and, in the lower intervening space, supports a magnificent eagle with outstretched wings. Then, in the second space between the garland and the base of the altar, is a subject in the romantic vein of the Augustan period. A handsome bearded Centaur and a young Centauress are playing love-ditties to one another; he supports the stately lyre on his raised left knee, and turns half round to catch the notes from the flute of the roguish Eros who is riding on his back. She the while plays the double flute, while on her back Psyche, known by her butterfly wings and riding much more demurely than her playmate, accompanies with the castagnettes. Between the pair are a horn and a large pitcher which has overturned. The theme, though doubtless inspired by types long current, is retold with indescribable charm and freshness. Beside the garlands long knotted woollen fillets hang down on either side. At the back and sides the short garlands reappear, but from the central nail, instead of a mask, we find — at the back the ox-skull, and at the sides the skulls of stags (perhaps in allusion to this animal's longevity). Below are seen the favourite laurel branches of Augustan art, framing various sacrificial and emblematic objects. Another richly decorated altar, also in the Louvre, is shown by the heads of Ammon at the angles to belong to a somewhat later period, probably to that of Nero or Claudius (Altmann, 77). In the space between the inscription tablet and the wreath is a magnificent Gorgon's head flanked by swans ; behind the wreath a AUGUSTAN DECORATION 79 Nereid rides on a sea monster, within the coils of whose tail gaily gambol three Erotes. This altar, which may belong to the middle of the first century, shows the increasing desire to cover all available surface with ornament. Finally, a third beautiful altar in the Louvre, decorated with rams 1 heads and sphinxes — that of P. Fundanius Velinus — comes within the same ornate category (Altmann, 42). In citing certain later altars from the age of Tiberius or even that of Claudius, we have anticipated our dates. But because these sepulchral altars form a compact series, developing along well-marked lines, it seemed reasonable to consider them in a group, in connection with the Ara Paris, which contains the elements of their decoration. In the second century their artistic significance diminishes as they are gradually supplanted by sarcophagi, which, under Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius, develop, as we shall see, forms of art peculiarly original and instructive. Neither the small altars nor the larger sarcophagi must be taken too seriously as manifestations of any very lofty aesthetic ideals. But where the record is so scanty they have an undoubted value, precisely like the numberless stelai of Attic art, as filling up gaps in the artistic link. CHAPTER III AUGUSTUS TO NERO Scarcity of extant monuments — The Ara Pacts and kindred picture Reliefs — Two silver cups from Bosco Reale in the Rothschild collection — Augustan Cameos in Vienna and Paris — The Bases of Sorrento and Puteoli — Augustan Art in the Provinces — The Tropaeum at Adamklissi and kindred monuments — The Tomb of the Julii at St. Remy, and the Arch at Orange. The rapid changes which Rome underwent in the first century B.C., the great fire of Nero, the extensive public works undertaken in the second century by Trajan and the Antonine Emperors, account in great measure for the scantiness, especially in Rome, of monuments from the Augustan and Julio-Claudian periods. In fact, till the comparatively recent discovery of the Ara Paris, there were practically none which could be dated with any certainty, and thus afford a point of departure for the study of kindred art. We have already detected in a number of altars and sarcophagi of the first cen- tury the artistic influence of the flower and plant decoration of the Ara Paris* A number of other works can be brought into relation to its other sculptures. PLATE XXVI Schreiber, Brunnenreliefs To f< ice p. 80 DETAIL FROM FOUNTAIN RELIEF / ienna ARCHITECTURAL r LIE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AUGUSTUS TO NERO Si The slab with the sacrifice to Tellus on the left of the main entrance of the Ara Paris proves, as Wickhoff first saw, the Augustan origin of a series of reliefs which had previously been classed as Hellenistic* Even now archaeologists, arguing from similarities of subject or type to the neglect of style and tendency, insist on placing them in pre-Roman times. Yet the art of certain so-called " Hellenistic " reliefs is clearly allied to that of the Ara Paris. This is specially evi- dent in two fountain reliefs at Vienna which form the basis of WickhofFs inquiry into the relation of this class of work to Augustan art. These Vienna examples are pendants ; the one represents a sheep with her lamb, the other a lioness with her cubs.f Each group is placed within a rocky hollow, whence the animals emerge into the contrasting light. The method of lighting is accordingly analogous to that employed for the camilli on the slab of the Ara with the Sacrifice to Tellus. Other points of stylistic similarity may be detected in the character of the garlands {Ara and Lioness), and in the realistic rendering of the gnarled tree-trunks in all three reliefs. The springing flowers on the left of the tree in the " Ewe and her Lamb," closely resemble those on the Tellus slab of the Ara, while the cottage or shed on the right with its open door, within * Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 35. t First published by Th. Schreiber, "Die Bmnnen Reliefs aus Palazzo Grimani" (with five plates); Wickhoff, "Roman Art," Plates V., VI. ; the "Lioness," reproduced in Springer- Michaelis, Fig. 509 (where the relief is still erroneously classed as Hellenistic); also S. Reinach, " Apollo," Fig. 12?. ¥ 82 ROMAN SCULPTURE which is seen another animal, recalls the little temple of the Penates. The carefully studied projections of the relief, the skilfully graded intrusion of light, the sug- gestion of atmosphere, are all factors unknown to Greek art, with its severe attention to the silhouette and con- sequent rejection of every effect interfering with the clearness of the edges in a design. The same calculated effects of light and shade, accompanied by an almost identical technique, are found in the charming relief from a fountain in the Lateran, showing a little Satyr eagerly drinking from a large horn which a nymph holds up to him (Helbig, 648) * It is the art of the Vienna reliefs, with their distinctive lighting. This time it is Pan who issues from the rocky cave into the light ; a second smaller cave or hollow, within which is a goat, is seen at the entrance of the larger ; just outside on a ledge of the rock sits another goat. A finer version of the boy Satyr is to be seen on a fragment in the Vatican ; f the little body thrills with physical enjoyment ; the firm and soft tex- ture of the young flesh is rendered with great brilliancy, the forms are strong and tender, the head has the massive bony structure so visible in babyhood (Schreiber, " Hellenistische Reliefs/'' xxviii). The whole is a gem of Augustan naturalism. This scheme, whereby one side of a relief is filled by a mass of rock, which conditions the lighting of the composition, may be further traced * Amelung-Holtzinger, "Museums and Ruins," i. p. 140 ; Fig. 31. f Candelabri, 243 A ; Helbig, 394 ; cf. Amelung-Holtzinger, " Museums and Ruins," i. p. 130. PLATE XXVII Vo/aeep. 82 2. Augustus receives the homage of conquered peoples S1LVEK CUP FROM BOSCO BEALK Collection Ed, de Hothachild Mont. I'oit 3ITY OF CAL1 A AUGUSTUS TO NERO 83 in the " Perseus and Andromeda " of the Capitoline Museum.* A similar treatment of trees and foliage, as on the Ara Pacts and the Grimani reliefs, is seen in the " Peasant driving his cow to market " of the Glyptothek (Cat. 30i),f where, as Wickhoff has pointed out, the more crowded landscape indicates a later date. The per- sistence of the style may be seen in the " Boatman enter- ing a harbour" in the Capitol,J which Wickhoff is assuredly right in dating as late as the second century a.d. ; in both these later reliefs we again find the little gable-roofed buildings which, with only slight variations, can serve as cottage or as shrine. Two Silver Cups from Bosco Reale. — Variations of the processional and sacrificial themes of the Ara Paris may be studied in the reliefs of the two most magnificent of the silver cups from the famous find at Bosco Reale§ (Plate XXVII.). These deserve detailed attention. On the principal side of the first cup, in the centre, is seated a Roman Emperor, whom we can have no hesitation in calling Augustus. He is draped in the toga, holds the Imperial globe in one * Helbig, 469 ; Schreiber, PI. XII. f Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 40, Fig. 1 5 ; Schreiber, PI. LXXX. % Ibid. p. 43, Fig. 17 ; Schreiber, PI. LXXIX. § Of the 109 pieces of which this silver service consists, 101 are in the Louvre, one is in the British Museum, while six more — among them the two discussed above — belong to the private •collection of Baron Edmond de Rothschild in Paris. See Monu- ments Piot., vol. v. 1899, where the cups are magnificently repro- duced, with an excellent descriptive text by Heron de Villefosse, whose interpretation of the subjects I have in the main followed. 8 4 ROMAN SCULPTURE hand and a roll or volumen in the other ; he sits on a chair without a back and with the curved feet which distinguish the sella curulis from the chair with straight crossing legs — the sella castrensis or camp-stool on which Augustus sits in the second relief of this same cup. A processional group is approaching the Emperor, but exigencies of space compel the splitting of the group, one half of which appears to approach him from his right, the other from his left. In the finely modelled female figure who presents a statuette of Victory to the Emperor we should recognize, I think, not the Empress Livia, but the Roman Virtus (Valour), She is followed by the charming figure of the Genius Populi Romania who holds a patera and the horn of plenty ; at his side is a winged Love-god as symbol of fertility. Behind comes the personified City — the goddess Roma — herself. Her left foot is supported on a helmet, while the spear she rested on is lost. From the other side advances the War-god Mars — here as elsewhere the male counterpart of Virtus — presenting personifications of conquered countries ; the only one that can be identified with certainty is Africa, with her helmet of elephant hide. Nothing can surpass the shrinking grace and tender pathos of these female figures, or the artistry with which the effect of a crowd is conveyed by means of only four figures. It is the same skilful grouping which we observed in the spectators of the Ara Pacts, and of which we shall have a still grander example on the panels of the Arch of Titus. P. o u ' OF CALIF AUGUSTUS TO NERO 85 On the other face of the vase, we pass from the general to the particular. The Emperor, seated on the military faldstool, surrounded by his six lictors and two officers of the Praetorian Guard, is receiving a group of barbarians presented to him by a Roman general. The grouping equals in spontaneity and grace the provinces of the principal face. These con- quered people are bringing their children to the Emperor, who is conceived, not a? a stern conqueror, but as a benign divinity, to whom the little ones put up their hands in trust. It has been pointed out that this seems the first appearance of a scheme which was utilised by Christian artists for pictures of the Adoration of the Kings.* Behind this first group comes another chieftain presenting his two sons to the Emperor. Behind this group again comes a third bearded barbarian, unceremoniously carrying his boy on his shoulders, as if to let the child see from a point of vantage what is taking place. The boy holds on by clasping his hands round his father's forehead, and watches with the serious absorption of childhood. It is a composition which we find repeatedly in Koman art (p. 222 from the Arch of Trajan at Benevento ; Plate XCII. 4, from the Con- giarium of Marcus Aurelius). The height obtained by this group prevents the composition from sinking in importance on this side. Apart from the penetrative charm with which the episode is delineated, the figures are grouped so as to produce an illusion of natural space or depth, in a * By Heron de Villefosse, op. cit. t p. 156. 86 ROMAN SCULPTURE manner which is quite unknown in any Hellenistic work, and which marks an advance upon the Ara Pacu. The artist surpasses his first achievement on the principal face of the vase. For he is here also dealing with what is to all intents and purposes a processional group, but he has known how to show it without having recourse, as in the first scene, to the naive device, familiar from the Parthenon downwards, of splitting up the procession into two halves, each converging towards the central figure of the central group. He has shown us the scene as a pictorial whole, giving it unity by the skilful distribution of the figures that compose the Imperial guard, in such a manner that they effect a fusion between the central group and the advancing chieftains. This psychical unity of the two scenes is unparalleled in any previous work. On the pendant cup we find the earliest known instance of an Imperial procession — it is uncertain whether triumphal or only sacrificial — with the Emperor mounted on his chariot. On the first or chief face the Imperator — with features strongly resembling those of Tiberius* — is seen on his chariot ; he holds the eagle-crowned sceptre in one hand, and the olive branch * I incline to refer both cups to the German campaign of B.C. 8-7, after which Augustus and Tiberius were both acclaimed imperalores. Augustus, however, declined the honour of a triumph, but Tiberius entered Rome as triump hator, and received the con- sulship for the next year (cf. Gardthausen, "Augustus" i. p. 1 091). H. de Villefosse thinks two separate incidents are represented on the second cup —the procession on the occasion of the First Consulship of Tibe r ius, i.e., B.C. 13, and the nuncupatio votomm of B.C. 12, before his departure for Pannonia. PLATE XXIX — 7 1. The Triumph of Tiberius \ To face p. 86 2. Sacrifice of a Bull SILVER CUP FROM BOSCO KEALE Collection Ed. de Rothschild Mows. Piot Y OF CAL AUGUSTUS TO NERO 87 in the other ; a young attendant standing behind him in the car holds the oak crown (the corona civica) above his head. Behind the chariot walk four of the Imperial bodyguard, with olive branches instead of weapons. One of them arrests his companion's attention and seizes his arm to compel him to turn round. The movement is admirably conceived, the momentary arrest of these two figures emphasizing the onward march of the rest of the procession. The heads of the horses are unfortunately much damaged ; just behind them a group of lictors is spread out so skilfully as to link this first incident of the procession to the second, where the bull is led to sacrifice by the attendant. (Plate XXIX.) These two scenes may be said to constitute one act, of which the sequel appears on the other side of the vase. The military personage, unfortunately damaged beyond recognition, is doubtless the Emperor of the chariot at the moment when, previous to the sacrifice, he has exchanged his civic for his military costume. The slaying of the bull in the next scene is treated with singular power. In the figure of the attendant who holds down the bull's head, the tension of the muscles of the knee and of the shoulders and arm shows the force employed in the act. The third attendant, nude to the waist, swings the axe with a vigorous movement that animates his whole frame. The highest mastery is attained in the bull. The receding hindquarters are in lower relief, which gradually increases till the big powerful head stands out in the round. The 88 ROMAN SCULPTURE contraction of back and neck necessitated by the fore- shortening accentuates the animal's agony. Augustan Cameos and Gems. — This is the place to mention the scenes of triumph or apotheosis on the famous cameos of Vienna and Paris (Plates XXX. and XXXI.). On the first of these, the celebrated Gemma Augustea,* the picture is divided into an upper zone, with the main subject, and a lower, somewhat smaller zone, with a scene of subordinate interest. In the upper row Augustus and Roma sit enthroned side by side, with the symbol of Capricornus, the constel- lation appropriated by Augustus,! visible in the space between the two heads. Behind, three figures form a group of great beauty ; they are : a woman generally interpreted as 17 otjcou/ievi?, i.e., the inhabited Earth, placing the oak crown (see above, p. 73) on the Emperor's head; a bearded man, probably Octanus or Coelus ; finally, Tellus or Terra Mater, already familiar from the Ara Pacts. She sits with the horn of plenty resting on her lap, and a child on either side of her. On the left is a complicated composition surpassing anything hitherto attempted in art; a chariot is shown from the back, and stepping out of it to the front edge of the picture is Tiberius, draped in the toga and holding the sceptre. Standing behind him in the chariot which she has brought to a stand - * Furtwangler, " Antike Gemmen," Plate LVI., with full descriptive text. \ Suetonius, " Augustus," 94. AUGUSTUS TO NERO 89 still is a Victory with outstretched wings. One of the horses is shown reined back ; in front of this horse, facing the spectator, stands a youth, identified as Germanicus.* In the lower zone Roman soldiers erect a trophy. Seated on the left are two prisoners of war, a bearded man and his wife. On the right two soldiers seize another couple by the hair. In the tendency to isolate the groups, and to give almost equal importance to the subject of the lower zone, we detect a survival of Hellenic influence, which vanishes in the great com- position to be considered next. The cameo is attributed by Furtwangler to Dioscorides (see below). The celebrated Paris Cameo — le grand camee de Frame — the largest, it is said, of all antique sardonyx cameos, is cut in as many as five layers. It represents living members of the Julio-Claudian family protected by the deified Augustus. In the centre is the superb group of Tiberius with Livia at his side, and before him stands Germanicus with his mother Antonia. Further to the left are the boy Caligula and Agrippina, the wife of Germanicus. On the right the younger Drusus, son of Tiberius, with his wife Livilla. Above, among other heroised members of the Julian house, appears Augustus, borne aloft by an allegorical figure * Gardthausen, " Augustus unci seine Zeit," vol. i. p. 1228, refers the event depicted to the triumph of Tiberius in the year a.d. 13. The moment chosen would be that in which, as the pro- cession turned from the Forum to the Capitol, Tiberius descended from his chariot, and bowed the knee before Augustus (Suet., Tib., 20). 90 ROMAN SCULPTURE who holds the globe as a symbol of power. In a lower strip, forming a sort of exergue to the main composition, is a group of captives, conspicuous among them a lovely woman with long flowing hair, pressing her child to her. The history of this famous gem, the numberless inter- pretations of its personages, must be read elsewhere.* For our purpose, it is more important to seize its peculiarly Roman character and the advance in spatial composition which it displays over the Vienna cameo. A greater appearance of unity of design is attained by reducing the height of the lower zone. This no longer invites by its size equal attention with the main subject, but is strictly subordinated to it. In the main picture, moreover, the different parts of the composition are fused with considerable skill — as, for instance, on the right, where the trophy carried by Drusus links the lower figures to the heroized group above, and where his right hand, upstretched towards the deified Augustus, is made to fill up the space beneath the hoofs of the winged horse. Furtwangler rightly observes that the picture — excepting, of course, the lower narrow strip — must be viewed as a whole, and not as consisting of an upper and a lower zone. No sort of reproduction can do justice to this exquisite work, with the Rubens-like opulence of its forms, its mastery of design, the warm colours of the stone itself, the skill with which they have been discovered and utilized by the artist, the feeling for light and shadow displayed throughout. * Furtwangler, " Antike Gemmen," text to Plate LX. Babelon, " Catalogue des Camees," p. 136. PLATE XX XI p. 9U LE GRAND CAMEE DE FBAHCl Jiibliothi Titus, 79-81 a.d. — Sculptures on the Arch of Titus — Sculpture under Domitian, 81-96 A.Drf. SENATUS POPULUSQUE ROMANUS DIVO TITO DIVI VESPASIANI F VESPASIANO AUGUSTO Incessant renewal and transformation are among the most necessary conditions of artistic progress. Without the spur of new subjects and the intervention of new ideals, the most splendid school, the most vital § tradition, can only issue in monotonous repetition. Owing to the dearth of monuments we cannot precisely gauge the condition of sculpture at the close of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. But an art so essentially national in character as was Roman sculpture must have suffered from the absence of any inspiriting influences such as those which, under Augustus, had animated it into new life. We have already seen (p. 95) that Tiberius, when Emperor, showed himself no very zealous patron of contemporary art. Under Claudius (41-54 a.d.) there was an almost unparalleled building activity, but this was chiefly of an utilitarian character (harbours, canals, PLATE XXXIII To face j>. Iu2 PORTRAIT OF VESPASIAN Museo delle Term Minar, Y OF C. THE FLAVIAN AGE 103 aqueducts), which gave small scope for the decorative arts. Till lately, indeed, it was supposed that certain sculptured panels in the Villa Borghese came from an Arch of Claudius, which spanned the Via Lata, but these have been shown by Mr. Stuart Jones to belong to the period of Trajan.* Nero (54-68 a.d.) was one of the greatest collectors of antiquity. Two exquisite statues — among the very finest of any period — bear witness to his excellent taste. One is the " Priestess, 11 f now in the Villa of Prince Ludovico Chigi at Anzio, where, on a stormy night of February, 1878, it was disclosed by a sort of landslip in a niche of the retaining wall of Nero's Palace. The other is the more famous but not more beautiful u Kneeling or Running Boy " (Museo delle Terme), from the ruins of the Neronian Villa at Subiaco.J In Rome, the M Golden House " contained a priceless collection, which was afterwards removed by Vespasian to the Temple of Peace (Pliny, " Nat. Hist., 11 xxxiv. 84). We may feel certain that the palaces and villas built by Nero to house such treasures were worthy of their contents. Moreover, the Prince, who "as a boy, was trained in almost all the liberal arts 11 (liberalis disciplines omnis fere puer attigit, Suetonius, " Nero, 1 ' 52,) and who himself developed a pleasant talent (non mediocre . . . studium) both in paint- ing and in sculpture, must by his example alone have * " Papers of the British School at Rome," iii., 1906, p. 215 ff. Below p. 165. \ Photo, Moscioni ; W. Altmann, " Das Madchen von An- tium," in Oesterreichische Jahteshefte, vi., 1903, p. 136, PI. VII. X Helbig, " Fuhrer," No. 1125 ; Amelung-Holtzinger, "Mu- seums," p. 280 f. ; Fig. 160. io 4 ROMAN SCULPTURE encouraged the art of his period. But everything appertaining to Nero and his enterprises was even more ruthlessly and completely swept away than, at a later date, were the monuments of Domitianic art. Nor, indeed, were sculpture and the other arts likely to have remained unaffected by the depression, almost verging on ruin, that set in with the last disastrous years of Nero's reign and reached its lowest depth in the tragic Year of the Four Emperors. With the accession of Vespasian, however, foreign exploits and victories, followed by dazzling pageants at home, once more stirred the enthusiasm and the imagination of the Roman people and found expression in that great Flavian sculpture which in one sense marks the high-water level of Roman artistic achieve- ment. Under Vespasian (69-79 A - D -)» intellectual and artistic life received an enormous impulse from the direct encouragement of the Emperor.* He favoured and protected men of letters, restored the Capitol and placed in his Forum and Temple of Peace a collection of works of art worthy to vie with that brought together by Augustus in the Porticus Octaviae.f If he pulled down Nero's Golden House to court popular favour, he yet so far made up for this artistic crime by building on its site the Coliseum and the superb baths called after his son Titus. It follows that sculpture * See Dill, " Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius," p. 148. f For the works of art in the Gallery of Octavia and in the Temple of Peace see the Museographic Index to " Pliny's Chapters on the History of Art " (ed. by K. Jex- Blake and E. Sellers). THE FLAVIAN AGE 105 also resumed its place as an exponent of national power and prowess. Under the Flavians, moreover, aesthetic formulas were once more rejuvenated by foreign influ- ence — mainly Graeco-Syrian in character.* Once more too, as under Augustus, the Romans transmuted what they borrowed in a profoundly original manner. From the East came richer architectural forms and peculiarly luxuriant systems of ornament, but in Rome these were made subordinate to the main subject which continued to be exclusively concerned with human figures and events. Of actual sculpture from the reign of Vespasian, however, we possess but scanty traces, if any. The best preserved as well as the most interesting extant sculptures of the Flavian age were not completed till the principate of Domitian (81-96 a.d.), the third of the Flavian dynasty. They adorn the Arch, erected to immortalize the conquest of Judaea by Vespasian and Titus and the capture of Jerusalem (71 a.d.). The arch stands on the Velia, the ridge which joins the Palatine to the Esq ui line, and thus spans the Sacred Way at its highest point {in Sacra Via summa).f The inscription records its dedication to " the god Titus, * C. Gurlitt, " Geschichte der Kunst," i. p. 308, is of opinion that the Arch of Titus not only points to Palestine and Syria, but that prisoners were made to erect it in order to teach the Eastern methods of construction to the Romans. This is surely straining the evidence rather far. However, I presume that all this applies neither tq the figure sculpture of the Arch of Titus nor to Flavian portraiture. t S. Reinach, "l'Arc de Titus, et les Depouilles du Temple de Jerusalem," 1890. On the position of the Arch, and its probable removal under Hadrian, see Hiilsen, " Roman Forum," p. 236. 106 ROMAN SCULPTURE son of the god Vespasian. " The title of divus, and the representation of his apotheosis, show that, even if the arch was begun in the lifetime of Titus,it was not finished till after his death in 81 a.d., and therefore belongs properly to the reign of his brother Domitian.* Of the arches now extant in Rome, that of Titus is the simplest in type — it consists of a central passage, flanked by piers adorned by columns acting as supports to the architrave. Decoration is as yet sparingly employed ; *f a frieze covered the architrave, and sculp- tured panels were let into the walls of the passage. The pylons seem to have been pierced with windows, while, in the Arch of Trajan at Benevento, the pylons, like the walls of the passage, are covered with rich reliefs. A further elaboration of the type, with triple doorway, as at Orange, is seen in the Arch of Septimius Severus, and in the still more splendid Arch of Constantine. The figures on the key-stones are mutilated beyond identification, but, on the analogy of similar monuments, that on the side facing the Coliseum is probably Roma, and the figure holding a horn of abundance on the other side, towards the Forum, is presumably Pax, the goddess of Peace, or the Genius Populi Romani. The four Victories of the spandrils are good decorative figures, of a type recurring repeatedly in Roman art. Both appear to be soaring upwards, supported on a * For the inscriptions, see beginning of chapter and Dessau, " Inscriptiones," vol. i. p. 71. No - 26 S- t t It is confined, that is to say, to definite spaces. The fresh Eastern influence makes itself most felt in the rich composite capitals and in the coffered ceiling of the archway. THE FLAVIAN AGE 107 globe representing the earth. The Victory on the left holds a standard, that on the right the palm and wreath. The sculptured decorations fall into three groups, forming a sort of trilogy in honour of the deified Titus. On the frieze and the slabs of the archway are repre- sented the triumphal pageant, while on the key-stone of the archway is the apotheosis of Titus borne up to the gods upon the Imperial eagle. The frieze, which is only fifty centimetres high, adorns the architrave on the side of the Coliseum. Only portions of it are preserved, and these are badly mutilated ; it is possible to make out the procession of the sacrificial animals and a number of personages, some of them in civilian, others in military costume, all moving in procession to the right. The reclining figure, which is carried by three men, has been interpreted as. that of the river-god, Jordan. We know from classical authors that the impersonated rivers of the conquered lands were prominent figures in the triumphs of the Roman generals.* In Caesar's first triumph over Gaul, the Rhine, the Rhone, and even the Ocean figured in the procession. In the second triumph over Egypt, the River Nile was carried in triumph. In the triple triumph of Augustus in B.C. 29 images of the Euphrates, the Rhine (Rhenus bicornis) and the Araxes were displayed,! while Ovid, predicting to Tiberius a new triumph over the provinces, calls up pro- phetically the image of the mourning Rhine, hiding * See the examples collected by S. Reinach, op. cit. p. 20. t Virgil, "Aeneid," viii. 726 f. 108 ROMAN SCULPTURE his disordered tresses beneath his broken reeds.* Though the texts are numerous, and isolated recum- bent figures of river-gods are not unfrequently found on the coinage of the conquered countries, the Jordan on the Arch of Titus affords the only instance of a river-god actually carried in the procession. If we stand inside the arch, with our back to the Forum, we have on our right the famous panel repre- senting Roman soldiers carrying the sacred utensils from the Temple of Jerusalem. t We see the table for the shewbread ; | the long trumpets which summoned the people to prayer or to battle, § and the seven-branched candlestick.|| On the tablets which two of the soldiers carry at the end of long poles were once inscribed the names of the conquered cities of Judaea. The sacred objects were to be deposited in Vespasian's Temple of * Squalidus immersos fracta sub arundine crines Rhenus, et infectas sanguine portet aquas.J Ovid, Ep. iii., 4, 107. t Josephus, de Bell. Jud. vii. 16: ". . . and in everyplace were carried the spoils taken in war ; amongst all which, those that were taken in the Temple of Jerusalem were most excellent, for there was a golden table weighing many talents, and likewise a golden candlestick . . . composed of a central stem attached to a base, and out of it proceeded smaller branches disposed like the prongs of the forked trident, every one being at the top made like a lamp, which were seven in number, showing the honour of the seventh day, which is called the Sabbath among the Jews" (cf. transl. Tho. Lodge, p. 751). Gibbon's account of the vicissitudes of the " holy instruments of the Jewish worship " should be read (ed. Bury, vol. iv., p. 5 f.). I It is the table of shittim wood overlaid with pure gold, which is described in Exodus xxv. 23. § Numbers x. 2. || Exodus xxv. 31. PLATE XXXIV fr.108 SCULPTURED PANELS PROM AIM II <>F TITUS AUnari UNIVERSITY OF CALIFOR THE FLAVIAN AGE 109 Peace, by the side of the Greek works of art rescued from the Golden House of Nero. They apparently remained in Rome till it was stormed by Gaiseric in 455.* They were then taken to Carthage, whence, after the conquest of the Vandalic kingdom of Africa by Belisarius in 534 a.d., they were transferred to Constantinople to figure in the triumph so glowingly described by Gibbon (ed. Bury, vol. iv. p. 293). Eventually, Justinian, moved by certain superstitious terrors, restored the sacred utensils to Jerusalem. Henceforth they vanish from history ,f though M. Salo- mon Reinach conjectures that they probably only disappeared finally in 614, when Jerusalem was taken and sacked by the Persian king Chosroes II. (Gibbon, ed. Bury, vol. v. p. 70). On the left panel of the archway is the Emperor in the triumphal chariot, with Victory at his side, escorted by allegorical figures of Rome and the Roman people, who mingle freely, however, among the Imperial escort. The Genius Populi Romani, a classical figure, draped only below the waist, stands by the chariot, while Roma, in full panoply, is seen at the horses'' head. In looking from one relief to the other we are dis- * For the ill-authenticated tradition that Maxentius, after his defeat at theMilvian Bridge, threw the candlestick into the Tiber, where it abides till the day of judgment or the coming of the Messiah, see S. Reinach, p. 25, note. f See Reland, " De Spoliis Templi Hierosolymitani in arcu Titiano," 1746, pp. 137-138. Cf. Levesque in Vigoureux's "Dictionary of the Bible," s.v., and Cheyne's "Encyclopaedia Biblica," s.v. iio ROMAN SCULPTURE turbed by the fact that two scenes which in life were consecutive are here represented as parallel events. A similar flaw was noticed in the case of the processions of the Ara Pacts. The error arises from the endeavour to adapt a processional scheme to a monument of un- suitable shape. It will be best to relinquish the attempt at unifying the composition and study each panel by itself on its own merits. These panels, famous from time immemorial because of the illustration they afford of one of the most striking events in history, had been, from the artistic point of view, discussed only in the most general and common- place terms, till in 1894 Wickhoff startled the world of archaeologists and critics by placing them on the same level of achievement — and for much the same aesthetic reasons — as the masterpieces of Velasquez. The passage, though now almost classical, must be quoted in full : — On the arch of Titus the reliefs are worked in real stone style out of blocks, whose original surface, preserved at the upper and lower edge, limits the depth of the relief. The latter exhibits a subtle variation of depth from the figures of the front plane to the flatly w r orked heads of the lowest layer on their vanishing background. The common statement that the artist worked in three planes is not quite accurate, because the swellings and sinkings of the surface are very subtle and depend on the variety of effect to be gained, but not on definite levels. All relation of the separate groups and figures to the architecture, such as is maintained in the Pergamene sculptures, is here ignored, or, more exactly, purposely avoided. A frame is simply THE FLAVIAN AGE m hrown open, and through it we look at the march past of the triumphal procession. We are to believe that the people are moving there before our eyes ; we are no longer to be reminded of pictures ; rather the plastic art tries to attain by its own methods the same effect as would a highly developed art of painting* — the impression of complete illusion. Beauty of line, symmetry of parts, such as a con- ventional art demands, are no longer sought for. Every- thing is concentrated on the one aim of producing an impression of continuous motion. Air, light, and shade are all pressed into the service and must help to conjure up reality. The relief has respiration, like the pictures of Velasquez. But, as it is the real and not painted air that filters in between the figures, it follows that all the master's art is brought to bear on such a skilful arrangement of groups as, in spite of the compression, may allow air to pass between, above, and around the figures, thus helping to supplement the modelling, even as the sunlight which, when it breaks in, awakens these figures to magic life. To allow natural illumination to contribute to the perfecting of the artistic effect was one of the boldest innovations. On the success of this startling experiment depends the whole marvellous effect of this relief, unequalled except in the " Spinning Girls " in Madrid. — " Roman Art/' p. 78. The observation, that the actual block of marble has now become not simply the material but the very medium of effect, is of capital importance. The neutral, or tactile background as Riegl would call it, a * On the other hand, I assume, that, up to a point, sculpture and painting followed the same development, ii2 ROMAN SCULPTURE mere dead wall of uniform depth against which the figures detach themselves, is now transformed into a living mass, out of which the sculptor calls forth by means of his chisel, movement, light and shadow, as the painter with his brush would call them forth out of the plane surface of his canvas or his wood panel. In other words, after centuries of groping, sculpture has dis- covered the third dimension, not indeed because it tries, as so often asserted, to imitate painting, but because, like painting, it has reached a stage where, by simple normal development, the problems of space must be attempted. Up to a point, at any rate — and one which the present writer believes was never passed by the Antique — the development of painting and sculpture is the same. Long ago this had been claimed as regards painting and the branch of sculpture known as relief; it is now, since the researches of Loewy,* admitted to be true also of sculpture " in the round." In fact there is but one formative art finding expression in different materials, and the limitations which the material im- posed upon the artists were of a tactile nature only. Not until the great fundamental problems of form had been solved did artists become aware apparently of the several aesthetic capabilities of the different materials. For instance, the phrase "imitation of bronze technique," though still current, needs to be modified if not aban- doned as regards the antique. Whether working in bronze or marble, the artists were attempting the same * E. Loewy, " The Interpretation of Nature in Older Greek Art," passim. THE FLAVIAN AGE 113 problems, hence the same technical effects ; whether working with brush or with chisel, they were again striving for similar effects, hence people, judging with insufficient knowledge of the actual phenomena, speak of the "sculptural quality of Greek painting" and the ** pictorial quality of Roman sculpture." These phrases have a certain captivating precision, but they are false and misleading. Greek painting, so far as we know it, shares the qualities of Greek sculpture because both, to the extent allowed by the mere physical conditions imposed by the material, are in the same stage of development. It is true that animated gesture will be expressed in painting and in relief — which is merely painting in relief — long before it is even attempted in " sculpture in the round," but that is merely because the background affords a material or tactile support. Roman sculpture, on the other hand, appears " pic- torial " only because we have arbitrarily chosen to take the Greek sculpture of a certain period as our standard, instead of realising that sculpture, like painting, must normally progress towards a stage where the tridimen- sional problem forces itself upon the artist. In the panel with the holy vessels, the surging, swelling movement of the procession is magnificently rendered. A rich rhythmic progression pervades the figures, from the man standing still on the left to the figures on the right, who pass under the arch almost at running speed. Moreover, owing to the skill with which the figures have been cut out of the marble block in varying depths, the spectator receives the H U4 ROMAN SCULPTURE impression of looking not only along a line of proces- sion, as on a Greek relief, for instance, or on the Ara Paris, but of penetrating its ranks. These great things, and many others pointed out by WickhofF, have been attained ; but that the sculptor does not yet fully command the resources of art is shown by the dispropor- tion between the arch and the human figures, and in the absence of the most elementary laws of perspective, which might enable the sculptor to place the arch in some sort of just relation to the orientation of the procession. This is evidently conceived as passing straight in front of the spectator, yet the arch is placed in a three-quarter view, so that none of the figures are really going through it, but are passing between it and the frame of the relief. If we turn to the panel with the triumphal chariot, the same graduated rhythm, the same animation of pose and movement, of light and shadow, strike us, with the same and even greater defects of perspectival composi- tion. The group in the chariot, and the group below, between the chariot and the frame, are in themselves of extraordinary beauty. They face the spectator frontal ly, presenting a majestic breadth of composition. The Emperor stands there much in the pose of the Augustus on the Ara Paris, while on his left, the pose of Victory, who crowns him with her right hand and spreads both her wings on her left, adds greatly to the massive dignity of the group. The lines of the wings, moreover, connect the group of the chariot with the group below on the right. But how is this chariot group related to THE FLAVIAN AGE 115 the horses ? To our uneasiness we perceive them almost at right angles to the chariot, moving sideways from right to left. The horses themselves offer a curious blending of defects and merits. Their heads have animation and even individuality of pose — in this they are far superior to the dull beasts which draw the chariot of Marcus Aurelius on the Relief in the Conservatori (p. 291) — but the bodies are placed con- ventionally. In reality they are moving four abreast, but this is indicated merely by the symmetrical pro- jection of one horse beyond the other without any perspectival diminution. It is simply laughable to speak of " pictorial sculpture " here, in the light of our knowledge of true pictorial relief in the Italian Renaissance (any panel of Ghiberti's Bronze Gates, for instance). The artists of the Arch of Titus failed neither in artistic intention nor in technical capacity, nor were they unable, as their predecessors had been, to apprehend spatial effects, but they lacked the science of perspective, which Europe was not to obtain for nearly thirteen centuries. The discovery of per- spective, and the reduction of its laws to a system, constitutes, perhaps, one of the few landmarks which really define the end of one epoch and the beginning of another. By its help the Quattrocentists were able to seize and hold what in Roman art was after all only a transient phase. The absence of any known laws applicable to the further development of the problem attacked on the Arch of Titus is doubtless the cause of the comparative backsliding of art in the period of n6 ROMAN SCULPTURE v. B Trajan. When episodes on a vast scale had to be depicted, demanding the representation of a number of personages, of landscape, buildings, and other objects, the simple perspectival resources at the command of Roman artists failed them, and they fell back upon older schemes out of which they evolved that continuous style of pictorial narrative which was to dominate the artistic imagination of Europe for many centuries to come. The remark of Wickhoff in the passage quoted above, that "all relation of the groups and figures to the architecture ... is here ignored, or, more exactly, purposely avoided,'" is certainly true, though not every one will see a special merit in such avoidance. It suggests the faults criticised by Vernon Lee in certain frescoes of Masaccio, Ghirlandajo and Signorelli who turn the wall into a mere badly-made frame ; . . . the colours melt into one another, the figures detach themselves at various degrees of relief. . . . The masonry is no longer covered, but carved, rendered uneven with the cavities and protrusions of perspective.* In architecture no decoration seems entirely apt which detracts from, instead of contributing to, the solidity of the structure ; " to open a frame through which we look at the march past of the triumphal procession " is perhaps an achievement of doubtful merit when this frame covers the whole width of the lateral pier and nearly half its height. An open window is not precisely * Vernon Lee, " Euphorion," vol. ii. p. 7. THE FLAVIAN AGE 117 the feature most suited here. The flatter designs of Trajanic art — with less insistence on the illusion of depth — may to many seem more appropriate to archi- tectural decoration. Perhaps it was the unconscious realisation of this fact which partially recalled sculpture to simpler methods and impeded its full conquest of the third dimension. Painting and sculpture in antiquity were so entirely the servants of architecture that neither developed its resources to the full. Since in the two panels of the Arch of Titus Roman artists so nearly reached the goal as to suggest, to so deep a student of modern art as Wickhoff, comparison with the master- pieces of Velasquez, they would surely have eventually touched the achievement of the great Seicentists, had sculpture been cultivated in antiquity more for its own sake and not solely as decorative appendage. It is rather in the treatment of surface than of space that our panels recall, in one particular at least, the manner of the great Spaniard. In both panels the effect of a crowd is once more conveyed, as in Augustan art (p. 46), by the skilful grouping of comparatively few figures (seventeen in the panel with the holy vessels, fifteen in that with the Imperial chariot), while the swaying, animated pattern formed against the back- ground by the sacred trumpets, by the triumphal tablets at the end af their long poles, and above all by the upright fasces — once gilt — carried by the lictors of the Emperor's guard, recalls the " Lances " of Velasquez, which " cut across the design, connecting the sky and the crowd . . . used with the same tact for conveying n8 ROMAN SCULPTURE a host that the painter has shown in the making of two armies with some eight figures, a horse and fourteen heads.'" * Even so, the panels, by a few well-disposed masses and eloquent strokes, can suggest the whole tumult of a pageant. The motive of the connecting lance was a very old one. We find it employed more than once by the Attic vase-painter, Euphronios, as in the lovely cylix with Achilles and Troths^ where the falling spear across the background at once imparts a synthetic quality to the design. It was used with deliberate skill by an artist so cautious of his pattern as the painter of the Battle of Alexander, of which the Naples mosaic pre- serves the copy. The popular motive is used with varying success throughout the Middle Ages and the Renaissance to modern times. Tintoretto, on the other hand, in the great " Crucifixion " at San Cassiano in Venice, obtains a new and magic effect from the motive, no longer by using it to connect the parts, but by letting the main scene dominate the sombre forest formed by the spears of the Roman soldiery. We jnust return for a moment to the mutilated and neglected frieze of the attic. As it is very difficult to see, and is almost inaccessible to photographers,^ its figures are practically not known except from the * C. Ricketts : " The Prado and its Masterpieces," p. 82. t In Perugia. X Photographs taken under difficulties were kindly lent for this book by Dr. Ashby, Director of the British School in Rome. They are, unfortunately, too faint for reproduction. THE FLAVIAN AGE 119 imaginative restoration of Santi Bartoli and other drawings or prints of the same class. Accordingly, archaeologists, in describing these poor fragments, have been more than usually lavish in epithets to the dis- paragement of Roman art. Indeed, one scholar has taken the trouble to compare these half-dozen mutilated figures to the whole Panathenaic pomp in its amazing preservation, and naively discovers more " life and variety " in the Athenian than in the Roman example.* Let us examine dispassionately what remains of this unpretentious little frieze with its figures not exceed- ing 16 inches in height. Even from the photographs it is at once evident that the figures are by no means lacking in artistic merit; whatever they are, " stiff silhouettes " is the last phrase to describe their animated gesture and rapid movements. The charming camillus who, with his libation jug in his hand, comes forward almost at running pace from the recess of the left side is a worthy descendant of the Augustan camilli (above, p. 51 ; p. 97). Just rounding the corner appear two figures occupied with the stretcher upon which the figure of the Jordan (above, p. 107) is carried. The foremost man turns entirely round to address his companion, and is therefore only seen from the back. Next we have three soldiers from the slab to the right of the keystone; they are turned nearly full to the spectator, thus displaying their shields, with the well-preserved emblems upon them.f Beyond the * Courbaud, " Le Bas Relief Romain," p. 1*1. f S. Reinach, " Arc de Titus," p. 20, where, however, the 120 ROMAN SCULPTURE soldiers is a grave personage wearing the ample toga. Another slab from the recess on the right shows the familiar bull with his sash, led by the attendant, who carries an axe, the head of which is clearly distinguish- able ; beyond is a fully draped figure apparently holding a tablet at the end of a pole. This frieze, seen at a great elevation and in a strong light, offers a pleasantly broken surface with strong, cool shadows. It is also interesting as an attempt to show certain parts of the procession as though advancing towards the spectator, instead of passing him at right angles. This ten- dency to give a frontal instead of a profile presentment of a scene is genuinely Roman. The group of the Genius of the deified Titus carried up to Olympus by the eagle, must once have been of powerful effect, though the composition shows that the artist hesitated between two aspects of liis subject. He imagines a spectator standing below and watching the group disappearing upwards through the arch into space. Quite correctly he apprehends that the nearest object in this spectator's field of vision would be the under part of the talons of the soaring eagle, and he represents this apparently from actual observation of the flight of birds.* But at this point his powers of presence of the emblems is questioned. They are clearly visible in the photograph. * The talons and the whole of the left leg are now broken away, but sufficient remans of the left leg to show that the eagle had his talons gathered under him. Bartoli's readng is, therefore, right in the ma ; n. Dr. Amelung had the kindness to examine the relief and to send me notes and a rough sketch, whxh confirm my own impression. THE FLAVIAN AGE 121 foreshortening and of perspective fail him, and he has recourse to the simpler method of showing the group of eagle and man facing the spectator as though seen from the front instead of from below. For this scheme he had abundant precedent. Thus was imagined the apotheosis of the earlier emperors — that of Nero, for instance, on a cameo at Nancy * — that of Germanicus, or more probably Claudius (Furtwangler), on a well- known cameo of the Cabinet des Medailles in Paris.f So, likewise, the Italian painters who represented the Ascension or the Assumption, showed the ascending figure as though the spectator were facing the scene. And this was sufficient so long as only cameos, easel panels, or pictures and lateral walls were being decorated. But the problem on the soffit of the Arch of Titus, of showing a figure or group soaring into space as it would appear to a spectator standing directly under it, is peculiarly complicated, because the material conditions of space are partly given and partly denied. The spectator is actually viewing the group from below in such a way that its vanishing upward parts should reach his eye only in strong perspectival diminution. On the other hand, the subject has to be represented on a plane surface within which the artist has to discover the third dimension by the help of a peculiarly compli- cated perspective. This particular aspect of the soaring figure, therefore, has not often been attempted even in * Furtwangler, " Antike Gemmen," vol. iii., p. 324, Fig. 168. t No. 265 ; Furtwangler, op. cit., p. 320, 324. For the inter- pretation, cf. Bernoulli, "Rom. Iconographie," ii. 1, p. 234. 122 ROMAN SCULPTURE modern art. We do not exactly know with what amount of success Melozzo — an accomplished master of linear perspective — met in his Ascension in the Dome of the SS. Apostoli. But it seems to have been reserved to Correggio in his celebrated frescoes at Parma to make every architectural resistance yield to the magic of his brush and show us ecstatic figures " about to burst open the dome and fly out into the open air. v In presence of the triumphant solution attained by Cor- reggio criticism is silent — art is its own excuse and explanation. Yet mastery of this kind often turns to trickery, and it may be that, from the standpoint of decoration at least, the Domitianic artist was fortunate in his limitations. For the rest, the design is good — the bust of the Emperor, who is sitting on the eagle, is disclosed within the curve of the wings, and the eagle itself is grandly composed. This central design is framed by rich gar- lands of oak-leaves and acorns supported at each of the four corners by a putto. CHAPTER V FLAVIAN RELIEF Flower and plant life in Flavian sculpture — Relief with lemon and quinces and the " Rose Pillar " — Plant and animal scrolls on the Arch of Titus — Antique sculptured slab in the Crypt of S. Peter's — Flavian altars — The cir- cular medallions from the Arch of Constantine — Flavian reliefs in the Vatican, Lateran, Villa Medici and the Uffizi. Two Flavian Reliefs in the Lateran. — If Flavian art failed, owing to lack of a science of perspective, to pre- sent persons or objects correctly interrelated in space, it showed, in its treatment of portraits (below, ch. xv) and of the plant world, Roman illusionism at its height. First and foremost comes the relief with quince and lemon foliage in the Lateran,* signalised by Wickhoff: Lemon and quince branches laden with fruit are here freely treated like a kind of trellis laid over the back- ground, which is visible only in order that the shadow thrown on it by the fruit and leaves may add to the effect of the relief. The bravura with which the wrinkled skin * Room X, No. 722. Not mentioned in any catalogue or guide- book. Wickhoff, "Roman Art," Plate X.; phot. Moscioni, 8274, 11,229. 124 ROMAN SCULPTURE of the lemon is rendered by means of a few sharp chise strokes was impossible to surpass, but it is equalled in numerous extant works of that school. It is a further, but direct advance upon the altar with the plane branches of the Museo delle Terme. — " Roman Art," p. 63. This relief is also remarkable for the technique of its border of inverted palmettes. Here the under- cutting is deep and uniform, producing a heavy shadow of unrelieved blackness. The effect is somewhat like that of marble " Graffito " work, and this border makes us realize the truth of RiegPs dictum as to later Roman sculpture, that it prefers light and hard materials (such as marble) to the dark and soft (such as bronze), because of its desire for isolation of the single form and conse- quent preference for contrasts of light and dark in place of the diffused light and shadow of earlier art. We have here one of the earliest manifestations in Rome of a tendency which, in the third and fourth centuries, was gradually to conquer all others.* It is Wickhoff also who first pointed out the singular beauty of the Rose Pillar in the Lateranf from the tomb of the Haterii (Plate XXXV.). The sculptor knew how to arrange the twigs in a free design round the slender vase, and by the subtlest artistic means to conjure up the illusion of a rose-bush in bloom. By varying the height of the relief in which flowers, buds, and leaves are * As we shall see later on, the method probably originated from the East, but in Rome it underwent remarkable transfor mations, and was eventually applied with signal success to figure-sculpture (see below, ch. xi.). t " Roman Art," Plates. VII and VIII. PLATE XXX V j>. l.'i THE KOSE PILLAB Lateraa Motcioni UNIVERSITY OP CAL FLAVIAN RELIEF 125 cut ... he produces an impression of pulsating life. . . . The illusion, however, does not degenerate into a clumsy deception. The vases do not stand on the ground ; they are suspended free, and under their bases are laid cherry twigs with ripe fruit. On the neck of each vase two birds, placed symmetrically, peck the leaves of the rose-bush, and, on the mouth of each, two parrots are sitting talking to each other. One vase is filled with fruit heaped up over the edge, and the other with some liquid substance ; large humble-bees have come and settled on the rim to suck the sweet juice. One of the parrots, in the heat of dis- cussion, has seized a humble-bee, and is vigorously twisting it round, thus adding a slight touch of humour. Nowhere do we find any dull imitation of actual fact, but everywhere a free play of symmetry and pleasing design, composed of motives not conventional, but illusionist in effect, selected and arranged with artistic intention. — Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 52 ff. Acanthus Scrolls on the Arch of Titus. Sculptured Slab in the Crypt of St. Peter. — Among the minor decorations of the Arch of Titus the acanthus scrolls which run along the inside border of the piers and the vaulting deserve special notice. The pattern derives from the scrolls of the Ara Pacis y but the design is more compressed, the foliature thicker, and the effect accordingly heavier. The central shaft sup- ports a majestic eagle, and the scrolls end in flowers or rosettes from which emerge now and again the fore- parts of various animals.* This blending of plant and * Studniczka, " Tropaeum Traiani," p. 95, Fig. 56. 126 ROMAN SCULPTURE animal life can be well studied on the magnificent slabs which have been fastened to the exterior walls of a mediaeval building on the site of the Basilica ^Emilia (Plate XXXVI.).* The Greeks themselves had intro- duced into their architectural and other decorations composite forms of every description. These arose naturally out of simple juxtaposition. From showing Erotes amid branching foliage, nymphs lightly poised on flower stems, or Aphrodite rising from a flower, was but a step to letting the flower or stem actually pass into the human or animal form. The rich acanthus was specially beloved in this connection, and no orna- ment was more popular than that which is formed by a female figure coming out of an acanthus and extending her arms to either side to hold the uprising acanthus scrolls.f Superb combinations of the human figure with the acanthus took place in Trajanic times (below, p. 230). This world of phantasy — originally inspired by Hellenic mythology — was the common property of all Hellenized art centres. The peculiar contribution of Roman artists to this as to other motives which they took over from their Greek predecessors was to impart to these combinations of vegetable and human or animal forms a fresh artistic significance. They trans- * The date seems to me approximately Flavian, though Pro- fessor Studniczka, whom I consulted, while agreeing with me in the main, reminds me what excellent ornament of this kind was still turned out in the period of Septimius Severus. A third similar slab is in the Lateran. Hiilsen, " Roman Forum," p. 130. f Altmann, " Architektur und Ornamentik," p. 81 f., where numerous examples are cited. AftCtflTECTL Vbil ry 01 CAL; ARCHIT . D~PJ UNIVERSITY OF TLATE XXX VI I To face p. 127 DETAILS OF BCULPTUBED PILASTER Crypt of St. Peter's FLAVIAN RELIEF 127 lated the sharp linear Greek design into the language of " illusionism " by more studied gradation of relief. Moreover, they came to employ this composite style of decoration on a scale of unprecedented magnificence. It seems to have attained to its maturest and most splendid phase in the sculptured band now placed above the sarcophagus of a certain Constantius, in the chapel of S. Maria de** Febri in the crypt of S. Peter's.* I should not like to hazard an exact date for this precious relic of antique decoration, but its style and composition so well illustrate the magnificent development which this class of ornament took in Rome that it cannot be out of place to discuss them here. The basis of the design is again formed by the two branches of a central acan- thus, which develop into a rich system of spirals. In the opening of these branches, standing on the central acan- thus leaf, appears Apollo, with his tripod and his griffin. Above his head two spirals curl themselves into flowers, from whose calyx spring the foreparts of griffins. The two main branches continue to move upwards, and break into a group of spirals which end in vine leaves and grapes, then shape themselves into the fantastic frame for the central subject. Here we see a gracious mother-goddess, Ceres, or perhaps a fresh impersonation of Tellus (p. 42), wearing a crown of fruit and hold- ing a child to her breast, while the surrounding four spirals contain figures of the Seasons; above, lightly clad Spring, carrying flowers, and Summer, a nude * Reproduced in outline in Bmnn, •' Kle ne Schriften," vol. i. pp. 65-67, Figt. 22-24, after " Wiener Vorlegeblatter.", 128 ROMAN SCULPTURE figure, with her wheat-sheaf and her sickle; below, Autumn, wearing the chiton fastened only at one side and carrying a vine-branch and grapes ; and Winter, warmly enveloped in her cloak. The stems continue to move upwards, and after breaking out into apple and cherry branches laden with fruit and foliage, at which birds peck and a mouse nibbles, they form a last frame, this time for the group of Apollo and Marsyas. The spirals below end in half-figures of Tragedy and Comedy, each holding her mask. In the spandril-like spaces above are two female figures representing Night, apparently asleep, and Morning, with her torches. Delightful minor touches of bird and animal life enliven every available corner : here a bear looks round fiercely at a frightened stag ; an eagle is seen with its angry shaggy eaglet ; below are a swan and its fledgling. This admir- able " pilaster " has as yet been published only in outline, though the contrast of light and shadow is especially needed to bring out its beauties. Like many other precious works of art in the crypt, its pieces are scattered, and even now, with the newly installed electric light, are difficult to study (Plate XXXVII.). Decoration of Flavian Altars. — There are numerous sepulchral altars of the Flavian period, in which its principles of decoration may be further studied. One in the Cortile of the Belvedere in the Vatican is remark- able for its elegance (Plate XXXVIII.).* A portrait * Helbig, " Fiihrer," No. 160. Altmann, " Romische Gra- baltare," p. 56, No. 12. The face is, unfortunately, entirely restored. LATK XXXVI rt To face p. 12s FLAVIAN ALTAI; Cortile del fielredsre, Vatican Mosiimii uur TY OF CM A FLAVIAN RELIEF 129 of the deceased forms the main design on the front face ; he is seated with torso turned to the spectator, his left hand firmly resting on the chair seat, his head turned to the left and the knees to the right. A wreath hangs above, between the pilasters, and is caught up in the centre by a mask (cf. the same motive in the period of Tiberius on the altar of Amemptus, Plate XXIII.). The base is supported by winged sphinxes with great acanthus leaves springing upwards from between their wings. The Domitianic character of the monument is evident from these phantastic animals, and from the bushy leafiness of the laurel wreaths of the sides and back, but above all from the desire to suggest the spatial quality of the subject. Thus the task, so difficult in relief, is essayed of turning a seated figure towards the spectator, instead of showing it in profile. There is an irony about the fact that this effort to show figures from the front did not lead, as might be supposed, to the entire mastery of the third dimension, but was among the factors which brought sculpture back, in time, to the old frontal con- struction of figures. In attempting to turn figures to the front, sculptors, owing to imperfect knowledge of perspective, fell into grave errors of spatial composition — as in the sepulchral slab of Ulpia Epigone * in the Lateran, from the same tomb and the same period as the beautiful altar in the Belvedere described above. The lady whose elaborate coiffure of curls shows her to have lived in the Flavian period, lies with her little dog * Altmann, p. 58, No. 16. I i 3 o ROMAN SCULPTURE tucked under her left arm, and her work-basket at her feet. The artist has evidently wished to avoid the meagre profile of a reclining figure, but with compara- tively little depth at his disposal he has not known how to show the further side in perspectival diminution, and has, therefore, turned the whole figure clumsily and uncomfortably to the front. The altar inscribed Sui et Sibi in the Galleria Chiara- monti has distinctly Flavian garlands suspended between boukrania and supporting a female bust on the front face. The crinkled ribbons should be noted as a further Flavian characteristic* Flavian illusionism, spacing and delicate fancy are all united in an altar unfortunately much rubbed and mutilated in the British Museum. f The rich foliated scroll-work of the sides recalls the imposts of the Arch of Titus. On the principal face is a large inscribed tablet ; above this is an original design formed of a strip of orna- ment ending in rams' heads, between which is a nest with two birds. Below the tablet is a charming group trans- lated into relief from the well-known subject in the round of Aphrodite at the Bath. It shows the crouching Aphro- dite playing with a swan ; one little winged Eros empties a jug of water over her back, and another is apparently emptying water out of a shell over the swan ; to the right are a fountain and basin. One more example must suffice, but its ornament has * Altmann, No. 6, Fig. 57. \ In the Hall of Inscriptions, Altmann, 203, Fig. 131 ; B.M. Cat. iii., No. 2360. ARCH17 DEF . i i v_> i PL ATE "XX XIX To face i'. M II. \ \ 1AX AI/I'AK I.iitvran FLAVIAN RELIEF 131 a rare distinction. It stands in the Lateran (Room IX., No. 582), where it was unnoticed, except by a few lovers of art, till Altmann detected in it " a masterpiece of the Flavian style of decoration." * He comments on the amazing wealth of ornament (on the upper cornice alone we can enumerate egg-moulding, astragal, dentils and wave pattern), which " stirs our fancy to unremitting activity ," and rightly observes that " the atmosphere surrounding the monuments of this period is one of ecstasy and enchantment " (Plate XXXIX.). We may further note with Altmann that the beautiful decoration of the basis with its infinite play of light and shadow re- calls the fine fragments from a pilaster also in the Lateran and also unnoticed till Studniczka, in a subtle apprecia- tion, pointed out its affinities to the mouldings of the Arch of Titus and of the Temple of Vespasian.f The delicate spiral pattern of the plinth with birds among the leaves and flowers is especially beautiful. Medallions on the Arch of Constantine. — It is due to two English scholars — Mr. Stuart Jones and Mr. A. J. B. Wace % — that our knowledge of Flavian sculpture has of late been nearly doubled. Mr. Stuart Jones, indeed, in a brilliant and erudite thesis has demonstrated that the eight famous circular medal- lions of the Arch of Constantine which had been claimed * Altmann, 1 50. This altar can only be appreciated in the ori- ginal. It stands in a bad light, and no photographs do it justice. t " Tropaeum Traiani," pp. 74, 75 ; Fig. 38. X " Papers of the British School at Rome," vol. iii., 1906, pp. 216-271 (Stuart Jones), pp. 275-294 (Wace). 132 ROMAN SCULPTURE for the period of Trajan, and more lately for that of Hadrian, are Flavian, and probably Domitianic. We shall be in a better position to understand this new and startling proposition if we first study the medallions themselves and glance, however rapidly, at antecedent theory. The medallions represent Imperial scenes of hunting and of sacrifice ; they appear on the Arch of Constantine arranged in two sets of four on each front. On the south side of the Arch (in the direction of San Gregorio) the head of the Emperor has completely dis- appeared from two of the medallions, in one case the whole upper body being torn away, but on the other two medallions the original head has been preserved, though much defaced. But on the north side (towards the Coliseum and Rome) the head of the Emperor originally represented had already in antiquity been replaced or entirely worked over. Moreover, the four heads of this side all wear the nimbus. Like all the other sculptures of the Arch which are not contemporary, the medallions are much anterior in ,date to the period of Constantine. From the seven- teenth century till lately all these earlier sculptures had been referred indiscriminately to the period of Trajan, chiefly, it would seem, because this was the only period which the older school of archaeology knew anything about. In 1889 and 1890,* however, Petersen laid the foundations of a more critical knowledge of the sculp- * Romische Mitthciliingcn , iv., 1889, PP- 3*4-339 (" Rilievi tondi dell' Arco di Costantino ") ; ib., v., 1890, pp. 73 f. (" Die Attika reliefs am_Constantinsbogen "). FLAVIAN RELIEF 133 tures of the Arch. He was able to show that the great panels of the attic belonged undoubtedly to the period of Marcus Aurelius. and had formed part of a series, two other slabs of which, with the head of Marcus, are preserved in the Palazzo dei Conservatori. With regard to the medallions, Petersen demonstrated the principle of their grouping on the building for which they had originally been made. They had evidently been com- posed as pairs representing four huntings, each act being divided into two scenes, the chase itself and the sacrifice to the tutelary god of that particular chase — a point to which we shall have to return. Petersen, however, did not challenge the Trajanic date, nor was it till 1903 that a first definite effort was made to break with the established opinion. In Bruckmann , s " Denkmaler " * for that year, the medallions were pub- lished with a descriptive text by Dr. Arndt, who attributed the reliefs to the Hadrianic period. t This opinion was based in the main, (1) upon the presence in the medallion of bearded figures resembling, it was thought, Hadrian, or at any rate Hadrianic personages ; (2) upon the supposed likeness to Antinous of certain youthful attendants. Arndt, however, presented his theory with considerable reserves, and himself pointed out certain difficulties and problems which he left unsolved. In this Hadrianic series, for instance, he * Plates 555, 559, 560, 565. t I had myself suggested a Hadrianic date, and entered into the question in considerable detail in a lecture given at the Pass- more-Edwards Settlement in May 1900, with the late Mr. A. S. Murray in the chair ; cf. p. 241 ; p 388. 134 ROMAN SCULPTURE owned that in one scene (the Lion Hunt), one of the personages had a strong Flavian type. He also per- ceived that on two medallions of the north side the head of the Emperor had been replaced by that of Constantine, and on the other two by that of an Emperor of the third century — of the Gordianic period, as he supposed. Had the medallions, he accordingly asked, already known earlier vicissitudes before' they were transferred to the Arch of Constantine ? Had, in fact, some Emperor of the third century already adapted them to his own use ? It is at this point that Mr. Stuart Jones steps in with a series of fresh observations made on the actual medallions.* The results of his investigations are briefly as follows : The bearded men have nothing to do with Hadrian, nor are they specially Hadrianic. In all cases, moreover, they represent atten- dants or subordinates, who "wear beards from the Flavian period onwards, though the habit was not adopted by persons of rank till Hadrian set the fashion " (Stuart Jones, p. 249). The young men supposed to resemble Antinous are really quite unlike his type ; they are whiskered, and, like their bearded comrades, belong to the attendant class. On the other hand, the real comites of the Emperor — the aristocratic members of his suite who gallop at his side, or face him in scenes of sacrifice — are all of them beardless, and have the un- mistakably Flavian face as we know it from the portraits * Mr. Stuart Jones was able to examine these in 1904 with the aid of a mechanical ladder. I may remind students that casts of these medallions exist in the Museum of Saint-Germain. FLAVIAN RELIEF 135 of Vespasian, of Titus, and countless other portraits of the period that range from the aristocratic head in the Vatican, so long misnamed "Marc Antony,'* 1 to the homelier features of the shoemaker, Gaius Julius Helius, on his monument in the Conservators But seeing how eclectic Roman art was to become precisely in the period of Hadrian, it might still be argued that this Flavian type was in itself an insuf- ficient proof of the date of the monument, especially as the head of the Emperor, even where preserved, is too much mutilated for purposes of precise identification. Here it is that Mr. Stuart Jones's historical know- ledge and acumen enable him to place his theory almost, if not quite, beyond the possibility of doubt. We have seen that on the south side the original head of the Emperor is still preserved in two of the medal- lions. Presumably, therefore, it had been retained in all four. On the north side the head was replaced on two medallions by that of Constantine, and it has here been shown by Mr. Stuart Jones that on the two others the head, which* resembles an Emperor of the third century, is the original head worked over. The ques- tions Mr. Stuart Jones sets himself to solve are, why did Constantine allow the portraits of certain older Emperors — apparently Flavii — to appear on his Arch at all, and who is the later Emperor whose portrait he retained on the north side by the side of his own ? The answer is found in the identification (by means of his portrait medals) of the third-century Emperor as Claudius Gothicus (268-270 a.d.), whose reverential 136 ROMAN SCULPTURE devotion to the Flavian dynasty can be proved both from literary and monumental evidence. With par- donable vanity, possibly also on historic or political grounds, Claudius more than once introduced his own portrait into Flavian reliefs. Mr. Stuart Jones has shown that on a relief in the Villa Medici, with the Temple of Magna Mater, the head of the figure on the right has been worked over apparently to represent Claudius. He evidently also appropriated to his use the hunting medallions, and altered the face of the Emperor in at least two cases into a likeness of himself. Then, when Constantine assumed the purple and pro- claimed himself the grandson of the deified Claudius Gothicus in order to establish the legitimacy of his descent, he in turn placed his own portrait among those of the Emperors whom it so well suited his pur- pose to claim as his immediate and his more remote ancestors. This would take place when the medallions were removed to the Arch of Constantine, where their new distribution was probably the result of a desire to present them in a sort of historical progression, show- ing the medallions with the Flavian Emperors on the one side, and those of their " official " descendants on the other. On the south face of the Arch the unrestored medal- lions represented the Emperors of the gens Flavia antiqua, if we may use such an expression, while on the northern front the gens Flavia nova, distinguished by the solar nimbus which the identification of the Emperor with Sol inuictus had caused to become the symbol of the new autocracy, is ARCHITECTURAL UNIVERSITY OF CALIFO TLATE X MEDALLIONS \\ ITU HINTING AM) SACRIFICIAL SCBNK8 lietireen j>p. 13G ,|- 137 Arch of Coiitfantine, So'ith Fuqad* PLATE XLI MEDALLIONS WITH HUNTING AND SACRIFICIAL 8CENE8 -a ]>/>. 136 if 137 Arch of Const antine, North Farade Y O F CALIFORNIA FLAVIAN RELIEF 137 represented by its reputed founder — the "Flavius Claudius" of the Court historians — and by its greatest representative, already master of Rome and the West, and soon to be sole ruler of the Empire. — Stuart Jones, p. 244. The historic thesis propounded by Mr. Stuart Jones so admirably fits the evidence derived from the actual reliefs, that their Flavian date and provenance must, I think, be henceforth conceded .* We must now try to obtain further light as to the original arrangement of the medallions. Petersen's grouping into pairs may be taken as proven, but his various schemes for the distribution of this series of four groups is more uncertain. The scheme first proposed by Petersen was as follows : Sacrifice to Departure for Boar Hunt, Sacrifice to Apollo. the Chase. Diana. Sacrifice to Bear Hunt. Lion Hunt. Sacrifice to Silvanus. Hercules. * Dr. Sieveking, 0:1 the other hand, in a supplement (Beilage) of the Miinchener Allgemeine Zeitung for 1906, accepts Stuart Jones' theory only partially. He sees a difference of style in the medallions of the no.th and south sides, and attributes the latter to the Flavian, the former to the Hadrianic period. Constantine, he thinks, left the heads of the Flavii untouched, but substituted for the Emperor's head on the Hadrianic medal- lions, in two instances his own, and in two more that of Claudius Gothicus (the insertion of this portrait Sievekiag attributes t:> the Constantinian period and not to that of Claudius himself). These theories, Sieveking is developing in an article which will shortly appear in the Rom. Mittheilungen. What, I wonder, is to become of Petersen's groups ? 138 ROMAN SCULPTURE For this scheme Petersen now proposes to substitute another, in order that the Emperor of the Silvan us and Hercules medallions may neither face outward nor away from the centre of the composition. This latest dis- tribution * would then be : Sacrifice to Departure for Boar Hunt. Sacrifice to Apollo. the Chase. Diana. Bear Hunt. Sacrifice to Sacrifice to Lion Hunt. Silvanus. Hercules. In either case Petersen obtains an excellent pro- gramme of events marked by an increase of danger and of consequent glory in each hunting : boar, bear, with the lion-hunt as crowning exploit. " It is a com- plete cycle of hunting adventures, which, like the labours of Hercules, grows each time in danger and importance, and in which beginning and end are clearly marked" (" Vom alten Rom. 1 ' p. 62). Whatever the original order — and it is always dangerous and unprofit- able to theorize concerning lost compositions — it was disregarded by the Constantinian artists, or perhaps only dislocated in obedience to the exigencies of the new ideas to be illustrated. The portrait of Claudius Gothicus had already been introduced into the Apollo medallion. Mr. Stuart Jones has accordingly suggested that if its companion, " The Departure," was not selected to bear the portrait of * Privately communicated; cf. Ilberg's Neue J ahrbiic her fur das Klassische Alterthum, 1906, p. 523. FLAVIAN RELIEF 139 Constantine, it was possibly because it was the sole medallion to retain the portrait of some one or other of the Flavii. Possibly, therefore, the dislocation was in view of bringing together on the south side all the medallions with Flavian Emperors, and leaving for the north side those which had already been altered by Claudius Gothicus, and which were now to undergo further changes at the hands of Constantine's sculptors. It is a pleasure to turn from these difficult questions of date and of history to the contemplation of the medallions themselves. The subjects form a pleasing contrast to the usual themes of Imperial official art. Toga and armour are alike laid aside. In a singularly attractive series we see the Emperor and his friends indulging in the noble pastimes of the chase amid the silvan scenes which at all times were so dear to the Romans. The medallions show the wintry side of that country life in Latium which has been so bril- liantly sketched for us at different periods of its history by Dill.* " The pastoral charm of the midsummer prime " is here replaced by the sterner sports of autumn and winter. The spirit which inspires the medallions is that which led the Roman cavalry officer in Britain to leave " a memorial of his gratitude to Silvanus for the capture of a wild boar of surpassing size and strength which had long defied the hunter." f The artist has entered into the spirit of his subjects with singular * " Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius," p. 174 f., p. 197 f., etc. t Dill » P- 539- 140 ROMAN SCULPTURE felicity. The spatial composition, the pervading move- ment, the unconstrained rendering of nature, are all alike admirable. The heads of the horses with their lively turn (Boar Hunt) recall those of the chariot of Titus. The breathless gallop shown as a flight through the air, the panting pursued beast below, the attempt at foreshortening in the group on the left, are all in the same line of artistic endeavour as the panels of the Arch of Titus. In spite of the bad state of the surface we can detect the artist's fidelity to texture. He has care- fully distinguished between the sleek coats of the horses, the long shaggy hair of the bear, and the hard bristles of the boar. In order not to repeat himself too much, he has not chosen the actual episode of the chase for the Lion Hunt, but the moment immediately succeeding the slaying of the brute, when the Emperor and his suite have dismounted and stand discussing the event. Per- haps, too, the artist wished to mark out by a totally different treatment what, in antiquity as now, was doubtless the coveted distinction of a sportsman's career. Anyhow, the subject stimulated him to a composition which is one of the noblest in the history of art. The Emperor and two personages form a central group skil- fully flanked by the groups of attendants holding a horse on either side. The scene is in a forest, but all five stand on a rocky ledge forming, with the lower seg- ment of the medallion, a kind of exergue within which the dying lion is seen stretched at full length. The proud episode could not be told with quieter dignity, nor yet kept more closely within the bounds of archi- PLATE XLtt To face p. 140 PORTRAIT OF THE FLAVIAN PKUIOD Braccio Xuoro, Vatican Anderson UNIVERSITY OF C, FLAVIAN RELIEF 141 tectural design. The lion is a masterpiece — the fine feline stretch of the limbs, the once vigorous tail now lying powerless, the big heavy head with the closing eyes and the panting tongue, are felt and expressed with great force. The skin is indicated by roughening of the surface with occasional longer curly tufts, while the long full mane is rendered with a touch of convention which, by imparting a sense of pattern, contributes to the solidity of the design. For so fine a presentment of a lion we must go back to the wonderful metope of Olympia showing Herakles resting after slaying the Nemean lion, with the dead brute at his feet. Com- parisons of the two should enable us to apprehend more closely the peculiar character of each without, it is hoped, causing us to praise either by detracting from the other. It is impossible to comment here on all the individual beauties of these medallions — the dainty altars with their garlands, or heaped with fruit, the clever illusionist technique of the trees and foliage, the fresh beauty of the woodland shrines, Silvanus on his pillar beneath a spreading ilex whence hangs a shepherd's pipe ; Apollo, with his tripod, his lyre and his griffin, framed by the branches of his bay tree, recalls the Apollo on the " pilaster" ; Diana, with her torch at her side, appears in a similar scheme, between the branches of a bay-laurel. Less happily imagined, but introducing a new theme, is the seated Hercules of the medallion. The idea apparently is to show the group raised above the scene of the foreground and somewhat recessed, but the artist has somehow failed in his effect. 142 ROMAN SCULPTURE Other Flavian Relief -sculpture. — Chief among other fragments and monuments which have lately been vindicated for the Flavian period are two fragments of triumphal processions, respectively in the Galleria Chiaramonti and the Cortile del Belvedere of the Vatican. The first,* with its fragments and traces of figures carrying the front end of a ferculum or stretcher, such as that which supports the table for the showbread on the Arch of Titus, is conjectured by Mr. Wace ("P.B.S.R." iii. p. 281) to belong to another representation of the same subject, possibly this time from the Arch of Vespasian and Titus dedicated in B.C. 81 in Circo Maximo. The second relief in the Belvedere f contains the first part of a triumphal cortege — a group of horsemen and lictors with the goddess Roma preceding the Imperial chariot, only the foremost of whom are seen advancing from the left. The rest of the composition is lost. In its present mutilated and restored state it is impos- sible to derive any clear aesthetic impressions from this relief. The design, though sufficiently animated, seems only mediocre, and since we are assured that the relief extended no further at the top, it is evident that the artist no longer has the sense of spatial composition which we admired on the panels of the Arch of Titus. J * W. Amelung, " Catalog des Vatikanischen Museums," vol. i., No. 152. t Helbig, " Fuhrer," No. 163 ; Wace, " P.B.S.R.," iii. p. 283, Fig. 1. X It is hardly worthy of either Riegl or Mr. Wace (op. cit. p. 278) to assert that " this open ground [in the Arch of Titus] is intro- - > MTY OF CA ' I A FLAVIAN RELIEF 143 Nor, so far as the fragment enables us to judge, does the "open ground " appear to have been abandoned, as in the later monuments, in favour of some other artistic device. The general Flavian character, however, is incontestable. Far more beautiful as works of art are six heads from some great composition in relief, which now lie in Room VIII. of the Lateran. Mr. Wace (loo. cit. p. 285) rightly detects their Flavian style, and from the appearance among them of a female head, pre- sumably of a " Roma,' 1 conjectures that they all be- longed to a processional relief decorating an arch or similar monument. Thus it would seem that, beside the Arch of Titus, which is properly Domitianic in point of time, the decorations of two, if not three, of the many arches which Domitian set up are extant. Finally three more reliefs have — though as yet only tentatively — been brought within the Flavian range by the same English scholars. Two of these are walled up in the Villa Medici (Plate XLIIL, a and b). They represent respectively the Temple of the Magna Mater, with a draped male figure standing by (in whose features, evidently overworked in antiquity, Mr. Stuart Jones detects a likeness to duced by the artist not of his own free will, but fro n necessity. He was obliged to represent Titus in the triumphal car and the spoils of the temple above the heads of the procession as they actually appeared." But the greatness of an artist consists in turning such necessities to artistic advantage and effect. As well say that Velasquez, being commissioned to paint a particular episode of the Surrender of Breda, the subject alone would have issued in " the Lances " without the painter's individual interpre- tation of the whole and distribution of the parts, 144 ROMAN SCULPTURE Claudius Gothicus), and the Temple of Mars Ultor.* The third relief — apparently belonging to the same serie^f — is in the Uffizi (Plate XLIV.). It .has alieady been alluded to as having been u§ed by Raphael for his cartoon of Paul and Barnabas at Lystra. The execu- tion seems to me rather weak, scarcely worthy of the admirable composition. ^ To the Flavian period^ of course — and more specially to that of Domitian — belongs the Temple of Vespasian, with its richly moulded cornice, and its^ frieze so cle- verly decorated with boukrania and" priestly insignia.^ The admirable technique, the illusionism and rich' effect of this cornice, should be repeatedly studied.. Another fragment of Domitianic decoration survives in the frieze — alas, much mutilated — which adorns the * Before the excavations of 1903, tyjtfr' reliefs were assigned by Petersen to the At a Pads. l f The idea is- that the three reliefs, which agree in size and style, were part of a long composition (of which other portions are Jost) seen against an architectural background of Augustan and Flavian buildings. In the Uffizi slab Stuart Jones inclines% to recognise, on the left, the dotnus Augustana, on the right, the temple of the Palatine Apollo. Claudius Gothicus changed the features of the figure standing by the temple of Magna Mater, in one of the "Villa' Medici reliefs, into a portrait of himself, because he was proclaimed Emperor ipso in sacrario Matris. (Trebellius Pollio, "Claudius" 4). All these reliefs and the eight medallions Stuart Jones further believes to have decorated the gens Flavia, or House of the Flavii, on the Quirinal/built by . Domitian on the site of the paternal mansion. In the case of the circular reliefs, I incline to believe that they did adorn an % arch — as has hitherto been supposed — and this .arch, moreover, was the one at the entrance of the Forum of Trajan (see p. 148 note ||). • X Hulsen, "Roman Forum," p. 89. o £ H S u Y OF C FLAVIAN RELIEF 145 wall and projecting columns so familiar to visitors to Rome as Le Colonacce (in the Via Alessandrina), This is part of the outside wall of the Forum, which, together with the Temple inside it, was planned and begun by Domitian in honour of his patron Minerva. Both buildings were finished and dedicated by Xerva (98 a.d.). after whom the Forum was then called. We can still admire the rich cornice, and the frieze along which are depicted the toils and triumphs of the wise Goddess. Here she appears victorious over the foolish Arachne in the strife of weaving. There we see her surrounded by the nine Muses in a landscape marked as Helicon by the presence of the local god. The relief is rubbed and mutilated and difficult to appreciate techni- cally, but in spite of all that has been said of its direct dependence upon Greek models, the flow of the com- position, the introduction of landscape, the number of accessories mark it as distinctly Roman. In the attic above is an imposing figure of Minerva turned full to the front. A word remains to be said of the enigmatic personality, during whose principate of fifteen years sculpture attained to so great a development. In discussing the Augustan period we pointed out the error of making Augustus solely or directly responsible for its artistic manifestations. But in the case of Domitian it would seem that the opposite error has been committed. Of late the great art of the Flavian period has, it is true, been more nearly defined in point of time as Domitianic, but no other effort has been made to connect the 146 ROMAN SCULPTURE Emperor with the art that flourished under his rule and, we may suppose, by his encouragement. He has been represented as such a monster of iniquity that it is difficult to recognize in him the liberal patron of the sane and serene art of his own period. History has painted him in lurid colours, which have deepened with time. From the somewhat prosy narrative of Suetonius a supreme artist has drawn the materials for a portrait of Domitian which, whether true to fact or not, is in- delibly stamped on the modern imagination.* Cassius Dio's f fantastic tale of the funereal banquet, deprived of its puerile ending, has been worked up by Dill J into an imposing peroration which closes the preceding vivid sketch of the Emperor on a note of remorseless cruelty. The Domitianic legend seems to need revision as sorely as the Neronian, where criticism, however, has at last begun its work.§ But this is not the place for historic or literary considerations. All I want to point out is that the impression we get of Domitian from contemporary art is not precisely consistent with his literary portrait. We read of his passionate jealousy of his father and brother,|| and that he was exasperated by everything that recalled Titus,*T yet the Temple of * Renan, " Les Evangiles," pp. 219-226. I LXVII. 9 (ed. Boisevain, iii. p. 174!). % " Roman Society," p. 57. § Schiller, "Geschichte der Romischen Kaiserzeit," 1883, i. 2, § 56, already did something towards modifying the current views o£ Domitian, but the sagacious pages of J. B. Bury ('* Students' Roman Empire/' pp. 383-396) are so far the best that have been written on the subject. II Renan, " Les Evangiles," p. 225. % Dill, p. 54. FLAVIAN RELIEF 147 Vespasian and the Arch of Titus are both there to show that he not only respected but completed the monu- ments they had begun or planned. On the Temple he was careful to permit, even if he did not command, the insertion of the name of the deified Titus after that of Vespasian, These are not the workings of jealousy as exhibited for instance in Caracallus, who, after murdering his brother, caused his effigy and his name to be erased from all the monuments where they had once stood side by side with his own. Far from behaving in the manner of Caracallus, it has been shown that Domitian probably had himself portrayed in the hnnting medal- lions in company with the other Emperors of his house. Domitian, too, showed both taste and discretion in the choice of subjects for the frieze of his Forum. What, in effect, would be so well suited to decorate a public building in a busy and crowded part of the city as a picture of the blessings of art and industry. Considerations such as these show him not entirely unworthy of the praise bestowed upon him by Martial and Statius, although, with the consistency which is most conspicuously displayed when we attack a person or a memory, we accept crude or childish tales of Domitian's cruelty, but interpret every word of praise as " base adulation. 11 Domitian^ campaigns have been represented by history as unmitigated dis- asters, though Statius — so far apparently can the desire to flatter carry a man — wrote a whole epic poem to cele- brate his Dacian exploits. Tacitus * and the younger * "Agricola," 39. 148 ROMAN SCULPTURE Pliny * turned into ridicule the victories and titles of Domitian; modern writers have followed suit and sneered at his mock triumphs, j* Yet, lately recovered inscriptions show — in corroboration of Statius — that the triumphs of 89 a.d. for successes in Dacia and in Germany were, at any rate, amply justified. t Arches rose everywhere in Rome to commemorate Domitian's real or imaginary triumphs. Of one of these, the picture at least has been preserved on a relief of the period of Marcus Aurelius (see p. 29 1 ). § The loss of these monuments is certainly among the greatest suffered by the history of art. Everything leads one to believe that they possessed high artistic merit, while histori- cally they would have taught us much, at present un- known or only surmised, concerning the sculpture which preceded the " continuous " style that so distinctively marks the period of Trajan. One question forces itself upon me in conclusion : are all these Flavian works as irremediably lost as was once supposed, and may not much that still passes as Trajanic belong in reality — like the circular reliefs of the Arch of Constantine — to the Principate of Domitian ? II * Panegyric, 16. f Merivale, Renan, Dill, &c. J See especially Ritterling (" Zu den Germanenkriegen Domi- tians an Rhein und Donau ") in the Oesterr. Jahreshefte, vii., 1904, p. 23, on the inscription found at Baalbek. § Stuart Jones in " P.B.S.R.," iii. p. 260 ; cf. Wace, ib. p. 277. || For instance, these very reliefs did, I believe, adorn — as suggested by Rossini and Arndt from the evidence of coins — the entrance arch of the Forum of Trajan. But may not this arch date from the period of Domitian, who will, I think, be gradually discovered to have planned the ^reat Forum afterwards FLAVIAN RELIEF 149 completed by Trajan. This Forum is attributed to Apollodoris ; but if the great Damascene architect was employed by Trajan about 102-105 a.d. to construct the great bridge over the Danube, may not this have been because his engineering capacities had already been tested in the laying out of the Forum ? Petersen has pointed out (in the Neue Jahrbiicher, 1906, p. 522) that in the four large slabs transferred from the Forum of Trajan to the Arch of Constantine (Plates XLVII., XLVIII.) can scarcely be referred to the Dacian campaigns of Trajan, which were already amply commemorated on the column. To me the slabs appear undoubtedly earlier in' style than the re- liefs of the column. May they not therefore refer to the Dacian campaigns of Domitian ? It may turn out that the words of Aurelius Victor (Caesares, 23) : "Traianus . . . adhuc Romae a Domitiano coepta fora atque alia multa plusquam magnifice coluit ornavitque" represent the real fact. The proud inscription on Trajan's column (Cichorius, Plate II.) may mean no more than that Trajan completed the great engineering and artistic enter- prise. Nor would the excellent Emperor have cared to join his name to that of the detested Domitian. CHAPTER VI THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN (98-117 a.d.) Plutei in the Forum Romanum about 101 a.d. — Forum of Trajan — Battle scenes removed to Arch of Constan- tine. Nerva's short principate of sixteen months (96-98 a.d.) has naturally left few traces in the history of art. We have already noted that this Emperor completed the Forum Transitorium begun by Domitian. Among the reverses of his coinage are some of extreme interest and beauty.* One magnificent example worthy of some great Renaissance medallist, is shown below on Plate CIX., No. I2.f It bears the legend Vehiculatione Italiae remissa, and refers to the removal by Nerva of the onerous munus vehicularium, which had rendered it obligatory to provide horses, mules and conveyances for persons travelling on public business. The delicate composition shows two mules quietly grazing. They are released from their yoke, which is seen in the background. * See Alfred Merlin, "Les Revers Monetaires de l'Empereur Nerva," 1906. t Cohen, ii. p. 13, No. 143; Merlin, op. cit. p. 75, and Plate No. 11. THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 151 The movement of the animals has been carefully studied from nature, and yet the design is severely schematised to suit the circular shape — and the yoke, placed nearly upright, gives height to the centre of the composition. I think it possiple that certain monuments described in this chapter as early Trajanic may be found in time to belong to the closing years of Domitian , s Principate. But if we pushed back the date of this sculpture for some years, our aesthetic appreciation of its place in the history of Roman art would not materially alter. Artistic evolution is a slow process, and it is probable that the changes which bridge the distance from the Flavian perspectival style to the Trajanic methods had already set in under Domitian. For the present, however, till more proofs are forthcoming either way, we lose nothing by retaining the old date, provided we remember that the sculptures we are now going to study belong, in any case, to a period previous to the erection of the Trajan column. A. The Balustrades in the Forum. — No Roman works of art are more familiar than the sculptured balus- trades, the anaglypha Traiani, which stand in the Forum, not far from the Rostra and the Lapis Niger.* They present some difficulty of dating, yet the balance of opinion is in favour of the early years of Trajan's * Amelung-Holtzinger, p. 61 f. ; Huelsen, u Roman Forum," p. 97, ff. The balustrades have been repeatedly described and discussed, best by E. Petersen, " Reliefschranken auf dem Forum Romanum," in Festschrift fiir Alexander von Oettingen, 1898, pp, 130-143. 152 ROMAN SCULPTURE principate. We shall first consider the subjects repre- sented. The balustrades are sculptured on both faces. On what are now the inner sides, though originally they faced outwards, there is repeated the same group of the sacrificial animals of the suovetaurilia, the bull, the ram and the pig, each time on the same large scale. On the balustrade which now faces the Rostra two groups are brought within one composition by means of a continuous background. To the left the Emperor, enveloped in the rich folds of the toga, stands with his suite and his lictors on the Rostra, which is indicated by three beaks of ships. He holds a roll in his left hand and has evidently been making a proclamation which the group of citizens in the Forum below are receiving with applause. The two foremost men raise their hands in approval ; a third man turns back eagerly, as if to communicate the news to those pressing forward from behind. There is a charming everyday touch in the group of two men at the back, one of whom lays his hand familiarly on his companion's shoulder. The right half of the composition explains the nature of the proclamation. It is a favour which the Emperor has just bestowed, and it is commemorated by a statu- ary group on a plinth,* showing the Emperor on the sella cwulis, and a woman with a child in her arms This is Petersen's interpretation, op. cit. p. 134. Comm. Boni, on the other hand, thinks that these are living personages, and^that the low platform is the Tribunal. (c/. Class. Rev., March 1905, P- 132). Ai- DEF uk „VERS1TY OF CAUF THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 153 standing in front of him. This group is generally acknowledged to represent Trajan with Italia, who is thanking him for the munificent measures of the year 10 1 a.d. for the support of poor children. " This bene- faction, 11 says Dill,* "was a bold and sagacious attempt to encourage Italian agriculture, to check the ominous depopulation of Italy, and to answer the cry of the poor." Being apparently on a great scale,f it so impressed the popular imagination that it is no wonder to find it celebrated twice by a work of art in the Forum alone — the balustrade relief and the statuary group shown upon it. The original group, or some other resembling it, might have given rise in the Middle Ages to the legend of Trajan and the " Vedovella " so touchingly narrated by Dante (" Purgatorio," x., 75, 76)4 On turning to the relief which now faces the Coliseum, we find ourselves within the same range of events, but the personal environment is dif- ferent. We have just seen the Emperor among the * " Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius," p. 192. f A similar benefaction had already been instituted by Nerva (Aurelius Victor, 12) ; but the coin with the legend Tutela Italiae (Cohen, ii. p. 12, No. 142; cf. Class. Rev. 1906, p. 132), supposed to commemorate the measure, is now shown by Merlin, Revue Numistnatique, x. 1906, pp. 298-301, never to have existed at all. Hadrian (Spartian 7), Antoninus Pius (Capitolinus 8), and Marcus Aurelius (Capitolinus 1 1 and 20) followed in the footsteps of Trajan, the foundation by Antoninus Pius of thepuella Faustiniana in memory of his wife Faustina being especially celebrated. X This legend has been charmingly discussed by Comm. Bon in the Nuova Aniologia, November 1906, February 1907. *S4 ROMAN SCULPTURE peaceful Italian agriculturists, clad in the homely paenula, the short cloak of the working classes ; here we again find him on the Rostra (the beaks of the ships are visible, though the Rostra and the figure of the Emperor are almost entirely lost), but he is addressing a high official clad in the toga, who stands just below the Rostra, while a number of men in military undress (the short tunic held in by the sword girdle) * bring documents and pile them in a heap. The event repre- sented has been interpreted as the cancelling of arrears of taxes for the provincials. Thus the two reliefs afford at once a balance and contrast — in the first we had a benefaction to relieve distress in Italy, in the second a measure destined to relieve provincial distress. So far as our imperfect record enables us to judge, we have here a new note in art. We have seen the Emperor as J chief actor in distinctly religious or political scenes, and we have seen his apotheosis ; in the reign of Domitian the pastimes of the Emperor, with himself as central figure, begin to be the subjects of art. Now we find him once again among his people and his soldiers as a beneficent ruler ; but the emphasis given to his person becomes more marked, he is not only the State per- sonified, but the State's benefactor and protector, ; he stands near his people, and is at once a pervading and a dominating presence. On each frieze the scene is bounded by a statue of Marsyas under a fig-tree. Both in this figure and in the group of the first relief we have further examples * See also the Hadrianic relief from Chatsworth, Plate LXX. THE PRI NCI PATE OF TRAJAN 155 of the Roman fondness for translating statuary in the round into relief. The Marsyas is familiar from the reference in Horace ("Sat." i., 6, 120) ; it had been brought from Greece, probably in the train of some triumphator, and had been placed at the lower end of the Forum. In older art this figure would have suffi- ciently indicated the locality, but there is a growing tendency, already observable in the Flavian reliefs, Plates XLIIL, XLIV., to show events against a con- secutive background of buildings not placed in any correct spatial relation to the figures in front of them, but forming a picturesque tapestried pattern against which the different episodes are pleasantly relieved. These backgrounds have nothing of a true pictorial character about them, since instead of revealing, or help- ing the spectator to realize, the third dimension, they at the most conceal the artist's powerlessness to express it. / Beginning from the broken end of the second relief, the buildings represented are : the Temple of Vespasian and Titus, with its six Corinthian columns ; then to the left an arch, which is thought to represent the Tabularium, and to the left again the six Ionic columns of the Temple of Saturn, followed by the long side of the Basilica Julia. On the corresponding relief with the " benefaction to poor children " we see, beginning from the left side, behind the Emperor, an arch which archaeologists have not yet named, followed on the right by the old Curia with its flight of steps, divided by the wide space of the Argiletum from the long side of the Basilica /Emilia, answering to the Basilica Julia of the 156 ROMAN SCULPTURE second relief. As already noted, both the reliefs close with the Marsyas and the fig-tree ; the only landmark of importance omitted from this picture of the Forum is thus the great Tjemple of Castor on its south-east side. Now it has been shown that the reliefs, which stand where they were found, had been diverted in " very late antiquity n from their original purpose. This was to safeguard the platform of the Rostra, which faced south-east — that is, towards the Coliseum. Thus, since the scenes depicted on a small scale would naturally be on the inside, anyone standing on the Rostra would find sculptured on his left and on his right the buildings as they actually were in real life. The omission, noted above, of the monuments of the east side of the Forum is then plausibly explained by the fact that, since they faced the Rostra and the speaker, it , was not necessary to represent them. Though there is a good deal in favour of an early Trajanic date, it must be admitted, that the face of the Emperor is mutilated beyondj recognition on both reliefs, while so far as the actual subject is concerned, the reliefs might admit of other inter- pretations than the one put forward. It has, for instance, been urged, and the argument is a tempt- ing one, that the reliefs are Flavian, and illustrate Domitian , s wise edicts against Oriental mutilation * — a humane measure which was justly praised by con- temporary writers (Martial, ix., 8, (r, cf. Statius, Silvct, iii., 4, 14 ; Suetonius, Flavins Donutianus, ch. 7) — and ■* CassiusDio, lxvii. 2, 3 ; ed. Boisse vain, vol. iii. p. 165. 9$ 02 to TY ° F CM THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 157 that the second relief represents his edict against the script a famosa, or libellous pamphlets, which he ordered to be burnt in a public place (Suetonius, Domitianus, ch. 8). Although both interpretations are now generally rejected, it cannot be denied that the lines of Martial, with the insistence on the benefit to tender childhood, are entirely in accordance with the spirit of the statuary group : Tibi, summe Rheni domitor, et parens orbis, Pudice princeps, gratias agunt urbes. (To thee, mighty Conqueror of the Rhine, and Father of the World, the cities render thanks, oh Chaste Prince). The strongest argument against it is the total destruc- tion of Domitian's monuments, ordered on his death. We have, it is true, seen that, as usual in such cases, the destruction was not everywhere as thoroughgoing as represented by rhetorical historians ; * on the other hand it is unlikely that reliefs showing Domitian as a special and kindly benefactor of humanity, and as a severe censor of morals, should have been allowed to remain standing in the Forum, the very centre of Rome's poli- tical life, at the time when, by a political volte face, Domitian, once the " Father of Italy," was to be held up as a monstrous impersonation of vice and despotism. B. Reliefs from the enclosing wall of Trajan's Forum, ab. 112 a.d. — The great Forum of Trajan, which * The destruction was probably of life-size official statues, such as the equus Domitiani, rather than of decorative relief- sculpture. 158 ROMAN SCULPTURE surpassed in splendour every other complex of build- ings in Rome and rivalled in interest the Roman Forum itself, was, according to the current opinion, y constructed between the years in and 114 a.d. from the plans of the celebrated architect Apollodorus.* He was a native of Damascus, a centre of Graeco- Syrian culture, where the impulse given to art by Roman enterprise would not be slow to penetrate. Descriptions of the glories of this Forum have reached us from numerous ancient and mediaeval writers, f We are not concerned here with the grandiose scheme of the Forum, but with the fragments of certain sculptural friezes generally admitted to have decorated its walls.J Foremost among these fragments are the four slabs thought to represent Trajanic exploits, which were removed to the central archway and to the attic on the shorter sides of the Arch of Constantine.§ Although ruthlessly torn apart they form a continuous whole, and should therefore be carefully studied, not only in * Signor Boni's researches have shown that the real history of the Forum of Trajan differs very considerably from what was currently believed (see Nuoia Antologia, November 1906, article "Leggende," p. 19). f See Huelsen-Kiepert, " Formae Urbis Romae Antiquae," s.v. X It has been pointed out, however, by various authorities, that the difficulty in admitting these slabs to come from the Forum of Trajan is that the Forum appears to have been intact at the time of the famous visit of Constantine in 35-6 a.d., and nearly two hundred years later under Theodoric. § The two slabs of the passage are reproduced in Amdt- Bruckmann's " Denkmaler," Plate 580, with descriptive text by Sieveking. THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 159 the original, but also in Rossini's plate, where they are reproduced in sequence.* The reliefs are much damaged, and if looked at closely the boldness of execution, destined to produce effect at a distance, verges on coarseness. But it is not so much the single parts that compel attention, though there are beautiful and striking individual motives, as the rush and swirl of the composition, which almost overpowers us by its tumultuous vehemence, while yet commanding our attention and respect through the magnificent sense of ordered pattern. A severe design is combined with an animation unknown to previous art. The lion-hunt on the sarcophagus of Alexander is broken up into over- lapping groups with only a material interconnection ; the battle of the mosaic at Naples gives only one episode out of many (though the central and most splendid) ; but the reliefs assemble a series of groups and episodes in one indivisible artistic unity. The eye travels from end to end, pausing to fathom individual beauties, but never because of a break in the composition. The open ground above the heads is broken by a multitude of beautiful lines formed by the trees, the spears of the soldiery, the standards surmounted by eagles, the pointed tents, the splendid curves of the horns of the cornicines. From the extreme left a group of Roman cavalry charge forward, galloping over the bodies of the * Gli Archi Trionfali (Plate 71). — Our plates are from two photographs by Anderson (for the slabs of the passage) ; and from photographs of the east and we^t attics, kindly lent by Dr. Ashby. 160 ROMAN SCULPTURE fallen enemy.* The transition to the intervening group of soldiers and captives on foot is effected by the dis- tribution of line ; there is no pause or break as in earlier art, yet there is also no confusion, and the standing group dispels the possible monotonous effect of unin- terrupted combat. The standing personages, by looking eagerly towards the left, prepare the eye, which hitherto has travelled from right to left, for the advance of groups from an opposite direction. Here indeed the tumult is at its height ; the Emperor him- self, in splendid armour, with flying cloak and bare head, is charging forward over the heaps of dead, while barbarians meet him suing for mercy ; behind him crowd his standard bearers, behind them again come more cavalry and the trumpeters. Then, by an extra- ordinary manipulation of the lines, just in front of the trumpeters, the movement is again reversed, the change of direction being skilfully covered by the shield of a horseman. The composition becomes less crowded, and insensibly we find ourselves once more at the left end amid a peaceful group of standing figures. The recognition of a familiar subject brings a shock of sur- prise. We have been watching the Emperor fight in distant Dacia, and here we find ourselves in Rome in presence of the Emperor and his lictors ; he is placed almost facing the spectator, between Victory, who crowns, and the personified City, who guides him. * Plates XLVIL, XLVIII. The order is i, 2, 3, 4- Plate XLVI. is from Marc Antonio's beautiful rendering of No. 4 (reproduced from the " first state " in the Library of Chataworth). ARCH11 UNIVERSITY OF < FL ATE XLVfl 1. West Attic Between pp. 160 tj- 161 2. Archway TKAJANIC FKIK/.K PLATE XLYIII 3. East Attic Between pp. igo cj- 161 <»N" ARCH OF CON8TANTINB ARC HI" Y OF CAL. THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 161 Wickhoff, who first hit upon the happy term " con- tinuous" for this style of composition, thus analyses these reliefs : Extreme naturalness of movement is here combined with an ideal treatment of time. This makes it possible to crowd victory and battle together into a narrow space. In the midst of the fray, which runs its course at one end of the design, the Emperor is thundering against his enemies, while the other end is occupied by a peaceful scene in which Roma welcomes the hero and Victory crowns him # The spectator who has assimilated this work knows that a new sphere has been opened to art, and therefore will not be surprised that a narrative style which could produce such a masterpiece held its own for fifteen centuries, sur- vived the decline of artistic power, and accompanied the revival of art among foreign peoples, because no other kind of narrative could approach it in force and vitality. — w Roman Art," p. 113 f. Thus, this counterpart of Roman historic prose, as it has been called — this epic in stone — is at the same time highly dramatic. It is instructive too, seeing how glibly Roman art is pronounced " realistic,"" to ponder WickhofFs remark as to the ideal treatment of time. For this applies also to the treatment of space. The Panathenaic festival that unfolds its splendour along the frieze of the Parthenon is not more severely abstracted within an ideal sphere than is this battle of Trajan, where the distant conquest and the Roman triumph which was its sequel are shown in their spiritual unity irrespective of actual conditions of time and space. 1. / 162 ROMAN SCULPTURE As a fact the Roman conception is in a sense the higher, for on the Athenian monument we have the prolonga- tion of one and the same scene, taking place within a closely connected area, and therefore comparatively easy to transfer to a neutral or ideal region. Whereas on the Trajanic frieze two episodes as distant as Dacia is from Rome are indivisibly united within one compo- sition. This frieze and the reliefs from the column of Trajan are rightly regarded as the two most perfect examples / of the continuous method. I have begun with the frieze not only because it probably comes first in point of time, but because it presents the method raised, so to speak, to its highest power. It is some- times asserted that the method consists in giving a continuous background to successive but disconnected scenes. This definition holds good, in a measure, of parts of the Trajan column, but in the large frieze the con- tinuous style is evolved out of the forceful groupings of the main subject itself — is the result of the skilful overlapping of the lines — so that it is really impossible to separate the groups without dislocating the whole. It is, in fact, the grandest expression attained by the Roman system of accumulating masses in order to pro- duce a sense of crowding, or of turmoil. The secret of the clearness of the composition resides in the employ- ment of only a few figures (above, p. 46; p. 117). Velasquez has already been mentioned in this connection; it is further interesting to note how comparatively few are the figures used for their panoramic pomps by THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 163 great artists — as by Mantegna, for instance, in his Triumph of Julius Caesar. Spatial composition is now superseded, but the change has been accomplished in a perfectly logical and normal manner. With no fixed laws of perspective by which to safeguard what had been attained in this direction, and with repeated conquests and triumphs pressing upon them for representation, artists were foredoomed to abandon the search for space, to compress rows of figures one against the other, and arrange them in superposed tiers. If we are only interested in the extent to which obstacles can be overcome by technical knowledge and skill, the introduction of the continuous method must be taken to indicate failure and even de- cline. On the other hand, there is no doubt that to this method we owe the great decorative schools of Europe — those of " Byzantium " and of mediaeval Italy, the beautiful and solemn art of the Middle Ages in England, France, and Flanders. We noted above (p. 112) that, up to a point, the development of painting and sculpture is the same. To my mind the differentiation begins, or should begin, when all three have conquered the spatial problem. Sculpture, as I ventured to say in another con- nection many years ago,* must not insist aesthetically on the dimension which it commands materially. The work of a great genius like Bernini, who could dispose of every resource of aerial and linear perspective, and applied them as easily and freely to sculpture as though he * " L' Hermes de Praxitele," in Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1897, pp. H9-I39- / 164 ROMAN SCULPTURE were opening vast vistas on a canvas with brush and paint, must after all, in spite of unsurpassed isolated beauties and merits, be looked upon as a colossal failure. It is interesting to note how the greatest modern sculptors — Auguste Rodin, for instance — are attempting to combine the accumulated experience and knowledge of centuries with what, for lack of a better word, may be called the pre-spatial doctrine — the acceptance, that is, of material conditions and restraint. The idea already present to Michelangelo, that the group or the figure must in some subtle way convey the shape of the original block, is gaining ground once more. This Trajanic frieze from the Arch of Constantine is attracting considerable attention. Only lately Mr. Stuart Jones * has discussed other of its fragments — one a very beautiful group of two heads, those of a Roman soldier and of a barbarian, with the branches of an oak tree and a Dacian wattled hut in the background (in the Louvre, Plate XLIX.) ; the other is walled up into the garden front of the Villa Medici. f It shows a Dacian swimming across a river, presumably the * Papers of the British School at Rome, iii. 1906, p. 226, Fig. 1. f These had already been vindicated for the Trajanic period by Petersen; see "Trajan's Dakische Kriege," ii. 68, 1. The Medici fragment was drawn by Pierre Jacques, " Album," 56 (Petersen, in the Neue Jahrbiicher, 1906, p. 522). Petersen's view, that neither these fragments nor the large slabs probably represented the Dacian war of Trajan, which was already suffi- ciently commemorated by the column, deserves attention. I begin to suspect that the reliefs may represent the Dacian campaigns of Domitian. Could this be proved, we should have a precious example of real Flavio-Trajanic art. PLATE XLIX p. 164 KnMAN SOLDIEB AND DA( IAX Fragment of /:< Nef fa Louvre Girandon ■Y OF CAL1 UNIVERSITY TLATE L DACIAX SWIMMING THE DANUBE To face p. 165 Belief in Villa Medici THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 165 Danube, with Trajan's famous bridge in the background (Plate L.).* Finally the same scholar has shown that the two well-known reliefs with Roman soldiery, in the entrance of the Casino Borghese (Helbig II. p. I22),f cannot belong, as was supposed, to an Arch of Claudius or to the Claudian period, but, from the circumstances of their discovery and from their style and technique, belong, if not to the same great frieze as the Battle Scene on the Arch of Constantine, at any rate to a similar decoration from the Trajanic Forum. The serried files are seen closely packed one behind the other as in other Trajanic works. Moreover, there is a curious return, noticeable also in many of the figures both of the Trajanic frieze and the column, to the drawing en face, instead of sideways, of an eye seen in profile.* * From a small photograph kindly lent by Professor Petersen. t Brunn-Bruckmann, " Denkmaler," No. 403. % Some further sculptured decorations of the Forum of Trajan have apparently been identified by Mr. Wace (see Class. Rev., xx. 1906, p. 137). Among them are the two familiar fragments in the Louvre (phot. Giraudon, 1926, 1932), which have recently been brought together in the Salle de Mecene in accordance with the well-known drawings (Michaelis, Rom. Mittheil. vi., 1891, p. 2of. Plate iii. ; Pierre- J acques, Album, Plates 18,48). On the right, a group, surrounding the Emperor, is seen in front of the Capitoline temple (the pediment, shown in the drawings, is missing). The four heads of the men in the front row, includ- ing the Emperor, are restored. On the left, the haruspices are examining the entrails of the slaughtered bull. This is a nuncu- patio votorum previous to a campaign (Wace) , though the precise occasion and the Emperor seem to me uncertain. The Trajanic date, however, suggested by Michaelis is corroborated by the inscription, M. Ulpius Orestes, on one hoof of the bull. CHAPTER VII THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN (113 a.d.) Quiri era storiata l'alta gloria Del roman principe . . . The continuous style which co-ordinated successive episodes, and allowed the same personages to reappear in them when necessary to the interest of the scenes, was specially expressive of the spirit of a period that witnessed the steady growth of the Imperial idea. Henceforth cere- monies, pageants, triumphs, war itself, become so many settings from which the Emperor emerges in ever- increasing majesty. He is the beginning, the centre, and the end of every composition. And it is in the ordered repetition of the emphatic note that the con- tinuous style differs from all the previous forms of art which had essayed to convey succession of events. / We know from abundant literary sources that pictures of single episodes, or picture chronicles commemotating in their order the various events of a campaign or a siege, were regularly displayed at triumphs in order to make vivid to the crowd the deserts of the triumphator. Unfortu- nately, the monumental evidence is practically confined to the well-known fragments of a wall-painting from THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 167 the Esquiline now in the Palace of the Conservatori.* The composition, though apparently once extensive, is very meagre. On the Esquiline fragment we have a picture divided into four zones ; of the uppermost only a small piece now exists, on which is seen the / lower part of a leg. On the second band, to the left, is a turreted fortress over which two men are looking ; beneath this fortress, out of all proportion to the archi- tecture, are two warriors conversing. The same two reappear on the third zone, with their names — Marcus Fannius and Quintus Fabius — inscribed above their heads. Behind Fabius are his suite of four soldiers, whose inferior rank is naively indicated by their smaller size. It should be carefully noted, however, that their heads rise in tiers behind one another, according to a method which will be revived by the Trajanic artists. On the left, behind Fannius, is a trumpeter. In the fourth band is a battle scene. This precious fragment, which so far has not been brought into connection with any known event, has been dated at about b.c. 200. Thus some three hundred years before Trajan's principate there existed a mural picture — doubtless not the first of its kind — which already contained the elements of the continuous style. Yet a world of aesthetic endeavour separates thtf art of the two periods. In the Esquiline fragment the same actors reappear and events are shown in succession, but the co-ordination is as yet * Helbig, "Fuhrer," i. p. 420; reproduced Bulletino della Commissione Archeologica Comuna/e," xvii. (1889), Plates XI., xii. (pp. 340-350). 168 ROMAN SCULPTURE merely mechanical. There is no organic fusion of the /episodes. They could almost be shifted about without detriment to the resulting aesthetic impression. The composition is too visibly composed of co-ordinated parts which have not yet been conceived as a whole in the artist's brain. Each group has its own move- ment, but there is no general movement to link together the different scenes. A prolonged comparison between the scanty Esquiline fragments and the majestic friezes of the Trajanic monuments seems as absurd as the comparison I criticized of the fragments of the frieze of the Arch of Titus with the Panathenaic frieze. Unfortunately, however, we have no other examples of these sort of chronicle pic- tures either from middle or late Republican times. We would, indeed, give much to know what the pictures were like, of which Appian and Livy and Pliny have left such minute descriptions. How strangely interest- ing must have been the picture illustrating the conquest of Sardinia, which was displayed in the triumph of Sempronius Gracchus (Livy, 41, 33), or the pictures with the flight and death of Mithridates and all his family seen at the triumph of Poinpey (Appian, "Mithri- dates, 1 ' 117), or the twenty pictures which at the triumph of Caesar illustrated the evils of the civil wars (Appian, " de Bello Civ." ii. 107) ! In these cases conjecture affords but a slippery foothold, seeing that verbal imagery is always ahead of the formative arts, and that ancient writers were probably as skilful as the modern in crediting art with intentions and effects which were THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 169 conspicuously absent. I imagine, however, that Wick- hoff" has come near the truth when he suggests that those crowded triumphal pictures often resembled the curious sculptured panel from the Tomb of the Haterii (" Roman Art,"" p. 50, Fig. 20). Here everything con- nected with the life of the deceased lady and her family is accumulated within one frame ; so we may at least surmise that in many triumphal pictures every detail capable of elucidating the history of a siege or a war was piled up, often without the merest attempt at composition. There was not always occasion for elabo- rate artistry. Very often these pictures must have been simply put away after figuring in a triumph. Sometimes, too, they served the mere ephemeral purpose of an electioneering campaign, as when the praetor Hostilius Mancinus exhibited in the Forum a picture of Carthage, into which he had been the first to pene- trate, and stood by his picture explaining the various events to the passers-by " with a geniality which at the next elections won him the consulship " (b.c. 145 ; see Pliny, "Nat. Hist.," 35, 23). This narrative treatment may have dropped out altogether by early Imperial times. On the great cameo of Vienna (above p. 88) groups of combatants and of captives appear on the lower zone, but the group is introduced, allusively, to remind the spectator of the Prince's triumphs — and it is so strictly subordinated to the main scene above that the introduction of the prin- cipal figure into both is, we feel, out of the question. Probably the old narrative method was, in the first 170 ROMAN SCULPTURE century of the Empire, forgotten or eclipsed by the •J illusionist and spatial styles. It may have lingered on in homelier monuments now lost, to be touched into life again by the Imperial idea which, no longer satisfied by the dramatic moment of triumph or apotheosis, demanded expression along a line of successive splen- dours. But the mere juxtaposed scenes of older narra- tive art could no longer satisfy the new grandiose con- ception. It therefore seems more probable that the continuous style was entirely or practically uninfluenced by tradition, but was — to a greater extent than even Wickhoff has represented it — the outcome of the spatial and illusionist methods. The necessity for unrolling a sequence of res gestae provoked a return from spatial to surface composition. But the apparent coincidence between the continuous style and the old narrative / methods was the result of natural tendencies and not of conscious imitation or revival. The great battle scene formerly in Trajan's Forum must have forcibly driven home to the student the salient principles of the " continuous style V ; the subse- quent analysis and digression may have served to establish wherein this style differs from similar older methods. It is now time to approach the most exten- sive, if not the most grandiose, of its manifestations. On the great column which bears the name of Trajan? unknown artists unfolded the great storied rotulus that tells the exploits of his two Dacian campaigns. Owing to the shape of the monument, it is difficult to study m 8 a a, UK TY O) CM THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 171 the detail of the reliefs in situ, for, unlike Raphael and his friends, we can no longer climb on to the roofs of the houses which in his day closely surrounded the column. At the same time, the difficulty of studying the original is exaggerated as regards general impression. This must be gained from the column itself. With the help of glasses, at any rate, a great deal can be made out both from the surrounding upper level of the street, and from the Forum below. Thus only can we appreciate the profoundly decorative effect of the sculptured spiral, the wonderful variety of the pattern, its mobility under the varying light, the perennial novelty of its interest and yet its grave subordination to the architectural effect. Piranesi has caught the very spirit of the design in his famous etchings. Moreover, those who do not fear to exchange for one moment antiquarian accuracy for artistic truth, will do well to run quickly through the prints of Santi Bartoli. These are not archaeologically accurate ; they emend, fill up and restore according to fancy ; but they remain an artist's vision of an artist's work, and bring out the salient points of the composition in a way impossible in a mere mechanical reproduction. For detailed study we shall turn to the plates of Cichorius, not forgetting that sets of casts exist in the Lateran, at the museum of St Germain and at the Victoria and Albert Museum. The literature of an antiquarian or historic character which has gathered round the column is immense. The following description is only intended as a commentary to the composition, and avoids as much as possible / 172 ROMAN SCULPTURE minute questions of interpretation. Indeed, it would be impossible to approach such questions to any pur- pose within the small compass of this book. They must be studied in the great publication of Froehner,* and its admirable resume by S. Reinach,f in the later work of Cichorius, J and Petersen's exhaustive criticism of the views advocated by Cichorius. § / The story is told on the twenty-three windings of the column, within a band about one metre high, that increases somewhat towards the top in order to correct the perspectival diminution as the spirals approach the summit. The column is supported on a base decorated with trophies of war, which formed the sepulchral chamber destined to contain the Emperor's urn. It was crowned by his statue, which was re- placed in the sixteenth century by that of S. Peter, the patron of Christian Rome. Since the illustrations of Cichorius are the most accessible as well as the most recent, I shall for the convenience of the reader adopt his numbering of the various episodes. The explana- tion I give is, however, chiefly based on Petersen. || * W. Froehner, "La Colonne Trajane, reproduite en photo- graphic" &c, Paris, 1869-1875, fol. f S. Reinach, "La Colonne Trajane au musee de St. Ger- main." Paris, 1836. % C. Cichorius, "Die Reliefs der Trajanssaule." Berlin, 1896. § E. Petersen, "Trajan's Dakische Kriege nach dem Saulen relief erklart." Leipzig, 1899, 1903. || The Roman numerals in the margin refer to the episodes, the arabic numbers^ given in parentheses in the text refer to the single slabs. ARCHITECTURAL DEF ITY OF I THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 173 THE FIRST WAR (a.D. IOl). A. The First Part of the Campaign. {Cichorius, Scenes i. to xxxii. — Plates iv. to xxxn. — Frochner, Plates, 26-56.) The locality of the campaign is indicated at the outset by a simple river scene with traffic (slabs 1-10). Roman sen- i-m tinels guard the fortified turrets on the banks of the Danube. Two soldiers are unloading boats full of army stores. The Roman army is seen issuing from the gate of a fortified city (Viminacium). Further up it divides into two columns, iv each of which crosses the Danube by a different bridge of boats (12-15), while Father Danube himself, represented as a dignified bearded man, is seen in his cave on the left, stretching out his right hand in encouragement and pro- tection. The Romans are imagined as marching up stream, i.e., from left to right. Of the two bridges, therefore, that in the foreground is the eastern, and the other the western.* Hence the two divisions of the army which we see starting may be conveniently called, with Petersen, the Eastern and the Western armies. Here, as always on the column where the armies are divided, the Western division is led by Trajan. It is the Eastern division, then, v headed by an officer, which we see on the first bridge on the left of the picture (13, 14), but the file of soldiers seen above, or in other words, in the background, belongs to the Western army. Its progress is seen on the next slab (18), where the Emperor is seen somewhat ahead, standing just outside the camp. (Plates LI., LI I.) f * For the probable locality of these bridges in respect of Viminacium, see Petersen, "Dak. Kriege," i. p. 16. f Theseand Plates LV.-LVII., LX..LXI., reproduced by per- mission of Messrs. G. Reimer, of Berlin, from Cichorius, "Die Trajanssaule." 174 ROMAN SCULPTURE This whole scene is remarkable for the incisiveness of the drawing, the beauty of many of the heads, and for the free space above the heads, which is merely broken by the spears or the curving horns of the comicines. As soon as he has entered the camp, the Emperor, vi mounted on the suggestus, or military tribunal, holds a council of war (19) j Trajan and the officer on his left are seated on military faldstools ; a second officer on his right sits on a piece of wall ; in the background are grouped vii the guards. Below are a group of cavalry. Then comes a splendid religious scene — the lustratio, regularly held at the beginning of a campaign.* In front of his tent Trajan, with the veil of the Pontifex drawn over his head, stands viii by an altar, pouring a libation over the flames, while, out- side, the sacred animals — the pig, the sheep, and the bull of the suovetaurilia, familiar from the slabs in the Roman Forum — are led to sacrifice. The pig, with an olive wreath tied round his body, is seen disappearing round the corner (24), led by his attendant ; at this point the com- position becomes of extreme interest — the group of trum- peters being only one end of a procession which, after making the circuit of the camp, reappears on the left of the enclosure (at 22), headed by a third sacrificial IX attendant. To the right, Trajan, with two officers, is seen on a rocky eminence, apparently giving some order (26) ; in the foreground a barbarian, carrying what appears to be an enormous mushroom,f is so overcome by the unex- pected sight of the Emperor that he has fallen off his * Plates LIII., LIV., LVIII., LIX., LXIL, are from the original photographs at the Museum of St. Germain (by kindness of S. Reinach). f In effect he has been identified as the Bur who brought to Trajan a large fungus with a message of defiance (Dio, LXVIII., 8. ) UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 175 mule (25), and the animal looks round at him maliciously lowering its ears (Demitto auriculas ut iniquae mentis asellus, is appropriately quoted by S. Reinach). The Emperor, standing on the military tribunal (27), x next harangues his troops (28), while further to the right works of fortification are in progress on either side xi-xii of a river which is spanned by a wooden bridge (29-32). Then to the right again Trajan, with his two officers, reappears within the camp (33). In the next picture the Emperor leaves the camp, which xiii-xiv is guarded by sentinels (5), and goes out reconnoitring up the river valley (36). He is seen above, approaching a mountain fortress, the steep road to which is protected by a parapet, while below three scouts are crossing a bridge ; in the foreground a soldier draws water, and to the right the soldiers are seen felling timber in an oak wood (37-39). xv This extensive and animated composition skilfully passes into the next, where, under Trajan's supervision (40), the xvi soldiers are seen driving in the posts and stakes made out of the timber which was being cut down in the preceding scene. Above, between the trees (39), travels a Dacian with his pack-mule. On the other side of a bridge, in xvn front of a walled camp, Trajan appears standing (42) while xviu a captive Dacian, possibly a spy, is brought before him (43), Next, on the other side of a river, the soldiers fortify another camp, in the midst of which is seen Trajan's tall xix-xx figure (45). # The next picture shows a walled camp, with its tents in xxi-xxiii the background ; below, a number of soldiers are holding their horses by the bridle previous to crossing a stream by * The difficult question of the localities intended cannot be discussed here. Consult Petersen, " Dakische Kriege," i, p. 20. 176 ROMAN SCULPTURE a trestle bridge (on 48 note the beautiful motive of the horse drinking). Beyond, the army is seen advancing (47- xxiv 52) ; others in front fell trees so as to facilitate the passage of the army (53-54). If we remember that Trajan was last seen on slab 45, it follows that the division of the army now approaching is the Eastern army, which we lost sight of after the pas- sage of the bridge. They may have marched north by a shorter way,* and we shall now see them rejoin Trajan, who reappears on 57. The Romans now meet the enemy, who rush upon them from the forest on the right (58-62) xxv (Battle of Tapae, Cassius Dio, 68, 8). Above, Jupiter himself, in his character of storm -god, comes to the assist- / ance of the Romans and hurls his bolts against the foe. Towards the centre, a characteristic Roman soldier holds his enemy's head between his teeth while he continues fighting. On the left, other soldiers bring heads to Trajan, who seems, however, to look upon the barbaric custom with disgust. On the right is a beautiful group of two bearded Dacians carrying a young wounded comrade out xxvi of the battle. Immediately beyond this scene Trajan contemplates an impregnable barrier, and directs his soldiers to set fire to the Dacian huts which are seen within an enclosure, grimly adorned with poles bearing the skulls of slain enemies. A group of Dacian fugitives is seen in the foreground (63-64). To the right, the Roman army fords a river (65-66) and reaches a large camp within which Trajan receives two embassies (67-70). xxvii On the left Trajan stands, on the svggestus, to receive the Dacian chiefs, many of whom are mounted (67-68) ; to the xxviii right is a similar scene, but this time Trajan, accompanied * Petersen, " Dakische Kriege," i. p. 26. THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 177 by ljis staff, stands on the ground to receive the advancing group of Dacians (69, 70).* In the background, soldiers look over the wall of the camp. The punishment ofxxix refractory Dacians is depicted on the right (71, 72) ; a father is seen fleeing with his child, and below are great heaps of slain cattle. Meanwhile, Trajan has returned to the region of the Danube, for on 72 we see him near a camp, with hand extended towards a boat, in which a cap- xxx tive Dacian woman, with her child on her left arm, is apparently about to embark (72) ; other women escort her, and raise their children aloft, as if to take a farewell look at her (Cichorius).f Further to the right a number of Dacians, some of them xxxi mounted, are seen struggling in the water, while attempting to cross the Danube in order to attack the Roman camp on the opposite shore (74, 75) ; above is a group of Sarmatian cavalry in the splendid scale armour which * covers both man and horse (76). The Roman soldiers are next seen above the rampart of xxxn their camp (77-79), hurling missiles upon their enemies. With this episode the first part of the campaign closes (102 A.D.). B. Second Part of the Campaign. (Cichorius, Scenes xxxm. to xlvi. — Plates xxv. to xxxv. — Froehner, Plates 57-71.) The opening picture of this second part of the campaign xxxm * It has been suggested that the first embassy, thus received by Trajan with formality (68), represent the real enemy, who come to expostulate with him, and that the second embassy, whom he advances to meet on an equality (69, 70), are tribes friendly to the Romans. f For Petersen's view, see " Dakische Kriege," i. p. 34. M 178 ROMAN SCULPTURE is of singular interest and beauty (80-83). A Roman city, with its temples, its arches and amphitheatre, fills the background. In the foreground flows the Danube, covered with boats and galleys. To the left soldiers are stowing the camp baggage into boats ; to the right Trajan, wrapped in the paenula or travelling cloak, for it is still winter, prepares to embark ; below is a galley already manned (82, 83). The two arches on the extreme right have been well explained by Petersen as those of the Pons Traiani at Pontes* The locality, therefore, is approximately the xxxiv same as on scenes xcviii-c of the Second War. Beyond, the river voyage begins in earnest ; first, a transport with horses (84) ; further on, Trajan himself at the helm of the Imperial galley, with a sort of canopy-tent at his back ; above, a galley steered by an officer (85, 86). xxxv The Emperor is next seen landing (perhaps at Novae in Lower Moesia); in the background is another Roman town, of which the temples are visible within the walled xxxvi enclosure (8j). Trajan, at the head of a flying column, is next seen riding through a wood, where they encounter xxxvii two scouts, apparently in great agitation (88-91). The enemy must be just beyond, for in the next picture a troop of Roman cavalry is seen attacking Sannatian horsemen xxxvni in the distinctive scale armour (93, 94). Then follows a night attack on the enemy's camp, indicated above by waggons loaded with booty and by sleeping Dacians. A dead body hangs over the side of the first waggon. Night / herself half emerges from behind the rocks on the right, holding above her head a drapery which spreads in crescent xxxix shape (95). In the next scene Roman soldiers are again fortifying a camp, and Trajan, standing in its midst, listens "Dakische Kriege," i, p. 36 ff; ii. p. 59 f. ARCHITECTURAL D_, UNIVERSITY OF v TLATE LIV DACIAN WOMKX TOKTIUK IIOMAX PRISONERS To face p. 179 Trajan column THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 179 to the entreaties or expostulations of three Dacian chiefs. The Dacian old men, women and children, who approach from the left (99, 100), are apparently friendly tribes, but on the right, a Dacian enemy is having his hands bound by a Roman soldier. Beyond, is a touching camp scene — xl Roman soldiers tending their wounded. In the foreground an army surgeon binds the leg of a soldier who is sitting in an attitude of great pain (103). A long panoramic battle scene extends from slabs 102-IIO. The Roman army, headed by the Emperor, is seen issuing from the left ; they are preceded by the Roman artillery waggons drawn by mules, and immediately after ensues a pitched battle (104-109), in which the Daciansare again defeated.* Trajan harangues his troops (111-113), and on the right xlii a splendid group of Dacian prisoners are seen within a Roman fortress (114). xun The subjects of the two next scenes are fresh. First, Trajan, a kingly figure seated on the military faldstool, is xliv seen dispensing rewards to his soldiers ; one man kisses S the Emperor's hand, while two others in the foreground joyfully fall into one another's arms. Immediately beyond, contrasting strangely with the scene of rejoicing, Dacian xlv women are seen torturing Roman soldiers (117). The Michelangelesque treatment of the nude in this group should be carefully studied (Plate LIV.). The two epi- sodes must have taken place far apart in reality, but the desire to effect a contrast may, as Petersen suggests, account for their strange juxtaposition. Trajan now rejoins xlvi * The central theme of battle has, so to speak, two side wings ; on the left the episode of the wounded Romans, on the right that of the wounded and fleeing Dacians, whose dead are seen lying in heaps. 180 ROMAN SCULPTURE his galley (119) at the same spot where we saw him land on slab 87 (Novae ?), thus bringing to a close the second part of this campaign. C. Third Part of the Campaign. {Cichorius, Scenes xlvii. to lxxvii. — Plates xxxv. to lvii. — Froehner, Plates 72-107.) xlvii We are again in the same city as in iv. at the opening of the war.* Then follows the beautiful scene where the army, issuing from the city gate, crosses the Danube xlix once more on a bridge of boats (121, 122). They move forward in three divisions ; the artillery waggons, drawn by mules and oxen, are seen above moving behind a palisade (123-125), while a fortified wall, ending in a cir- cular crenellated tower (125), separates the line of infantry from the cavalry. The three divisions, which rise in tiers one y behind the other, according to the decorative conventions of the column, are thus imagined as in the background (artillery), middle distance (infantry), and foreground l (cavalry). On the right Trajan, with his staff, descends a rocky mountain path to receive his army (126). On the li left, with hand graciously raised in salutation, he is seen with his troops issuing from a rocky pass and approaching lii the Roman camp in the background (127, 128). To the right soldiers fell trees (129, 130), and Trajan receives Dacian liii envoys (131), after which comes another magnificent lustratio. Within the camp Trajan, with veiled head, pours the libation over the altar flames ; grouped to the right are the standard-bearers ; a boy attendant, with long hair and high coiffure resembling that of a Flavian lady, is seen from the back. The actual procession moves * The identity of the two is shown by Cichorius (i., p. 224) and admitted by Petersen (i., p. 57). THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 181 round the camp in two streams which meet at the gate ; from the left come the sacrificial beasts; from the right a group of trumpeters (132-135). Trajan once more ad- liv dresses his army (136), after which the soldiers construct a bridge over a river in a rocky and wooded region (137), and make a road (138-140). In the background is a Roman camp with its tents (140). In front of it the heads of two Dacians, probably spies, are seen on poles fixed into the ground. To the right a detach- lvii ment of cavalry attack a Dacian settlement. Further on, Trajan crosses the first of two bridges over a river, lviii at the foot of a hill crowned by a fortress (142, 143). A troop of Dacians, one of whom carries the dragon lix standard, are seen concealed behind a rocky ground. They anxiously watch the Emperor's movements. The foremost man expostulates with the standard-bearer, and the whole troop will probably hurry off to some locality which is threatened by the Romans. In effect, just below, are Roman auxiliaries setting fire to a native village (144). A fortified camp is next constructed (145-147), at the gate lx of which Trajan is seen with his staff receiving a Dacian envoy (148). The submissive kneeling chieftain, the stern Roman officer behind, and the superb trumpeters and standard-bearers rising in serried tiers to the upper verge lxi of the design, make up a picture of great beauty. Instanta- neously the scene shifts to a wooded hillside, where oxen lxii and mules are seen drawing the camp baggage (149). Again a fortified camp, with sentinels at the gates (150, 151) ; in the background are four circular buildings which have given rise to much archaeological conjecture.* A * Cichorius (p. 283) explained them as forts; Petersen (p. 67 f.) rejects the view, but has no very definite counter-suggestion. 1 82 ROMAN SCULPTURE curiously accurate rendering of detail should be noted in / the two u trap-wiudows " which are shown in the roofs of lxiii each building. We next see Trajan at the head of his legions, halting on a sort of rocky ledge whence he is viewing the exploit of the Moorish cavalry of Lusius lxiv Quietus. These Moors are represented with minute s fidelity ; they ride bare-back and without bridles, have bare heads and long hair twisted into curls in minute accordance with Strabo's description (xvii. 828).* Evi- dently they have struck terror into the Dacians, who, after short resistance, are seen fleeing before them into a lxv forest of oak-trees (158-160). Next comes the building of extensive fortifications (161-164). To the right, in what would be the middle distance of a perspectival composi- tion, stands Trajan between his two officers,! courteously extending his hand to the first of two Dacian envoys, who apparently bends to kiss it. Below, on a two- wheeled artillery cart drawn by mules, is a catapult. lxvi This suggestion of active warfare prepares us for the ensuing extensive battle scene (slabs 165-172). Behind a rampart of cut logs stands a reserve force of fourteen legionaries (Cichorius aptly compares Tacitus, "Agricola," 35: legiones pro vallo stetere, while the actual battle is fought by the auxiliaiies) ; immediately in front, the battle begins to rage within a forest of oak-trees, among lxvii which are seen two poplars (slab 169). On the further side the discomfited Dacians, still on their guard, are seen • Cichorius, i. p. 295. t It should be noted that here, and often throughout the column, the group of Trajan and his officers resembles that of the Imperial group in the lion- hunt of the Flavian medallion (Plate XLL). THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 183 hurriedly felling down trees to fortify their camp. Two # tall trees effect the transition from the Dacians back to the Romans, who also are fortifying a camp. On the right Trajan, in the midst of his officers, receives a Dacian lxviii prisoner of high rank, who is brought with hands tied behind his back. Beyond, the legionaries are engaged in felling trees to make a road (175-176); then comes a lxix crowded scene (177-179), in which a mixed force of Romans and their barbarian auxiliaries (note the six archers lxx of the uppermost row, and the barbarian, naked to the waist, wielding the club in the front row) attack the Dacians outside their entrenchment.* The dead lie piteously along the foreground ; the Dacians flee to their fort (179), while on the right (180, 181) the Roman lxxi soldiery attack this fort by forming themselves into the y military figure known as the testudo.f Beyond, the familiar Imperial group stand on raised ground, while two soldiers, each holding the gory head of an enemy, rush forward from the right, thus preparing us for the final battle of the war (184-187), which, as often before, takes place in an oak forest. Victory apparently does not come as easily lxxii or swiftly to the Romans as heretofore ; indeed, on 185 a / legionary is actually fleeing from the foe. On the right, within a walled camp, Trajan addresses his army. In accordance with the artistic convention observed on the column, the figures are fully visible above the enclosing walls. Outside the camp four soldiers are tree-felling, and lxxiii * According to Cichorius and Petersen, this is the same Dacian fortified post which appeared in lxvii. t From th3 way in which ths shields are raised till they join and overlap, thus forming a solid roof, like the shell of a tor- toise, under cover of which the attack proceeds. 1 84 ROMAN SCULPTURE beyond, soldiers, standing with their horses by a mountain lxxiv spring, draw water and drink. This quiet episode rests the eye before the crowning act of the war — the reception lxxv by Trajan of the subdued Dacians — a majestic composition which spreads over seven slabs (193-199). On the left is the Roman Emperor, a grave figure seated on the suggestus, closely surrounded by his officers and his guards with their victorious standards held superbly erect. Kneeling at the side of the suggestus and raising piteous hands to Trajan is the conquered chieftain (Decebalus). In front of Trajan kneel two barbarian nobles, in attendance on the chieftain. Behind these is a group of standing prisoners, followed by a long line of kneeling, suppliant Dacians. A beautiful, but unobtrusive background is formed by the nearly empty camp, within which are seen one or two soldiers, and by the Dacian huts. The gjory of conquest and the pathos of defeat have never been combined with more dignity and force. Nor yet could the contrast of the two be driven more directly home than by the massed ver- tical lines of the left side, rising joyously upwards,* and the long low group on the right with the horizontal lines formed by the extended arms and kneeling figures, and by the oblong shields lying lengthways on the ground. The intensity of the chieftain's gesture, the added emphasis obtained by separating him from the other Dacians, strike the note of pity and terror. Nor is the first effect weakened by vehement repetition. For his comrades and the Dacian soldiers exhibit well ordered, almost rhythmical gestures, which introduce a certain solemn monotony, like that of a • Precisely the same note of triumph is imparted by the crowded upright "lances" in the "Surrender of Breda." UNIVERSITY OF C. THE COLUMN OF TRAJAN 185 church chant, that sustains the emotion without straining it (Plate LV.). Towards the end of the row, the Dacians no longer kneel, but stand bending forward, with hands still extended in supplication. A sturdy figure, somewhat raised on a rock, closes the scene. Behind, two Dacians are seen conversing within a walled enclosure. This is their capital, Sarmize- getusa, the fortifications of which other Dacians are now destroying, probably according to the terms of the treaty. We next see the conquered but pacified people — men, lxxvi women and children — returning with their flocks to their homes and pastoral occupations. Then, for the last time lxxvii in this campaign, we see the familiar group on the suggestus • Trajan, standing between his two officers, is thanking his troops before they retire to their winter quarters. Victory, writing on a shield, records the glorious conclusion of the first campaign. She is flanked by two trophies, em- lxxviii blematic of the campaign just ended and the one still to y begin. CHAPTER VIII THE TRAJAN COLUMN (continued)— THE SECOND WAR A. First part of Campaign. (Cichorius, Scenes lxxix-c, — Plates lviii. to lxxiii. — Froehner, Plates 108-130.) Immediately to the right of the trophy, the preliminaries of the second campaign are depicted, including the Prince's departure from an Italian seaport and his subsequent voyage. These events spread over a number of slabs (Nos. 207-230), which are among the most interesting of the whole column. Animated seafaring scenes intermingle with sumptuous episodes of departure or grand ceremonials, shown amid the beautiful architecture of three distinct lxxix seaports. The first of these is now almost universally admitted to be Ancona (207, 208). High up on the left, within its sacred precincts, is the Temple of Venus. Ante domum Veneris, quam Dorica sustinet Ancon. (Juvenal, iv. 40.) . The image of the goddess, in the attitude of the Venus Genetrix,* is seen through the open doors. From this height, where the Cathedral of San Ciriaco now replaces * S. Reinach in Revue Auh&ologique, 1905, v. pp. 392-401. 3 ? > 8 UNIVERSITY OF CAL! THE TRAJAN COLUMN 187 the shrine of Venus, a road comes winding down to the seashore, where it ends in an arch surmounted by the statues of three divinities. This must certainly be the famous Arch of Trajan, erected by the Emperor to com- memorate the restoration, at his own expense, of the harbour of Ancona (C.I.L. ix., 5894).* Although this resto- ration was not completed till 115 a.d., and the column was already put up two years earlier, in 113 a.d., it has been plausibly argued by Cichorius and others that the arch already planned, and perhaps on the way to completion, might well be represented on the column out of compli- ment to Trajan (Plate LVI.). The triad of statues that crowns the arch represents Poseidon t or else Palaemon-Portunus,* the god of harbours — in the attitude of the Lysippian Poseidon in the Lateran — with the Dioscuri in their character of patrons ofsailors,§ This whole picture, from the shrine of Venus above to the arch below, recalls the vows of Horace for the safety of his friend Virgil : Sic te diva potens Cypri, Sic fratres Helenae, lucida sidera, Ventorumque regat pater. The time is night, or the closing day, for above the city walls men hold torches aloft to light the departing fleet. Three boats, ready manned, are seen on the right ; in the stern of the middle boat stands Trajan in the attitude of * Dessau, 298. t Benndorf. X Studniczka, quoted by Cichorius. § S. Reinach in Revue Archiologique, v., 1905, pp. 401-403, interprets the triad as Poseidon between Hercules on the left (holding a club ?) and Palaemon-Portunus on the right. [88 ROMAN SCULPTURE command. The sea is clearly indicated by the presence of dolphins darting through the waves (212). lxxx The voyage is interrupted by arrival at a second seaport of stately dimensions, within or near to which Trajan appears in a succession of scenes that spread from slabs 213-224. A number of people, among them five women and a child, and a group of five soldiers who have appa- rently arrived by land, hurry forward with right hands extended in welcome to the Prince (213). They stand on a promontory supported by a sea-wall ; higher up is an altar with a bull lying down at its side, indicative perhaps (so Petersen), of the sacrifice which we shall immediately see accomplished with great pomp.* lxxxi The group of women and soldiers who greet the ap- proaching galleys stand in front of a building with sloping roof and back wall pierced with windows (214, 215). Though the columns are invisible, it is presumably a * The architecture of this city (214-215), like that of the following seaport, is so individual and striking that the identifica- tion of the actual places should follow as a matter of course, yet conjecture is nowhere more active than at this particular point. After Ancona everything becomes uncertain. One scholar (Benndorf) proposes to recognize Greek harbours — Corinth, for one — in these beautiful pillared cities, and sends the Emperor to Dacia by the sea route through the Gulf and Isthmus and Corinth and up past Byzantium into the Dobrudscha. Another (Cichorius) proposes to interpret these towns as Jader, Scardona (on slabs 215, 216), and Salona in Illyria, and to send the Em- peror into Dacia " by the shortest route " over Sirmium. A third (Petersen) reverts, reasonably, I think, to Froehner's view that the harbours which Trajan touches at lie north of Ancona along the Adriatic coast (Rimini ? Ravenna ?), and that the great complex of buildings on slabs 213-216, which Cichorius distributes between Jader and Scardona, belong to one and tha same place — though, for the present, it must remain unnamed. ['LATE \\ INXKIJ FKIKZK <>F Till: AKA I'A< tfi Tb/aeep. 6» ihucodelle Term Anderson THE TRAJAN COLUMN 189 covered colonnade, such as was frequently seen in har- bours, at the Peiraieus, for instance. Above this, is a great structure like a basilica, and to the right a quadrangular court, with columns on the back and front, encloses a temple. In front of this architectural background Trajan lxxxii advances among his lictors (214), while from the right a procession of citizens descends from the town to meet him (216). Next is a lighthouse, to the right of which, in the lxxxiii harbour, the crews busy themselves with their ships (217, 218). From above, a large crowd of men, women and children — the little ones being specially conspicuous — come out of the city gate to follow Trajan (221), who advances on raised ground towards a superb scene of sacri- fice, which occupies four whole slabs (221-224). Two great lxxxiv bulls are led by attendants, who are seen from the back as they turn inwards towards the altars decked with gar- lands, which are seen above. Behind these altars stand lxxxv two more attendants facing, each with a bull. On each side of this upper group is a man draped in the toga, with right hand extended to greet the Prince. To the right is a group of soldiery who all wear the festal garland. From within a camp, on the right, two soldiers appear, watching the scene. Between the camp gate and the altars two standards are planted in the ground ; they indi- cate, perhaps, that the sacrifice is in honour of the standards of the legion.* This scene of sacrifice is surprising in the wealth of artistic device, by which so much is conveyed within so small a space and with no depth of relief to speak of; observe the majestic pose of the sacrificial attendants, the tense modelling and fine foreshortening of * Cf. Petersen, ii. p. 35 ; von Domaszewski, "Religion des Romischen Heeres," p. 4. 190 ROMAN SCULPTURE the beasts, the splendid movement of the arms that are raised towards the point whence the Emperor is seen approaching. lxxxvi Close upon this sacrificial pageant follows another (225- 228), this time within a magnificent architectural setting, which represents a third important harbour town. A quay supported by an arched construction, against which the sea is beating, runs along the lower edge of the picture, and then bends inwards at either side, as though to suggest that the city is built on a projecting tongue of land. In the background are seen the walls of the city and various buildings. Pre-eminent among these, and in the centre, is a great theatre (226), with an upper story pierced by arched windows and surmounted by a baluster. The semicircular tiers of seats, divided into six cunei by five passages, appear above the facade as though in a bird's-eye view, according to the naive perspectival conventions of the column. To the left of the theatre, a group of trees within a colonnade may represent an enclosed garden, or xystos (Petersen) ; to the right are various structures, including a temple, On the left of the quay, is the ship from which Trajan, escorted by lictors and standard-bearers, has just disem- barked (225). He is now standing by the altar, decked with garlands and piled with fruit, which occupies the middle of the scene in front of the great theatre (226). A huge bull has just been slain in sacrifice, and a crowd of of people, among whom children are again prominent, look on. lxxxvii To judge from the ship with reefed sail in the following picture (229), the voyage has been resumed in sailing instead of rowing ships. This change of ships seems to S make it clear that the first part of the voyage was along ARCHITECT UNIVERSITY OF C, y K THE TRAJAN COLUMN 191 the Italian coast, and that rowing was exchanged for sail- ing, when it became necessary to put out into the open sea and cross to Dalmatia. The Emperor and the army now lxxxviii arrive in a northern region, as shown by the little one- windowed wooden hut above (231). They march through hilly country; above is a great waggon laden with shields. The army passes, apparently without entering it, a city seen in the background within its walled enclosure (232, 233). Trajan and his suite must mount their horses at lxxxix this point, for we next see them galloping to the right (234, 235). They are met by a number of Dacians with their children (236), the latter being as conspicuous as are xc the children in the Italian scenes. They stretch their hands in greeting rather than supplication, and probably represent friendly, or at least submissive, tribes. Immedi- xci ately upon this follows the famous scene of sacrifice at the six altars.* In the foreground, by the first altar, stands Trajan, facing towards the left (237). He pours the liba- tion over the flames ; behind the altar, stand a long-haired camillus, with his acerra or incense-box, and a young flute- player. Immediately behind this group, within an arch which may indicate a city gate, stands a man who is pobably in special attendance upon the Prince. Higher up, and stretching to the right, is a scene of the utmost magnificence (238-240) ; four sacrificial attendants, each holding a bull by its bridle, stand behind five altars, all decked with delicate garlands. Below, on the front * Mr. Stuart Jones kindly informs me that he believes the locality to be Ulpiana— like Remesiana, probably a centre of Imperial cultus (The six altars, then, would be in honour of the six deified Emperors — the Divi.) ; and the mixed Romans and Dacians who greet the Emperor, to represent a colony planted at the close of the First War. 192 ROMAN SCULPTURE margin of the scene, are the spectators, first a group of Romans with their children, followed by a group of Dacians with their wives and children. The Dacian women, wearing kerchiefs folded over their heads, are singularly picturesque figures (Plate LVII.). After this superb pageant Trajan disappears for a while, only to reappear again after a considerable interval, occu- pied by various military operations that may be reviewed xcn more briefly. They comprise the making of a road by the Roman soldiery (241-244) ; a Dacian camp (247), with a xcin stately personage (Decebalus ?) shown in its midst. A number of discomfited soldiers are rushing into this camp through the gates on either side. According to Petersen (D.K., ii. p. 48 f), the cause of their terror is a Roman detachment which has come upon them unawares, and of which we get a glimpse on slabs 253, 254 (C, Plate LXX) xciv above on the right. We next find the Dacians attacking a Roman fort (249-251), from which they are repulsed with great loss of life, their dead and wounded lying heaped in the foreground, while further to the right another Dacian force has been storming Roman entrenchments ; the xcv Romans are sore pressed ; they hurriedly build a third xcvi wall, but almost at once pull it down again (254), for help in the person of Trajan himself, riding at the head of his xcvn cavalry, is at hand (255, 256) ; the Prince apparently arrives by the same road which was being constructed on 241, 242. After victory follows another of those grandiose xcvin scenes of sacrifice, for which the artists of this second half / of the sculptured spiral show such a fondness. In the background, Trajan's famous bridge over the Danube, con- structed by Apollodorus, the architect of the Forum,* is * The bridge, in process of construction, already appears in ARCKiT£C\ UNIVERSITY OF C PLATE LVIII To face p, 191 GKODPJOF < li I il r \!\- Trajan column THE TRAJAN COLUMN 193 seen extending between two fortified camps. In the fore- xcix ground Trajan, surrounded by the usual attendants, pours the libation over the garlanded altar. In the next scene he receives a mixed embassy ofc barbaric peoples, foremost among which are representatives of a Germanic race, with long hair tied up in a knot over J the right ear (263). These are the lineal descendants of the Germans on the Augustan monument at Adamklissi. Then come the familiar Dacians, and on the left (262) — forming a superb group worthy of a Florentine master of the stamp of Masaccio — are five men, in costumes hitherto unrepresented on the column (Plate LVIII.). The three on the right wear long coats, reaching to the ankle, and over these a kind of short-waisted corslet. They are both bare- headed, though the man to the left wears a fillet; yet they are warmly clad, for besides the long sleeves they appa- rently wear gloves. The two men to the left, who hold their horses by the bridle, wear shorter coats, from beneath which appear the customary barbaric trousers. Above, on the second plan, and partly concealed by the wail of the camp on the left, is seen a fifth man with the same pointed helmet, but wearing a corslet identical to that of the short- haired, bare-headed men first noted.* These barbarians form one of the most impressive groups of the whole column. The robust modelling, the massiveness of the the pictures of the First War (above, p. 1 78 on scene xxxiii., where Petersen's view, D.K., i. p. 37, is adopted). Cichorius (vol. iii. p. 141) wishes to identify the bearded figure standing behind the Emperor, with his back to the spectator, on slab 261, as Apollodorus. But we must admit with Petersen (D.K., ii. p. 73) that all proofs for this tempting identification are lacking. The bridge is shown on certain of Trajan's medals. * Cichorius (iii. p. 151) proposes to identify them as Iazyges. N 194 ROMAN SCULPTURE figures, the simplicity of gesture and pose, deserve close study. This scene (262, 264) is set against an architectural background, formed by a walled city on the left ; outside the walls on the right is an amphitheatre, with the tiers of seats shown in bird's-eye view, above the facade, as were those of a theatre in a previous composition (see p. 190). Since a moment ago Trajan was by the bridge over the Danube, we evidently have here a free rendering of the same city which was depicted in scene xxxm. (Pontes).* As a fact the main features are sufficiently recognisable. This fine scene closes the first part of the campaign. B. Second part of campaign. (Cichorius, Scenes ci. to cxxvi — Plates lxxiv. to cxv. — Froekner, 131 to 161.) ci The second part opens, on slab 265, with the march for- ward of the Roman troops. They have just passed the great bridge whose northern gate, with its pillars sur- mounted by trophies, is visible on the left ; from this a fence leads down to a small trestle bridge which spans a ditch, intended apparently for the protection of the large bridge. The last men are leaving the gate and passing en this second small bridge ; already the Princeps is seen riding on far ahead (267, 268), approaching an altar at which a bull is about to be sacrificed. Massed round are the standard-bearers and soldiery (269) ; in the back- ground are seen a fortified camp, with its gate and other buildings on its right — after an empty interval is a circular cm camp with tents in its midst (270). Immediately beyond — is a great lustratio, or purification, the first in this second war (cf. the two suovetaurilia of the first war, above p. 174 ; * Petersen, D. K., ii. p. 63 ; cf. \. p. 39. .L. DEP, NT L UKIVZRSITY OF CA FLATE LIX GROUPS FROM TIIK PROCESSION OF THE SloVKT A T KI I.I A To face p. 195 Trajan column THE TRAJAN COLUMN 195 p. 180). Within the camp Trajan, with veiled head, pours libation over the altar, while the procession of the suovetaurilia passes round the camp outside. In the foreground, in front of the sacred animals, is a magnificent group of Roman trumpeters (Plate LIX.). Next we find Trajan, with his staff, addressing from the suggestus the civ massed soldiery who stand below (274-277). The Imperial group, among whom, however, now appears a young bearded lictor with his fascis, is familiar from the pictures of the First War. As in the First War, likewise, the adlocutio takes /• place immediately after the lustratio. Next comes a council of war ; Trajan is seen seated among his officers (279). They are inside the camp, yet appear well raised above it, cv S according to the perspectival conventions of the column. The result of the council is immediately apparent outside, where cm the Roman soldiery are seen marching in two long files * to the right; behind the upper, or left column, are waggons laden with shields, and at its head appears Trajan (280-284)- They approach a camp (285), within which another waggon cvu with shields is being unloaded (or loaded ? See Petersen, D.K., ii. p. 77), and on the further side, the march of this division continues to the right, still headed by the Emperor. While the soldiers of the upper row are bare- headed, those of the right column in the immediate fore- ground wear helmets, as if prepared for instant warfare. Their march is interrupted by a walled city, with its wooden houses seen in the foreground below and a little to the left of the camp (slab 286). At this point the cvm * These represent, of course, Petersen's Eastern and Western divisions of the army, the upper column, led by Trajan, being the " Westarmee," the lower the " Ostarmee " (Petersen, D.K., p. 75 and p. 83 ff.). 196 ROMAN SCULPTURE lower or right column appears to have been joined by auxiliaries, who are seen marching ahead, namely, two Oriental archers, similarly attired and equipped to those on scene lxx of the First War, followed by Dacians, as usual naked to the waist and wearing trousers. The en long march ends for both divisions on 290-292, where two camps are indicated, one above with tents, the other below on the left. The soldiers are seen busy within.* On the ex right is a quiet scene of foraging. The soldiery cut down the long ears of barley, which one of the men is already cxi carrying off in a bundle. We next see a large Dacian fortress or city (294-297), within which reigns the greatest agitation. Here, too, a council of war is apparently taking place, and to judge by the excited gestures, opinions are by no means unanimous. Outside the citadel, three Dacians anxiously spy to right and left, and two more mount guard. The agitation is easy to understand, for the Roman lower column is entering on the left, while the upper column has passed behind the Dacian stronghold, and has already engaged in battle with the Dacians beyond the cxn citadel on the right (298, 299). Once more the Dacians are beaten, and lie huddled in the foreground dying or wounded. Note, on the edge of the battle, the masterly group of a Roman soldier slaying an enemy beneath an oak cxiii tree (299 = C. Plate LXXIII.). Then again a fortified Roman camp, with soldiers mounting guard (300, 301). Thence the Romans issue with ladders (observe the splendid figure seen in three-quarter back view) to attempt the storming of the huge Dacian citadel which is figured again on slabs 302-305. * There is confusion and indistinctness at this part of the design. S«e Cichorius, ii. p. 196, and Peterten, ii. p. 78. THE TRAJAN COLUMN 197 It is well remarked by Peterson (D.K., ii. 82) that cxiv this important Dacian stronghold, which seems the goal of both divisions of the army, can be none other than the capital Sarmizegetusa, towards which the Romans have been marching steadily northwards, since leaving the bridge over the Danube. At the close of the First War, we had seen the Dacians demolishing its walls in accord- ance with the Roman treaty, while a Roman garrison had been left in a neighbouring camp. But, once Trajan's back turned, Decebalus had not been slow to expel the Romans. We now see the city fortified afresh,* stoutly defended once more by Dacian occupants. From the Roman camp on the left, then (300, 301), (its circumvallation wall extends to the right up to the Roman fort on 306) the Roman soldiery pour out to attack the Dacian garrison with spears and missiles — some, too, bring long ladders to scale the walls (301) ; meanwhile the Dacians repulse their assailants with spears, arrows and stones. The assailants are in peril of discomfiture, but not for long, for once more Trajan, with his division of the army, is at hand coming from the right. He is still within the second Roman fort (306), and the calm mien, both of the Emperor and of his soldiery, show that they are as yet unaware of their com- rades' peril on the other side of the city (Petersen, ii. p. 92). Above, on the left (308), appears a strange three-wheeled engine of war, the construction of which has given rise to much ingenious conjecture. Along the background stretch the mighty walls of Sarmizegetusa. The Dacian garrison sally forth impetuously in considerable numbers ; a pitched * It is impossible here to enter into the difficult plan of the fortifications of Sarmizegetusa. This must be studied in Petersen, D.K., ii., p. 88 ff., with the he'.p of his plan. 198 ROMAN SCULPTURE cxv battle takes place (309-312). Conspicuous, almost in the centre of the picture (311), is the Dacian "without shield, who seems to have thrown aside his curved sword in order to hurl a gigantic stone down upon the assailants " (Petersen, ii. p. 94). Further to the right, we see the cxvi Dacians who have remained within the city walls ; some look eagerly to the left, as if to spur on their comrades to battle, others already draw back or turn to watch the Roman attack on the other side (315). In the foreground, unseen as yet by the Dacians, the Roman soldiers have already penetrated the fortified outworks, which they are hastily demolishing, while on the left (313) two Dacians stand watching in silence the work of destruction. A certain maliciousness of expression marks them out as the traitors who have let the enemy in. Probably they belong to a party among the Dacians that was always friendly to the Romans. Further on (316-318) the Romans hastily cxvn cut down trees to construct fortifications. Next, a Dacian cxvni chief kneels before Trajan* (319), who seems by his gesture to receive him with favour. If this be so, the man belongs to the " Roman party." who had marked with disapproval the violation by Decebalus of the treaty concluded after the first campaign, cxix In the next scene, despairing Dacians are seen setting fire (323-325) to a quarter of Sarmizegetusa, and to the cxx right of this is (326-329) the tremendous scene of the self- poisoning of the Dacian chiefs, who prefer death to dis- honour. The episode is depicted with the utmost originality * According to Petersen (D.K., ii., p. 99), the Emperor him- self had been superintending the preceding operations, but turns to receive the Dacian, though one member at least of his staff •till looks to the left in the direction of the works. u: :ty of calif 3 THE TRAJAN COLUMN 199 and force, as if in Rome some captive Dacian who had witnessed it, had described it fresh from his memory to the artist of the column. In the centre two splendid Dacians stand by a great cauldron or mixing bowl (328). The one ladles out the poison into the cup which his comrade holds, and towards which the others stretch forth eager hands as though towards a coveted treasure. No words can convey the pathos and tragedy of this composition ; the piteous sight of strong men in their prime, bent on deliverance through death — the tenderness with which men, themselves about to drink the fatal poison, support and help those already dying. For death, even when courted, is hard to meet. Thus a man above, on the left, clasps his hand to his forehead as if in intolerable anguish (326). Another, lower down, already dead, is carried out to burial. The weight of the head, which the strong neck is now powerless to bear, and the arm thrown forward and stiffening are rendered with daring truth. Most poignant, however, in cxxi its expression of sorrow, is a group on the right of a young man dying in the arms of his aged father. The old man supports his son's body with his left arm and raises his right hand to dry his tears with the end of his cloak, while another chief stretches out his hand to him, bids him raise his head and take comfort, since death is about to release him also, and to unite him to his son once more (Plate LX.). In the next picture those Dacians, who had not courage cxxn for the extreme form of release, are seen fleeing in terror from the doomed city (330-333) and escaping without the gates. Where a tree (333) marks off the composition, we ' must suppose them to turn inwards and pass behind the Roman soldiery grouped here (333-335), for they reappear in 336, 337 to make their submission to Trajan, who, with cxxm 200 ROMAN SCULPTURE his two generals, and immediately followed by a military band and by the standard-bearers, is at the head of his victorious army. The victorious march has been arrested by the suppliant Dacians (336, 337). The Emperor and the generals have halted, but a standard-bearer is still marching, and the soldiery behind are just shown in the moment of pausing. cxxv The second occupation of Sarmizegetusa by the Romans now takes place. Trajan is seen in the midst, being ac- claimed Imperator by the joyful soldiers (so Froehner and cxxiv Petersen). To the left, provisions of grain are meted out to the soldiers, presumably from the captured Dacian stores. cxxvi Then to the right, a detachment of Roman soldiery is seen leaving the city, apparently by the same gate through which the Dacians were seen fleeing on slab 333. With these tremendous events this part of the cam- paign closes. Henceforth to the end of the sculptured spiral, although the " continuous " method is retained, / the pictures are no longer of connected warfare, but rather of isolated episodes, which are then linked together by the continuous style. C. Third Part of the Campaign. (Cichorius, Scenes cxxvi-clv — Plates xcl-cxiii — Froehner, 161-136.) cxxvi- cxxix Within a Roman camp (346, &c.) Roman soldiers build a circular fort (348), beyond which Trajan, in the familiar attitude, with his officers grouped about him, c? xx receives more Dacian fugitives (349).* These repeated * Petersen (p. 105) notes that there is repetition here of the motive on slab 349. Trajan has been watching the soldiers at work, and has now turned to attend to the Dacians (cf. slab 319). THE TRAJAN COLUMN 2Ci groups of Dacian fugitives, seeking Trajan's protection, indicate the gradual breaking up of the forces of Dece- balus, and prepare us for the approaching catastrophe. Further on, Roman soldiery stand on a bridge of planks cxxxi placed across trestles (351, 352). They do not march over the bridge, but stand still in a file, facing the spec- tator, and apparently converse. In two places the planks have come apart — evidently the trestle bridge is not a success, for in the next picture Roman soldiers are hur- cxxxn, riedly constructing pontoons (356). The Dacians have not cxxxm been slow to take advantage of the momentary difficulty in which the Romans find themselves, for they reappear (354-356) in great force, and, under cover of their shields, attack a Roman camp (358-360), but are repulsed by the cxxxiv Romans, who hurl down stones upon their assailants. This bold Dacian attack,* when so many of their people have already submitted to Trajan, must have been at the instiga- tion of a powerful leader — and lo ! between the trees on the right Decebalus himself appears from behind a rocky cxxxv ledge ; he is flanked by two Dacians, and the three form a group somewhat resembling the familiar Imperial Trio. But the chieftain soon vanishes again as he sees his followers fleeing (362, 363), presumably because the Roman cxxxvi army have now found a means of crossing the river and are hurrying up to succour their hard-pressed comrades in the fort. Now again Trajan, standing on the suggestus, is seen cxxxvii addressing the troops ranged on either side of the military * Petersen (D.K., p. 107) aptly compares it to the " inter- mezzo " formed by the attack of the combined Dacians and Sarmatians between the first and second years of the First War in xxxi. In both cases the attack on the Roman Fortress is made when Trajan is believed to be out of the way. 202 ROMAN SCULPTURE cxxxvm tribunal. From the right advances a curious cavalcade. Roman soldiers lead their horses, laden with saddle-bags filled with all kinds of small vessels and other utensils. This booty is, of course, the famous treasure of Decebalus, hidden by him in the bed of the river which flowed below * his palace, but betrayed to the Romans by his trusted comrade Bikelis. The account of Dio should be compared.* I have purposely avoided quoting much or any Dio, for it is dangerous to try to force the monumental evidence into agreement with the literary ,f but it is interesting to note once in a way the divergence between the two traditions. The historian almost certainly gives the events in the order of their occur- rence — i.e., the betrayal of the treasure after the death of Decebalus. The artist, while faithful to the general movement and spirit of events, orders and selects them to suit his own pictorial purpose. His object evidently is to concentrate attention gradually upon the tragic fate of Decebalus to the exclusion, as we shall presently see, even of Trajan. With this end in view, episodes are distributed or massed so as to secure all the spectator's interest and sympathy for the person * Cassius Dio, 68, ch. 14. Ed. Boissevain, iii. p. 200 f. f M. Tillemont (" Hist, des Empereurs," vol. ii., p. 85) remarks with humorous scepticism : " Ceux qui l'ont vue " (i.e., the Trajan column) " croient trouver dans les bas reliefs dont elle est enrichie, divers evenemens considerables des deux guerres de Trajan contre Decebale . , . pour nous, nous avons cru nous devoir contenter de ce qu'on trouve dans les auteurs." The wise archaeologist, on the other hand, will keep to the evidence of the monuments. THE TRAJAN COLUMN 203 of the Dacian chief. His betrayal, his loneliness and consequent spiritual anguish are intensified by making / the capture of his worldly treasure — the secret of which has been betrayed by a trusted friend — precede his death. Bereft of all material and moral support he will presently choose a self-inflicted death rather than fall a prey to his conqueror. The artist here is pro- ceeding as would a poet or tragedian, who seeks by transposition of events to enhance dramatic effect. The locality of the events last represented is un- certain, though the capture of the treasure shows that it cannot be very far distant from Sarmizegetusa. We next see Decebalus, standing once more in an atti- cxxxix tude of command, between two trees (369). He is address- ing a last faithful remnant of followers, the same, doubtless, who had tried in vain to storm the Roman fort in scene 134. But the great chieftain's words no longer avail to dispel the growing discouragement ; his men turn away from him disaffected, and many of them, after shunning death at Sarmizegetusa, now kill themselves rather than face further trials, or suffer punishment at Roman hands cxl (37*> 372). In the next scene (373, 375), indeed, we are again in a Roman camp, in the midst of which stands Trajan. A cxli number of Dacians advance to him from the right — the foremost has penetrated into the camp, and, kneeling to the Emperor, throws out his arms in an attitude of ex- postulation, as if endeavouring to explain that he and the men with him had no part in the violation of the treaty. As a pledge of their good faith to Rome they betray their 20 4 ROMAN SCULPTURE cxlii brave chief. In the next picture Roman cavalry gallop through a wood (376-379), giving chase to Decebalus, who, swift to mount the horse which was held ready for cxliii him on slab 368, now appears a majestic figure on horse- back between the trees on slab 380. Trajan has appeared for the last time on slab 374, for another protagonist has now taken his place, and the spectator breathlessly follows the fortunes of Decebalus to the final catastrophe. The cxliv great chief, with a sadly diminished retinue — one gallop- ing at the right already falls wounded from his horse — is seen rushing through the forest at full speed. All in vain, for the Roman cavalry pour upon them from all sides, till cxlv under a great oak-tree the Dacian king throws himself from his horse, and, after inflicting upon himself the death- wound, is seen sinking, yet still supporting himself on his left hand, as he looks up undaunted to the Roman horsemen who bear down upon him.* (Plate XLI.) cxi vi After this climax little more remains to be told. On the right, Roman soldiers are making short work of the few who had remained faithful to their king. At the extreme end of this scene the two sons of Decebalus, mere lads of twelve or fourteen, are led away to captivity, or, perhaps, to death. cxlmi i n the next picture, which is unfortunately much muti- lated, the soldiers display to the troops the head of Decebalus, which is placed on a platter. t * Petersen notes that the wounded Decebalus is inspired by the " dying warrior " so frequently found in antique reliefs. I may point out that the Roman horsemen seem inspired by the Dexileos at Athens or a similar group. None the less, the artist of the column understands how to adapt to a new meaning the compositions which he borrows. f Kai j] KcpaKrj avrov cs t>)v 'PojfXTjv dire KOfiia 61] (Dio). H ti Y OF CA A UNIVERSITY Ol TLATE LX1I T<> /(«■!■ p. 2or> TIIK CUDDI — NKJH'I '/'riijtiii column THE TRAJAN COLUMN 205 The few remaining pictures are of skirmishes between cxlviii the remaining handful of hostile Dacians and the Romans ; more prisoners of war are taken (395-404). On 397 is a bit of natural landscape which comes as a relief amid cxlix scenes of capture and slaughter. A highland lake is re- S presented to the left of a tree — a wild boar is drinking here, or perhaps grazing on the bank ; from the hill oppo- site, a stag is coming down to the water ; in the foreground, where there is a hole in the relief, is an ox resting. ". . . Tacet omne pecus, volucresque, feraeque, Et simulant fessos curvata cacumina somnos." Then to the right of this peaceful scene is the goddess cl . u Night," enveloped in her crescent-folded drapery (399). A lonely Dacian hut (perhaps merely a cow-shed) is seen in the foreground ; behind it two Dacians in hiding (?), and beyond, on the right, more Roman soldiery with a captive. The whole is a beautiful night scene, where the peaceful life of the animal world is placed in fine contrast to the tortures endured and inflicted by men. To the left of the group with the captive a river is indicated. The Dacians cli have evidently crossed this river boundaiy into the terri- tory of a friendly people, for we next see, in front of a well-built city, Roman soldiers skirmishing with Dacians and their allies, who are distinguished from the former by a high-pointed cap and other details of costume. (Plate XLII.). The group of Romans with a Dacian captive on 404 is a clii less pathetic variant of the group on slab 400. The Romans set fire to a fortress. It is the end, for in the cliii next and last picture we see the Roman soldiers escorting 206 ROMAN SCULPTURE cliv to new homes the now pacified Dacians. The conquered people drive their flocks in front of them, and the stupen- / clv dous story closes on a simple pastoral theme. This Trajan column must assuredly rank with the greatest creations of the human genius as shown in the plastic arts. The scenes we have reviewed comprise 2500 figures spread over a band 200 metres in length. Yet the artist moves on tranquilly to his goal with absolute certainty of purpose and consequent sureness of touch. The style is so sustained that the spectator's attention rarely flags. Let us for one moment compare our Trajan column to the Parthenon frieze — that other sublime expression of the antique — not in order to depreciate either, but to understand how each solved its peculiar problem. In no other way can we so well come to understand how great artists can make the very limitations of art at different periods subserve their purpose. The Greek artist of the Panathenaic frieze conceives an " idealised state,' 1 a whole nation raised momentarily to a higher power of existence by its participation in the goddess' feast ; hence the procession of the Par- thenon frieze is severely localised in a free ideal space, which is nowhere defined by the introduction of monu- ments or of landscape accessories. The Roman artists, on the other hand, are inspired by an opposite conception. They do not want to trans- port their subject into an ideal space ; on the contrary, they want to bring the event as realistically before the THE TRAJAN COLUMN 207 spectator as material and means permit. Their reliefs^ in a word, as a recent critic has acutely pointed out, are the splendid counterpart of their historic prose. Hence no detail of landscape or architecture, of costume or character, escapes them ; no ethnical trait is too trivial y to be noted and expressed. Yet this realism and truth of detail in no way conflicts, as we shall presently see, with the magnificent idealism of the composition as a whole. The sculptured band of the column of Trajan marks the reconciliation between art and architecture, whose union we saw endangered by the attempts at spatial composition of the Flavian period. Henceforth, as in archaic days, the shape of the monument will dictate the style of its decoration. Nothing can emphasize so well as a spiral band the purpose of a column ; the en- circling seems to impart additional strength, while the steady upward movement of the spiral contributes to the soaring effect of the pillar. Now if the surface of such a continuous spiral is to be decorated with sculpture, it is evident that no subject can suit it so well as a protracted campaign viewed not as a series of isolated episodes, but as a progressive whole. But the narrow spirals only admit the flicker of a pattern — depth of relief would at once annul the strengthening quality of the spiral. Hence the artist will abandon the search for spatial effect, and apply himself to the problem of surface decoration, making use only of the simplest perspectival formulas in order to indicate, without ever attempting fully to express, y 208 ROMAN SCULPTURE that a river, an army, or a procession is turning in- wards. For his purpose he found ready to his hand the splendid continuous art which decorated the great frieze in the Forum of Trajan. But to prolong crowded battle or triumphal scenes up through the twenty-five windings of the relief would have issued in intolerable monotony. Therefore every imaginable episode of a campaign is studied and depicted, so that although it requires a considerable effort of attention to get through the reliefs from end to end, yet monotony is the last fault which we should impute to them. There is, of course, a certain unavoidable parallelism between the earlier scenes of the First and Second War — imposed by the actual events represented — but the variety within this parallelism is truly astonishing. The infinite resource became clear from the diversity of treatment discovered for similar episodes. We should compare, for instance, the successive scenes of the lustratio or suove- taurilia, and the splendidly dramatic sacrifices of oxen at the opening of the second war. Everywhere, indeed, the variety of motive, the animation of movement, is beyond praise. Fighting is relieved by the humours of camp life; victory is contrasted with the pathos of defeat ; gesture and even facial expression are carefully brought into harmony with the subject, and all these scenes are linked together and animated by the true Roman spirit, austere, dominating, even merciless, when mercy has been exhausted by treachery or deceit — yet gracious to the conquered, tender to its own, and wise in the hour of victory. A great foe was never done nobler THE TRAJAN COLUMN 209 justice to than in the scenes of the death of Decebalus, / or of the self-poisoning of the Dacian chiefs within the walls of Sarmizegetusa. The Imperial group, it is true — Trajan between his two staff officers, with the rarer accompaniment of a third — reappear with only very slight modifications — but this is as it should be, for they form a Leitmotiv destined to bind the whole com- position together, and which, therefore, must be at once recognizable. No biography, not the panegyric of Pliny, can give so complete and harmonious a picture of the great Emperor as that which results from the reliefs of the Trajan column. He is by turn the Imperator marching at the head of his troops ; the priest who offers sacrifice ; like a scout he goes out reconnoitring ; he surveys the build- ing of camps, cities, and bridges ; he exhorts and rewards his soldiers ; he discourages acts of barbarism, though he feels perhaps that it would be unwise to check these altogether or too suddenly. Trajan is present everywhere, decides everything, • orders everything, and sees his orders carried out, takes every kind of toil upon himself, and then in the hour of victory becomes the centre of all homage ... so soon as we begin to grasp this, all accessory interest shrinks before the interest in him everywhere ; wherever war is going on we want to know what he is doing, and in every fresh event we are dissatisfied till we have found out his striking person. — Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 112. As a fact, where Trajan withdraws from the scene, during one or more episodes, we have noted that it is o 210 ROMAN SCULPTURE always that he may be brought in with the greater J effect, to rescue his soldiers in the moment of danger, to reinforce attack, or at the commencement of perilous operations. The greatest merit of these reliefs, however, remains still to be considered. To my mind it resides in the singular originality of the architectural and landscape settings. Hitherto the employment of landscape had y been restricted to small panel pictures influenced by Alexandrian models. On more serious monuments, its intrusion had been symbolical of locality rather than intended as true pictorial setting. But now a great campaign is to be shown amid the localities that wit- nessed it. And here a tremendous problem immediately arises ; if on this narrow spiral men are to be shown in the right relation to architecture or landscape, they will be so dwarfed that even on the lower spirals they must be nearly invisible, and become quite so as the spiral rises to the top. Hence the surprising reversal of the true proportions of man and the surrounding architectural or natural setting. The human element is to dominate ; therefore the landscape, so naturalistic, so real, so accurate when we look into its details, is to be on so small a scale that it becomes a mere tapestried background for the human action that takes place in front of it. At times the landscape provides the link for the "continuous" composition, at others it may interpose with a tree or an arch to effect a passing break or afford a point of rest to the eye, but nowhere — not even when splendid Adriatic cities are pictured THE TRAJAN COLUMN 211 at the opening of the Second War — does it for one moment detract from the predominance of the human interest. So consistently is the scheme carried out that the spectator accepts the strange compromise without the slightest effort of imagination, and becomes entirely accustomed to a toy architecture and landscape among which men move, build, fight, march and die — offer stupendous sacrifices or receive extensive embas- sies — like so many Gullivers in a land of Lilliput. At the opening of the second century a.d. it might seem doubtful whether spatial composition, which had given so brilliant an example of its powers on the Arch of Titus, or the dawning continuous method were destined to win the day. It is evident that the decisive victory of the second of these styles was definitely established by the successful patterning of the Trajan column in accordance with its laws. As often in the history of art, the subject proved the powerful control- ling factor in the creation or formation of a style. A people seeking to commemorate their deeds in the durability of stone, could not have hit on a more suit- able artistic medium. If not only the pylons and the attics of arches had to be covered with sculpture, but also the spiral shafts of tall columns were to carry from earth into the skies the tale of the Imperial exploits, it is evident that spatial composition, or composition in depth, that ultimate goal of all art, must yield for the time at least to decoration along the surface by which means alone a sufficient field could be found upon which to unfold the successive episodes of a protracted cam- y 212 ROMAN SCULPTURE paign or the " slow majesty * of a Roman triumph. But since narrow spirals do not admit depth of relief, the aerial quality of space which is so definite a factor of effect in the Arch of Titus has been sacrificed to a method of superposition. Men walk, no longer side, by side on the same level, but along superposed tiers. Nearly sixty years after the erection of the Trajan Column, the continuous style was to be adapted once again with singular force and originality to a similar monument, the column of Marcus Aurelius, which still stands in the Piazza Colonna. The method was followed with varying success for the reliefs of the numerous commemorative columns of the later Emperors. More- over, in time this system of superposition so impressed the artistic imagination that we find it early in the third century employed for the decoration of the pylons of the Arch of Septimius Severus (p. 297), where panel composition would have been both simpler and more suitable. Later on, towards the period of Diocletian J and of Constantine, fresh classic influences from the East seem to have reduced these crowded compositions to symmetry and ordered pattern, thus imparting to the system a new life which enables it to persist throughout the Middle Ages, as the Christian ivories and miniatures abundantly show. At the dawn of the Italian Renais- sance the Pisani are found obedient to its laws; in painting as in sculpture it will hold its ground by the side of newer perspectival methods ; and in the Town Hall of Siena (for instance), opposite the picture of Guidoriccio riding out to war in the enchanted land- THE TRAJAN COLUMN 213 scape of mediaeval romance, we find, painted by the same artist, on lines directly derived from the picture-reliefs of the Empire, the Blessed Virgin enthroned, surrounded by tiers of the celestial hierarchy rising one behind the other with no space allotted to the play of either light or air. CHAPTER IX THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN— continued (98-1 17 a.©.) The Arch of Trajan at Benevento (1 13-14 a. d.) — Sculp- ture in the round — The Mars Barraccio — Statues of Barbarians — The Eagle of the SS. Apostoli. Imp. Caesari divi Nervae filio Nervae Trajano Optimo Aug. Germanico Dacico pontif. max. trib. potest • xviii • imp • vii • cos • vi • p.p. fortissimo principi. senatus p. q. r. The sculptured band of the Trajan column marks, as we saw, the final introduction into Europe of a great narrative or story-telling art, the full import of which is realized when biblical subjects take the place of the pagan content. Moreover, the repeated presence of the Emperor likewise constitutes an aesthetic factor of paramount interest, which facilitates the introduction of Christian subjects into art. This becomes even clearer when we pass to the reliefs on the Arch of Trajan at Benevento. The artists of the Trajanic period understood per- fectly well that the method they had created for the decoration of a column was not suited to all and every monument. In the Arch of Trajan at Benevento we THE PRTNCIPATE OF TRAJAN 215 are brought face to face with yet another fresh mode of composition, made up, so to speak, of the isolated and the continuous. The panels each represent a scene complete in itself, which is linked to its neighbour by the repe- tition of the Imperial personage. The arch was raised in b.c. 1 14, on the road from Benevento to Brindisi, in order to commemorate the successful policy and beneficial rule of Trajan, upon whom the Senate had that year conferred the surname of Optimus.* The subjects have been brilliantly ex- pounded by Petersen f and A. von Domaszewski, J whose descriptions, already accepted by WickhofF, § it will be convenient briefly to recapitulate here, in order that we may appreciate the perfect correspondence of content and expression. || A. Reliefs facing towards Rome — Home-policy of Trajan. On the side which faces the city and which, since it looks towards Rome, must be regarded as the principal face of the Arch, we see, in the attic above, the great Capitoline Triad, Jupiter between Minerva and Juno, * For the inscription on the arch and the date, see Dessau, i. p. 78, No. 296, and beginning of this chapter. t Petersen, Romische Mittheilungen, vii. 1892, p< 241 ff. % A. von Domaszewski, Jahreshefte des Oesterreichischen Archdologischen Instituts in Wien, ii. (1899), p. 173 ff. § " Roman Art," p. 105 ff. || Students are recommended to refer to the following well- illustrated little book: "The Triumphal Arch at Beneventum ; Catalogue of the Casts, compiled by A. L. Frothingham, jun." 1893. Mr. Frothingham's interpretations, however, have been n great measure superseded. 2i 6 ROMAN SCULPTURE accompanied by a crowd of lesser divinities (Ceres and Mercury behind Juno ;. and behind Minerva, Liber — the Italian Bacchus — and Hercules). The gods are preparing to welcome Trajan, who as yet is outside the sacred precincts (Plate LXIII.).* Accompanied by Hadrian as Emperor designate,! and followed by two lictors carrying their fasces, Trajan has only reached the Temple of Jupiter Custos, on the left of which, within an arch, the goddess Roma, accompanied by the Roman Penates and the two Consuls, receives the Emperor, who is immediately to be ushered into still more august presences. Jupiter hands over his thunderbolt to the Emperor, by which he acknow- ledges him, according to the epithet of the inscription, as Optimus, a title hitherto granted to Jupiter alone. The splendid composition is divided into two groups by the intervening inscription. Not even the gods created by Pheidiasfor the Parthenon surpass in nobility of conception the group on this Arch. Pose and gesture are alike digni- fied, yet animated at the same time by the evident interest with which the assembled gods are watching the action of Jupiter, who is about to establish a new order in this world (von Domaszewski). After the welcome by the spiritual powers on the Capitol, Trajan, in the two lower panels of the pylons, is received in the Forum by figures allegorical of the Temporal powers — namely the senatorial and equestrian orders marshalled by the Genius of the Roman people, with his horn of plenty. The locality is indicated on the left panel by a building with six Corinthian * The gods, from a photograph of the cast at the Ashmolean Museum, kindly given by Professor Percy Gardner. For the group with Trajan, see Frothingham, Fig. 4. t von Domaszewski, p. 178. TLATE LXIII To/act i> 21 « Tin: CAPITOLINE - Anii <;/' Bene* ut<> OF CAUF-- T4\A U*U V1 UNIVERSITY OF CALII PLATE LXIV SCULPTURES ON THE PYLONS OF THE ARCH OF BEXEVENTO To face p. 2 1 7 Facing th e city Aliimri THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 217 columns, and on the right panel by an arch. (For the suggested identification of these buildings, and comparison with those on the balustrades of Trajan, see von Domas- zewski, p. 179, and Petersen, p. 257.) To Petersen is due the brilliant recognition of the contrast intended between these lower panels and the sculptures of the attic. We next have to consider the intermediate pylon reliefs which are significantly wedged in between the spiritual and earthly powers of the Roman state. We shall admit with von Domaszewski that the events represented must be — not isolated episodes in the Em- peror's career — but chosen for their general import in order to emphasize the relation of the Princeps Optimum to the Roman people. On the left intermediate panel the goddess, wearing a crown in the shape of the wall of a camp and holding a vexillum or standard sur- mounted by five eagles, personifies the Virtus (valour) of five legions.* She lays her arms protectingly about a soldier as she presents him to the Emperor along with the comrade at his side. From the fact that they wear the toga, they must be veterans; and the two Agrarian divinities, Diana (with her quiver) and Silvanus (with his dog), who accompany Virtus, indicate that the Emperor is about to grant them allotments of land. There is a profoundly Roman and Imperial touch in placing the military scene in the place of honour, immediately beneath the august Capitoline deities. On the upper panel of the right pylon, Trajan is seen receiving a deputation of merchants from the Roman har- bour. On the extreme left is the young god Portunus, who holds his anchor against his left shoulder, and his key * vonDomaszewski, p. 181. 2i 8 ROMAN SCULPTURE in his right hand — then Hercules and Apollo, both of whom had statues near the harbour and the Temple of Portunus, and who therefore characterize the locality beyond the shadow of a doubt.* Thus the side of the arch facing the city sums up the leading traits of the home policy of Trajan (Plate LXIV.). B. Relief s facing towards the country. Provincial policy of Trajan. When we turn to the sculptures on the side of the arch that faces the country in the direction of Brindisi, we pass from the Roman to the provincial administration of Trajan. On the left side of the attic we again see a group of divinities, and doubtless Trajan was represented on the missing left portion of this slab. The gods, however, are no longer the canonical Olympians of the State religion, but the four divinities — Liber and Libera, Diana and Sil- vanus — given as protectors to the newly conquered Dacian provinces (Plate LXV). They are represented welcoming Roman rule as personified in the Emperor. This allegory of Northern conquest is balanced on the other side of the inscription by a scene from the East, where Mesopotamia,t kneeling between her rivers, recommends herself to the mercy of the Emperor, who is accompanied by Hadrian. J * Frothingham, Fig. 10. t So von Domaszewski, p. 185. Petersen had considered the province to be Dacia. t In the distinguished-looking individual of foreign mien on Trajan's right, v. Domaszewski proposes to recognise the Moorish general, Lusius Quietus, already known from the Trajan column. He was the most important of the generals engaged in the Parthian war, and would be in place here bringing Mesopotamia specially to Trajan's notice. l'LATE LXV To face p. 218 AKi II OF T RAJ AH AT BKK1&1 K.N I < » Fadmg tin covmtry AUnari oF CAUFO ^HiA THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 219 The rivers are shown as crouching figures. The Euphrates, on the left, sits by his own bridge which the Romans are crossing.* The scenes enacted in the attic are again finely balanced by the two lower scenes of the pylons. On the right Petersen has acutely recognized the episode of 114 a.d., narrated by Cassius Dio, lxviii. 18 (ed. Boissevain, iii. p. 2o6),when Trajan received an embassy from the Parthians, who, here on the arch, are introduced by their patron Hercules, and who, moreover, bring with them as a gift, the wonderful horse who had been taught to prostrate himself. Then, on the corresponding panel of the left pylon, the Emperor receives the oath of fealty of the Germans, in presence of Jupiter Feretrius, the god of oaths — an admirably balanced composition, with a greater feeling for space and depth than is commonly found in this period, t The skilful geographical distribution should be studied — the East is represented on the right by Parthia below, answering to Mesopotamia above, while on the left Ger- mania and Dacia represent the sphere of the Western conquests. The four scenes of the outer facade, hitherto considered, celebrate not so much military deeds as the Emperor's beneficial rule in the provinces. We shall thus expect to find — in close correspondence with the thought expressed on the first or city facade — that the intervening panels emphasize provincial progress and prosperity. Accordingly * Frothingham, Fig. 2. f Ibid. Fig. 12. 220 ROMAN SCULPTURE we see in the upper panel of the left pylon Mars, the god of war, and Virtus, who wears an oak wreath round her walled coronet (Pliny, "Nat. Hist.," xvi. n). They pre- sent to the Emperor a young provincial recruit, who is accompanied by the centurion entrusted with the training. The attitude of the young Mars is admirably conceived — the easy but dignified pose contrasts agreeably with the awkward stiff bearing of the young soldier who stands " at attention," with his feet drawn tightly together.* It has been thought that Mars is pointing specially to the benefits to be derived from the disciplina Romanavthich. was to educate and to enlighten the youth of the conquered provinces. The antecedent of this thought is expressed in the correspond- ing upper panel of the right pylon. Here Mars looks at Roma, whom he grasps by the hand,t while Trajan presents to them two children who seem to spring from the earth. The field of corn symbolized by the ploughshare — itself the token of the Roman colonies — shows that the children represent the proles Romana, whom Trajan was so keen to foster in the provinces, and whom, on the foregoing slab, we saw him enlisting in the Roman army.f The reliefs of the eastern facade of the Arch of Bene- vento give pictorial expression to the leading characteristic of Trajan's foreign policy, which was to raise the provinces to equality with Rome — an elaboration of the Augustan policy which, as shown by the monument of Ancyra, was in reality restricted to Rome and Italy, and considered * Frothingham, Fig. 7. t In her extended right hand, now broken, Roma probably held the globe, as symbol of dominion over the Orbis Romanus (von Domaszewski, p. 190). \ Frothingham, Fig. 8. HiTECT UNIVERSITY OF C; :IA PLATE TAVr p. 221 PANELS l'Ko.U THE ARCHWAY Arch <>/' Benevento THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 221 the provinces only as a theatre for the expansion of Roman power. C. Reliefs of the Archway. But the subjects of both facades which we have been studying might appear somewhat cold and remote to the "man in the street." Their full import and meaning could only be understood by people who possessed political knowledge and insight, as well as an educated appreciation of Roman history and religion. As a fact, they constitute only the first two acts of a mighty political trilogy. After the Emperor has been seen in Rome and the provinces, con- ferring those political benefits which are to give strength and vitality to the empire for many centuries to come, we have still to find him in a homelier sphere, bringing his paternal bounty within the narrower limits of the good city of Benevento itself. The sculptures of the arch that spanned the great road leading eastwards from the city were to be the record, not only of glories connected with distant Rome or the still remoter provinces, but also of two events intended to stimulate more directly the imagination and memory of the local inhabitants and their neighbours. It was a happy thought of the artists, when the distribution of the subjects was planned out, to reserve subjects of local interest for the passage of the archway where the humblest wayfarer must be aware of them as he passed through. On the one side is a scene of sacrifice — probably the sacrifice offered by Trajan as he started on his Parthian expedition, when he travelled by the new road to Brindisi — the Via Traiana — constructed by him and afterwards spanned by this arch.* Such a glorious cere- * von Domaszewski, p. 191. 222 ROMAN SCULPTURE mony, conducted by the Emperor himself, would be likely to remain long in the memory of the Beneventines, who would point with pride to its record on the panels of their arch. Then, on the opposite side, we find represented Trajan's charitable gifts to the poor children of Benevento and the neighbouring localities, another version of the scene depicted on one of the balustrades in the Forum. It is a similar motive, rendered, however, in a strikingly dif- ferent manner. The atmosphere is homelier and more intimate ; allegory and real life are present on an equal footing ; proud fathers carrying their children on their shoulders, or leading them by the hand, mingle with the personified cities. The cities wear their mural crowns, and one of them, on the right, maternally carries a child in her arms. (Plate LXVI.) The narrow frieze which runs round the arch, below the attic, displays the triumphal procession.* Here are bearers of the sacred utensils, musicians, youths carrying helmets and shields, victims with the sacrificial attendants, stately figures wearing the toga, men carrying poles with inscribed tablets (above, p. 108), or stretchers (fercula) loaded with booty. Then groups of prisoners — the male prisoners with their hands bound, the women with their children in their arms or at their side. Other prisoners are seen on their native carriages, chained. At the end comes the quadriga of the Emperor, surrounded by lictors and horsemen. Each of the four narrow friezes that run along the top * For the description of this and of the other narrow friezes, see Petersen, pp. 243 and 259 ff. The details of the arch can best be studied in the plates of Meomartini, " L'Arco di Traiano in Benevento." See also Frothingham, Fig. 5. THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 223 of the pylons is adorned, in the centre, by a high censer flanked on each side by two youthful male figures (camilli ?) carrying shields, and wearing the high headdress of ladies of the Flavio-Trajanic period.* The friezes which run between the panels of the pylons are decorated, on each side of a high censer, with Victories slaying a bull in the attitude afterwards borrowed for Mithras. f In the span- drels of the side facing the city are the usual flying Victories carrying trophies ; in those of the side facing the country are reclining river-gods. { On the keystones of the arch are long-draped female figures.§ In the lower angles are nude boys impersonating the Seasons. Finally in the keystone of the vault is a small relief with the group of " Victory crowning the Emperor." || The great Emperor who had started with so much pomp on his Eastern expedition, accompanied by the blessings of his people and especially of the poor, whose needs he had just relieved, never saw Rome or the soil of Italy again. He died in 117 a.d., on his homeward journey, at Selinos in Cilicia, probably before the completion of the arch on which great artists expressed, in terms at once so logical and har- monious, the policy which Trajan had pursued with magnificent consistency and consequent success. Never has a monument embodied so completely the methods and achievements of a great career, the supreme reason- « Frothingham, Fig. 6. t Ibid. Fig. 11. I Ibid. Figs. 18, 19. The figure on the left is female, and is of great beauty. § Frothingham, Fig. 23. || Ibid. 22. 224 ROMAN SCULPTURE ableness of a master mind, where the springs of action as well as its results are analyzed and exhibited. If we read through the panels of the arch again and again, we are struck by the intellectual grasp of events, possessed in equal measure by those who imposed the subjects and by those who planned the actual design. An art highly intellectualized, so as to convey a great idea with the lucidity of language, must needs be con- trolled by genius akin to that which inspired the ceiling paintings of the Sixtine Chapel. Forms and types were created by these Trajanic artists as durable as the ideas embodied. We are already in possession of the art language which will clothe not only the political and religious thought of decaying Paganism, but that also of the religion already then rapidly spreading over the Empire freshly consolidated by Trajan's measures. At Benevento, even more than on the Trajan column, the interest is concentrated in the person of the Emperor. On the two panels of the arch that represent Jupiter, suiTOunded by the other Olympians, advancing to hand over to Trajan the thunderbolt as symbol of supreme and divine power, we witness the first act of a Gbtter- dammeiiing more significant in its issues than even that which inspired the genius of Wagner. On the ten remaining reliefs of the arch this twilight of the gods deepens — they appear indeed, but in the service of the Emperor — and as we follow Trajan's figure in panel after panel, accomplishing some act of wisdom or of charity, we feel that it is only a thin wall that divides the plastic representation of the res gestae — the Acta — THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 225 of the Emperor from the Acts of Christ and of the Saints. The night must close over the Olympian gods before the forms of Pagan art can be adapted to the God and to the Saints of another creed, and the Em- peror — the Man-god — must become the precursor in art of the God made Man. It is when studying the reliefs of the Arch of Constantine that we understand exactly the point at which the antique passes into the mediaeval world, but from the higher vantage-ground of the Trajanic monuments we may already distinguish the meeting of the roads. I have dwelt somewhat fully first on the political and religious interpretation and then on the spiritual signi- ficance of the Beneventine reliefs because of their unique place at one of the turning-points in the history of the " Antique." Technical methods have much, or every- thing, in common with what is now familiar from other monuments of the period. But the manner of compo- sition is in a sense as novel as the continuous style of the Trajanic column. Though Professor Wickhoff considers the one to be the outcome of the other * — the continuous style, that is, to be merely an expansion of the group system seen on the arch by letting "the landscape background be continued uninterruptedly" — yet each seems rather to arise out of the preceding illusionism, practically at the same period, but con- ditioned by different architectural necessities. The continuous arises in obedience to the mural frieze or to the spiral which admits of neither breaks nor divisions, t "Roman Art," p. III. P 226 ROMAN SCULPTURE while the arch with architectonic parts that suggest natural divisions calls into existence richly decorated panels. It is simply the decoration already employed on the Arch of Titus intensified and multiplied. The spirit of the panels, whether they be viewed singly or in their totality, recalls not so much the Roman con- tinuous style as the isolated scenes of earlier Greek art, linked as they are into pseudo-continuous bands or friezes (WickhofTs " isolating " method ; see " Roman Art," p. 1 6). Here also the artistry of the Trajanic sculptor must be admitted. For since the subj ects necessitate the repe- tition of the Emperor in each scene, the purely con- tinuous style would soon degenerate into tediousness. On the spiral band of the column we noted how variety and even dramatic effect were attained by making the Emperor disappear occasionally during operations of minor importance and then reappear at the psychologi- cal moment. Thus, though a continuous and unbroken composition presents itself to the eye, its contents are varied and even contrasted so as to sustain and stimulate the spectator's interest. The panel composition of the Arch of Benevento took to itself in time the superposed tiers of the continuous method, and the combination of the two had the greatest vogue right down into the Renaissance. Duccio of Buoninsegna himself — ultimus Romanorum — gives in his pictures, notably in the panels of the famous Maiestas, a brilliant example of the narra- tive force of this method. The groups of apostles or the simple spectators crowd up to listen to the Sermon, or to watch the Entry into Jerusalem, in a manner ARC UNIVERSITY OF CALIF PLATE LXYII To face p. 227 HEAD OF MA US, TRAJAN PERIOD IftiMO liarmcco THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 227 deriving from the superposed tiers of people in the Trajanic column, while the subjects are divided into single or isolated panels, each dominated by the pre- sence of One Personage, according to the method employed for the Trajanic Arch of Beneventum, Other Works of Art of the Period. — The period of Trajan, however, produced not only the long friezes that recorded his and his peopled exploits. We owe to it some fine single statues, and at least one mag- nificent impersonation of a god has survived from that time. It is a head of the War-god Mars in the rich Museo Barracco (Plate LXVII.). The affinity both of conception and of plastic treatment to the gods of the Beneventine Arch is evident. The work strikes one at once as a fresh and original creation, equally remote from the close adaptations of Greek ideals in the Augustan age and the faithful copies of Greek statues so greatly in fashion under Hadrian. The ruggedness of the conception is entirely non- Hellenic ; it is developed rather from contemporary soldier types, the very essence, as it were, of the martial spirit of the epoch. Dr. Amelung, who first published this head,* rightly calls it a "brilliant" example of Roman work. "A plume once waved from the helmet, and on its fastener we notice a bit of sculp- ture which explains the purely Roman character of this * In "Strena Helbigiana," p. 2, with Plate. The present plate is from a new photograph, kindly given for this book by- Baron Barracco. 228 ROMAN SCULPTURE head— the wolf with the twins Romulus and Remus. The head is of the time of Trajan, and there is such intense vigour in the expression, and the manner of the execution is so masterly that we might even say that it gives us the most perfect image of the Roman War-god extant. 1 "' * Of the body belonging to this beautiful head we unfortunately know nothing, but we may form a high idea of the power of executing single statues possessed by the Trajanic artists, from the " captive Dacians " which now stand in front of the projecting parts of the attic of the arch of Constantine but which once, in all probability, adorned the Forum of Trajan. The seriousness of the conception, the melancholy majesty of the pose, with the folded hands and the sunk head, must have struck a fine note of repose amid the glitter of the splendid Forum, and the scenes of battle or of triumph that spread along its walls or soared upwards on the column. Three magnificent heads of Dacians which once belonged to similar figures are in the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican (Amelung 'Catalog der Vatikanischen Skulpturen" 9, 118 and 127). Seen as they now are at closer quarters than originally intended, the workmanship may strike us as coarse and summary compared, for instance, with that of the Mars Barracco. Technical detail and elaboration, however, would be out of place in statues destined to decorate a large public space, and we can only wonder at the amount of expressiveness retained in these heads, yet * Amelung-Holtzinger, " Museums," i. p. 249. .L DEf UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PLATE LXVIII To face p. 229 HA KHAKI AN WOMAN Loyyia (let Lanzi, Florence THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 229 not interfering with their general decorative effect. Moreover, it seems probable that the famous Tkusnelda under the Loggia de Lanzi at Florence (Plate LXVIII.)* is a female counterpart of those male " barbaric" types ; the type, which unmistakably derives from such creations as the Mourners on one of the celebrated sarcophagi from Sidon (Les Pleureuses), in Constantinople, has been adapted to a new conception. The expression is inten- sified to suit a more violent grief, yet gesture and pose are self-contained, subordinated to some monumental idea — it may be to an architectural purpose. It is within the same group also that a fine head in the collection of Mr. Claude Ponsonby must be placed. The present writer, and others, had erroneously assigned the head to the period of Lysippus,t but those wild eyes and dishevelled locks, that suffering mouth and contracted brow are neither Greek nor Hellenistic. They are of a period when the expression of suffering was no longer limited to an external mood — indicated, that is, by mere pose and gesture (Les Pleureuses), or by certain conventional frowns and grimaces (Pergamon) Sorrow in this head moulds the features from within The kinship is to the despairing if resigned Trajanic captives, not to the serene mourners of Hellenic art, nor yet to the impassioned foes of Pergamon, courting violent death rather than endure humiliating captivity (cf. the Terme-Ludovisi, " Gaul and his Wife "). • Amelung, "Fiihrer," p. 10, No. 6. f P. 209, " Catalogue of the Burlington Fine Arts Club," 1903 (Greek Art), No. 29. 230 . ROMAN SCULPTURE Space fails me to describe the more purely decora- tive sculpture of the Trajanic age. Some of its finest examples from the Forum of Trajan may be studied in the second room of the Lateran (Helbig, " Fflhrer^ i. p. 441). Among these the most striking are an acan- thus scroll (Amelung-Holtzinger i., Fig. 79)* and the two beautiful fragments with winged Erotes who from the waist downwards turn into branches of acanthus leaves that curl up into large rosette-flowers. f These Erotes were arranged in pairs ; each Eros poured liquid into a cup and was faced by a griffin. These three magnificent pieces deserve to be carefully studied, and also compared with the earlier decoration of similar character from the epochs of Augustus or Domitian. The richer, heavier Trajanic manner and the more fantastic treatment of design soon become apparent by contrast. But the supreme message of Trajanic art seems brought by the wonderful eagle within a wreath now in the forecourt of the Church of the SS. Apostoli in Rome. J By the side of this Imperial conception even such a masterpiece as Donatello's bronze eagle at Padua seems exaggerated and provincial. Truly does Wickhoff say of the Roman eagle that it remains * Phot. Anderson, 1850; Studniczka, "Tropaeum Traiani," Fig. 55. According to Studniczka, the familiar slab walled into the "Torre di Nerone," near the Forum of Trajan, is a further fragment of the same ornament. f The larger fragment illustrated Amelung-Holtzinger, i. Fig. 2. Both fragments are photographed by Anderson, 185 1, 1852. X First published by Wickhoff, " Roman Art," pi. ix. LCTU y OF CALIFORNIA THE PRINCIPATE OF TRAJAN 231 unsurpassed at the present time, notwithstanding all the attempts of the Renaissance to produce something similar. The motive of the eagle in the wreath, familiar as it is to Roman art, is here entirely created afresh by an original artist. As a rule, the eagle sits in the wreath, but here he has just entered it, with pinions still spread as in flight and head outstretched. What is gone is the detail of foliage, feather, and fluttering streamers, and yet what repose and concentration in the whole. — (" Roman Art," p. 62.) The eagle seems at once the picture of the political and spiritual tendencies of the age, and the finished expression of its technical and decorative skill (Plate LXIX). CHAPTER X THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN, 1 17-138 a.d. Relief at Chatsworth — Reliefs in the Palazzo de' Conser- vatori — Relief with Hadrian passing theTemple of Venus and Roma — Altar from Ostia — Provinces from the Basilica of Neptune — Hadrian's Mausoleum — Hadrianic Statues — The Semo Sancus in the Vatican — Dionysos from Tivoli — Antinous. After the splendid outburst in every direction under Domitian and Trajan, artistic activity paused awhile. For a time sculptors seemed content with established formulas, or when stimulated to search new paths they did not move forward so much as hark back to older periods, to forgotten " classic " and even archaic forms. Under Hadrian we observe, on the one hand, a decorous official art, following for the most part established usage, though rising at times, under the influence mainly of Trajanic models, to a high level both of composition and technique ; on the other, a conscious return to earlier formulas, artists being partly moved in this to gratify the learned and versatile Hadrian. Art in this period becomes profoundly eclectic — a character which it re- tains right through the Antonine period and down into the third century. THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 233 Relief of Hadrian and Roma. (Plate LXXII.). — Few sculptures are more familiar than the great slabs, some of the Hadrian ic, others of the Aurelian period, exhibited on the several landings of the Palace of the Conservators On the left wall of the first landing is a relief (No. 41), rightly attributed by Helbig * to the period of Hadrian. It was found on the Piazza Sciarra, and transported in 1594 to its present liabitat.\ Un- fortunately, the head of the Emperor, which is lost, has been restored as that of Marcus Aurelius, but considera- tions of style can, as we shall see, leave no doubt as to the period of the panel. The head of the man looking back to the left of the Emperor is of the distinctly Hadrianic type, such as we know it from other monu- ments of the period — from Hadrian's own portraits, with the short crisp beard and hair, from the fine bust of a Hadrianic personage in the Capitol signed by Zenas,J and from the soldiers on the Chatsworth relief. The beardless head on the right of the Emperor, how- ever, is Trajanicin character,§ nay, its squareness almost recalls certain Domitianic types. The draped figure of the Emperor, moreover, has close affinities with that of * Helbig, 562. Phot. Anderson, 1728; Brunn-Bruckmann, Plate 268a. The other reliefs on this landing are Aurelian, and form part of the same series as those on the attic of the Arch of Cons tan tine . \ Cf. Michaelis in Rom. Mith. vi., 1891, p. 6i ; Stuart Jones in P.B.S.R., 1906, p. 220. X Helbig, p. 314 (No. 49) ; Loewy, " Inschriiten Griechischer Bildhauer," p. 268, No. 383. The signatuie runs Zrjvdi A\c£&y$pov £toI£i. § Also noted by Helbig, 562. 234 ROMAN SCULPTURE Trajan on the Arch of Benevento {cf. especially the Trajan of the Sacrifice in the archway), so that I would place it rather early in the series of Hadrianic monu- ments. The deities themselves are cast in a somewhat cold and meaningless classical mould, which compares to disadvantage jwith the animated gods on the attic of the Beneventine Arch * The scene represented is of the simplest and most familiar. In front of a triumphal arch which appears on the left, Hadrian, who is escorted by lictors and standard-bearers, is received by a group of Roman divinities : the goddess Roma herself, who extends her hands in greeting to the Emperor (the hands of both, as well as the globe, are modern), accompanied by the Senatus, represented as a stately bearded man, and by the Populus, featured as usual as a young man wearing the festal wreath. The relief, owing to its Trajanic affinities, doubtless belongs to the early part of Hadrian's principate, but the precise event com- memorated is difficult to discover. It is recorded that the Senate, on Trajan's death, decreed for Hadrian the triumph prepared for Trajan, and, moreover, offered to bestow upon him the title of Pater Patrice. But Hadrian appears to have declined these honours for the time being (Spartian, Hadrianus, 5, 6). The panel, which probably formed part of a triumph sequence decorating an arch, may therefore be brought, tenta- tively, into connection with his victory over the combined Sarmatians and Roxolani in 118 A.D/f * Cf. Amelung-Holtzinger, i. p. 200. f Bury, "Students' Roman Empire," p. 499 ; ^/. C.I.L., v. 32. ARCHH -AL DEI IVERSITY OF C - 5 ^ THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 235 Had name Relitf at Chatsivorth. — To the earlier part of Hadrian's reign also belongs the fine frag- ment at Chatsworth interpreted by Petersen.* On it are four soldiers in military undress, two to the right and two to the left of the officer in their midst. The foremost man, who is also the most completely preserved, carries on his left shoulder a large circular book -box — a sort of scrinium — into which are loosely thrown a number of tablets. The next, whose head also is preserved, though the nose is broken and the head itself has been broken off and replaced, carries with both hands a pile of similar tablets. Both these figures move rapidly from left to right. The action of the three other men seems uncertain. The central figure appears to stand still, as if giving some order, or else directing operations. The two on the left have turned towards one another, as if engaged in conversation. In the background behind the first figure is seen an unfluted column resting upon a stylo- bate. The tablets, the Hadrianic character of the heads, and the general resemblance to the similar scene on the Anaglypha Trajani leave no doubt that the * Romische Mitlheilungen, xiv. (1899), p. 222-229, and Plate VIII. The importance of the relief was first detected by Mr. S. Arthur Strong and Professor Furtwangler (cf. Petersen, p. 222). It was bought at Christie's by the sixth Duke of Devonshire in 1844. Mr. Guy Laking kindly informs me that the fragment was in the Jeremiah Harman sale (Lot 122, sale May 20, 1844). It is curiously described in the sale catalogue as "a portion of a relief from a Roman arch with five figures ; the first, a soldier with a sword in one hand and carrying the fragments of a temple on his shoulder. . . . This fine piece of sculpture has prob- ably formed part of a triumphal frieze." 236 ROMAN SCULPTURE event represented is Hadrian's famous remission of taxes. From Spartian {Hadrianus 7) it appears that Hadrian, at the close of 118 a.d„ remitted all the debts owing to the State by private individuals in Rome and Italy, and all that had accumulated for the last sixteen years. The gracious act is one in the long series of Imperial benefactions, two of which, under Trajan, we have already seen represented on balustrades which had belonged to the Rostra (see above, p. 151.) Thus the Chatsworth fragment possibly also adorned a balustrade. Moreover, it is highly probable that the alimentary benefaction in favour of poor boys and girls, attributed by Spartian to Hadrian as well as to Trajan, was also represented. A relief of this scene or some fragments of it might well turn up some day. The relief has a singularly fresh surface. Comparison with the Trajanic reliefs reveals a more loosely co-ordinated composition — more space is allowed between the figures, the first sign of a classicizing tendency which may have already set in before Hadrian, but which would doubt- less be favoured by this Emperor's personal leanings towards Greek art and literature. (Plate LXX.) Two Hadr'wnic Reliefs from an Arch, — A similar classic strain pervades the composition of two other Hadrianic reliefs in the Palace of the Conservatori (Helbig, 564, 565).* They are composed as pendants and once decorated the arch — known in the Renaissance • Amelung-Holtzinger, i. pp. 201, 228. Brunn-Bruckmann, Plate 405. UNIVERSITY OF CAL PLATE I-XXI To fact p. 237 llriiil.iiKinn HADEIANIC i: 1:1.1 Kl's PakutO dei Con*ernit<>ri lintfL-inann THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 237 as the Arco di Portogallo from its vicinity to the Portuguese Embassy — which spanned the Via Lata (modern Corso) immediately south of the Ara Pacts. When the Corso was widened in 1662, the arch was pulled down and its reliefs were brought to the Palace of the Conservatori. They have been separated in the latest re-arrangement of the collection ; the one (Helbig, 265) being placed on the right wall of the second landing, while its companion (Helbig, 264) is on the third landing, Plate LXII., Figs. 2, 3. The first of the pair, then, represents the " Apotheosis of an Empress." Her bust, rising from the flames, is seen carried up to heaven by a winged female figure personifying Aeternitas, while the Emperor sits enthroned near the pyre, looking up at the new goddess. The youth reclining on the ground personifies the Campus Martius, where the Imperial cremations usually took place. The head of the Empress is modern, so her identity is unproven. She has been variously explained to be Matidia, the mother-in-law of Hadrian, or Sabina, his wife, or finally, and more probably, Plotina (d. 129 a.d.), the widow of Trajan and the powerful protectress of Hadrian. In any case it is a Princess of this house, for the Emperor's head — in spite of the badly restored nose — clearly reveals the features of Hadrian. On a second relief an Emperor is making a proclama- tion. His head is unfortunately lost, but the fact that Hadrian is represented on the former relief, which forms a pendant to this, places the personality beyond dis- cussion. The crowd who presses so eagerly about Trajan 238 ROMAN SCULPTURE on the Arch of Benevento, and dares to mingle freely even with the divinities, is here reduced to three figures who are mere types : the impersonation of the Populus Romanus, who is accompanied by an elderly man, clean shaven still as under Trajan, and by a boy. These two doubtless represent the extremes of age in the popula- tion. What the edict may be is uncertain ; it probably refers to the apotheosis of the pendant relief, for if the "apotheosis 1 ' be really that of Plotina, it would naturally be followed by some edict in her honour. We know that Hadrian made a special case of the lady to whom he owed the Empire, that he granted her, beside the apotheosis, every sort of honour, wore * a garment of a dark colour for nine days, built a temple to her, and composed hymns to her." * Relief with the Temple of Venus and Roma. — It is well known that Hadrian, with that infinite intellectual curiosity which reminds one of a certain modern Imperial personage, prided himself on his own artistic attainments. We would give much to know more of the sculptured decorations of the double Temple of Venus and Roma, erected, it is said, after the gifted Emperor's plans, criticism of which cost, it is said, Apollodorus his life.f By good fortune, however, we can form some notion of the pedimental group belonging to the facade on the Sacra Via, from two * Dio lxix. ch. 10 ; ed. Boissevain, iii. p. 231. f For the sources and evidence, see Pauly-Wissowa, s.v., No. 73. PLATE LXXI1 rjj^^SBajJ *m*Si HADRIAN PASSFXC IN FRONT OF TEMPLE OF VENUS AND ROMA Fra;/mrnt8 in Terme and Lat< ran UNI fY OF CALIFOI THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 239 fragments respectively in the Lateran and the Museo delle Terme,* which have been astutely fitted together by Petersen. The fragment, as now reconstituted, shows the Emperor Hadrian (Thorwaldsen wrongly restored the head as Trajan), accompanied by lictors, passing in front of a temple, of which one half, with its five columns, is preserved. The whole temple front was accordingly dekastyle, and therefore represents the Temple of Venus and Roma, which was singular among all other Roman temples both for its double cellas joined back to back and for its ten columns at each end.f The pedimental group is much defaced, but we can still make out the subject and the main lines of the composition, t In the centre Mars is seen approaching Rhea Sylvia ; on the left the twins Romulus and Remus are already being suckled by the wolf while the shepherds gaze in astonishment. § The constant occurrence of the shepherds from this time on in the Nativity of Romulus and Remus reminds us that the Roman type cannot have been without influence in representations of that other Nativity where shep- herds kept " watch over their flocks by night." | We * Helbig, 647 and 103. The temple was dedicated in 135 A.D. t Hulsen, " The Roman Forum," p. 231, and for the literature ibid. p. 248. X Amelung-Holtzinger, Fig. 80, p. 139. Petersen, "Rom.," p. 78, Fig. 54. § The principal groups of the pediment occur on two Roman coins. || In the "Nativity of Mithras" also, "shepherds peep forth from their hiding-place to see the wonder, or offer to the 2 4 o ROMAN SCULPTURE may conjecture with Petersen that the legend of ^Eneas was represented on the lost side. The east pediment, surmounting the cella sacred to Venus, was probably adorned with the Trojan legend of Anchises, the be- loved of Venus and the ancestor of the Roman race. Thus the east and west pediments would correspond to Troy and to Rome — typified respectively by the sacred ancestral legends of Venus and Anchises, and of Mars and Rhea Sylvia. The whole relief was of a triumphal character — it commemorated, most likely, the solemn dedication of the temple. As workmanship it is of a high order of merit. The restrained dignity, the quiet attitudes, the distinguished technique (note the unrestored faces in the background and the treatment of the hair) place it far above the coarser work of the three Hadrianic panels in the Palace of the Conservatori. The skilful spacing and the relation of the figures to the columns of the background recall, in a certain measure, the Chatsworth fragment.* (Plate LXII.) This relief shows how vital Domitianic and Trajanic influences still were under Hadrian. The Temple of Venus and Roma cannot be dated earlier than b.c. i 30. Yet of the four heads of the background, which are entirely preserved, three it is noteworthy are clean shaven, as under Trajan — only the first on the left new-born god the first-fruits of their flocks." C. Bigg, "The Church's Task under the Roman Empire," p. 52. * Moreover, the heads of the two personages in the front row, whether restored by Thorwaldsen or another, are of admirable workmanship* § i © * «! 5 H ^ CAL THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 241 wears a slight beard, thus favouring the fashion intro- duced by Hadrian.* Hadrianic Altar from Ostia in tlie Terme. — Another very beautiful sculptured version of the legend of Romulus and Remus occurs on an altar from Ostia, now placed in cell B off the north cloister of the Museo delle Terme.f The inscription on the plinth (C.I.L. xiv., 5) records the dedication of the altar in 124 a.d. (under Hadrian therefore) to Silvanus and other deities by one P. Aelius Syneros, the freed man of P. Aelius Trophimus, Procurator of the Province of Crete. Those accordingly who will not allow that any- thing good could be produced later than the Trajanic epoch, at the utmost, maintain that the sculptures must, because of their excellence, be earlier than the inscription, and they proceed to assign the sculptured decoration either to the period of Trajan or even as far back as to the principate of Augustus. Those who are familiar with the style and technique of the Augustan altars collected by Dr. Altmann, or with the few examples cited in the present book, must at once admit the later date of the sculptures on the Ostian altar. On the front face is the beautiful group of Mars and Venus, whom Eros is about to unite, already laying his hand • This persistence of the beardless type shows, at any rate, that the beardlessness of many of the personages on the hunting medallions would not be against the Hadrianic date once pro- posed (see above, p. 133). t Amelung-Holtzinger, i., p. 252. Mariani-Vaglieri, " Guida," p. 16, No. 212. Helbig, 1086. Q 242 ROMAN SCULPTURE on the god's left shoulder to draw him nearer to the goddess. This subject is balanced on the back of the altar by the " Nativity of Romulus and Remus."" Here on the left, sheltered by the projecting rocks, are the divine Twins suckled by the wolf and watched over by Father Tiber, who is seen on the right reclining on his urn. The rocky landscape is delightfully enlivened by plant and animal life: a snake darts swiftly forward from a hole in the rock ; a long-eared rabbit, a lizard, a mouse and a snail represent the humbler creatures of the rocky bank, while, within a hollow above, the imperial eagle perches and spreads his wings. Then in the third or upper tier of the picture (in accordance with the now familiar method of superposition) are the astonished shepherds with their long crooks, shrinking, as it were, from the portent — their flocks indicated by one goat. On each of the lateral faces are subjects touched with Boucher-like grace. Mars has, of course, left his chariot ■ outside," and divested himself at the same time of his heavier armour. The love-gods have all this martial paraphernalia in their charge. Here one little rogue plays the charioteer and whips up the horses ; another acts the groom and raises himself on tiptoe to try to reach the horses 1 heads ; a third sits below watching the fun ; while yet a fourth, hovering in the space above the rearing horses, seems to tell us he is innocent of any mischief which his playfellows may cause. On the other side, two more love-gods proudly hold between them the shield of Mars ; a third bears off the spear, which is about twice his own height ; others PLATE LXXIV _JL^*V X ^ ' ^ ' X ^ ' " l 1 ' * 1 V w-*~-*te* To face j>. i> 12 NATIN ITY oF ROMULUS AM) REMUS Altur I'mni Otthk — Museo delle Ternu •NT LI ITY OF CALIFORNIA THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 243 below are busy with the corslet and other pieces of the armour. The fresh fantasy displayed in this monument is indescribable, and shows how great a vitality animated Roman art even in periods which were content to follow established methods or to revive forgotten styles. (Plates LXXIL, LXXIV.) The Provinces from the Basilica of Neptune. — The eleven Corinthian columns in the Piazza di Pietra, now built into the " Exchange " of modern Rome (formerly the "Dogana"), belonged to the north side of an extensive Temple of Neptune, built by Hadrian, or rather restored by him on the site of a former temple dedicated to Neptune by Agrippa after the battle of Actium.* It had once before been restored by the energetic Domitian after the fire of 80 A.D.f In the form given to this temple by Hadrian, the columns — except on the east or entrance side — were supported on a magnificent podium decorated beneath each column with the allegorical figure of a subdued province, and in the intercolumniations with trophies executed in low relief. Of the figures of Provinces, once numbering thirty- eight, as many as eighteen are preserved, while three more are known from drawings. These charming figures are less familiar than they deserve to be, owing * For brief accounts see Amelung-Holtzinger, ii. p. 135 ; Peter- sen, " vom alten Rom.," p. 105. I Cassius Dio, liii., 27 (ed. Boissevain, ii. p. 435) ; sez Gardt- hausen, " Augustus und seine Zeit," i. p. 756, and the notes in vol. ii. p. 425. ! 244 ROMAN SCULPTURE probably to their being scattered among several Museums and private collections. In this case, again, it is desirable that casts should be taken, and arranged so far as possible in the original order of the series. The figures have been minutely catalogued and described by Lucas in an article contributed to the archaeological Jahrbuch (1900). For the sake of English students who may not have this publication to hand, a short description of each figure — drawn from Lucas's article — is given at the end of this book.* It appears from this list that in addition to the seventeen figures in Naples and in Rome (where they are distributed between the Palazzo dei Conservatori, the Vatican, the Palazzi Farnese and Odescalchi, and the Villa Doria-Pamfilia) three more are known from drawings or notices. The most accessible of these figures are the seven in the Court of the Palace of the Conservatori, where they remain not very happily exposed to the open air.f The stately figure with long drapery and folded arms, diversely interpreted as a Germania or a Gallia capta (Plate LXXV., Fig. K), is a fine composition, akin in pose to the captive women of the Trajanic age. But in the warlike maiden (L) on the right of the trophy (not shown in the Plate) we have a composition in the Greek manner, recalling Polykleitan influences both in the type of head and in the gesture, and in the position of the feet. The rich corselet, the dainty military cloak clasped * Consult also Bienkowski, "De Simulacris barbararum gen- tium apud Romanos," p. 60 f. f Helbig, 552 ; Amelung-Holtzinger, i. p. 199 and ii. p. 135. THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 245 on the right shoulder, and the classic pose impart to the charming figure the mingled character of a Greek ephebe and a mediaeval Joan of Arc. A third figure — sometimes called Numidia — has a like originality and charm ; she wears a short chiton that clings to the figure, and high boots, and holds her standard with her right hand. The heads of many of the figures are pre- served ; they display a serene melancholy. The con- ception, it has been well pointed out, is not so much of the conquered country ; it is no longer the Germania, the Gallia or the Judaea capta, who sit desolate on the reverse of so many Imperial coins, as of the friendly allied province, tenderly regretful, perhaps, of past inde- pendence, yet proud to be raised to equality with Rome.* These * 'Provinces," or "Nations," as Lucas prefers to call them, are worked out almost in the round. They be- long to that class of " pseudo-reliefs " of which we have had abundant examples in Augustan and later times. Doubtless the impression aimed at was of a statue in the round — and the statuesque composition, with feet sufficiently apart to give strength to the pose without detracting from its grace, produces something of the effect of Caryatids : the figure seems to have an archi- tectural function of its own, and to contribute to the solidity of the supporting podium, precisely there — under the column — where its strength must be taxed to the utmost. The composition is further broadened and strengthened by the standards, spears, battle-axes, &c, which the figures lean upon. * See Lucas, loc. cit. p. 34. 246 ROMAN SCULPTURE The purely decorative trophies fill the podium very happily beneath the interspaces of the columns. They are carved in comparatively flat relief, for they naturally have no architectural function. Moreover, the design follows either a horizontal or a diagonal line, which helps to bring out by contrast the vertical lines and columnar character of the " Provinces.' 1 Hadrian was merely reviving an idea of the con- quered or allied nations long familiar to the Romans. The victae gentes had frequently figured in the triumphs of Roman generals, as in the triple triumph of Octavian (Virgil, iEneid, viii. 722).* The great porticoes of the Campus Martius were crowded with figures of nationes or provincice, destined to pro- long in stone the memory of the more ephemeral triumphs. f Here and there in museums and collections isolated figures, fragments, and other traces of these have been discovered. But the most instructive and complete series is that from Hadrian's restoration of the Basilica Neptuni. The reign of this Emperor was one of active building and restoring in Rome itself and throughout the Em- pire. Like Agrippa's " Posidonium," so, too, his Pantheon was restored by Hadrian, { but no statuary works belonging to it can be pointed out. From the great Mausoleum which Hadrian built for himself and his family (the modern " Castel Sant 1 Angelo ") some * Se3 Conington's note on this line. f A scholarly account of the different types of these figures will be found in Bienkowski's monograph. % Sei Gardthausen, "Augustus," i. p. 757 f. PLATE LXXV I • p. 246 PBOVIN< E8 PROM THE TEMPLE OF I'aln-.zo (lei Conservator/' UNIVERSITY OF CAL: THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 247 few decorative sculptures have found their way to the Museo delle Terme,and two magnificent bronze peacocks, out of the four that probably once adorned its entrance gates, now flank the great antique pine-cone in the court- yard of the Vatican to which the cone gives its name.* The most perfect complex of Hadrianic buildings and collection of Hadrianic statues must have been seen in the famous Villa Adriana, whose splendid ruins still exist near Tivoli. It is here that the classical- minded Emperor indulged to the utmost his antiquarian and artistic fancies, imitating the famous classical sites he had visited on his travels, and gathering together pictures and sculpture — both genuine antiques collected by his care, and copies and adaptations of such. A large proportion of the antiques now scattered in the various museums of Italy and Europe come from the excavations on this site. These, whether originals or copies, belong mainly to the history of Greek art. But the principate of Hadrian was fertile, not only in copies, but also in adaptations inspired by, without being directly imitated from, Greek models. These works also do not exactly fall within the direct lines of de- velopment of Roman art, but they are so characteristic of the period that one or two examples may be adduced. Such is the statue of Dionysos, found in that same villa of Hadrian, and now in the Museo delle Terme * Petersen in Araelung's "Vatican Catalogue," i., "Giardino della Pigna," Nos. 225, 226, and Plate 119. Petersen's careful description of the peacocks should be read. The birds, how- ever, are finer than he admits (Gute nach der Natur gemachte Arbeit). 2+8 ROMAN SCULPTURE (Helbig, 1063 ; Amelung-Holtzinger, i. p. 277; Mariani- Vaglieri, " Guida, y> 487, p. 68). Archaeologists have tried to trace it back to a definite Greek original, variously attributed to Myron, to Polykleitus, to Euphranor (about b.c. 375-300), and lastly to Phradmon.* The fact of so many conflicting theories points rather to an eclectic type inspired not by one but by various models of the great Hellenic schools of the fifth and fourth centuries b.c, combined and translated in response to the indefatigable spirit of research which penetrated the art, as well as the philosophical and religious specu- lations, of the period. But the head of the Dionysos (Plate LXXVI.) also has distinct affinities of technique with certain Hadrianic portraits. The eye-balls are plastically indicated, and the hair combines a certain Greek quality of linear design with the more summary Roman manner of indicating the masses by modelling. In these respects it may be compared with the portrait of a young girl from the period of Hadrian (Plate CXVIIL). Other Hadrianic artists reached back beyond the fifth century for their inspiration. A statue of Semo Sancus in the Galleria de' Candelabri of the Vatican (Helbig, 368), the inscription of which points to the second century a.d. (C.I.L., vi. 30997), shows this Roman agrarian divinity in the pose of an archaic Greek type of Apollo created by Kanachos of Sikyon. Neither body nor head, however, is a copy. Helbig well remarks that " the sculptor has observed the prin- ciples of the archaic only in the design and in the main * See the literature cited by Helbig, loc. cit. PLATE LXXVI HEAD OF THE DION Y SO 8 FROM VILLA ADIMAW I'd jus, p. 218 Muteo (telle Terme Indt raw \ , S1 TY OF CALirC. THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 249 forms of the statue, while alike in rendering the nude and the hair, he has followed a less constrained method of treatment. " The Antinous. — The supreme and most characteristic achievement, however, of the Hadrianic period was the creation of the type of Antinous. It is the triumph of original thought over eclecticism of form. The type can be analysed back into its constituent parts, and each of these may be discovered to be Greek. None the less the whole remains one of the most powerful presentments invented by the sculptor's genius. In it is summed up the whole spirit of that strange Hadrianic period with its intellectual, unanswered curiosities and unappeased longings, its sensuous illusions and tragic scepticism. As the Antinous is the last of the great classic types given to the world by the antique, so also is it among the most powerful and majestic. The grand head of Antinous in the Louvre (the Antinous Mondragone) is assuredly, as Furtwang- ler has pointed out, modelled upon a Pheidian Athena ; * but place the now celebrated copy at Bologna of the head of the Lemnian Athena by the side of the Antinous and it will be seen that — for all the simi- larity of form — the features of the Roman head are charged with the spiritual experience of six intervening centuries (Plate LXXVIL). * " Masterpieces," p. 18 : "The unknown artist who made the head of the Antinous Mondragone for Hadrian seems to have attempted to bring some of the charm and beauty of the Lemnia into the face of the Emperor's favourite." 250 ROMAN SCULPTURE The obscure Bithynian youth who, by his early death, won the crown of immortal beauty, and left for a record only the strange tales of the Emperor's pas- sionate love, and the still stranger legend attaching to his tragic disappearance in the Nile, was just the per- sonality, at once splendid yet veiled in mystery, to attract unto itself the religious sentiment of the age. In Antinous all the cults of declining Paganism seem to meet. He is the mystic Dionysus with the sacred Cista, wearing the diadem that presses into the soft rich hair, under the shadowing ivy leaves and berries (Antinous Braschi, Vatican; Helbig, 302);* again he is Vertumnus, with his gifts of fruit and flowers (Lateran, 3rd Rom ; Helbig, 653),! or, as in a statue at Eleusis, he appears as Apollo on the Omphalos — the god of healing and of light — and in Egypt, the land where he died, he was honoured both as Osiris and Serapis. * In fact, the whole of the latter-day Olympus reawakens in him to a new life." J If, in order to create the statuary type of Antinous, artists borrowed the austere features of Athena or the lithe, virile outline of Hermes, they also invested these with a new meaning. Satiety and * S. Reinach, "Apollo," Fig. 137; see also the magnificent head, known, unfortunately, only from the cast at Strassburg, ib. Fig. 136, and the head in the Brit. Mus. Cat. 1899. f On the important question of the restorations consult Helbig. The head is restored, but the body, with the prominent chest and high placed breasts, is certainly that of Antinous, and just enough remains of the fold of drapery within which the god held his gifts to make certain the identification as Vertumnus. X Dietrichson, " Antinous," p. 92. Mil I : ANTIN0U8 HONBBAGONE Giraudon '/',. filmJtM »» OKA Y OF C THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 251 sensuous melancholy are the dominating traits. In spite of his powerful frame, the new god bends his shapely head as if weary alike of Imperial favour and of divine honours. A modern critic has admirably analyzed the sadness that pervades the youth of Antinous ; "pain and enjoyment of life, darkness and light, death and youth mingle in these features, and impart to them that infinitely pathetic expression which we best define when we say that, with the head of Antinous, melancholy made her entry into antique art. . • « * • It was the pathos that attaches to early death — a pathos made doubly poignant by the fact that Antinous died voluntarily on behalf of the master whom he loved — which powerfully attracted the Hadrianic sculptors, and made them expend on the creation of this type much evident care and thought in addition to a technical skill scarcely as yet on the wane.f This death of Antinous seems to have presented itself to the minds of his time as a sort of sathf actio vicaria (Dietrichson, p. 162) — a reflex, therefore, as Dietrich- son has it, " thrown back by awakening Christianity upon antiquity that was dying in its rear." So much, indeed, but no more, seems borne out by the art type of Antinous. Our enjoyment of its subtle and pathetic beauty should neither be lessened by the uncritical gossip of historians J nor cooled by the comments of * Dietrichson, " Antinous," p. 150. t See the excellent remarks of Emil Braun on the Antinous Braschi in " Ruins and Museums," p. 201. X The slight evidence upon which the early Fathers based 252 ROMAN SCULPTURE recent critics, unwilling here, as always, to admit that a Roman type can have either originality or beauty.* In the Mondragone head the forms have the firm- ness and fulness of youth ; the curves of the mouth, especially between the lips, are extraordinarily subtle and mobile. In the nose the artist has departed from any classic model. Instead of the conventional straight line, it forms an angle with the forehead, and is of a pronounced though not exaggerated aquiline type. The tip is unfortunately restored, but the structure of the upper part is strong and delicate. The eye, with its strongly projecting upper lid, is finely drawn. The somewhat heavy modelling of the part between lid and eyebrow, the well-marked eyebrow itself, the low fore- head and the hair drawn down from under the fillet, finally the forward inclination of the head, — all con- tribute to that sombreness of expression for which the heads of Antinous are celebrated. Perhaps the artist surpasses himself in the treatment of the hair with its simple, grandly drawn strands, its well-defined masses, and the subtle lines of shadow that separate them. There is a certain austere delicacy about the their defamations has been brought together and discussed by Dietrichson, pp. 33-56. * Mr. Ernest Gardner, for instance, does not show his usual insight into the qualities of sculpture when he writes of the Antinous Albani : " The fact that such a type, which has little of intellectual character about it, could influence the whole course of art, suffices to indicate the poverty of ideas and the lack of originality which mark the sculpture of the time, although it still retained a considerable amount of technical skill (" Hand- book of Greek Sculpture,'' p. 519). THE PRINCIPATE OF HADRIAN 253 ear, which is left uncovered by the hair. Surely it is unnecessary to apologize for Winckelmann , s enthusiasm over this head, and over the almost equally beautiful conception of Antinous in the celebrated relief of the Villa Albani (Helbig, No. 818) : " The glory and crown of sculpture in this age as well as in all others are two images of Antinous. One of these in the Villa Albani, is executed in relief; the other is a colossal head in the Villa Mondragone above Frascati. r '* * Winckelmann, "Hist, of Ancient Art," tr. Lodge, ii. p. 335. Winckeltnann's judgments of the Antinous type, and those of other writers of any importance, are collected in the curious book by Ferdinand Laban: " Der Gemuthsausdruck des Antinous" (1891. CHAPTER XI HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI Sarcophagi of the Hadrianic and Antonine Periods — Their artistic value — Sarcophagi with the legend of Orestes and with the Slaughter of the Niobids — Com- parison with the " Sarcophagus of Alexander " — Representation of Erotes on Sarcophagi and Altars. \ Ix studying the official art of the principate of Hadrian, we seem to have lost sight of the continuous style which, on the column of Trajan, erected only three years be- fore the accession of Hadrian, had afforded so splendid an example of its narrative and artistic capabilities. But if the method was obscured for a while under the influence perhaps of the new Hellenism in fashion in Imperial circles, we find it none the less deeply rooted now as a popular, and genuinely Roman, mode of representation. We must not look for it, however, on Imperial arches, but among humble monuments, such as the sculptured sarcophagi which, from the time of Hadrian onwards, were, owing to changing modes of burial, produced in great numbers. These sarcophagi escaped, within for- gotten tombs, the destruction that overtook more HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI 255 prominent works of art, and can thus help to fill up the gaps in our knowledge of Roman sculpture from the middle of the second century a.d. There are sarcophagi in almost every collection ; they can, moreover, so far as subject and composition are concerned, be conveniently studied in Robert's magni- ficent publication, while Wickhoff, Altmann,* and Riegl,f each contribute aesthetic observations of the first order, showing the importance of a class of monuments which has been absurdly neglected.) Hadrianic Sarcophagi in the Lateran. — To the period of Hadrian belong three of the finest Roman sarcophagi, which can be conveniently compared and studied since they are all in Room XII. of the Lateran (Helbig, 703, 704, 705), having indeed been found in the same tomb of the Vigna Lozano Argoli, not far from the Porta Viminalis^north of the railway station) Fortunately in this case the date is certified, for the sepulchral chamber was built of bricks, among which were found two with the dates 132 and 134 a.d., well, therefore, within the principate of Hadrian. The two sarcophagi, No. 799 (Helbig, 703), with the legend of Orestes, and No. 813 (Helbig, 705), with the "Slaughter of the Niobids," are peculiarly interesting as belonging to a class of compositions for whose sculptors Wickhoff claims that the " continuous * In the monograph " Architektur und Ornamentik der Antiken Sarcophagreliefs," so often alluded to. j " Spatromische Kunstindustrie," passim. t 256 ROMAN SCULPTURE style * enabled them to infuse a renewed artistic vitality into themes otherwise outworn. In the earlier periods of antiquity poetry and art worked independently and creatively upon mythical material, now the one, now the other, inventing new motives. But in the third century of our era mythology had long lost all power of further development, so that artists following in the learned track common to the whole period kept to the narratives of the most celebrated poets, which they sought to reproduce as faithfully as possible in their works, Thus the works of the second and third centuries a.d. follow Homer or Pindar, iEschylus or Euripides, much more lite- rally than did the works contemporary with those poets which treated of the same matter. It was only thanks to the continuous method of representation that this pedantic proceeding became endowed with a wealth of fancy which makes the works of that time appear so living in com- parison with the illustrations of our modern books. — y. ("Roman Art," p. 165.) ( \ Students should not fail to read WickhofTs brilliant analysis of the sarcophagus in the Hermitage with the legend of Orestes., We shall turn to the closely allied treatment of the same subjects in the Lateran example (Plate LXXVIIL). And first it is necessary to grasp that what we have before us is not one but four subjects, so closely interwoven that it is impossible to tell where the one subject begins and the other ends. Three mighty acts of a drama, the murder of ^Egisthus, the murder of Cly- temnestra, the pursuit of the Furies, with, as an epilogue, the gracious indication of forgiveness and release to O o 1 ■ HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI 257 come, are unfolded with such artistry that though the separate episodes are clear to our intelligence they are yet so blended as to offer to the eye a compact and closely connected scene. In the centre the murders of ^Egisthus and Clytem- nestra are already accomplished facts. The usurper has fallen violently forward head downmost, his knees caught up by the back of his chair. To the right lies the dead or dying Clytemnestra in a quieter posture. Above, towers the exultant Orestes with Pylades at his side, while the old wrinkled nurse shrinks from the hideous tragedy her old age has been forced to witness. Already from the right the Furies, with snake-encircled arms, move towards Orestes who, on the left, is seen, Hamlet- like, encountering the Ghost of his Father, a still, shrouded figure within the shadowy hollow of the tomb. Then on the right Orestes grasps the tripod of Apollo the Deliverer, stepping lightly over a sleeping and soon to be pacified Erinys. On the left short side are seen the Shades of ^Egisthus and Clytemnestra approaching Charon's ferry-boat. On the right side, under a pine tree, lies an Erinys with torch and snake. Along the lid are unfolded the subse- quent adventures of Orestes in Tauris, again in the u continuous style " : we see the arrival of Orestes and Pylades at the shrine of Artemis, the recognition by Iphigeneia, the scene on the sea-shore, the battle by the ships, and Iphigeneia already embarked holding the sacred image in her hand (Robert, " Die Antiken Sarco- phagreliefs/ , ii., Plate LIV.). I 2j8 . ROMAN SCULPTURE We pass to the sarcophagus with the K Slaughter of the Niobids," and see at a glance that the principles of composition are the same. The first homogeneous im- pression is not in the least disturbed or lessened, but rather confirmed by a detailed examination. As in the sarcophagus of Orestes, so here the dominant motive occupies the centre. The note of terror and pathos is struck by the group of the frightened uprearing horse and the young boy who, fallen piteously to earth, has his hand still entangled in the bridle. For it is in the midst of a joyous hunt — as on a well-known Pompeian wall-painting — that the beautiful sons of Niobe have been overtaken by the jealous arrows of Apollo and Artemis. (The gods themselves, by a naive contrivance of the sculptor, are shown on the lid of the sarcophagus, as diminutive figures supposed to be far away above the main scene.) But by the licence which the con- tinuous style makes appear logical, the slaying of the daughters is brought within the same cadre as that of the sons. Here to the right of the central group the aged nurse places her withered old hand on the breast of a young girl, who is already drooping under the mortal wound inflicted by the arrow in her side. (Plate LXXIX.) On the extreme right Niobe herself, an impersonation of majestic motherhood, framed within the arching drapery of her uplifted cloak, presses to herself her two youngest daughters — one little girl throwing her arms desperately about her mother's neck. Between this and the central scene the triangular space is filled in with singular skill by a group of three Niobids on horseback , o *• u OF CA1 HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI 259 massed up like an inverted pyramid. To the extreme left, balancing Niobe and her daughters, is Amphion in full armour, raising his shield to ward off the arrows from his youngest boy whom he holds between his knees ; his effort is in vain, for the child's head droops, his little knees bend, his arms hang stark — the arrow of the god has found him out. Between Amphion and the centre, the bearded peda- gogue appears twice " continuously," once endeavouring to shelter one of the younger Niobids, the second time supporting the wounded dying boy. On the shorter sides we see, on the right, Niobe sitting in desolate sorrow by the tomb of her children ; on the left a simple sylvan scene — a shepherd with his flock conversing with a nymph. I think it a mistake to try to bring this scene into direct relation with the other compositions. At most does it indicate the quiet landscape within which an unutterable tragedy is presently to be enacted. f In presence of these two masterpieces it is idle to urge " imitation of Hellenic or Hellenistic models, 1 ' or to try to disparage the whole by pointing out that single motives and figures are borrowed from composi- tions reaching back as far as the fourth century b.c. We readily admit that the novelty is not one of types or motives (though as a fact the group of the rearing horse and fallen horseman on the sarcophagus of the Niobids seems composed, if not for this actual monu- ment, yet for this special rendering of the scene), but maintain once more that it resides in the method of composition, in the subtle interweaving of the various 260 ROMAN SCULPTURE groups, in the strong contrasts of " light and dark " obtained by so compressing the figures together that the intervening shadows or lights are intensified instead of diffused. The method pursued and its results will come out clearest if we recall the friezes of almost any Greek temple or the sculptured panels of the sarcophagi from Sidon. Take, for instance, the friezes of the Greeks and Amazons from the temple of Afjpllo at Bassae (fifth century b.c), or from the Mausoleum of Halikarnassos (fourth cen- tury b.c), both in the British Museum; or, again, the " Lion Hunt of Alexander " on the Sidonian sarco- phagus (late fourth century b.c.) at Constantinople. Any of these compositions — even the last, which is the most complex — breaks up easily into its constituent groups, but the Roman compositions cannot be thus disintegrated ; any attempt to isolate the groups results immediately in the dislocation of the whole. This is said, not to disparage either the one or the other art, but simply to point out that there, within the domain of composition, the Greeks had left unsolved and un- approached problems which were to attract the artists of Rome. It is, however, one form of homage rendered not only to works of genius, but to almost any work produced in a really great period of art, that it appears to us unsurpassed and unsurpassable. Moreover, if that particular work or that particular period becomes the object of our special study, we soon come to regard its achievements as a limit not to be transcended by subsequent effort. When we contemplate the sculpture HADRTANIC SARCOPHAGI 261 of Greece, with its clear contours and definite lines, its groups that overlap yet retain unobscured their own individual conduction, it is difficult to realize and to remember that other aspects of form and of composition may be equally vital, and may appearand appeal suc- cessfully, to the artistic imagination of other periods. The composition of the scenes which decorate these sarcophagi is actually in the " continuous " manner. Yet it shows in various respects a marked departure from what we observed on the Trajan column. On the column lowness of relief was observed, that heavy shadows might not obscure the design, and the figures were all forced into one plane that all parts of the sub- ject might be equally distinct. Now on the sarcophagi we likewise have all the figures brought within the same distance from the eye — kept, that is, in the same plane — but the treatment of light and shadow differs entirely from that observed on the column. Where heavy shadows were carefully avoided, in the sarcophagi there is an obvious search for powerful contrasts of light and dark. The artist seems to be once more haunted by problems of space, by the desire to produce an effect of depth. But he does not revert to the perspectival manner attempted by the Flavian artists half a century before. He cuts deep into the surface to be decorated, and allows the figures to stand out almost free. That no sort of spatial perspective enters into his calcula- tions is evident from the fact that an animated and crowded composition is severely kept in one plane. A new conception of space has evidently arisen, perhaps 262 ROMAN SCULPTURE out of the failure of the earlier perspectival attempts. Instead of aiming at bringing the figures into correct spatial relations to the background and to one another, the background is practically obliterated, and an empty space substituted in its stead. Inside this space, as times goes on, figures will be arranged more and more as inside a niche. Space never seems to have pre- sented itself to the ancient artist as an independent factor in itself within which figures move, but merely as a complementary factor resulting from the cubic content of the figures which it surrounds ; in RiegPs own words : " The history of art has to distinguish between two manifestations of tridimensional space — the cubic content which is a property of bodies, and the space which plays between them" (" Das Hollandische Gruppen Portrat," p. 85). We shall have to admit with Riegl that at this stage the relation of bodies to space is optic and not, as might appear to a superficial ob- server, the merely tactile or material relation of archaic art.* At the same time the tendency, always evident in the antique — to lay greater stress on the cubic than on the spatial aspect of the tridimensional problem * This meaning of Riegl's is best illustrated by reference to another monument — apilasterin the Lateran, decorated with vine- leaves and clambering Erotes, published byWickhoff ("Roman Art," Plate XI.). The character of its peculiar flattened relief had appeared to Wickhoff to indicate retrogression, because, as Riegl says, " he mistook the flattening of the relief for a return to archaism, although this flattening — unlike the Egyptian and archaic Greek — was not tactile but optic, and meant the sub- stitution of space for background " (" Spatromische Kunstin- dustrie," p. 71. note 1). HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI 263 led, in Diocletianic-Constantinian sculpture to that " cubic isolation " of bodies in space, which, as we shall see, has of necessity many points in common with the old frontal presentment of figures and objects. This new manner of manipulating the background, through primarily inspired, I believe, by the desire to solve the spatial problem, was also the outcome, no doubt, of a novel apprehension of colour. The alter- nation of light and dark, produced by compressing the composition, was the sculptured imitation of the sharp juxtaposition of colours made fashionable in Rome by eastern influences. These colouristic effects, which as Strzygowski* has shown were being skilfully adapted to sculptured ornament in Graeco-Syrian art, now seem to have infused a new life into Roman sculpture. Colour now became a factor not only in the treatment of relief but also in that of sculpture in the round. Of the same character as the two sarcophagi we have been considering are three others in Room XL of the Lateran (Amelung-Holzinger, i. p. 159). One, with scenes from the legend of " Phaedra and Hippolytus," shows the hunting of Hippolytus combined with the scene in which he is brought before the love-lorn Phaedra (No. 77, Helbig, 699). On another are three scenes from the Myth of Adonis (No. 698, Helbig, 769) ; the third represents the " Triumph of Dionysos and Ariadne." If we look back through Robert's publication it soon becomes evident that the same * In his work on " Mehatta." 264 ROMAN SCULPTURE mythological subjects were utilized again and again on sarcophagi — just as scenes of "leave-taking' 1 are repeated on countless Greek stelai. What we must admire in the one as in the other case is the com- parative variety of the treatment, exact repetition at any rate being scarcely ever found. Yet like the stelai and the sepulchral altars, the majority of sarco- phagi were works of inferior order — often mere mason's sculpture— nor, of course, do we always or even frequently find these compositions to be on the high artistic level of the two examples in the Lateran which we considered first. It would, however, be an error to suppose that all sarcophagi of the period betrayed identical tendencies. Among them are many which suggest in different ways the eclectic taste of the period. It is interesting, for instance, to compare with the Lateran version of the Niobids, the Sarcophagus of the Vatican (Galleria de' Candelabri) with the same legend. Here, indeed, the first impression is not of a continuous design closely woven out of light and shadow, but of linear groups lightly linked together. We should note the beautiful design of the lid, along which the bodies of the slain Niobids lie in natural poses and yet so as to form a sort of scroll -pattern. Erotes and kindred Subjects on Hadrianic and Antonine Sarcophagi. — Finally a third sarcophagus, in Room XII. of the Lateran (No. 806, Helbig, 704), brings us to a different class of representation, but one equally charac- teristic of the Hadrianic and Antonine periods. Since HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI 265 it belongs to the same tomb as the other two, its date is presumably the same. On the main panel it displays the familiar motive of garlands, supported by a satyr in the centre and by Love gods at the angles, with masks of Medusa in the hollow above the garland. But a fresher and more seductive motive, as often on sarcophagi (sarcophagus of the Niobids in the Vatican, for instance), adorns the lid, where eight boys, riding the most diverse animals, are enjoying a novel kind of sport. The one rides a bear, another a bull, but the huge animal has fallen on its knee, and it is in vain that his rider attempts to pull him up by the tail ; yet another urchin has been thrown from his horse, another is mounting a donkey, another letting himself down from a panther. The wings have probably been forgotten by the sculptor, for these plucky little rogues must be the same love-gods whose Puck-like freaks are so familiar in the art of the period (above, p. 242). In effect we see one winged Eros riding a lioness, and then at the close the winner, proudly waving his palm branch, advances on a lion. Slight as these subjects are they strike a charming note amid the more serious themes of Roman art. The Erotes and their pranks had been favourite themes from Hellenistic days, but in the second century they acquire fresh importance. From mereputti they grow to the stature almost of adolescents. They no longer hover in the air, lightly catching up the fluttering garlands, but stand on the ground at the angle of the altars or sarcophagi, acting as real supporters to the 266 ROMAN SCULPTURE heavy trailing foliage. Their frolics are no longer con- fined to the sides of an altar (cf. Ara from Ostia, p. 241), or to the lid of a sarcophagus, as in the Lateran example, but cover the main panels also. To this class must be referred the well-known sarcophagi in Athens, with dancing and revelling cupids (1 180-1 183 in Room XL of the Central Museum). One indeed has revelled only too well, and has to be supported by his more sober companion — a humorous incident parodied from the groups of Bacchus and Silenus.* Within the same cycle of representations should be placed, I think, the charming octagonal ash chest of Lucius Lucilius Felix in the Capitoline Museum (Helbig, 440 ; Altmann, 105),! on seven sides of which is repre- sented a robust Donatellesque Eros, the eighth side being taken up by the inscription. One Eros plays the double flute, a second the simple pipe, a third the cithara, while two of their companions, holding torches or wreaths, dance to the tune. Again, one little fellow is busy negotiating a torch taller than himself, while the seventh, closely wrapped up in his filmy cloak, his head still crowned with the festal wreath, has left the gay thiasos and is going home, holding his tiny lantern to light him on his way. Above, at each of the angles, hangs a mask from which are suspended delicate vine- * A replica of the group exists on the fragment of a similar sarcophagus in the collection of Sir Frederick Cook at Richmond. On this class of sarcophagi, see Matz in Arch. Zeitung, xxx., 1872, p. 11. t Cf. Petersen's dating of sarcophagi with kindred subjects, Annali delV Institute, i860, p. 207 ff. o %, H g CO 8 3 I w CO u Y OF HADRIANIC SARCOPHAGI 267 leaves. This dainty masterpiece alone should suffice to compel us to revise the current notions as to the coarse- ness and absence of taste of Roman art, or of art in the Roman period. A similar delightful phantasy pervades a beautiful sarcophagus of the Villa Albani (Robert, ii. 1), representing the "Marriage Feast of Peleus and Thetis.'" The bridegroom, with the veiled bride at his side, is seated Zeus-like on a throne receiving his dis- tinguished guests, who advance in procession, each with his wedding-gift. On the left short side, moreover, is depicted in the spirit of the aforementioned sarcophagi, an Eros holding a parasol over his head and riding a dolphin. There is here a close and direct imitation of Greek models, especially in the spacing and distribution of the figures. But the depth of modelling and the technical execution point to the period we have just been studying, while the fashion of the women's hair is already that of the Antonine dynasty.* These classicizing tendencies were not a mere re- action or revival without further influence on the real trend of Roman art. The direct copying from the Greek — a branch of the subject which does not come within our present scope — and imitations of the Greek, such as we have considered both in the round and in relief, influenced the genuinely Roman continuous style, and the two combined were the main factors in the art of the coming Antonine period. * Altmann, p. 102 f. CHAPTER XII THE ANTONINE PERIOD The Principates of Antoninus Pius (138-161) and of Marcus Aurelius (161 -180)— Relief in the Palazzo Ronda- nini — The Basis of the Column of Antoninus Pius— The Aurelian Column commemorating the Wars of 174 and 176 — The Panels on the Attic of the Arch of Constantine and in the Palazzo dei Conservatori— Reliefs at Vienna from an Honorary Monument to Marcus Aurelius in Ephesus — Reliefs in the Palazzo Spada. Although the principate of Antoninus Pius lasted for twenty-three years, there are comparatively few monu- ments which can be referred to it with certainty. The portraiture of the period we shall consider later. In the Palazzo Rondanini, however, are two reliefs * which may be attributed with tolerable certainty to the period of Antoninus. The better preserved of the two is repro- duced on Plate LXXXI. The background is entirely covered by a landscape setting. A steep rock crowned with buildings rises from a river. From a hole in the rock a snake darts forward towards a fountain indicated by water flowing from a large urn turned on its side. Below runs the river, presumably the Tiber, * Rom Mittheil., 1836, i. 167-172, Plates IX., X. (von Duhn). PLATE LXXXI To face p. 268 i:i:i.ii:k in i'.vlazzo kuxdamm Rtim. Mith. y OF CAUFO: THE ANTONINE PERIOD 269 and the river-god himself appears amid his own waters. With his right hand he holds up a bowl to catch the water from the urn, with the intent, doubtless, of offer- ing it for the snake to drink. In his left hand he holds a reed. A similar scene occurs on a medallion of Antoninus Pius,* where, however, the snake springs into the river from a ship which is seen on the left. Neither subject has as yet been satisfactorily explained, though the allusion must be to the introduction into Rome of the cult of Asclepios, who is here symbolized by his sacred snake, f The date of the relief is proved by the medallion, but the workmanship also presents stylistic and technical points of resemblance to other works of the Antonine period. The head of the river- god, for instance, recalls in contour and in the treat- ment of hair and beard that of the barbarian who advances to meet Marcus Aurelius on the panel in the Conservatori (Plate XC. , Fig. 1), while the landscape * Grueber, *' Roman Medallions in the British Museum," Plate VIII. t The medallion is interpreted by von Duhn (op. cit.) as the arrival of the sacred snake at his island on the Tiber, and the scene on the relief as showing the snake already established in the island and coming out to drink at the sacred well. But Dressel, in the Zeit- schrift fur Numismatih, 1899, pp. 32-36, rightly contends that the steep rock both of the relief and the coin cannot represent the flat, low-lying " isola Tiberina." He suggests that the locality re- presented is the Aventine, since Hulsen (in Dissertazione della Pontifica Accidentia Romana, 1895, vl - 2 53 *■) ^ as already proved that on the coin the arches seen on the left were not, as supposed by von Duhn, those of a bridge, but represent the navalia where the ships from Ostia were docked after discharging their cargoes. 3) > 270 ROMAN SCULPTURE background has many details of rendering in common with certain Antonine reliefs in the Palazzo Spada (p. 296). Of the second relief, also in the Palazzo Rondanini, only the fragment of a female figure seated in a ship is antique. These two panels may once have formed part of a larger series illustrating certain episodes in the Roman cult of Asclepios.* The Basis of the Column of Antoninus Pius. — The sculptures on this basis commemorate the apotheosis of Antoninus, and therefore belong properly to the period of his successor. The Antonine column stood not far from the Aurelian, close to the Piazza del Monte Citorio. The inscription records that it was set up to Antoninus by his " sons/ 1 Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus.f It was of plain granite, and earned a statue of the deified emperor. The pedestal now stands in the spacious apse of the Giardino della Pigna of the Vatican (Amelung, u Vaticanische Sculpturen," p. 883, No. 223)4 On the front panel of the basis is the apotheosis of the imperial couple, who are shown in half length borne up to heaven on the outstretched wings of a winged male figure. The design is similar to that of the Apotheosis qfPlotina on the Hadrianic panel in the Conversatori (Plate LXXI. Fig. 2). The nude genius is boldly made to cut across the design, recalling in this the figure that bears the deified Augustus on the * For the cult of Asclepios in Rome, see Preller, M Romische Mythologie," pp. 406-408. t For the inscription see Dessau, vol. i. p. 88, No. 347. X The description is by Petersen. PLATE LXXXII B^UBmI --•■';- ^ f > Rv '^m ^^■HMRbfl Ik^V \T y^mi ' « I BASIS OF THE COLUJEN OF AMTONIND8 PlUfl Anib-rsht in a of Marcus Aurelius Bruckmniui Y OF CALIFO: ARCHIT UNIVERSITY OF CAL ^ ^ THE ANTONINE PERIOD 287 cavalry shown at full gallop in Scene LXXVIII. (Plate 87) is noteworthy, because of the looser spacing of the groups. In LXXXI. (Plate 92 a) is a composition more in the style of a Sienese Quattrocentist than of what is usually known as the antique. We see the tents and the watch- men above the walls of a fortified camp. To the left a soldier issues from a gate ; in front, outside the camp, Marcus, with hand raised in a gesture afterwards borrowed by Christian art for that of benediction, stands between his two officers somewhat like a mediaeval Christ between Peter and Paul(c/". Scene CI.). In LXXXIV., LXXXV., after the crossing of a bridge, Roman soldiers seize German women and children, while above, a splendid captive princess sits, with her daughter by her side, in a chariot drawn by oxen (Plate 96A). In Scene XCIII. we get an interesting presentment of the march of the Roman army with its artillery and its waggons. In XCVII. the Roman soldiers capture and slay Sarmatian women, who pathetically try to defend themselves. In CI. (Plate iioa) we have another scene in a fortified camp recalling the previous composition on 92A. This time Marcus and his officers are seen within, above the walls. A ramp with steps leads on each side to the camp gates seen above. At the central gate, in the foreground, a sentinel enters hurriedly to give warning of approaching danger (see Petersen, p. 88). A magnificent group occurs in CIV. (Plate I13A), of a woman with her young son clinging to her. Further battle scenes (among which the storming of a Roman camp by the barbarians, and the repulse of the latter) lead to the final conquest and pacification of the barbaric tribes, and, 288 ROMAN SCULPTURE as on the Trajan column, the great war closes on a pastoral note. I have already said that the Aurelian column has been made the subject of close comparison with the Tra- janic, to the disadvantage of the latter. In the short analysis given above I have here and there indicated obvious points of resemblance in composition, grouping, gesture and other motives, and this enumeration might have been prolonged almost indefinitely, for it is the peculiarity of art, especially in the antique phase, to be content with the repetition of external formulas which have been tested and found satisfactory. Great art economizes its forces and applies itself to the dis- covery of new formulas only when the older ones begin to fail in suggestiveness, and have to be discarded because they no longer answer present purposes. But while using the same or similar formulas, a great artist or a great school of artists, spiritually in touch with their subject, will know how to invest it each time with a new meaning. If the informing spirit were more closely studied and observed, we would not at once assume that an art is derived, and has accordingly neither originality nor significance because it accepts forms handed down from the art of preceding generations, or perhaps borrowed from that of other peoples. There assuredly is, as there could not fail to be, a marked resemblance of composition between the reliefs of the two columns. But this resemblance is only superficial. The points of divergence are more and further reaching than appear at first sight. I have THE ANTONINE PERIOD 289 tried, when analyzing the first passage of the Danube, to show how a student may learn to grasp and under- stand divergence of artistic conception between two similar episodes rendered according to a same external convention. The whole Aurelian column, as a fact, shows different aims and methods to those of the Trajanic artists, though the continuous style of pic- torial narrative employed for the decoration of the one and of the other column forms an obvious link between the two. On the later monument the con- tinuous style is employed once again in obedience to decorative necessities, as being the method best adapted to an unbroken spiral band of relief. But it is no longer imposed from withm by the artist's conception of a progressive series of events, since, as we have seen, the events are episodic rather than continuous, and the artist even intermingles scenes from the two wars. These scenes are still linked with great artistry, but there is no doubt that in following them out, mind and eye are not carried along as on the Trajan column, a fact which will become clear by repeated and attentive study of both compositions. I think it probable that the artists of the Aurelian column were influenced by the isolated panel scenes which had come into vogue, already under Trajan, side by side with the continuous method. On the Aurelian column we sometimes have the feeling that a number of such scenes have been placed together and the dividing line simply omitted. This, too, may account for the somewhat wearisome repetition of the Emperor. In itself each scene with 290 ROMAN SCULPTURE Marcus is of interest and importance, and as often as not of impressive beauty. But the Imperial presence is no longer an unexpected surprise, an emphatic note, a sudden heightening of interest, as on the Trajanic column. He is not made to disappear in order to be brought back at the psychological moment (above, p. 209). This monotony is one defect inseparable from the treatment as a continuous whole of an event which has otherwise not been thought out continuously. The general effect of the design differs considerably from that of the Trajanic column, owing to the greater compression of the figures. The shadows are less diffused than in earlier art, a fact which is apparent even from the illustrations on a greatly reduced scale given in this book. The influences at work are evidently the same as on the sarcophagi. It also soon becomes evident, as we study the Aurelian reliefs, that though the subjects are taken from active warfare, it is rather with the spiritual temper of men than with their external actions that the main interest now resides. The artists seem impelled to reveal moods and emotions passed over or unperceived by their predecessors. Their interpretation is at once humaner and more tender, and therefore more sympathetic and individual, than any attempted by the Trajanic artists even in the most moving scenes. Pathos in the antique sense, in the sense of the Greek tragedians, is fully represented on the Trajan column, as in the poisoning of the Dacian chiefs and in that almost Shakespearean scene in which the father, himself on ARCHITECTURAL DL UNIVERSITY OF CAL! PLATE XC To face p. 3 t^rv^^ j 4 PANELS I KOM A MONUMENT OF MARCUS AUKKLIUS Anderson 991 1. Pakutod, Conservator! 2-4. Attic of Arch of Constant! ne (^ ^T^ THE ANTONINE PERIOD 291 the point of death, mourns the vanished life of his son. This is the pathos attaching to great catastrophes whether of general or individual import. On the Aurelian column we become aware of the more searching pathos inspired not by outward circumstance so much as by the sadness now stealing upon mankind — Le monde s'attristait. It is the sadness of the meditations of Marcus Aurelius, and the sadness noted in the concep- tion of Antinous. Not only emperors or deified mortals feel its burden, but the soldier, the barbarian, the captive women are all tinged with a new spiritual seriousness, which is as distinct from the old serenity of the Greeks as the human searchings of Marcus differ from the hopeful idealism of Plato. Reliefs from an Arch of Marcus Aurelius. — In the Palace of the Conservatori, on the same first landing where we studied the first of the Hadrianic reliefs (above, p. 233), are three other large panels, which were removed here from the Church of Santa Martina in 1525.* They are of the period of Marcus Aurelius and belong, as Petersen has shown, to the same series as the eight panels on the attic of the Arch of Constantine. These, like all the earlier sculpture of this arch, were once attributed indiscriminately to the period of Trajan. An obtrusively disagreeable portrait of Con- stantine, executed in the eighteenth century, replaces an * Helbig, 559-561 ; see Stuart Jones, " B.S.R.P.," pp. 251 ft., where the later bibliography is fully given ; also Lanciani, "Storia degli Scavi" (1902-1904), i. p. 221 f. 292 ROMAN SCULPTURE earlier head of the same Emperor which had probably been hastily and loosely adjusted, and thus fallen off again. The panels in the Conservatori fortunately pre- serve the head of Marcus Aurelius in all three cases, but their surface is in a very unsatisfactory condition. The subjects of the eleven panels strike us at once as familiar. We recognize the Emperor as triumphator in front of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, the Emperor entering the gates of Rome or else receiving the submission of conquered peoples. It is evident that the events are taken from the same cycle which was depicted on the Aurelian column. In effect, it has been recognized that two types of Barbarians are also clearly distinguishable in these panels — the Sarmatian, with the flat sloping skull, the wild and tangled hair, and the German, with the high round head and short full whiskers. Further, as Mr. Stuart Jones points out, the panels fall into two series corresponding, like the reliefs of the column, to the Bellum Germanicum of 169-172 a.d., and to the Bellum Sarmaticum of 174-176 a.d. (see Appendix to this book, where the scenes are described in the order proposed by Mr. Stuart Jones). It follows from this division of the panels into two corresponding series that their number must originally have been even, certainly twelve and perhaps fourteen or more. The original distribution of this interesting series of reliefs is involved in much difficulty. Petersen, arguing from the locality where they were found, thinks that they may have adorned the Curia which corre- sponded partially with the church of S. Martina. Mr. PLATE XCI Misting f AUnari 'In/an /,. 393 PANELS FISOM A MuMMEN'T OF MARCUS AUBSLIU8 :.. Attte tf Arrh ef ComtttmHne. 7.8. Palaaeo d. Co ntervatori UNiVE^: TY OF CAL1FC THE ANTONINE PERIOD 293 Stuart Jones, however, suggests that their original purpose was the same as that still served by the eight adorning the attic of the Constantinian Arch — in fact he considers it " certain that each series adorned one front of the arch from which they were removed." The arch thus decorated he further proposes to identify as that erected to Marcus in Capitolio (for the inscription see C. I. L. vi. 10 14), erected in 176 a.d. in honour of* the double triumph over the Germans and Sarmatians. The composition of these reliefs is so striking that it is difficult to account for their neglect. The magnificent design of the relief in the Conservatori showing Marcus riding with Bassaeus at his side is self-evident. The setting — the two trees forming a natural arch within which the Imperial group is discovered, the backward flutter of the Emperor's mantle, the skill with which the head of the guard walking at the Emperor's side is relieved against the drapery, the standards which break the space without crowding it, the pose of the kneeling chieftains in the bottom corner beneath the horses' heads, are so many traits that announce an artist of merit. Even the more monotonous compositions of the Emperor's entry into Rome (III., IV.) and of his sacrifice on the Capitol, are full of distinguished and forcible motives (in II. the pathetic group of the wounded chief and the boy who supports him ; the figure of Mars in III.; the soldier trying to hold down the horses' heads in IV. ; the trumpets in VI.; and the dignified pose of the em- peror, who yet appears to shrink slightly within himself). The composition of the AUocutio in castris is severe ; on 294 ROMAN SCULPTURE the left, the Imperator, with Bassaeus, is raised high above the crowding soldiery, who form a sharp straight line at right angles to the imperial group. In the background a rich effect is produced by the standards seen against the arches of a portico. In the lustratio (VIII.), the effect of the procession, as it circles round the camp, is well rendered (cf. p. 174 for the similar rendering on the Trajan column). The movement is indicated by the trumpeter on the right, who is shown from the back, since he is moving inwards, and by the bull, who is being led forward to the front of the panel. In the panel with the congiarium (IX.) the Emperor and his suite form a fine group on a raised platform, while the Roman populace are typified by four figures below — one of whom, a man, seen from the back, places his hands on the edge of the podium and peers over it.* Aurelian Sculptures at Ephesus and Kindred Works. — The column and the reliefs just considered prove that the Antonine period deserves to rank for its artistic achieve- ments with those of Trajan, Domitian and Augustus. It was indeed " an age of splendid public spirit and great material achievement." t We shall not be sur- prised to find its influence active also in the more distant parts of the Empire. At Ephesus, one of the mightiest centres of Hellenic art and culture from time immemorial, recent excavation has shown how * For an Aurelian relief of similar character to these twelve see Appendix. f S. Dill, " Roman Society from Nero to Marcus Aurelius." P- 245. PLATE XCII ijpii , in ii >'-u-"' jvmn LosTfkPt-io r\ eU^e c*^ v K'fW^^w'W *fr*~Or>~/ ** n 12 PANELS FROM A MoM MKM ol M A liCUS AURELIUS To face p. 294 4ttfo o/" Arch of Constantine Anderson r lie UNIVERSITY OF CALIFOT THE ANTONINE PERIOD 295 the imperial idea fed and vivified anew a great artistic tradition. It was among the ruins of the great "Library" of Ephesus that in the autumn of 1903 were discovered a wonderful series of reliefs, which belonged to an honorary monument, put up apparently to commemorate the Parthian expedition of Marcus Aurelius (161-165 a.d.). These reliefs, which are of colossal size, were transferred to Vienna in 1904, where they are at present exhibited in the " Lower Belvedere."* They consist of a number of battle scenes with an inter- mingling of allegorical figures and groups. The date is fixed by the splendid group of two Emperors, with a child between them, and two attendants. Though the features are slightly u idealized " it is easy to recognize Marcus Aurelius in the elder of the two. The other Emperor is naturally the co-regent Lucius Verus, and the child is Commodus, whom his father presses close to himself, laying his left hand on the boy's shoulder. Marcus supports the sceptre against his left shoulder ; the right forearm is broken, but it was extended, and the hand must have held the sacrificial cup. It is one of the noblest compositions of Roman Imperial art.f * See R. Heberdey's Preliminary Report in the Oesterr. Jahres- hefte, vii. (1904), pp. 38-55. The interesting illustrations show the sculptures in situ, previous to their removal to Vienna. f The reliefs are described by R. von Schneider in the little guide- book to these sculptures, "Ausstellung von FundstUcken aus Ephesos im unterem Belvedere," Vienna, 1905. The illustrations, though on a small scale, are excellent. Figs. 5 and 13 reproduce two splendid combat scenes. Fig. 9 shows the slab with a winged female figure in her chariot drawn by stags (Selene ?) dipping into the sea; Thalassa herself with her oar, sitting on a sea monster, and to the right 296 ROMAN SCULPTURE We are only just beginning to know something of the Antonine and Aurelian periods, and to be able to collect and also to analyze the impressions left by a study of their monuments. There is no doubt that our knowledge of these will be further considerably in- creased, by excavation probably, and also by search in our museums. Already Wickhoff pointed out in 1895, in his " Wiener Genesis " (" Roman Art," p. 36), that certain reliefs formerly classed as Hellenistic belong in reality to the age of the Antonines. He instanced the Paris and Eros (Helbig, 939) and the Parts and Oenone (Helbig, 993) of the Palazzo Spada; and the number could be easily added to by a critical study of this collection, such as has been undertaken, I under- stand, by Mr. A. J. B. Wace. the beautiful draped figure of " Night " ; above the horses floats Hesperus, the evening star. Fig. 14 shows the slab with the Imperial Triumph. The Emperor steps into his chariot ; the horses are guided by Roma ; behind is Helios personified, wearing his crown of rays ; above the horses hovers Victory ; lying behind them is Terra Mater, with her horn of plenty and a child on her right side. Fig. 11 reproduces the Imperial group described above. Of approximately the same period and style is the frieze in Luna marble in the Vatican Belvedere (38, Helbig 145) representing a battle of gods and giants. The composition has been well analyzed by Helbig, and more recently by Amelung (Rom. Mitth. xx. 1905, pp. 121-130), who has found in other collections various fragments belonging to the same frieze. The fine group of Hecate, advancing with her lighted torches against two giants, should be especially noticed. CHAPTER XIII - SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN Arch of Severus (203 a.d.) — The Gate of Severus in the Forum Boarium — Principate of Caracallus (211-217 a.d.). — Fragment with the Temple of Quirinus — Sculptured Capitals from the Baths of Caracallus (Terme) — Roman Reliefs with representations of the cone of Emesa, of Sol, of the Taurobolia — Sarcophagi of the later Antonine period and of the Third Century — Reason for comparative scarcity of Art Remains from the Third Century — The Principates of Claudius Gothicus (268-270) ; of Aurelian (270-275) ; of Diocletian (284-305) — Basis of Diocletian in the Roman Forum. The Arch of Septimius Severus and the Gate of the Argen- tarii. — After the principate of Marcus Aurelius we find no monument of national importance till we come to the arch erected in honour of Septimius Severus in 203 a.d.* It was intended to celebrate the tenth anniversary of his reign (the dece?inalia), and also to commemorate his Eastern victories, by which Mesopotamia had been defi- nitely added to the Empire and the great Parthian cities Ctesiphon and Seleukia captured and dismantled. Both facades are richly decorated with sculpture. In * For a succinct account see Hulsen, "The Roman Forum," p. 82 f. ; Amelung-Holtzinger, ii. p. 63 f. and Fig. 31. For the inscrip- tion, see Dessau, i. p. 103, No. 425. 298 ROMAN SCULPTURE the spandrels of the central arch are flying victories carrying trophies ; in the space beneath them the winged Genii of summer and of autumn appear on the side facing the Capitol, and those of winter and spring on the side facing the Forum. On the keystones are figures of Mars. The spandrels of the side arches are adorned with figures of river-gods. The four spaces above the side arches are filled with crowded compositions illustrating the Eastern campaigns of Severus, but these compositions are so little individualized that it is difficult to fix upon the exact events which they are intended to record. The difficulty arises partly, no doubt, from our imperfect knowledge of the actual history. Moreover, on the side of the Forum the sculptures on the left are mutilated almost beyond recognition. On the facade towards the Capitol the general distribution and effect can be fairly made out. The sculptures on the right of this side are the best preserved of all, and allow one to penetrate the author's method and intention. The general com- position of these reliefs betrays the dual influence of the Trajan column and of the arch at Benevento. The reliefs are arranged in two rows corresponding to the Beneventine panels, but the division between the upper and lower row is not effected by a definite architectural member, but by the irregular ground line of the com- position ; so that the pictures, which are in reality two, appear to run together into one. It is necessary to observe the difference between this continuous ground- line, effecting a material separation of two subjects, and the broken ground-lines within each subject which belong SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 299 to the perspectival conventions of the continuous style. In the upper panel or row of reliefs on the right facing the Capitol, the figures are really well preserved, and the effect is both animated and pleasing. The Emperor is seen setting out from a city gate. Then, surrounded by his officers, he stands on the suggestus and harangues the soldiery, who are shown massed below in a manner worthy of Trajanic art. To the right the spears and waving banners fill up the space, and help to connect the two parts of the composition. Further on, to the right, always in true " continuous " style, we see Severus and his troops in a wood which is indicated by a few trees. The horses of the Emperor and his staff are led up ; evidently the imperial party are setting off to en- counter the enemy. The three scenes of this upper row are skilfully combined into one act, which may be called " The Departure." In the lower row is the siege of a city, against which a battering-ram is drawn up. Above the four side arches, below the large compositions, runs a narrow frieze with nearly similar subjects : a cortege of captives and of waggons laden with booty and trophies advancing towards a seated Roma. I can never understand why these reliefs of the Arch of Severus are always announced as marking the " fur- ther decline " of art. In the parts where they are sufficiently preserved for us to form an artistic judg- ment, they mark not so much a decline as a difference. In the greater compression of the figures, and in the way the composition is knitted together by the con- necting and unifying scheme of light and dark, the 3 oo ROMAN SCULPTURE reliefs of Severus bear witness to the development of the continuous style under the influence of new spatial and optic laws, which first manifest themselves on sarcophagi of the Hadrianic period (above, p. 261). These reliefs, which have been so sharply criticized — since even Wickhoff speaks of the " low level " of the work (" Roman Art," p. 65) — will interest and please us more if, instead of blaming their absence of perspective, we look upon them as we might upon the rich tapestries, equally innocent of perspective, of the justly admired early art of Burgundy and Flanders. It should be further noted that the columns rest on pedestals richly adorned with groups of Roman soldiers and their captives. The gate in the Forum Boarium, erected by the money-changers to Severus and his family in 204 a.d., is remarkable for the luxuriant, rich, and distinguished ornamentation which so greatly influenced the decorative art of the Renaissance.* The foliated designs of the pilasters, f the rich cornices, deserve careful study. The large panels of the passage contain, on the right, por- traits of Severus and of Julia Domna,J and, on the left, * Amelung-Holtzinger, ii. p. 121, Fig. 65. Paul Graef, in Baumeister's "Denkmaler," iii. 1880; for the inscription, Dessau, i. p. 103, No. 426 ; for the details, see Rossini, u Gli Archi Trionfali." f The strip of acanthus and rosette ornament visible in phot. Moscioni, 2436, compares favourably with Flavian examples. If we look back to Plate XXXVI. we shall now understand why the sculptured acanthus in the Basilica ^Emilia might belong to the period of Severus. X Bernoulli, "Romische Iconographie," ii. 3, PI. XV. SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 301 that of Caracallus, all of them sacrificing. Beneath each panel is a narrower strip adorned with sacrificial imple- ments minutely and accurately represented (cf. the similar representations on the frieze of the Temple of Vespasian). Relief in Palazzo Sacchetti. — Mr. A. J. B. Wace has lately claimed for the period of Severus the relief walled in the court of the Palazzo Sacchetti in the Via Giulia. It was first published by Braun in 1854,* who attributed it to the Flavian epoch, and it figures in the great catalogue of antique works of art in Rome by Matz and Duhn (No. 3516). On the left an emperor sits upon a high podium, surrounded by four other figures. In front of him are grouped eight men, draped in the toga, who enter from the left through a gate adorned with figures of Victory. In the back- ground is a Corinthian portico. The type of the heads is evidently that of the period of Severus and Caracallus. Mr. Wace, accordingly, interprets the relief as the " presentation of Caracallus to the Senate on the occasion when, after the defeat of Clodius Albinus in 197 a.d., he was declared Imperator destinatas by his father.'^ Relief with the Temple of Quirinus. — A fine and peculiarly interesting fragment has lately been pre- sented to the Museo delle Terme by its former owner * M*numenti ed Annali, 1854, Plate II. + Classioal Review, May 1905, p. 235. The relief will be published by Mr. Wace in the next number of the " Papers of the British School at Rome." 302 ROMAN SCULPTURE and discoverer, Dr. Hartwig, who attributes it tenta- tively to the period of Caracallus (Plate XCIII.).* The fragment is itself put together from a number of pieces found a few years ago on the north side of the Exedra of the Baths of Diocletian. Of these pieces the largest only is reproduced in our illustration. The date, if not proved, is made probable by the style of the head of a personage seen in three-quarters wearing a magnificent helmet, f The inclination of the head, the glance of the eyes, the short crisp beard, the conformation of the brow, recall the portraits of Caracallus (below, Plate CXXL). On the large fragment 'illustrated here, the bearded head of a flamen with his pointed cap has many points in common with the head interpreted as Caracallus. The characteristics are so clearly those of the portraiture of the period that we cannot, I think, be very far astray in accepting Hartwig's suggestion as to the date. The two heads we have considered, two younger beardless heads, a couple of torsi and the head of a bull, are part of a ceremonial sacrificial scene that plays in front of a temple which, from the subject, must be that of Quirinus on the Quirinal, restored by Augustus in b.c. 1 6. We have already met with similar copies of actual temples on reliefs — the temple of Venus and Rome, for instance, on an Hadrianic relief (p. 238) ; that of Jupiter Capitolinus on a relief of Marcus * Rumische Mittheilungen, xix. 1904, pp. 23-37 > Plates III., IV. Plate IV. is here reproduced by permission. t Loc. «/., PI. III. No. 9. PLATE XCIIJ CEREMONY IX FRONT OF TEMPLE OF QUIBINUS (deUail) To face j). su2 Mm&eo ih< Y OF CALIFORNIA SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 311 have been entirely unknown to the Greeks makes its appearance in the Roman world towards the close of the first century. One of its earliest monuments, dating, it would seem, from the principate of Trajan, is in the British Museum (Cat. No. 172 1 ; for the inscription see C.I.L. vi. 30, 728). It was essentially a cult of the army, and accordingly the majority of the monuments have been discovered on the sites of Roman military stations " from the mouth of the Danube to the North of Britain, and on the confines of the Sahara " (Cumont). In ancient Dacia, at Sarmizegetusa alone, on the site of the temple, the fragments of as many as fifty groups have been discovered. Germany, however, has yielded not only the greatest number of Mithraic monuments, but also the most interesting. In the group at Vienna from Aquileia (Cumont, " Monuments, " 116*) the emotion that pervades the features of Mithras is rendered almost with Skopasian power. From the treatment of the hair, which resembles that of portraits of the later Antonines, the group may be dated in the period of Com modus. The treatment of the relief also has analogies to sarcophagi of the period.f In another group of about the same date (ab. 130) from Neuenheim and now at Heidelberg (Cumont 251), a spasm of horror seems to animate the figure of Mithras, who slays the bull with face averted as if detesting the cruel task. But the only one of all Mithraic monuments which can rank * Well reproduced by R. von Schneider, " Antike Sammlungen des Allerhochsten Kaiserhauses," PI. XXI. j- Altmann, " Architektur und Ornamentik," p. 107. 312 ROMAN SCULPTURE as a real work of art is the famous group found at Osterburken and now in the museum of Carlsruhe (Plate XCV.). According to Cumont it may be dated at about 248 a.d. Here a great artist has transformed the some- what artificial composition into a work of inspired beauty. The bull alone, with his movement of impas- sioned suffering, is a masterpiece, and there is a subdued ecstasy about the figure of Mithras which lifts it above the usual tame renderings. This cult of the Sun, which took such diverse and in- teresting forms in the third century, found expression in what is certainly one of the most exquisite works of antique art — the relief in a lower room of the Capitoline Museum (left of the entrance) dedicated to the " Most Holy Sun " (Soli Sanctissimo, C.I.L., vi. 718;* Cumont, No. 115). The Sun is figured here in the image of a child with grave yet tenderly expressive features framed by the hair that rises to meet the rays of the aureole. Only the bust of the boy appears, borne by the eagle. The serious beauty of the composition, enhanced by the admirable relation of the group to the background, is on a par with the finest Greek reliefs. (Plate XCVI.) Altar in Capitol dedicated to Sol Serapis. — Within the same order of ideas comes the altar in the Capitoline Museum dedicated by the augur Scipio Orfitus to Jupiter Maximus Sol Sarapis (C.I.L., vi. 402 ; Helbig, 535 ; Altmann, u Grabaltare, M No. 249)^ * Dessau, ii. p. 173, No. 4337. f Dessau, ii. 1, p. 181, No. 4396. PLATE \< \ I To face p. 312 ALTAI! TO SOL SAXCTISSIMUS Capitol UNIY Y OF CALIFORNIA SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 313 Fortunately the monument, which was found near S. Sebastiano in the Via Appia, can be dated, for the same Orfitus appears again as augur on another in- scribed altar, found on the same spot (C.I.L , vi. 505 ;* now in the Villa Albani), as having celebrated the Taurobolia in the year 295 a.d. The oak wreath (Plate XCVII.) within which the inscription is placed is of extreme naturalness. Its beautiful leaves, acorns and fluttering tcenice are not unworthy of comparison with examples of the Augustan period. On the panel at the back is a scene which has not yet been satisfactorily explained. In the background appears a square crenellated enclosure — a kind of fenced garden or hoftits irwlusus, the trees of which are seen above the wall. The festal occasion is indicated by the garland hung up along the walls. In front of the city gate reclines Terra, the Earth, with her lap full of fruit and a child at her side, as we already know her from the Ara Paris, from the armour of Augustus of Prima Porta and from other monuments. Into her lap apparently springs a bull, ridden by a personage in armour who may be an emperor, represented here as the " new Serapis." The features are much mutilated, but the square shape of the head has nothing against identification with some emperor of the end of the third century. On the right side of the basis a Victory and a Roman stand on each side of a trophy, while on the left side the sacrificial thank-offering is represented. Since the second altar of Orfitus refers to the sacrifice * Dessau, ii. i,p. i8i,No. 4396. 3H ROMAN SCULPTURE of the Taurobolia, it seems probable that the scene on the Capitoline basis refers to the same ceremony. I can see no reason for doubting, as does Helbig, that the Orfitus named on both altars is one and the same person. We know too little, at present, of the art of the third century to be able to date any monument securely from considerations of style alone.* Nor does the style seem inconsistent with the date 295 when we reflect that the relief of Marcus Curtius in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, shows how admirably compo- sitions on a small scale, involving few figures, could be executed as late as the beginning of the fourth century. (Plate XCVII.) Sarcophagi. — It is on sarcophagi, however, that the patterns and the tendencies of art in the third century can best be studied. For one moment we must go back nearly to the first years of the principate of Marcus Aurelius in order to study a new realistic tendency manifested first on certain sarcophagi of that date. On the sarcophagi of the Hadrianic period, whether the scenes were treated in the continuous style (Niobids of Lateran) or in the Classic Greek manner (" Peleus and Thetis'" of the Villa Albani), the figures were of an ideal character. In the Albani sarcophagus, indeed, we already detected a certain modern or realistic note in the coiffure of the women, which was that of the earlier Antonine period. Under Marcus Aurelius a strongly marked realism sets * Altmann also accepts the date 295. ITY OF CALIFC SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 315 in ; not only is the hairdress modernized, but the principal personages of a mythological scene have features resembling the current portraiture of the time, and sometimes appear to be portraits of definite indi- viduals. Such is the case in the sarcophagus of C. Junius Euhodus in the Galleria Chiaramonti (Amelung, " Vaticanische Sculpturen," No. 179), which, from the in- scription, may be dated between 161- 170 a.d.* The myth represented is the death of Alcestis, but the dying heroine in the centre and all the attendant personages, male as well as female, resemble Antonine portraits. The movements of the figures are ugly and declamatory, and the sarcophagus, which is in every respect indifferent as a work of art, need not occupy us further. From the principate of Commodus we have a series of sarcophagi which retain mythological scenes for their decoration, but reflect directly the tastes of the Emperor and the fashions that he set. His passion for masquerading as Hercules, his devotion to this hero and to the Amazons find expression not only in the famous bust of the Palazzo dei Conservatori (below, Plate CXXI.), but in a long series of sarcophagi, on which the adventures of Heracles with the Amazons figure as the central episode, instead of appearing as ninth according to the usual order. These sarcophagi may be studied grouped together in Robert's great work. Another idiosyncrasy of Commodus betrays itself in the scene on the cover of a sarcophagus with the myth of Meleager (Helbig, 424), lately moved from the Capitoline Museum * See also Altmann, " Architektur und Ornamentik," p. 103. 316 ROMAN SCULPTURE over to the Conservatori. These scenes, which show boys attacking wild beasts, are an evident parody of the feats which Commodus liked to practise in the arena.* Among the most remarkable sarcophagi of the close of the Antonine period is the superb example at Aries, with the legend of " Phaedra and Hippolytos/' f The figures are worked completely in the round and thus produce, in combination with the shadow of the niche- like background, a distinct " colouristic" effect. The composition is remarkable for its quietness ; the figures scarcely overlap, but tend to divide off and stand in- dependent and at rest. A similar repose pervades the magnificent relief representing " the Discovery of Achilles among the Daughters of Lycomedes " on the sarcophagus in the Capitol from the period of Alexander Severus.t Comparison with other art versions of this legend shows that this quieter composition is not the result of the subject, for, as a rule, this scene from the legend of Achilles is full of confusion and impetuous movement. Let us consider the present * On the left of the frieze of the lid is a boy shooting at an ostrich with an arrow shaped like a crescent— an evident allusion to a favourite sport of Commodus, who, according to Herodian (i. 15), liked to display his skill with the bow by shooting off with arrows of this shape the heads of ostriches running at full speed. f Altmann, " Architektur und Ornamentik," Plate II. ; Robert, iii. 160. t Helbig, 432. Robert, "Die Antiken Sarkophagreliefs," ii. Plates 14, 15. Riegl, " Spatromische Kunst-Industrie," p. 74. The type of the reclining figures on the lid show that it must be dated in the first quarter of the third century. There is, however, nothing to support the popular identification of the group as Alex- ander Severus with his mother Julia Mamaea. UNIV Y OF CALIFORNIA SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 317 example somewhat more in detail. The main group^ which, however, is not exactly in the centre of the composition, is formed by Achilles, who, with his feminine attire still clinging to him, and one foot still clothed in a shoe, has seized a sword and rushes forward when Deidameia lays both hands on his shoulders. To the left another sister seems to shrink away in astonish- ment. This marvellously lovely figure forms the actual centre of the relief. On the left is a warrior, probably Diomede, who pushes back the vizor of his helmet and looks towards the happenings in the centre. The whole scene is framed in by the seated figures of the two kings? Lycomedes on the left, Agamemnon on the right. Both are magnificent, god-like figures, who sit in dignified majesty, yet show by their glance and their gesture that they are interested spectators of the scene. In front of each king stands a young warrior holding a horse by the bridle. On the right, between this figure and Agamemnon, is Odysseus, bearded and wearing, as usual, his pileus or pointed cap. Behind Lycomedes is a warrior with his horse, while the warrior immediately behind Agamemnon, pushes back his vizor like Diomede, and looks towards the central episode. On the left short side is depicted the farewell of Achilles to Lycomedes, on the right short side his arming, and at the back of the sarcophagus the " Ransoming of Hector * is roughly sketched in. (Plate XCVIII.) There are few compositions in the art of any period to equal in beauty of conception, execution and movements that of the" front face of this sarcophagus. We hardly 3i 8 ROMAN SCULPTURE know which to admire most — the abundance of expres- sive movement, the figures moulded as it were out of light, or the rich shadows of the dark interspaces. Pose and gesture are alike distinguished, the nude is superbly treated, a wonderful unity is imparted to the action by keeping the figures in one plane. Finally there is a rhythmic contrast of light and dark which, since pose and action are quieter, are not teased and broken up, as so often in sarcophagi of this class. RiegPs remarks on treatment of space in the sarcophagus may be para- phrased as follows : The background has almost totally disappeared; it is limited to a narrow strip, and this is so richly ornamented that its character is neutralised. The figures are arranged in two rows, but practically only the heads of the second row are visible. The front figures are so heavily undercut that strong shadows yawn between them. Thus the figures (similarly to the foliage on a pilaster in the Lateran *) seem to move freely in space. — " Spatromische Kunstindustrie," p. 74. The ground, that is, has now become empty space, or, as Riegl puts it elsewhere, space has now taken the place of matter. In this respect the sarcophagus of the Capitol and a few others of its class, mark to my mind the highest point attained by, a method of which we saw the first brilliant manifestation in the two sarcophagi of the Lateran. But strange to say, though the spatial problem might seem solved through the conquest of the obdurate back- * See above, p. 202, note. SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 319 ground, no further progress was made towards the correct optic inter-relation of figures within the free space thus gained. Artists remained content with the tapestried effects obtained by keeping figures in one plane. More- over from this moment there was a distinct falling off in the expressive relation of figures to one another, which gradually brought art back to the phase where figures and objects are once more seen in mere material juxtaposition. Interest now centres in the so hardly won " free space," and figures begin to be viewed as so many separate objects to be arranged within it. The gain in the rendering of space is thus counteracted by a corresponding loss in the power to express the psycho- logical link which should bind together the figures of one composition. We shall only understand the full import of the change when we come to the narrow friezes from the Arch of Constantine. But we can already realize the new mood which is stealing upon sculpture by turning to the great sarcophagus in the Vatican with the "Battle of the Amazons'" — once admired by Goethe.* Thehairdress of Penthesileia like that of the lady on the Capitoline sarcophagus is that of the Prin- cesses of the Emesene dynasty. t Spacious movement * Helbig, 147; Robert, ii. PI. 39, and p. 113, where Goethe is shown to have been inspired by this composition in describing the heroic group in Wilhelm Meister's " Wanderjahre. " t The monuments are therefore probably contemporary ; I can see no reason for following Riegl in giving the earlier date to the Vatican sarcophagus. It is true that in the latter example the background shows here and there, but this need mean no more than that art does not develop along a rigidly straight line. 320 ROMAN SCULPTURE has now given way to a crowded composition. In the centre is the dominant figure of Achilles, who supports the wounded Penthesileia. On each side is a Greek who, as he stretches up his arm to seize an Amazon by the hair or by the chin, fills up nearly the height of the relief. Around these two figures the composition of each side revolves in complicated groups, and the two sides of the picture are then linked to the central group by the figures fallen to the ground, and above by the figure of a fleeing Amazon. The figures are resolutely kept in one plane, though some sort of perspectival effect is attempted by varying the size of the figures. This device and the broken lines of the design have a restless, almost strident effect. Moreover, the central group is well-nigh offensive to our modern taste. The pathos of the situation has not been caught by the artist. He shows neither emotional control over his subject, nor yet has he the naivete which we should find, for in- stance, in an archaic vase painting of this scene. The connection between Achilles and the wounded woman is purely external. He is not really holding her, and she tamely places her arm round his neck, without in the least clinging to him. Nor does she resemble a wounded dying woman so much as a doll feebly bending at the articulations. There is here an obvious lack of interest in the subject. The faults which come out most con- spicuously in the central group are also apparent in the rest of the design, where we have no sense of any per- vading emotion. Still, it cannot be denied that, viewed merely as design, the sarcophagus is not without merits, Y OF CALIFCi. UNIVERSITY OF C, S J SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 321 and that by keeping the figures in one plane the in- extricable tangle gains a certain clearness of rhythm. These involved compositions long continued in vogue As late as the end of the third century a.d. — to judge from the type of face of the emperor portrayed — we. meet with what is perhaps the most complicated com- position of all antique art. It is the huge sarcophagus with a battle of Romans and barbarians formerly in the Villa Ludovisi, and now in the Museo delle Terme (Plate C.).* The emperor in the centre has been interpreted as Septimius Severus (by Platner) and also as Alexander Severus (Braun), but the type is evidently that of an emperor of the end of the third century, very possibly Claudius Gothicus.f Like the " Battle of the Amazons," the present composition has more rhythm and harmony than is at first apparent. The emperor gallops towards the right and raises his hand in com- mand. The composition forms a half-circle about him, and spreads out below along the ground- line, which is filled with the fallen and dying enemy. There are new and interesting motives, such as the trumpeter on the right, shown full to the front within the circle of his instrument. So powerful an invention does not betoken a really decadent period. The background, which in the relief of the Amazons still showed here and there as an unsympathetic element that conflicted with the required impression of limitless depth, has entirely * Helbig, 935. t This, is, I believe, the opinion of Mr. Stuart Jones and of Mr. Wace. 322 ROMAN SCULPTURE vanished on the sarcophagus with the battle scene. The figures do not present themselves as disposed along an unyielding background, but as we look we feel that the battle is continued also behind the figures which are actually visible. Such an intention, indeed, must have been present to the artist's mind, for on the short sides of the sarcophagus he curiously enough gives us the side view of figures, the front view of which appears on the front of the sarcophagus. The immense and intricate composition might appear disagreeably confused were it not kept severely in one plane, gaining thereby a surprising unity. The tapestried effect of the design, the skilful composition, the technical power, show that even in this period art had not declined, as much as art-historians would have us suppose, since the days of the Trajanic masterpieces. At the same time the connection between the figures is more material than psychical. The figures cross and overlap in a highly complicated design, but as a fact they are no more connected by one pervading emotion than are the symmetrically disposed and regularly overlapping groups of the friezes on the Constantinian arch. The emperor, for instance, and the trumpeter on the right — to take the two most striking figures — are admirably decorative, but they are placed with no sort of regard to the inner meaning of the composition. As we look at the huge battle scene we feel somehow that what is lacking is any true interest in the subject represented. Sculpture is nearing once more one of its periods of exhaustion. Just as archaic art has not yet SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 323 discovered the full capacities of its subjects, so decadent art gradually loses the secret whereby form and subject may be brought into perfect unison. Sculptured Basis of the Epoch of Diocletian. — In the Forum, to the left of the Arch of Severus, not far from the lapis niger and the anaglypha, is a curious sculp- tured basis of the period of Diocletian,* lately discussed by Riegl (* Spiitromische Kunstindustrie," p. 81). The subjects themselves are familiar and even trite. On the principal face is the emperor sacrificing to Roma and to Mars, and on one side are senatorial personages heavily draped in the toga. On the other sides we find the inscription flanked by Victories and the Suovetaurilia. The interest of the monument lies in the peculiar mani- pulation of the relief, which differs totally, at first sight, from the sarcophagi just considered. Instead of the shadowy " niche " within which figures appear to move freely, the hard background is visible everywhere be- tween the figures, yet Riegl points out that the optic effects aimed at in this relief and in the sarcophagi are essentially the same. In the former the background is left visible only in order not to weaken the impression of strength which is required of a basis destined to support a column ; at the same time, however, the figures have no visible points of contact with the tactile background, but, on the contrary, are separated from it by deep grooves similar to those between the * Hulsen, " Roman Forum," p. 95 f. For the inscription, sea C.I.L., 1204. 324 ROMAN SCULPTURE folds of garments. These " contour shadows " are in- tended to let the figures appear surrounded by an empty zone of space, without for that sacrificing the background. It is only by looking repeatedly at the reliefs that we become penetrated with the truth of this observation, or can realize that an illusion of space has been actually produced. The optic effect becomes clearest if we recall the friezes of Greek sculp- ture with their neutral backgrounds, or, better still, place the photograph of any one of these older friezes by the side of the basis. The Relief of Marcus Curtius. — Side by side with original products of late third-century sculpture it is interesting to find what is probably the copy of a Roman or Italic work of the archaic period. This is the well-known relief which is walled in on the left of the staircase of the Palace of the Conservatori (Helbig, 562), but which once adorned the balustrade placed round the Locus Curtius in the Forum.* It represents the romantic sacrifice of Marcus Curtius who, in order to appease the gods of the Lower World, leapt full armed into the mysterious chasm, the site of which was afterwards named after him. At the back of the slab is an inscription with the name of Lucius Ncevhos Surdinus, who is probably the consul suffectus of 30 a.d. (under Tiberius). f Of late years, since Helbig * Hulsen, ** Roman Forum," p. 140, Fig. 73. Our illustration is from the original photograph, kindly lent by Professor Hulsen. f C.I.L., vi. 1468. For the new inscription with this same name, cf. Class. Rev., 1906, p. 378. o > o £ J VHBMPni '-* * -^ -*^ -*««*■- MVnHvtr R»i UNIVERSITY OF CAL1FO. SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 325 (he. cit.) pronounced it a work of the Middle Ages or of the early Renaissance, the charming work has not enjoyed its old popularity. Furtwangler, however, in publish- ing a gem which exactly reproduces the group of the relief, took occasion to pronounce himself unhesi- tatingly in favour of the genuinely antique origin of the relief itself.* He, moreover, saw no reason for dissociating it from the inscription at the back, and re- ferred it accordingly to the Augustan Age. But Htilsen, while likewise fully admitting the antique character of the relief, has pointed out that originally it had nothing to do with the inscription, but that an old inscribed slab had been utilized at a later date for the copy of an archaic relief.f This copy, he^ thinks, was executed to replace the original, surmised to have been destroyed or injured in the great fire under Carinus which " gave occasion of the extensive building operations of Diocletian and of his colleagues." Whether original or copy, the delight- fully fresh fantasy of the composition strikes an agree- able note amid the sculptures of declining Rome. The devoted Roman is shown fully armed on his charger at the very moment of the fateful plunge. The chasm is indicated by tall rushes. Obvious faults of drawing scarcely detract from the admirable force and move- ment of the design. Man and horse form but one as they plunge forward impetuously. Marcus has planted his spear into the ground and grasped it firmly to gain * " Antike Gemmen," i. PI. XXVII. 42; and vol. iii. p. 254 f. t Hiilsen, Romische Mitiheilungen. xvii. 1902, pp. 323-329 ; xx. i9°5- P- 7°. 326 ROMAN SCULPTURE additional force for the leap.* By this motive the composition gains, so to speak, a centre of gravity and the eye a point of rest. Even considered as a copy, the relief of Marcus Curtius shows that artistic inspiration was not dead, though by the end of the third century it was ceasing to manifest itself in the traditional and now worn-out themes of official sculpture. (Plate CI.) The increasing popularity of figure-subjects, to the exclusion — or strict subordination — of mere ornament, must strike the student of later Roman sculpture. The flower and plant life of Augustan and Flavian art scarcely survives. When it does, it is in traditional schemes, like the heavy garlands that appear, supported by tall muscular Erotes, on late sarcophagi. Actual statues in the round may, as Riegl asserts, have been less in vogue for a time, owing to mystic religious influences, but there is no doubt that, even when the current of artistic inspiration ran thinnest, towards the period of Constantine, the bases of statues, the sides of sarcophagi, the 'figures of arches, &c, were almost invariably decorated with figures ; and ornament, though * The slab exactly illustrates the words of Livy, vii. 6, . . . "equoque deinde quara poterat maxime exornato insidentem armatum se in specum inmississe " (" he mounts his richly capari- soned charger, and springs fully armed into the gap "). Livy adds that, according to another version, the Lacus was called after Metius Curtius, a soldier of Titus Tatius, who nearly lost his life by falling into this swamp. We shall agree with Livy (and Furt- wiingler, "Antike Gemmen," iii. p. 285) in preferring the first version with its genuine Roman ring and tradition of human sacrifice. Other ancient authorities are Pliny, N. H. xv. 78 ; Valerius Maxi- mus, v. 6, 2. SEVERUS TO DIOCLETIAN 327 in itself of a luxuriant character, is used only sparingly. Very different was the course of art in the "Graeco Orient," when ornament, as Strzygowski has so often pointed out,* eventually suppresses every other form of decoration. According to Altmann,f the exuberant profusion of Flavian ornament had produced a reaction towards severer artistic substance. This probably only means that the sterner Roman spirit was asserting itself. Be that as it may, it is only by studying the later phases of Roman art, from Trajan and Hadrian onward, that we understand to what an extent its mission was to transmit to posterity the great antique secret of figure- sculpture. * See above, p. 18. f "Die RomischenGrabaltare," p. 287. In Gdttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1906, p. 914, Strzygowski combats Altmann's view, with- out, however, clearly stating his own. CHAPTER XIV THE PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE (306-337) The Arch of Constantine — ^Esthetic value of its Sculp- tures — Their spiritual significance — Summary — Relation of Christian to Roman Art. In hoc signo vinces. We now turn to the last official manifestation of Pagan art in Rome, the Arch of Constantine, which stands at the foot of the Palatine on its east side. According to the inscription, it was dedicated to Constantine by the Senate and the people in gratitude for the victory over Maxentius (312 a.d.) and the consequent pacification of the Empire. The inscription, which is important for the sculpture as well as the history of the Arch, runs : IMP • CAES . FL . CONSTANTINO . MAXIMO . P . F AUGUSTO • S.P.Q.R. QUOD • INSTINCTU . DIVINITATIS . MENTIS MAGNITUDINE . CUM . EXERCTTU . SUO TAM • DE • TIRANNO • QUAM • DE • OMNI . EIUS FACTIONE • UNO • TEMPORE IUSTIS REMPUBLICAM . ULTUS • EST • ARMIS ARCUM TRIUMPHTS INSIGNEM . DICAVIT • PLATE (II North fagade To face p. 328 South fagade THE ARCH OF CONSTANT! V llinari UK1VEHSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 329 To the Emperor and Caesar Flavius Constantinus the Great, the Pious, the Fortunate, the Exalted — inasmuch as through the inspiration of the Deity, and the greatness of his mind, he, with his army, avenged the State, both on the Tyrant and on all the partizans of his faction — the Senate and the Roman People dedicated the Arch adorned with Triumphs. The grand structure, with its * unsurpassable har- mony of proportion " (P. Graef), was an abiding inspira- tion to the artists of the Italian Renaissance, who looked upon it as the visible embodiment of the glory of antique Rome. In the Sola dei Santi of the Ap- partamento Borgia, the youthful S. Catherine pleads before Maximum amid a classic landscape, dominated by the Arch, which fills the whole background. In a fresco of the Sistine Chapel, Perugino placed the Arch on the left of the spacious Piazza, in the foreground of which Peter receives the Keys. In the same Chapel Botticelli showed the " Destruction of the Company of Korah " as taking place in front of the arch erected by the first of the Christian Emperors. The Arch is decorated in great measure by sculptures taken from earlier monuments, and we are told that its architectural members, likewise, were brought from an older arch — probably of the epoch of Trajan. That so harmonious a structure should result from the em- ployment of disparate elements can only add to our wonder. However, it is not with the architecture that we are concerned, but with the sculptures. As in the arch of Severus and elsewhere, the spandrels 330 ROMAN SCULPTURE of the main archway are adorned by flying Victories, bearing trophies, and by the Genii of the Seasons in the lower angles. On the keystone is a figure of Roma seated. In the spandrels of the side arches are reclining River-gods, and on the bases of the columns are sculp- tured Victories with captives at their feet. All these sculptures are Constantinian ; they show the " fron- tality," as also the deep under-cutting, which are characteristic of the period. We have already seen that the eight panels which adorn the attic on the north and south fronts are from a monument of the period of Marcus Aurelius (p. 291), and the slabs of the attic on the east and west sides, together with the two slabs of the central gateway, are from the'Forum of Trajan (p. 158). The medallions of the pylons were taken, it seems, from a Flavian monu- ment which had been appropriated by Claudius Gothicus (p. 131 ; p. 306). On the south facade were placed the four medallions which retained the portraits of Flavian emperors. On the northern facade were placed the two medallions in which the original head of the Emperor had been worked over into a likeness of Claudius Gothicus, and the two in which Constantine now intro- duced his own portrait, the whole series thus forming a sequence in which the usurper appeared amid the ancestors he had chosen for himself from mingled per- sonal and political motives. On the sides, then, Constantinian artists odded two more medallions, representing on the west Luna, the moon, sinking into the sea, and on the east Sol, the PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 331 sun, arising from its waves. The old Hellenic concep- tion of Helios and Selene, so beautifully expressed in the eastern pediment of the Parthenon, is singularly appo- site on the arch dedicated in honour of the new dynasty whose proud emblem was the solar nimbus, worn in the medallion of the principal front by Claudius Gothicus and his "grandson " Constantine.* The technique of these Constantinian medallions may be somewhat summary, but their composition is excellent. The curves of the design are adapted with great simplicity to the circular form. The reclining figures are skilfully disposed so as to fill up the space beneath the rearing horses of Sol, or — by reversing the movement of the design — beneath the sinking chariot of Luna. The winged figure of the "Evening Star" appears above the horses of Luna, sinking down- ward in the same line as the chariot, thus intensifying the expressive quality of the composition. Below the medallions — on all four sides — run narrow friezes of workmanship contemporary with the erection of the Arch. On each of the two shorter sides a triumphal procession is represented in similar though not identical terms. On the left frieze of the Southern facade are depicted the Battle and Siege of Verona (October 312 a.d.). The emperor is crowned by Victory, who is shown as a full-grown figure hovering above on his right. On the right side of the same facade is repre- sented a long battle scene in which the enemy's men and * This same pagan allegory of Sol and Luna is frequently seen in early Christian art on each side of the Crucifixion. 332 ROMAN SCULPTURE horses are precipitated into a river where they drown piteously : the battle has accordingly been identified as that of the Milvian bridge. On the left, about half- way between the centre and the end, stands the Emperor accompanied by Victory. The left frieze of the prin- cipal or north facade represents (Plate CIII. i) the Emperor standing on the Rostra of the Forum haranguing the people, who are grouped on either side. The scene is displayed against an architectural background and reminds us, in this respect, of the sub- jects on the Trajanic balustrades. On the right we see the triple arch of Septimius Severus; on the left the Arch of Tiberius, and on the left again the Basilica Julia.* On the frieze of the right pylon the Emperor appears enthroned, like a mediaeval Christ, inside a great building, perhaps a basilica — he is evidently dispensing favours to the citizens, and above, within separate rooms or enclosures, are grouped the officials in charge of the imperial bounty. The scene is evidently a congiarium or distribution of gifts, such as was ordered after a triumph.f * Cf. Hulsen, "The Roman Forum," p. 66 and p. 70. f Mr. A. J. B. Wace has pointed out that since Constantine celebrated no triumph in Rome, the two reliefs of the north front and that of the west side should be referred to the last triumph ever celebrated in Rome, that of Diocletian of 302 a.d., when in honour of his victories over the Persians Diocletian assumed the name of Persicus. In this case, these three narrow friezes also would have been transferred from an earlier monument, which, according to Mr. Wace, was the Arch of Diocletian in Via Lata (see Classical Review, xx. 1906, p. 235). A strong point in favour of Mr. Wace's argument is that in these three friezes the head of the Emperor had been carefully chiselled away, so as to be replaced by another (*.*., by that of Constantine). For my purpose, however* PLATE CHI mam l. The Emperor on the Rostra BQ^SajB^litiijiWiiqSHi 2. The C'ongiarium RELIEFS FROM NORTH FACADE 3. Siege and Battle of Verona To face p. 332 i. I tattle of Milvian Bridge RELIEFS FROM SOUTH FACADE AKCH OF CONSTANTINO Y OF CALIFORNIA ARCHITECT UNIYI ; PLATE CIV i/iiKiri To face p. 383 SCULPTURES FROM SIDES OF ARCH OF COXSTAXTIXE PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 333 At first sight the reliefs of the northern facade, with their well-balanced groups and the stately standing or sitting figure of the Emperor, appear superior both in style and composition to the remaining four. The difference must, I think, be attributed in part to the subject. Sculpture, as we saw in the last chapter, was fast entering a phase in which interest is shifted back once more, as in archaic art, to the rendering of individual form. Figures appear more and more isolated aesthetically — self-contained, that is, without any true relation to the rest of the compo- sition. It is a further natural outcome of this phase to isolate figures from one another in space, partly in order to concentrate attention on the individual form, partly also, no doubt, in order to obtain an ever richer con- trast of complementary lights and shadows. Now it is obvious that an art captivated by this isolation of the single form is more adapted to represent scenes of cere- monial where, from the nature of the event portrayed, movements and gestures tend to a measured and stately formality, than battle-scenes which require the expres- sion of animated and concerted action. On the large Ludovisi sarcophagus in the Terme, we saw that the Roman art of about 275 A.D.was still able to construct a highly complicated design, but that it failed to fuse it the date of Diocletian's triumph (302 a.d.), and that of the erec- tion of the Arch (315 a.d.) are sufficiently near in point of time not to affect the argument as to the aesthetic character of the sculpture. Against Mr. Wace's theory might be urged that the inscription distinctly says that the Senate dedicated to Constantine arcum triumphis insignem, so that the triumphal subjects were directly referred to Constantine, though actually he celebrated no triumph. 334 ROMAN SCULPTURE harmoniously or really to animate it, with the result that the sensation called forth by the huge battle-scene was at bottom one of ennui. At the time of Con- stantine this inability to animate scenes has grown. In the battles of the southern front of the Constantinian arch the soldiers appear mere puppets that have been pulled out of a box and arranged in this or that way to convey — we might almost say to symbolize — victory at this point or defeat at that. We are far enough from the splendid swirl of the Trajanic slabs transferred to this same Arch. But the scenes represented on the north front are unimpaired by this same absence of animation, of coherent effort or psychological unity. The loss of animation is perhaps a gain in impressiveness. The figures are materially j uxtaposed, as in archaic art — stiffly placed alongside of one another with the minimum of overlapping. But the sameness of movement and the uniform symmetry heighten the solemnity of the scene and emphasize the majesty of the central figure. The design has an austere quality which may become monotonous but is not without its charm. Riegl, indeed, the champion of M decadent w Roman art, saw in these friezes the highest expression of those optic theories which, as he was able to prove, governed the course of Roman sculpture from the end of the second century onward. I shall not attempt a literal translation of his difficult phraseology but the following shortened para- phrase may, I think, be accepted as representing his meaning (" Spatromische Kunstindustrie," p. 47) : PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 335 The composition is projected in one plane with pains- taking exactitude, but the individual figures betray equally decidedly the effort to isolate themselves in space within the common plane. They are all deeply undercut. Along the upper part of the relief the figures are drawn up one against the other in two rows, but they are none the less sharply isolated. This is the decisive point in which Constantinian relief differs from the old Oriental and the Classical. In the early Imperial period it was an invari- able law in each relief to maintain an evident tactile con- nection between the figures and the plane of the back- ground. . . . But now the common plane has lost its tactile character and splits up into a series of light figures with intervening dark shadows which by their regular alternation produce a colouristic effect. . . . Moreover, between the visible front plane of the figures and the background a spatial sphere like a niche is now interposed, just deep enough to allow the figures within it to appear as cubic bodies freely surrounded by space — framed, that is, by complementary shadow. Then Riegl continues : What appears to us coarse and inartistic in these reliefs is the relation of the figures to space, yet this Con- stantinian art is assuredly not the result of coarseness or negligence, but of the positive artistic intention clearly to differentiate figures and parts of figures from one another while calling forth at the same time the optic impression of a rhythmical alternation of light and shade. With the question, " Does a bridge lead back from this Constantinian to earlier art ? " he enters upon that 336 ROMAN SCULPTURE analysis of second and third century sculpture which I have already frequently alluded to. In the earlier saicophagi, from the time of Hadrian to that of Alexander Severus — from the " Death of the Niobids " of the Lateran to the " Achilles at the Court of Lycomedes of the Capitol," the figures, though brought into one plane and tending to frontality, are yet harmoniously inter-related. Then the tendency arose to consider each figure as isolated, though several figures might be combined into complicated groups and move, overlap, or cross within the shadow of the "niche." Finally with the growing desire to accentuate the colouristic effect obtained by the pleasing alternation of light and shade, the groups are loosened and the figures are placed more apart. If they must be grouped with a view to representing an event in which several people take part, the connection between them is purely material, without the pervading link of a common emotional motive, or rather the motive is there, but the artist fails to appreciate its capabilities. But, as Riegl himself admits, this " cubic isolation " of bodies which now appear freely surrounded by space, simply implies a final return to the " frontality " of archaic art from which previous generations had attempted, and nearly achieved, emancipation. It must, however, strike us as a curious and interesting problem that the search for subtle, optic, and colouristic effects should have issued after all in the old material tactile rendering of form. One cannot help feeling that if attention became thus concentrated on mere effective pattern, and if the PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 337 relation of figures to one another and to space were neglected, the change must, in measure at least, have been due to loss of interest on the part of the artists in the events proffered to them for representation. Vitality and spontaneous force — the creative instinct, in short — seem spent. The subject is no longer conceived as a whole prior to the execution of the parts, and the single forms, being no longer organically related, appear isolated and tend to exaggeration. In scenes of cere- monial these faults are counterbalanced to some extent by a gain of rhythmical symmetry well adapted to the subject. If the equipoise of the parts is somewhat crude, mechanical rather than artistic, it yet produces a distinctly decorative effect, easy to grasp and well adapted to a composition to be seen at a height and from a distance. Very different is the case with the battle or even the processional scenes. Here the artist attempts more complicated groupings, without any correct notions of relative distance or of relative size, with the result that the effect is not only exaggerated but often grotesque. And it cannot be called truly decorative at any point. With the consideration of these friezes our task has really come to an end, but we must not part from Roman sculpture in the period of its eclipse without either glancing back at its glorious past, or striving to penetrate its future possibilities. In a book so limited in scope as the present I could only attempt to point out the most significant mani- 338 ROMAN SCULPTURE festations of sculpture in Rome. We have seen how the Ara Paris was the first result of a confluence of Greek forms and Latin genius which did for the art of Rome what a similar mingling of the currents did for its literature. In the reliefs of the Arch of Titus we saw this Imperial art at a further stage of its development, when sculptors — moving along the same line of evolution as painters — attempted the perspec- tival effects which bring the reliefs of the Arch closer to the achievements of the moderns than any other works of the antique. But when we examined this Domitianic art in detail we found it destined to short duration for lack of any stable science of perspective which should enable artists to progress further in the conquest of the third dimension. In the period of Trajan, when sculptors were called upon to clothe whole monuments with figures, they abandoned the search for effects of depth, and substituted for true perspective the naive superposition of tiers of figures. Once freed of the necessity of bringing figures or objects into correct spatial relations, they were able to link together an endless succession of events, irrespective of conditions of time or space, and thus created the "continuous" style, which became a model of monu- mental narrative for centuries to come. Under Hadrian we observed a reaction towards Classical models which found supreme expression in the newly created type of Antinous. Antonine and Aurelian sculpture still betray considerable traces of this classic influence. Under Septimius Severus and his son Caracallus, there PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 339 was a vigorous artistic life which I have tried to indicate, but which still has to be done justice to. In sculpture in relief the u continuous " Roman style remained in vogue, and gained new power and effectiveness from being com- bined with a novel method of conveying spatial content, by so working away the back ground that there arises in its place a dark niche within which the figures are moulded by the surrounding " complementary shadow. 11 This treatment of light and shade had a splendid colouristic quality, of which the influence may be traced, as we shall see, in the development of portraiture also. The exclusive stress now laid on these optic effects, joined to a certain flagging of interest in the subjects of Roman official and religious art, brings back sculpture to a purely decorative phase. Thus groups are loosened, and figures are placed more apart, till in the friezes of the Arch of Constantine sculpture attains that " cubic isolation " in space which closely resembles the '* frontal " presentment of figures in archaic art. These aesthetic changes had their spiritual side as well. The gradual concentration of interest in the person of the emperor, which we watched from the Ara Pacis onwards, finally issues in his appearing as exalted above his fellows. On the Constantinian friezes, for instance, in the scene on the Rostra, albeit he stands among them, yet the groups are parted sym- metrically away from him on either side, and this isolation of the imperial figure in space adds also to its new significance. On the relief with the Congiarium he is seated high above the crowd in the attitude of a 340 ROMAN SCULPTURE Christ in Glory. The change which first made itself distinctly felt at Benevento on the panel where Jupiter, surrounded by the greater Olympian gods, advances to hand over to the emperor the thunderbolt as symbol of supreme and divine power, is now accomplished The night has closed over the Pagan gods. On the Arch of Constantine the emperor, unattended by local deities or allegorical figures, stands or sits directly surrounded by his people. In presence of this concep- tion we feel that we have reached the point where the imperial type will be adapted to the Central Figure of a new religion. Thus the Arch of Constantine, spiritually as well as aesthetically, stands where the Antique passes into the Mediaeval world. Nor is it altogether possible for students of antique art to study this arch, with its marvellous summary of the history of Roman sculpture, without deploring at the same time that it marks the end of much that they have learnt to cherish. It is less to the victorious Con- stantine that our sympathies finally turn, than to the weak and ill-fated Maxentius, the last of the Pagan emperors, who planned the restoration of Pagan Rome which was fast vanishing in a new order of things against which he was powerless to struggle. He called his little son Romulus in honour of the Founder of the City, and when the boy died, built in his honour the temple with the bronze doors, which marks to this day the resting-place of the last deified Roman Prince. He began the great basilica which was afterwards finished by Constantine, who had it dedicated in his own name. PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 341 We must be fair in our regrets. It was neither the vic- tory of Constantine nor the introduction of Christianity that caused the downfall of the ancient world or of ancient art. Nor could the archaeological schemes of Maxentius have restored to life what earned germs of evident decay. In spite of the significant aesthetic innova- tions which the penetrating discernment of Riegl detected in the two northern friezes of the Arch of Constantine, there are abundant signs that the interest in the subjects of Roman art is nearing exhaustion. The clumsiness of the figures, the poverty of artistic device, cannot be denied even when every allowance is made for the fact that the attention of sculptors was directed into other channels. Once again in the history of art, the stimulus of new ideas was needed, and this stimulus was found in that Christian religion which, after threatening to ex- tinguish the very sources of art, was itself to fall beneath the spell of Pagan forms. Ancient art, indeed, was not killed by Christianity, but with a change of theme received a new life at its hands. The art of Rome had been, above all, narrative and commemorative in character. It had developed in the service of the State, and was employed in the adornment of national monuments to record the triumphal or magnanimous deeds of the Empire and its representa- tives. So long as the State and its Rulers held sway over the minds of the citizens at large, dominating their conscience as object of religious devotion, if need were of self-sacrifice, so long Roman art had preserved vitality with dignity of purpose. That religion of the State had 342 ROMAN SCULPTURE long been flagging. The strenuous, self-forgetting, but material temper of the people was undermined by the religions of the E ast acclimatized in Rome, and raising dreams and hopes of a spiritual life which dwarfed the actual and overshadowed it. But the old Pagan art of Rome was to die hard, and not before its accumulated legacy of types and forms had been taken over by the new order that was steadily supplanting the old. Of late we have heard a great deal of the religious syncretism of the Roman Empire. A precisely parallel tendency was manifest in art. We have already seen the conical emblem of the Sun tended by the goddesses of the Capitol ine Triad. That the worships of Sol, however, or of Mithras, should not only readily blend with the forms of Western Paganism, but pass from crude sym- bolism to anthropomorphic representation, is a pheno- menon which merely exhibits at a late date the process to which all the cults of Greece and Rome had been subjected. Anthropomorphism, it is true, was no longer, as of old, helped by genuine creative impulse. We have seen that for Mithras, for instance, it was thought suffi- cient to borrow a ready-made imagery from another cult. But the anthropomorphic idea was active still, and the group of Osterburken, or the altar of Sol Sanctissimits, shows that it might still have its moments of inspiration. But it must always strike us with fresh surprise that the religion of Christ, which had adopted as its own the rigid Jewish precept, " Thou shalt make unto thyself no graven image," should have likewise drifted PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANT1NE 343 into adoption of the artistic formulas of Paganism. Yet no Pagan god or Emperor was oftener depicted than the God-made Man of the new worship — none ever inspired creative artist to more loving elaborate handling of his theme. Horace had wittily summed up the Hellenizing ten- dencies of the Augustan age in the famous line : Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit. u Conquered Greece took her rude victor captive,' 1 but a far more singular though analogous event was witnessed in the capture of Christianity by Roman Paganism. Roman ceremonial and customs were grafted on to the simple cult, clothing it in a mag- nificence of ritual scarce consistent with the spirit of its Founder ; and the art of Rome, taken into the service of the new religion, set visibly before the eyes of men, as centre of their worship, the Teacher who had preached the spiritual character of God. The Acts of Christ and His Disciples now take the place in art of the deeds of the Roman Emperors and their army, or, if these are represented, it is in strict subordination to the former. The new subject is equally rich in varied incident and in stimulus to the pictorial imagination. Art, moreover, was now invested with a didactic and doctrinal mission which at once immensely widened the sphere of its ap- plication. Already on the finer of the early Christian sarcophagi the fresh inspiration is evident. It has been usual, at any rate in books of a general and popular character, to speak of " a decline and final extinction 34+ ROMAN SCULPTURE of sculpture, 1 ' to allude to a long slumber of art during the Dark Ages, whence it was to reawaken in the magic dawn of the Italian Renaissance. But these are figures of speech which obscure the truth of history, and impede the proper understanding of art and of its development. They are conceits formulated by those who, failing to perceive either continuity or purpose in the history of art, have their vision limited at the one end by the Parthenon, at the other by the Tuscan Quattrocento, and between these two points see everything dark. There was neither final extinction nor slumber but, long before the Renaissance, the grand art of the Middle Ages bears witness to the immortal strength and beauty of the artistic idea which Rome transmitted, the richer for all the influences that came within the sphere of her mighty rule. The magnificent sarcophagi in the Museo Cristiano of the Lateran, the early Christian ivories — and the later Pagan ivories which subsisted by their side — the series of consular diptychs, such a masterpiece of pictorial narrative as the ivory throne of Saint Maximian at Ravenna * — all prove the strenuous vitality of the art * I make this statement with full knowledge of Strzygowski's theories as to the Syrian, probably Antiochene, origin of this epis- copal throne. But in whatever part of the Roman Empire it was produced, it cannot have been from the " Graeco-Orient " that it borrowed the beautiful figures of its front panels, or the figure-sub- jects which decorate it on all sides. If Strzygowski adheres to his famous apothegm, " Greece and Rome are smothered in the Orient's embrace," and if this process is represented by the victory of orna- ment over figure representations, then he must tell us whence the great figure-art of mediaevalism comes, if not from Rome, or through Roman influence. PLATE ( V To face p. 344 (onstantim: as defender OF the faith THE BARKERIXI IYoRY I.ntirrr Mud*. Pint OF C, PRINCIPATE OF CONSTANTINE 345 forms that Christianity received from Rome. In the " Renaissance " proper, some fourteen centuries after the sculptured panels with the " Triumph of Titus " had shown the Antique apprehending, for one moment, the modern feeling for space- values, artists attacked once more the problem of spatial distribution. Then it was that, with the final mastery of the secrets of perspective, those new and enlarged vistas opened out which distinguish modern from ancient art. But the Christian sculpture of the Middle Ages is essentially one with the sculpture we have been studying ; only the great change in subject- matter relegates it to separate treatment. One last example may serve to illustrate the ten- dencies of the Antique in the period in which we must perforce take leave of it. It is the ivory plaque in the Louvre from the famous Barberini Library. Even in the magnificent collection of ivories of which it now forms part, this example stands out among the rest for the splendour of both theme and treatment. In the central compartment the Emperor (Constantine) is rep- resented — not in the triumphal chariot, but on horse- back, as befits the militant champion of Christianity, the Fidel Defensor. In token of victory he reverses the spear upon which he rests.* A captive grasps the * For this peculiar motive, which is characteristic of the Emperor represented as victorious over the infidels, see Strzygowski, "Hel- lenistische und Koptische Kunst in Alexandria" {Bulletin de laSociiti Archtologique d'Alexandrie, 1902), p. 36 f. The lance is reversed, probably because the attitude is taken over from representations of the Emperor actually piercing the dragon, i.e., the foe of the Church, and the lance is shown with point downwards even whe the dragon is not there. 346 ROMAN SCULPTURE shaft and raises his hand in supplication. Beneath the feet of the charger lies the personification of a conquered country. Above, from the right, Victory with her palm branch flies to crown the hero. In the side-panel on the left, stands a warrior holding another image of Victory. In the lower frieze are pictured the vanquished foes bringing their gifts to the conqueror. But above, against a disk borne by two angels, His God- head veiled beneath the features of a Greek adolescent, with Sol invictus and Luna reduced to mere emblems on either side of Him, appears the Young Triumphant Christ. Certain details, the fact that the Saviour uses the Greek gesture of benediction, and is represented ac- cording to the Hellenistic type current in Alexandria and Antioch, show that Strzygowski is almost certainly right in claiming the plaque as an Alexandrian product.* But if the beautiful ivory really is of Egyptian origin, it only illustrates once more the compelling force of the Roman genius that could gather up into its service the art forms of the different countries under its sway. * " Dom zu Aachen," p. 49 f., and Fig. 31. CHAPTER XV ROMAN PORTRAITURE FROM AUGUSTUS TO CONSTANTINE But when Greek art had run its course, when beauty of form had well-nigh been exhausted or begun to pall, certain artists, presumably Greeks, but working for Romans, began to produce portrait work of quite a new and wonderful sort ; the beautiful portraits of ugly old men, of snub little boys, work which was clearly before its right time, and was swamped by idealised portraits, insipid, nay, inane, from the elegant revivalist busts of Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius down to the bonnet blocks of the lower empire. Of this Roman portrait art, of certain heads of half-idiotic little Caesar brats, of sly and wrinkled old men, things which ought to be so ugly and yet are so beautiful, we say, at least, perhaps unformulated, we think, "How Renaissance ! " And the secret of the beauty of these few Graeco-Roman busts, which is also that of Renaissance portrait sculp- ture, is that the beauty is quite different in kind from the beauty of Greek ideal sculpture, and obtained by quite different means. — Vernon Lee, " Euphorion," vol. ii. p. 24. Portraiture is the branch of Roman art which has been least neglected, the identification of the individuals portrayed having attracted antiquarians and historians 34 8 ROMAN SCULPTURE from time immemorial. There has also been a great deal said about its realism and its " individuality " ; but its true aesthetic value, the new note which it introduced into art, was never, I think, understood or clearly formulated till " Vernon Lee " wrote the passage quoted above. This was three-and-twenty years ago, and though much has been discovered since then, and her statements could be rectified in points of detail, the utterance remains true in all essentials. I can propose no better text for an essay on Roman portraiture ; it opens our eyes to what we may find, it suggests what we may look for, and yet does not fill us with ready- made judgments, nor predispose us to wholesale uncritical enthusiasms or condemnations. Our aesthetic enjoyment, however, will be all the greater, if we base our inquiry on historical lines, and try to discover, as we have in the case of other monuments, the relation between subject or conception and technique. It is repeatedly stated that, for the portraits of Emperors and their families at any rate, identifications have a sure basis in the coinage struck with their effigies. Unfortunately, however, in the desire to christen practi- cally every bust in a collection, this clue has not only been strained to the utmost, but has also been arbi- trarily disregarded. There is indeed no province of archaeology where disorder reigns so supreme as in that of Roman iconography, or where it is more necessary to start our inquiry with unprejudiced mind and memory and a fresh eye. Bernoulli's monumental Romische Icoiwgraphie, which ROMAN PORTRAITURE 349 spreads over the years 1 883-1 894, was the first attempt to criticize scientifically the vast accumulation of fact and fancy. He first showed the doubtfulness of three-fourths of the identifications of Augustan and Julio-Claudian busts, and enforced a closer com- parison between the coin and the sculptured portrait. The next advance in scientific method was made by Bienkowski, in a paper published in 1895, in which he showed that the shapes of busts afford safe guidance for a first broad classification into periods.* Wickhoff, without touching on iconographical interpre- tation, had in his "Roman Art" repeatedly drawn attention to the artistic merit of Roman portraiture, and showed that it manifests in different periods precisely the same character as the contemporary sculpture in relief. He was followed by Alois Riegl, who in the book so often referred to, traced and defined the aesthetic laws which govern the evolution of Roman portraiture from the second century onward. t Finally, and above all, students can command vast and well- arranged material in Arndfs " Griechische und Romische Portraits/'' still in course of publication. These various works have not been without their influence on English scholars, witness the paper on Flavian portraiture con- tributed by Mr. J. W. Crowfoot to the Journal of * Anzeiger der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Krakau, 1894. A French resumS in the Revue Archeologique, 1895, ii. p. 293; see also the lucid paragraph by S. Reinach, Chroniques d'Orient, 2 mc serie, 1891-1895, p. 411. f See also his essay on late Roman portraiture in " Strena Helbigiana," 1900, pp. 250-256. 350 ROMAN SCULPTURE Hellenic Studies in 1900 ; and Mr. Wace's more recent sketch of the " Evolution of Art in Roman Portraiture " (Rome 1905). , In portraiture as in the other branches of Roman art the Greek element insinuated itself, as we have seen, long before the period of Augustus. The true Roman portrait, as distinguished from the strongly Hellenized portraiture which comes into vogue in the last period of the Republic, is remarkable for an uncompromising realism arising doubtless from natural tendency, but strongly influenced by the wax images that were moulded over the face after death. In many cases, evidently, the sculptor worked from these imagines and not from the live model ; hence a certain lack of life-likeness in many of these portraits. This native Roman portraiture has come down to us in the simple tombstones from which one or two or more members of the same family look out with fixed gaze.* Lately they have been discussed and to a certain extent classified by Dr. Altmann. One of the finest instances, still inedited, showing five personages ranged stiffly side by side, is in the collection at Lansdowne House (Michaelis, 21). It is difficult to speculate on what the development of these somewhat homely effigies might have been had not Greek influence touched this Roman portraiture into new artistic life. On the other hand, a study of the Greek busts of the period of the Diadochoi shows that contact with Rome only matured tendencies, * E.g., Museo Chiaramonti, 6, and 60 B ; cf. Amelung- Holtzinger, i. p. 37 ; Altmann, " R6mische Grabaltare," p. 196 ff. PLATE CVI POBTBAIT OF AN OLD MAN. REPUBLICAN PKKIOD AUmm To face p. 350 Sraccio Xuovo, Vatican of c ROMAN PORTRAITURE 351 which had already set in, towards greater individual- ism.* It is usual to speak of Greek art as ideal and of Roman as realistic. But since there can be no artistic achievement without an informing idea, it is evidently absurd to talk of a realistic as opposed to an idealistic art. Any unprejudiced observer who stood, let us say, at the upper end of the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican, and studied the " Apoxyomenos " after Lysippus, the Demosthenes with clasped hands in the niche on the right, and, to the right of the Demosthenes, the mar- vellous head of an old wrinkled man of late republican times (Plate CVI.),f must admit that each of the three embodies in the highest degree an artistic idea ; but while the " Apoxyomenos " may be called a generalized portrait in which the individual is subordinated to a scheme of composition expressive of athletic valour, the Demosthenes and the old man are individualized portraits in which — exactly the contrary of what takes place in the athlete statue — the artists have brought out every trait that could contribute to individualize the person- age portrayed. * Consider, for instance, the magnificent head in the Louvre (cat. Somm. 204 ; phot. Giraudon, 1318 bis) long named Julius Caesar, and now identified as a portrait of Antiochus III. t Amelung, " Cat. Vat.," 60 ; Wace, No. 1. There is a very fine replica of this head in Lansdowne House (Michaelis, 29). Other excellent examples of Republican portraiture are the group of a man and his wife in the Vatican, Wickhoff, " Roman Art," Fig. B on p. 191 ; Helbig, 240. Also the delicately-executed head of an old man, from Ostia, in the Museo delle Terme, Ame- lung-Holtzinger, i. p. 252, Fig. 143 ; phot. Anderson, 2490, 2491. 352 ROMAN SCULPTURE Portraits of Republican and Early Imperial Periods {small bust to below collar-bone as in Plate CIX.). — According to Bienkowski, whose conclusions as to the shapes of busts I follow here, in the later Republican and early Imperial period — roughly from Julius Caesar to Nero — the bust is small, only the collar-bone and the parts immediately surrounding it being indicated. An excellent example of this shape is the Agrippa in the Louvre*. But though in a detailed, scientific study of portraits we should try as much as possible to start from the portraits on coins, and from busts which can be dated from their shape, in a brief survey like the present we shall not always be able to proceed with this precision, but shall be content to glance at salient examples of portraiture, whatever their original prove- nance — whether bust or statue, — which further illustrate the artistic character of the periods we have previously studied. Among the many admirable portraits in the late Republican style as it verges towards the Augustan, one stands out pre-eminent. It is the basalt head of Caesar, broken off from a statue, now preserved in the Museo Barracco. It is reproduced here from a new photograph (Plate I.). The diadem with the Julian star and the general cast of the features can leave no doubt as to the personage intended. Not only the material, but the fragment of a rigid support in the neck, shows that the head belonged to a statue of strictly Egyptian * Cat. Somm., 1203 ; Bernoulli, Rom. Icon., i. Fig. 38 ; Giraii- don, 1338 ; Arndt, 295. ROMAN PORTRAITURE 353 type, executed perhaps for Alexandria. Though Caesar appears as divus, he wears a slight beard, it may be to recall to the Egyptians a custom he had adopted in their country. Contrasted with such an " ideal abstraction " as the portrait of Pericles copied from a fifth-century model,* the Barracco Caesar shows the immense progress achieved by art in the direction of expressiveness and emotion. In the Pericles, to be sure, the generalized features receive a certain external pathos from the turn of the head to one side, but in the Caesar the emotional quality is from within. As an excellent connoisseur says of another portrait of Caesar, " the sculptor has portrayed the conqueror who owed his success to his own con- summate genius which was too strong for the human frame that it wasted and consumed in its service. 1 ' J The head has the true reticence of genius, the touch of suffering and of isolation inseparable perhaps from greatness. The highly intellectual features are eloquent of some hidden pain, whose traces furrow the delicate mouth and chin, and bestow upon this head an austere charm. The portraits of Augustus have little of this intimate quality. They are more generalized ; in them perhaps * Brit. Mus., Cat. I., 549 ; Furtwangler, " Masterpieces," Plate VII. and Fig. 46 ; Vatican, 525, Helbig, 288. j Ernest Gardner, " Handbook of Greek Sculpture," p. 514. The head referred to (Brit. Mus. Cat. 1870), though a forgery, is executed with knowledge of the Caesarian type, but the strongly-marked pupils are impossible in the period of Caesar, and the technique is obviously modern. C/. Furtwangler, " Neuere Falschungen von Antiken," p. 14. / z in p H in O D < O >< S s I *7 ■ P , ^ m n R 5s- II" • Q a *** ,5 rr> a. I IS 02^ 19 00 N . 'S3 do ^ P « OS p fc GO P a p < fa O H H B ■ > H u C ft C a ■ — i < M 33 H I- R l I? P »o o i « 3- oS ih— S3 <| a «s .2 »< a * o « II fl p! IL °< I p ^» PLATE CVII PORTRAIT OF A BOY, AUGUSTAN P-EKIOD To face i>. 3 r > » Mtueo /iarracco , nEPAR™ E ROMAN PORTRAITURE 355 more clearly than elsewhere can we detect the conscious revival of Greek ideas usually attributed to Augustus. Three portraits stand out as distinctly Hellenic in style — the young Octavian of the Vatican, so often and so justly celebrated : * the well-known profile (Plate CX., 1 and 2) on a gold coin : the superb cameo in the British Museum (above, Plate II.), which Furtwangler shows good reason for attributing to the famous gem engraver Dioscorides, alone privileged to portray the god Augustus.f As in the cameo, so in the head of the famous statue from Prima Porta (Plate III.), which is influenced by, though certainly not directly imitated from, a Greek model,J the lines are of the utmost simplicity. In the statue, however, Amelung rightly observes that " the fulness of the features has begun to be wasted by age." Though I do not propose to say much about statues, which for the present purpose are less instructive than heads and busts, we must glance rapidly at this justly celebrated creation. To the analysis by Wick- hoff, and more lately by Amelung, there is little to add. The political allegory on the superb cuirass has been partly described above (p. 44). || The student should * Wickhoff, " Roman Art," Plate I. ; Amelung-Holtzinger, p. 88 f., Fig. 43 ; Helbig, 228 ; Wace, No. 2. f Another striking portrait-cameo* of Augustus has been lately detected and published by Furtwangler. It is inserted in the " cross of Lothair " preserved in the Treasury of the cathedral of Aachen (Bonner Jahrbitcher, Heft, 114 pp. 189, 192.) % Cf. Wickhoff, " Roman Art," p. 28 f. and Fig. 9. || On the central zone of reliefs are represented Mars with 356 ROMAN SCULPTURE further notice the technical skill in the rendering of texture — the metallic strength of the breast-plate, the heavy folds of the military cloak, the pliancy of the leather straps, the dainty lines of their fringes,* the thin texture of the linen tunic visible at the arms and below the cuirass. Since Augustus is represented here as Imperator, he should hold the spear, instead of the sceptre given him by the restorer. The beautiful curved mouth of Augustus, and the fine abundant hair, combed somewhat boyishly over the forehead, where it separates into three distinct strands,f his dog preparing to receive the re-captured Roman standard presented by a conquered Parthian ; to the left of this central group is a seated female figure holding an Iberian sword. She is Hispania, and is balanced on the right by the seated figure of Gallia with her short sword, her standard surmounted by a boar's head, her trumpet ending in a dragon's head (for the type cf. Bienkowski, "De Simulacris barbararum Gentium," &c). Below, in an intermediate zone, are, on the left, Apollo with his lyre, riding on a griffin, and on the right, Artemis on her stag. No cuirass worn by any other prince or emperor seems to have equalled this in splendour. But the breast-plate worn by a prince of the Julio-Claudian house in the Lateran (from Cervetri, Helbig, No. 670) is also of great beauty. The designs, though simple, resemble those on the Augustan breastplate. These Im- perial cuirasses have been studied by Von Rohden in " Bonner studien," 1890, pp. 1-20 ; cf. also the careful list drawn up by Warwick Wroth, Journal of Hellenic Studies, vii. 1886, pp. 126-142. * This fringe is as alive with movement as the marvellous fringe of the chair in Titian's Charles F.in the Munich Pinacothek. f I do not share Mr. Wace's views of the portraiture of Augustus, op.cit.p.4. I do not precisely know what he means by " the eyes stare vacantly," except that the pupil is not indicated any more than it is on other portraits of this or preceding periods. PLATE CVIII To face p. 3.-)G 'ORTKAIT OF A BOY, AUGUSTAN PERIOD Museo Barracco ^ARTMSaNT LU UNIYERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ROMAN PORTRAITURE 357 are characteristics which reappear more or less markedly in other members of the Julio-Claudian family. No- where is the sculpturesque beauty of this group of portraits more keenly perceived than in the heads of children. One, worthy to take rank with the children of Donatello, is again in the Museo Barracco, and is now published for the first time (Plates CVII., CVIII.).* The face is less generalized than in the older person- ages ; nothing can exceed the alert, distinguished pose of the head, the fine setting of the eye, the full yet aristocratic lines of the childish mouth, the firm drawing of the hair. A little head in the Museo Chiaramonti also has remarkable distinction (Ame- lung, 423). A bronze bust of a boy, of singular beauty of form and technique, was exhibited in 1903 at the Burlington Fine Arts Club.f Another, cut out of hard basalt like the Barracco Caesar, has lately come to light. It is the property of Mr. C. Newton-Robinson, by whose kindness I hope to publish it in the Journal of Hellenic Studies. The heads of Tiberius offer close stylistic affinities to But to say that " the hair lacks all character " is to over- look the most beautiful and the most individual quality of these heads. In the beauty of the hair the superb head at Boston quoted so enthusiastically by Arndt (Gr. und Rom. Portrats, 704-705) seems to surpass all others, but unfortunately I have not seen it. Capitol, Imperatori No. 2 is also a fine head of Augustus. * Replica in Palazzo Lazzeroni according to Amelung-Holt- zinger, i. p. 248. f Catalogue of the Greek Art Exhibition, Plate XV. (Wyndham Cook Coll.) The eyeballs are of silver, or of a lighter alloy. 358 ROMAN SCULPTURE those of Augustus, but the mouth is even more delicate and sensitive, the eyes have a greater intensity, the hair is more evenly combed over the forehead. I know of no first-rate portrait of this Emperor, though the colossal head in the Louvre (Cat. Somm. 1239; Ber- noulli ii., Plate VII.) seems faithfully to represent the type.* There is also a fair example in the Capitol (Wace, No. 3). Artists at all times tend to bring the portraits of rulers into harmony with some pre-conceived type.f The more interesting heads as actual portraiture are therefore often those of private individuals. In the Museo Barracco, for instance, there is a head of the Augustan or Julio- Claudian period (Plate CIX.) which, compared with official portraiture, is surprisingly characteristic and individual in expression. The features are irregular, the eyes somewhat prominent, the upper lip long, the chin small though by no means weak, the jawpronounced. All this is faithfully rendered yet subordinated to the clear artistic conception which governs theJulio-Claudian portraiture. The general effect is masterly. The head, which is singularly cut in half, has an inferior replica in * The portraits of his brother the elder Drusus, of his nephew Germanicus, and of his son the younger Drusus, presumably resembled his own. They have not yet been satisfactorily iden- tified. No. 439 in the Lateran — a prince of the Julio-Claudian house, who has been variously called the Elder Drusus, and his son Germanicus — can give students a good idea of these portraits as also of the difficulties of precise identification. t Cf. the remarks in Amelung-Holtzinger, i. p. 45, on two portraits of Tiberius in the Museo Chiaramonti, 400, 494. PLATE CIX PORTRAIT OF THE JULIO-CLAIDIAN I'EKloh To face j). 358 Museo Barracco UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ROMAN PORTRAITURE 359 the so-called " Marcus Junius Brutus " of the Capitol (Helbig, 536). The portrait has been interpreted, but on insufficient grounds, as that of Virgil. The portraits distributed among the numerous ladies of the Julio-Claudian family are, as is invariably the case throughout Roman portraiture, less interesting than those of the men. Of the Empress Li via there is no portrait that can be regarded as absolutely certain, though, from its likeness to Tiberius, there is much in favour of Helbig's identification as Livia of the head published in RomischeMittheilungeni. , Plate I. (pp. 3-13). Its likeness to the profile generally interpreted as Livia on the coins with the legend Salus Augusta is also striking (Helbig, ib.). If we accept these two portraits of the Empress, then we must agree with Mau in recognizing Livia in a bust at Naples * (inv. 6045). The jaw is square, the face bony and worn, the profile markedly aquiline, the thin hair is simply drawn back and just relieved by a waved bandeau,, the eyes are sad and somewhat sunken. It may represent the Empress in her declining years. Whoever the personage, the portrait is peculiarly interesting as showing the power and understanding with which the Roman artists could express old age. Though they are not quite so success- ful with their elderly women as with men of the same age, these portraits of mature Roman ladies are far more fascinating, aesthetical ly, than those of their younger sisters (cf. Plate CIX., portrait of the elder Faustina). Fine ex- amples of Augustan female heads occur on coins and gems; * Rdtn. Mittheilungen, vii. pp. 228-238. 360 ROMAN SCULPTURE for instance, the Elder Agrippina on her memorial coin, the reverse of which displays her state chariot or carpen- tum (Plate, CX., 3, 4) ; the head, possibly Antonia, the mother of Claudius, or else the Elder Agrippina, on a gem at Devonshire House (Plate XXX., 2).* The character- istic coiffure is derived from that in fashion in late Repub- lican times ; but the hair, instead of being harshly drawn back, is softly waved, and no longer tied up into a hard " pigtail," but into a looser plait knotted at the nape, whence curls presently escape to the front ; at a further stage bunches of curls appear at the sides or enframing the face. To this later period, coinciding approximately with the principate of Claudius, belongs the charming bust of a girl in the Terme found in the same sepulchral chamber with the urn inscribed with the name of the fourteen -year-old Minatia Polla, whom the bust may accordingly represent (Plate CXI. ). Here, as in the so-called "Virgil, 11 the face — especially in its lower part — is more individualized than in Imperial portraits. The hair is of great beauty. It is brought low over the forehead and parted to the sides, where it is arranged in closely clustering ringlets. A singularly attractive head in the round, of similar character, has lately been acquired for the ^British Museum. It is cut out of "root of emerald 11 (plasma), and, from the coins, is identified as the Younger Agrippina.f * This gem, if carefully compared with the coins both of Antonia and of Agrippina, will show the difficulty there is in differentiating between the Julio-Claudian ladies. The large Carlisle cameo in the British Museum represents some lady of the Augustan family (Julia ?). | I am indebted to Mr. Cecil Smith for showing me this PLATE CX 1. 2. Augustus." dold. 3 4 Agrippina Senior, Bnu*. 5. (.all pit. lira**. « Vitellius. Jiruse. To face p. 360 7, 8. Domitian. Br$m n. Trajan. Atom. 10. Hadrian. Bras*. 11. Sabina, w.ot Hadrian. Gold. 12. Xerva. Brass. oF c ARCHITECTURAL Di >ITY CF CALi. PLATE CXI Tofac* p. 3ui HEAD OF A GIKL Mhs'O dalle Teniie \iiil> rsiin ROMAN PORTRAITURE 361 As a whole, the portraits on the processional reliefs of the Ara Pads are more life-like and animated than any single busts or statues of the time. The movement imparted to the glance in the Ara Pads has been commented on by Riegl (above, p. 57). The pupil there is at times already plastically indicated, whereas, in sculpture in the round, this innovation does not make its appearance till about the time of Hadrian. Caligula has not yet been satisfactorily identified. The heads which pass for his are generally portraits of the young Augustus. The fussy, pedantic Claudius — who has been so aptly compared to our own James I. — seems well portrayed in the colossal statue of the Vatican Rotonda (Helbig, 312). There is an astonish- ing difference of treatment and conception between Claudius and the other princes of the Julian house; almost suddenly Roman art seems to have recovered its characteristics and become individual once more. The finest portraits of Claudius, however, occur on two gems — one the superb portrait in the collection of H.M. the King at Windsor,* the other on the celebrated cameo with the four busts resting on cornucopia at Vienna, f The interesting portraits of Vitellius seem mostly Renaissance works inspired by the coins. + Portraits precious " new acquisition." It was published by Sambon in Le Musee, and erroneously identified as Livia. Height 8J in. (23! cm.). * Archaeologia, vol. xlv. 1877, Plate I.; reproduced by Furt- wangler, " Antike Gemmen," iii. Fig. 166. f Furtwangler, ib. Fig. 164. X An apparently genuine head, however, is published by Petersen, Rom. Mitth., xiv. 1899, Plate IX. 362 ROMAN SCULPTURE of Nero are mostly forged or faked up, but there is a genuine head in the Museo delle Terme (Mariani- Vaglieri, " Guida," p. 83, N0.583, phot. Anderson 2489). Galba is known from his fine coins (Plate CX ., 5), but not from any statuary portrait. The few portraits of Otho — if authentic — are visibly modelled on those of Nero. The finest portrait of this date is probably the Cnaeus Domitius Corbulo of the Capitol (Stanza dei Filosofi ; Helbig, 490 ; Amelung-Holtzinger, p. 183 f . ; phot. Anderson, 155 1). Corbulo's tragic end seems adum- brated in the strong but suffering features. Of his daughter Domitia, who became the wife of the Emperor Domitian, there is a charming and fairly authentic portrait among the Imperial busts of the same collection (Helbig, p. 314, No. 25 ; Bernoulli, II. , 2, Plate XX.). 2. Flavian Portraiture — the Bust includes the Shoulders and the Pectoral Line as in Plate CXIV. — Already under Nero the bust tends to increase in size — and under the Flavian dynasty the birth of the shoulders and the pectoral line are shown, as in the portrait in the British Museum (No. 1872), misnamed" Marcus Junius Brutus,''' which is an instructive example, as both the bust and the small pedestal are antiqued The characteristics of Flavian portraiture are those already observed in its sculpture in relief — an increase of illusionism. The fine Vespa- sian of the Terme (Plate XXXIII.), with its massive structure, square jaw and homely, rustic expression, is treated almost in an impressionist manner ; there is less attention to linear effects than in the Augustan LATE CXII Moscioni THE SHOEMAKER, GAIUS IULIUS HELIUS To face p. 362 Palazzo dei Conservator! p^i-v-- 1 ROMAN PORTRAITURE 363 period ; the modelling becomes still rounder, and the planes pass into one another by the softest transitions. The design appears to emerge from the block, as does the relief from the background or the figures in a picture from the plane surface. This illusionist quality is the same which we have already noted in the reliefs from the Arch of Titus (above, p. no f.) and in the working of the heads which once belonged to some monument of the Flavian period (in the Lateran, above, p. 142). Two masterpieces have many traits in common with our Vespasian.* The first is the bust of the shoemaker Gaius Julius Helius, in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Plate CXIL), erected in his life-time for his own tomb- stone, above which he exhibits a last and a shoe as samples of his trade. In the rendering of the " great hairy wart " on the left cheek, the sculptor anticipates the feeling for detail of the early Italian Renaissance-! The head " is full of humour ; the heavy serious imper- turbable self-consciousness of the successful bourgeois has been seized as happily as the keen adroitness of * The portraits of Titus seem only a younger and tamer version of those of his father {cf. Vatican, Braccio Nuovo, Amelung, No. 26 ; Helbig, 10). The handsome features of Domitian — who, whatever his sins, was certainly a great improvement in looks and bearing upon his father and elder brother — are well known from the aristocratic profile on the coins (Plate CX., 7) ; but his busts and statues, so far as identi- fied at all, are unimportant artistically. f Cf., inter alia, the Pietro Mellini of Benedetto da Maiano (Alinari, 6291) and the Federigo da Montefeltro of Mino da Fiesole (Alinari, 6296), both in the Bargcllo at Florence. 364 ROMAN SCULPTURE the noble. 11 * Of a more aristocratic character, but not finer in execution and conception, is a little head in the British Museum now published for the first time (Plate CXIII.).f It offers striking points of resemblance with the well-known portraits of the "father of Trajan, 11 J but surpasses them in execution. The modelling of neck and bust is strong and beautiful, the head nobly poised ; jaw and chin are vigorously outlined, and the brow is modelled simply, but with great subtlety ; the eye and mouth and wing of the nose are delicately indicated. The furrows of the brow, and of the corners of the nose and mouth are sharply chiselled, in a manner noted by Mr. Crowfoot as typical of Flavian heads. A peculiarly fine male portrait of the period — with intact bust — is in the Galleria Chiaramonti (Amelung, Cat. Vat., 561). It represents a middle-aged man with a " sly, sarcastic touch about the mouth, 11 and keenly observant eyes. The bust misnamed " Mark Antony, 11 in the Braccio Nuovo, certainly comes within the Flavian category (Plate XLII.) — the drawing of mouth and eyes, the contour and pose of the head, the shape of the bust, are all distinctly Flavian. The hair, however, shows a novel treatment. Instead of the lightly modelled impressionist hair of male Flavian heads, it is cut or drilled into complicated though carefully disposed meshes. The * J. Crowfoot, Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol. xx. 1900, P. 34- f By the kindness of Mr. Cecil Smith, who first drew my attention to this wonderful example of Flavian skill. The material is " brown stone " (Cat. 1975). \ E.g., Capitol, No. 80; phot. Anderson, 1558. :AL. E> vu\y Y oF CXUFC ARCHITECTURAL DIZ: ." LIE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFC 1 ROMAN PORTRAITURE 365 aesthetic effect is that of the elaborate front coiffure of the ladies of the period. The splendid portrait of an elderly man from the tomb of the Haterii (CXIV.) is shown by its shape, which now includes the part below the pectoral line, to belong to the last years of the Flavian era. The wrinkled neck, the hair on the breast, and the worn socket of the eye are rendered as faithfully as the wart on the face of the shoemaker. It is a finely observed study of age; as often, however, in the antique, the artist shirks baldness, and bestows upon this ancient personage a generous head of hair. Haterius, who wears the snake of iEsculapius tied round his waist, must have been a physician. Therefore when we discuss the portrait of his wife we shall find her wearing the simple coiffure of the middle-classes. The female portraits are decidedly inferior to the men's, and less interesting as studies of character. The general Flavian type — at any rate, as it reigned in Court circles — is well known, owing to the high dressing of the hair, which was curled in front into numberless tight ringlets, supported doubtless on a wire frame. These are rendered in stone by riddling the surface with holes, around each of which the lines of the hair are carefully carved. Most of these heads are indiscriminately labelled as "Julia," the daughter of Titus. A possibly authentic portrait of Julia is the life-size statue in the Braccio Nuovo,* which was found, together with the statue of Titus in the same collection (Amelung, 26 ; Helbig, 10). She * Amelung, No. in ; Helbig, 50 ; Alinari, 6533 ; Anderson, 1335. 366 ROMAN SCULPTURE appears there as a capable-looking, middle-aged woman, with none of the fatal attractiveness the lady was famous for.* Anyhow, if this be the portrait of Julia, she cannot also be the subject of the lovely head in the Uffizi.f With this head we may compare an inferior but charm- ing portrait in the same collection (Amelung, 54), and another in the Terme, from the Ludovisi collection (Schreiber, No. 14).+ The finest of all these « Julia " portraits is on the gem signed by Euodos (Furtwiingler, Plate XL VIII., 8), and in spite of Amelung's opinion to the contrary, I find in it a distinct resemblance to the statue of the Braccio Nuovo, though on the gem the lady is younger by a good twenty years than she appears in the statue. A considerable addition to our knowledge of the Flavian female portraiture was made by Furtwangler's publication in 1900 of the unique group of a lady and her daughter in the collection at Chats worth. || So far this portrait group stands alone. The mother wears the high, honey -combed coiffure of the women of fashion in Flavian days ; her little daughter has hair simply parted and thickly waved to the sides. The grouping is of the utmost simplicity ; it is effected by making the child * On this point see Amelung, loc. cit. p. 1 36, who recalls the fact that Cleopatra, likewise, appears on her coins as neither beautiful nor attractive. I Amelung, " Fiihrer durch die Antiken in Florenz," No. 57. X Bernoulli, ii. 2, p. 47, Fig. 4 ; phot. Anderson, 3308. || Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxi. 190 1, p. 221. Reproduced here from the original photograph kindly lent by Professor Furtwangler. NATE cxv LADY AND HER DAUGHTEU, FLAVIAN BPOCB To face p. 366 Chatsworth UNIVERSITY OF CAL1FO: ARCHITECTURAL DH UNIVERSITY OF CAL1 Q ^ *1 X O s* ROMAN PORTRAITURE 367 lean up against her mother's chair and place her hand on hers (Plate CXV.). The high coiffure was not affected outside court or fashionable circles. On the tomb of the Haterii it is not worn by the wife of the physician. Nor is it worn by the old lady, whose bust in the Museo delle Terme (Plate CXVI.) is here published for the first time (Mariani-Vaglieri, " Guida," p. 8, No. 5).* It is a fine head, not entirely unworthy of ranking with the " shoemaker " and the " Vespasian."" None of the heads labelled Nerva quite tally with the magnificent profile on his coins (Bernoulli ii. 2, Munztaf. ii. 17-19). The colossal torso in the Rotonda of the Vatican f is superb, but is it Nerva ? The kindly yet sad features of Trajan, his furrowed face, his lank hair, combed low on the forehead, are familiar from countless busts and statues, t There is a worried look about most of these portraits, contrasting with the serenity of the head on the coinage (Plate CX., 9). The two busts of boys in the Museo Chiaramonti (Amelung, Cat. Vat., 417, 419) so long misnamed Gaius and Lucius Caesar, belong to the Flavio-Trajanic period. The shape of the bust and the treatment of the hair alone suffice to show the absurdity of the old * From a photograph kindly taken for this book by Dr. Ashby, Director of the British School at Rome. t Bernoulli, ii. 2, p. 96, Plate XXIII. ; Helbig, 310 ; Wickhoff, " Roman Art/' p. 61, Fig. 18 : " Few portraits of any period could stand comparison in truth and breadth of conception with the Nerva of the Vatican Rotonda." \ Cf. Capitol, Galleria, 30 ; Imperatori, 27. 368 ROMAN SCULPTURE attribution. Both busts are important chiefly because of their perfect preservation (Plate CXVII.).* The portraits of the ladies of Trajan's family — his wife Plotina,f his sister Marciana J and her daughter Matidia,§ are as striking, owing to their singular architectural headdresses, as the Flavian ladies.|| They are represented as staid, ungracious, women, often middle-aged, and none of the portraits, moreover, attain to a high order of artistic excellence. Far sur- passing in interest the portraits of these Imperial ladies is the bust of a middle-aged woman in the Galleria Chiaramonti of the Vatican. Amelung nicknamed her "the Step-mother. 11 The characteristics are rather those associated with the " Dowager. 11 The ugly though aristocratic features ; the flaccid skin ; the long swollen eyes with their puffy under-lids ; the individual mouth with its deeply marked corners, the inquisitive, * A fine Trajanic portrait of a man about thirty is in the exedra, behind the Nile of the Braccio Nuovo (Amelung, 1063 — long misnamed Lepidus). The treatment of the hair has been sharply criticized by Crowfoot, J . H. S., 1900, p 37 ; it seems to me intermediate in treatment between the lanky hair of Trajanic busts and the curlier locks of the Hadrianic period. | Capitol, 23 ; Vatican Rotonda (Helbig, 315). \ Known only from her coins ; see Bernoulli. § Capitol, 29 ; phot. Anderson, 1596. || In front the hair is built up in three stages, supported on a stiff metal frame. An article by Lady Evans on the " Hair- dressing of Roman Ladies, as Illustrated on Coins," with full descriptive text (Numismatic Chronicle, 1906, p. 37 ff.), brings together in an interesting manner the chief forms of Roman coiffure. It is a subject which can naturally be barely touched upon in these pages. i 03 03 J/3 H +3 a W II ■ JJ^ a m 5 Jt— o o ^3 B3 H £ d a Q^ < 3 II ^ ?4 02 •< 5 7 O vO ... H CO 02 & -3 00 •< ON"" II oo T .2 3 < B« 9 <3 1 «4 2 aoo 03 OS in H a "o CO X! /~s 03 ■d *| oj^. II 02 ^-. 08 9 & T* IR 03 E "** & ^ OS 03 —.5 OS oj co « 0) 02^0 g 7 3~ 1* h3~ 2 A 370 ROMAN SCULPTURE ill-tempered look that lurks beneath the well-bred features, all combine in a master-piece of character- isation. The bust is of the typical Trajanic shape, and though broken, belongs to the head.* (Amelung, Cat. Vat., 263.) 3. The Hadrianic and Antonine Periods (Bust includes the upper Arm and the lower part of the Chest as in Plate CXIX.). — The great imaginative portrait of this epoch is that of Antinous already discussed. Of his patron, the Emperor Hadrian, numberless busts are extant. Among the best are a head in Naples (Ber- noulli, ii, 2, Plate 37), one in the British Museum (Cat. 1866), and the great bronze head in the same collection found in the Thames (Bernoulli, ii, 3, p. 39). t Yet it is in a portrait somewhat inferior to these artistically, that the enigmatic character of Hadrian is best brought out in the subtle irony of the expres- sive mouth (Braccio Nuovo No. 81, cf. Amelung Holtzinger, i, p. 35). Hadrian is the first Emperor to wear a beard, which, however, barely veils the shape of the chin and mouth (Plate CX., 10). The beard continues in fashion well into the third century, and gradually assumes fuller proportions. * Two other excellent Trajanic female portraits are : Brit. Mus. 2004 (with a triple row of curls) and Brit. Mus. 1925 (Olym- pias). f The colossal Hadrian of the Vatican Rotonda (Helbig, 305) seems to me over-rated. A portrait of the period, finer than any of the Emperor's, is the interesting bust signed by Zenas (above p. 233) ; in the Capitol ; phot. Anderson, 1495. < I s I s I O ^ c fl| lilTZCTURAL DUPAFi. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA UK ' : y or CAL g 1 c 5 ROMAN PORTRAITURE 371 The beautiful and unhappy Sabina appears on certain of her coins with a head-dress only slightly modified from those of her aunt and her mother (Plate CX., 11). At a later date her type is Hellenized and assimi- lates to that of a Greek goddess.* It may be noted that from this period on, the female portraits acquire a greater artistic significance. A head from the Palatine in the Museo delle Terme f shows a first attempt at individualizing the portrait of a quite young girl (Plate CXVIIL). The long heavy hair, just turning up at the tips, resembles in technical treat- ment that of the " Lepidus."! Under the Antonines the effigies of the two Faustinas on their coins render the individuality as well as the famous beauty of both Empresses (Plate CXX., 2, 5, 6).§ The Elder Faustina wears an elaborate but elegant coiffure composed of a crown of thick plaits. The finest of her portraits, though it shows her beauty on the wane, is the bust at Chatsworth, which has the merit, moreover, of being in- tact, and is therefore a precious example of an Antonine female bust.jj The drapery is very skilfully adjusted as a * Cf. Wace, " Evolution in Roman Portraiture," p. 7. f Mariana-Vaglieri, p. j6, No. 515. \ Another characteristic portrait of a young girl belonging to this period is in the collection of Mr. C. Newton-Robinson. § The reverse (6) of the younger Faustina's medallion, showing Venus with a child at her side, and five Cupids playing round her, should be compared both for the style and spirit of the compositions on the sarcophagi mentioned on p. 265 ff. || Furtwangler, Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxi. 1901, p. 225. Reproduced here from the original photograph kindly lent by Professor Furtwangler. 372 ROMAN SCULPTURE frame to the bust (Plate CXIX.). The younger Faustina wears her hair simply combed back and tied up in a "Grecian knot." In the portraits of her daughter Lucilla, and still more of her daughter-in-law Crispina, the wife of Commodus, this knot takes a more formal shape, which in the next century develops into the " nest w worn by the ladies of the Emesene dynasty. The portraiture of the Antonine Emperors created one famous type which has been significant for the history of art — the equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius, which now stands in the Piazza of the Capitol. It is a magnificently decorative monument, though the detail is at times dull, and even mediocre. However, it is certainly not my intention to discuss so famous a work, for and against which everything imaginable has already been said.* As a fact, the portraits of the philosophic Emperor, like those of his predecessor, Antoninus Pius, are neither impressive artistically, nor do they reveal a particularly interesting personality. Perhaps the artist found no inspiration in his subject. The flat, somewhat meaningless, weak face, where not only passion, but character, seems obliterated, doubt- less reflects faithfully enough the features of the author of the " Meditations," of the homme parfaitement bon — the philosopher on the throne. f But when we study * Cf. Amelung-Holtzinger, i. p. 164 ; Renan, Marc Aurele, remarks on the absence of " style " ; " l'artiste n'a pas le droit d'abdiquer toute cranerie a ce point." f Capitol, Galleria, 6$ ; Museo delle Terme (Mariani-Vaglieri, p. 85, No- 595), PLATE CXIX To face p. 37*2 •OBTfiAIT OF TIIK KLDKI! FAl'STIXA Chut xirorth UNIY Y OF CALIFC. ARCHITECT Y OF CALIFC: PLATE CXX 1. Antoninus Pius. Gold. 2. Faustina Senior, w. of Pius. Gold. H. Marcus Anrelius. Gold. 4. Faustina Junior, U>. of Marcus hl. 6,6. Faustina Junior. /;*■«** medallion. 7. L Verm. Gold. To face p. 373 8, Lucilla, W. of L Verus. Gold. 9. Commodus. Brass medallion, in. Crispin*,* of Oonunodai. QoUL 11. 1 Htlius Julianus Uold. 12. Beptimim Several. SeW. 13. Julia Donina, u\ of Severus. Gold, ROMAN PORTRAITURE 373 these portraits we no longer wonder that recent criti- cism sees cause to reverse " the panegyrics of Gibbon and of Renan."* From certain of the figures of Marcus on the column, and on the reliefs of his arch, we gain a truer insight into the pathetic shrinking weakness of the man. There is, however, a really fine and expressive bust of Marcus in the British Museum (No. 1907). If we place it side by side with what is, I think, the most splen- did of all the Antonine portraits — that of Commodus — a fair example of which is also to be seen in the British Museum (No. 19 13), we are first struck by the extraordinary and deep-reaching physical resemblance between the two men ; it should be sufficient to dispel the traditional doubts as to the paternity of Commodus. It is not a resemblance brought about by assimilating both to one type, as happens in the case of Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius, or of Marcus Aurelius and his co-regent Lucius Verus,f where the " official " resemblance has no root in reality. But between Marcus and Commodus there is an absolute resem- blance of feature, though the flat unfinished look of the older man is transfonned in the younger into volup- tuous beauty. If every natural instinct and passion seem extinct in Marcus, a frankly animal, but by no means unpleasant sensuousness moulds the features of Commodus, defines the curves of the handsome mouth, and of the shapely aquiline nose ; weights the heavy, * C. Bigg, " The Church's Task under the Roman Empire," p. v. f See the coin of Lucius Verus, Plate CXX., No. 7. 374 ROMAN SCULPTURE well-modelled eyelids, and pervades the soft cheeks and smooth brow. These characteristics are superbly expressed both in the medallion (Plate CXX., 9), where he is represented in his favourite character of Hercules with the lion's skin drawn over his head (on the reverse are the bow and quiver and the club ; see above, p. 315) and in the bust in the Conservatori (Plate CXXI.). In both, a classic type is successfully combined with a deep feeling for likeness and an execution in keeping with the aesthetic theories of the time. The simpler, but almost equally fine portrait in the Capitol (No. 121) should also be studied. If we turn to the portraits ot his beautiful mother, the younger Faustina, we under- stand whence Com modus inherited the sensuous traits which so distinguish him from Marcus, in spite of the general resemblance of feature between father and son. Lucilla , s fat, vacant countenance,* animated only by a look of slyness, resembles those of her mother and brother — minus the beauty. In the busts of the Antonines we are able to observe that innovation in the treatment of the eye, pointed out by Riegl. It consists in showing the iris as a bean-shaped segment filled with two dots to indicate the points of light.f This plastic indication of the pupil had already made its appearance in relief as early * Museo delle Terme, Mariani-Vaglieri, p. 92, No. 609 ; phot. Anderson, 2156. t In earlier art the pupil had been indicated, but without aesthetic significance. It was merely the rigid material imita- tion of the pupil on the eye-ball. PLATS < W! To face p. 374 COMMODU8 Afl HEBCULEt l'nla::<> dei Coii.it ratori Aliuari Ul Y OF CALIr ROMAN PORTRAITURE 375 as on the Ara Pacts, but it is not adopted for single portraits till the period of Hadrian. It is, however, in the busts of Commodus that we first find the device used for obtaining effects closely observed from the movement of the eye in nature. The aim is to show the glance of the eyes by the position of the pupil — while the two dots imitate the reflection of the light in the position in which the eye is turned. It is this innovation above all which imparts such a striking life-like character to the portraiture from Commodus to Gailienus. The faces now become animated as never before in antique sculp- ture, and thereby acquire a new psychological quality. In the portraits of Commodus we see the definite and successful attempt to bring into portraiture the same colouristic effects as in other sculpture. The hair and beard are deeply undercut or drilled, with the result that — as on the reliefs of«the contemporary sarcophagi — there is a bold alternation of " light and dark." The hair appears as a moving mass of deep shadows and high lights, which, in its turn, contrasts with the smooth face. In the heads of Commodus, moreover, the skin is highly polished and almost resembles ivory, the colouristic effect of the whole portrait being thus considerably enhanced. It is in the period of the Commodus busts that I incline to place a fine head in Athens (Central Museum), long interpreted as the earliest portrait of Christ, but which Lolling had tried to prove was a portrait of Herodes Atticus (Plate CXXII.). The earlier interpreta- tion, indeed, was not, in a sense, as absurd or fantastic as 376 ROMAN SCULPTURE it at first strikes us. It was based on a true appreciation of the Semitic character of the head (Arndt, 301, 302). The nose is aquiline, the lids heavy ; the features are pervaded by the kind of sensuous melancholy that so often appears in Oriental types. The sensuousness is passive rather than active in character, a difference which can be best understood if we study this head in connection with that of Commodus. The type is de- scended in a direct line from conceptions such as that embodied in the Mausolos from Halikarnassos. In the Athens head the colouristic treatment is enchanting, the fine rich modelling of the hair with the deep undercut- ting between the strands, contrasts with the smooth flesh parts. The eyeball and pupil are treated with the new attention to the mobility of the glance. The mouth alone is rather hard and meaningless. Another excellent bearded portrait head of this period is in the Terme — (Ludovisi Coll. ; Schreiber, 115 ; Arndt, 309) — it is above all admirable for the expressiveness of the eye. Arndt well remarks that the veiled sidelong glance reminds one of Titian's Charles V. at Munich. The portraits of Septimius Severus — not strikingly interesting, though very numerous — further illustrate the method.* In the busts of Caracallus a further innovation takes place, in that the head receives a lively * Capitol 51 and probably 50 (though the latter is identified by Mr. Wace as Clodius Albinus) ; Brit. Mus. 1916. For the coin, see Plate CXX., No. 12. On the coins the head of Didius Julianus, the immediate predecessor of Severus, is very striking (Plate CXX., No. 11), but no heads or busts have been satis- factorily identified as his. PLATE CXXI1 BEAD OF THE AXTOMNK PERIOD To face p. 376 Central Museum, Athens ut ;HITECTUEAL Dzr V/TY of cm: - h ROMAN PORTRAITURE 377 turn to the left ; the glance is, slightly raised in that direction, and the effect is of marvellous power and animation. In fact this pose, combined with the magnificent technique, as in the famous example in Berlin (Plate CXXIII.), makes the portrait of Caracallus without exception the most striking portrait left us by the antique, while the subtle influence of slowly return- ing " frontality" gives it a superb massiveness. It has only one rival, the head of an old man, of still later date, in the Capitoline Museum (Plate CXXVIL). Beside these two, the Augustan and Julio-Claudian heads must appear cold and remote, and even the Flavian mere essays and experiments. There are other heads of Caracallus of less, yet considerable excellence in other collections — in the British Museum, for instance (No. 1918) ; in the Museo delle Terme (Mariani Vaglieri, "Guida," p. 92, No. 618, phot. Anderson, 3316) ; in the Capitol (No. 53). In the last-named collection, to the right of the Caracallus, is the bust of a younger man, labelled Geta (No. 54 ; phot. Anderson, 1583), but more probably, as indicated to me by Mr. AVace, a portrait of Caracallus when quite young. The Third Century. — Half -busts reaching to the waist, as in Plate CXXIV., though other forms are also in fashion. — Under the successors of Caracallus, a new treatment of hair makes its appearance, corresponding probably to a change in actual fashion ; in the portraits of Alexander Severus (Chiaramonti, 674) for instance, and of Maximinus the Thracian (Capitol, No. 62), the 378 ROMAN SCULPTURE hair is rendered like a close-fitting cap covered with pick-marks. This gives the effect of hair cropped short or almost shaven, and yet the alternation of light and dark, and consequent colouristic efFect,are not abandoned. Two magnificent examples of third-century portraiture are the Pupienus and the Philip the Arabian in the Braccio Nuovo (No. 54 ; No. 1 24). They are practically half-busts, a popular shape at this time. In the Philip, the beard is represented, like the hair, by short strokes of the chisel on a raised surface ; but though the effect obtained is that of long instead of short hair, the colouristic principle at work is the same we have ob- served since the later Antonine period (Plates CXXIV., CXXV.). The medallion where Philip appears with his wife Otacilia, and their son, the younger Philip, has the characteristics of the contemporary sculpture (Plate CXXVI., No. 12). The portraits of Gallienus are familiar from his coinage (Plate CXXVL, No. 13). The finest of his busts is in the Terme (Mariani-Vaglieri, p. 83, No. 585). The iconographic type still has points in common with the Caracallus or the Commodus. The great masterpiece of the period, however, is the head of an elderly man (Plate CXXVII.)in the Capitol, already alluded to. It is placed in the centre of the lower shelf of the middle wall in the Sala delle Colombe. I do not think that the whole Tuscan Quattrocento once sur- passed this astonishing presentment — its fidelity to a great and elevated conception of portraiture, the quivering vitality of the forms, the artist's grasp of the psychology of his subject, the astute expression of PLATE CXXIV To face p. 378 PORTRAIT OK I'UIMIM - Brueeio BTtfoeo, Vatican (! < mi. Arrh. lust. r U >L D- 'Hi' vnv OF GAUFORHIA DEP ITY OF PLATE CXXV Id face p. a 7 '•• PORTRAIT OF PHILIP THE ARABIAN Germ. Arch. Inat. Bmccio Xucro, Vatican ROMAN PORTRAITURE 379 the sidelong glance, the simple masterly strokes by which the hair and the furrows of the face are rendered ; to find their like again we must go to the finest portraits of Donatello. Here, indeed, is one of Vernon Lee's " sly and wrinkled old men." 1 If you grasp and learn by heart the details of this head, of the Philip, of the Pupienus, of the Caracallus in Berlin, of the heads of Commodus, of Flavian portraiture, of the Augustus of Prima Porta, and of the Barracco Caesar, you will, I think, never again look upon Roman sculpture as a borrowed or second-rate or unimportant art. The De- ems of the Capitol (No. 70) is another fine example from the middle of the third century. It has been excellently analysed by Riegl (" Spiitromische Kunstindustrie," p. 70), who remarks that though the "momentary, arresting effect is entirely remote from Greek art, yet no one would have the courage to assert that it was significant of artistic decay.'" The portraits of Empresses, from the end of the second to the middle of the third century, form a com- pact group distinguished by the head-dress. We have already noted that in Crispina (Plate CXX., No. 10) the wife of Commodus, the loose classic locks of the Antonine ladies appear more formally waved and plaited and taken up at the back into an elaborate " nest " instead of a knot. This nest grows to the proportions of a chignon in the portraits of Manlia Scantilla, the wife of Didius Julianus, and of her daughter Didia Clara (Plate CXXVI.,i, 2). Thebandeaux are simpler than in Crispina, and in the following period appear sometimes more, m a a .2 ■ IS 5 Lj B 1 o 3 II QQ ^3 5 M S^-s B B w s? c3 0> H . ■ «3 n M ^ H J a .2 N 1* t-3 < $ lh — ■ a 02 in +3 13 < ■ .2 N 1 Q 3 3 J t-a pa m if 1-3 M W CO 02 OQ ■ OQ t— W « 1 5 1 w O H^ « m ffl a H CO 5 13 1-3 ■* 03 §Q GQ«j °2 _ P M M M S 1 W CO H ON PH ~ H^ OQ 1 =Plautilla Geta ) (m. 202 A.D.) a o Q So ►J "3 1? PLATE C.WVI 1. Manila s.-antilla. //•. of Didius Julianus t;,,/,l. 2. Didia Clara, d. of Didius Julianus. Gold. 3. Julia Domna, ic. of Sept Severus. Gold. 4. Julia Maesa, sister of Domna. Gold. 5. Julia Soaemias, «'. of Elagabalus. Brass. 6. Julia Manuea, w. of Severus Alexander. G»h\. 7. Plantilla. u: of Caracallus. Gold 8. Julia Paula, w. of Klagabalus. Braxx. it. SallustiaOrbiana. >'•. h, 265, 336 OPTDUM, title granted to Trajan, 215, 816, 217 op -sii's, legend of, on sarcophagi, 157 Otho, portraits of, 362 Palaemon- Pobtunus, on Arch of Trajan, 187 Partheuou, frieze of, compared to Trajan column, 206 ; frieze <>f. treat ment of space on, 161 : Marbles of, purchased by British Museum, 6 Parthia, on Arch of Benevento, 219 406 ROMAN SCULPTURE Pasqni, A., quoted 41 n, 45 n, 51 n, 59 n Pathos, in Trajanic and in Aurelian art, 290 Pax, on Arch of Titus, 106 ; on Ara Pads, 387 Penates, on Arch of Benevento, 216 Perspective, on Trajan column, 210 Petersen, E., quoted on : Roman art, 8, 25 ; Ara Pads, 41-79 passim ; 387 ; Basis at Sorrento, 94 ; Sculp- tures from Forum of Trajan, 149, 164; reliefs of Trajanic balustrades, 151-157 passim ; Trajan column, 173-205 passim; portrait of Con- stantine, 385 ; Arch of Benevento, 215-223 passim'; Hadrianic relief at Chatsworth, 235 ; relief with T. of Venus and Roma, 238-240 ; Antonine basis, 270 ; column of Marcus Aurelius, 273-288 passim Phaedra and Hippolytos,on sarcophagi, 263 Pictures, carried in triumph, 168 ; cha- racter of, 169 Piranesi, etchings of Trajan column, 171 ; of Aurelian Column, 276 n Pliny, the Elder, quoted on : ancient Roman works, 29 ; statues carried in Triumphs, 28, 30 Pliny, the Younger, Panegyric of Trajan, 209 Plotina, apotheosis of, 237, 238 ; por- traits of, 368 Pompey, portrait of, on gem, 92 Popultis (personified), 234, 393 ; see also Genius Populi Romani Poseidon, and Amphitrite, on frieze at Munich, 34, 35 Portunus, on Arch of Benevento, 187 Praechter, K., quoted, 282 Priestess, statue of, at Anzio, 103 Priestly insignia, on Temple of Ves- pasian, 144 ; on Arch of Silver- smiths, 301 Proles Romana, symbolized, on Arch of Benevento, 220 Provinces, personified, 84, 243-248, 388-391 Qutrinits, Temple of, on relief, 301-303 Raphael, Cartoon of Paul and Luke at Lystra, 54 Reinach, S., 26; quoted on : Roman art, 32 ; Arch of Titus, 105-109 ; Trajan column, 5, 172-205 passim ; Roman portraiture, 349 n; quoted, 92, 390, 395 bud. passim Religion, Roman, its influence on art, 341 ; Christian, contact with Pa- ganism, 339-346 ; Oriental, 306-307 Renan, E., quoted on : Domitian, 145, 148; Aurelian column and art, 281, 291; Oriental religions, 307 Rex Sacrorum, on Ara Pads, 50 Rhea Sylvia, on pediment of Temple of Venus and Roma, 239 Rhine, personified, 107 Riegl, Alois, quoted on : Roman art, 11 1, 21 f. ; animation of glance on Ara Pads, 57, 361 ; rendering of space, 202 ; sarcophagi, 255 ; friezes of Arch of Constantine, 335, 341 ; Roman portraits, 349, 379, 383-385 ; quoted, 111, 328 Ritterling, quoted, 148, n (Domitian's campaigns) Robert, C, quoted on sarcophagi, 25, 257 and pasxim Rodin, A. 164 Roma, personified, on cup from Bosco Reale, 84 ; on Hadrianic relief, 234 ; on Arch of Titus, 109 ; on Trajanic slab, 160 ; on Arch of Severus, 299 ; on keystone of Arch of Constantine, 330 ; on Arch of Benevento, 216 ; on capital, 304 Salonina, head of, on coins, 381 Sarmizegetusa, on Trajan column, 185, 197-200 ; cult of Mithras at, 311 Schiller, H., on Domitian, 146 Seasons personified, on Arch of Bene- vento, 223 Seleukia, 14, 297 8i unfits, personified, 46, 234, 393 Sieveking, quoted on : Augustan frieze, 39 j Flavian hunting medal- lions, 137 n Silvanus, ou Arch of Benevento, 217; altar ded. to, 241 ; on pediment of T. of Quirinus, SOS INDEX 407 Skopas, group of Tritons and Nereids by, 33 Sol, on Arch of Constantine, 330, 331 ; o» Barberini ivory, 348 ; altar tied, to, 312 ; cults of, 312, 346 Space, treatment of, 112-127 passim; 163, 184, 251, 261-263, 272, 318 Statins, quoted on Domitian, 147, 148 ; quoted, 205 Stendhal, H. Beyle, quoted on Trajan column, 4 Strong, S. Arthur, quoted on relief at Chatsworth, 235 Strzygowski, Josef, quoted on : Oriental influences in Roman art, 12-16, 263, 327, 344, 346, 388, 392 ; altar from Pergamon, 66 n ; modern principles of sculpture, 386 n Stuart Jones, H., quoted on : Roman art, 24 n ; Augustan art, 25, 26, 55 ; "Arch of Claudius," 103; Flavian relief - scuplture, 141-148 passim; Trajanic fragments, 164, 163 ; site of the "Six Altars," 191 n ; column of Marcus Aurelius, 27 6 ; reliefs from an Aurelian monument, 291-295, 392-394 ; a third -century sarco- phagus, 321 n Studniczka,F., quoted on : Adamklissi, 22 ; on Flavian decoration, 131 ; on Trajanic ornament, 230 ; a third- century pilaster, 307-309; Arch of Susa, 36 n Suggestus, on Trajan column, 101, 174, 176, 184, 185, 195; on column of Marcus Aurelius, 285 Suovetaurilia, 36, 92, 208, 278, 394 Susa, Arch of Augustus at, 24, 36 n Swan, Nereid riding on, 45 Swans, on Ara Pads, 61 ; on altar at Aries, 62 f. Syneros, P. Aelius, Altar ded. by, 241 Tapae, battle of, on Trajan column, 176 Taurobolia, 313 Tellus {Terra Mater), on cuirass of Augustus, 44 ; on Ara Pads, 42, 55 ; on pilaster of Elagabalus, 309 ; on Ephesus sculpture, 295; on Augustan cameo, 88 ; on altar of Orfitus, 313 Test udo, on column of Trajan, 133 ; on column of Marcus Aurelius, 285 Tiberius, on Ara Pads, 49 ; glorifica- tion of, on silver cup, 86 ; on cameo, 89; portraits of, 857, 358 Tillemont, L. de, quoted, 202 Titus, Baths of, 104 Trajan, column of, how regarded by the Renaissance, 4 ; and the "vedovella," 153 Tranquillina, head of, on coins, 381 Troad, discoveries in the, 7 Twins (Romulus and Remus), on Ara Pads, 387 ; on Temple of Venus and Roma, 239 ; on altar from Ostia, 242 ; on basis of Antoninus Pius, 271 Veii, statues brought from, 30 Velasquez, "Surrender of Breda" by, 117, 184 ; his feeling for space, 117 Venus Genetrix, on relief in Ravenna, 96 ; on column of Trajan, 187 Verona, battle and siege of, on arch of Constantine, 331 Vesta (Hestia),oni basis at Sorrento, 93 Vico, Enea, print by, 274 Victory, with Emperor in chariot, 109, 1 10 ; writing on a shield, on Trajan column, 185 ; on column of Marcus Aurelius, 285 ; crowning Emperor, 160, 223 ; on Arch of Titus, 114 Victories, as decoration of arches, 106, 223, 330 Virgil, his estimate of Roman art, 1 ; on Roman Triumphs, 107, 246 Virtus (Valour), on Arch of Benevento, 217, 219 ; on cups from BoscoReale, 84 Volsinii, statues brought from, 31 Wace, A. J. B., quoted on : Roman art, 24, n ; sculptures of Forum of Trajan, 165 ; Flavian sculptures, 142-144 ; relief in Palazzo Sacchetti, 301 ; Trajanic reliefs in Louvre, 165 ; friezes of Arch of Constantine, 332 ; Roman portraiture, 351-386 passim; third-century sarcophagus, 321 Weynand, quoted, 99 40 8 ROMAN SCULPTURE Wickhoff, P., quoted on : Roman art, 10-12, 14, 20, 21 ; panels of Arch of Titus, 110, 114, 116, 117 ; the "continuous style," 161 ; " isolating" method, 226 ; Trajan column, 209 ; the Trajanic eagle, 230, 231 ; sarco- phagi, 255, 256 ; Soman portraits, 349. 367 Winckelmann, J., History of Ancient Art by, 6 ; criticism of the Antinous, 253 Wren, Christopher, alluded to, 16 Zenas, portraitist, 233 Printed by Ballantynb A* Co. Limited Tavistock Street, London 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED ABCBIIECTUBB 1IBRARI This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. APR 6 1964 J^ 29 1973 SEP 2 11964 JUL 3 1974 JUL 3 11968 JU/V i 2 W5 , AY 2 3 1977 * JUN 2 JUL 2 9 1969 DEC 2 2 1970 PFPlS 1977 FEB1G 1972 DEC b 1980 REM l tNVI LI) 21-50w .16810)476 General Librar University of California Berkeley U - C ||F, t ? l K f L | EY LIBRARIES ^033fi70t^4 mm &Mffl\