practices which Diodorus and others described as known in their time, many centuries after Egypt had in some measure become the pupil of Greece. If a conjecture might be hazarded on this subject, it would appear that the Egyptians, in the infancy of their arts, were guided by an outline traced round a human figure, whether dead or alive, placed upon the block, and extended flat upon the back, with the arms close to the ribs, exactly as their statues are composed. This supposition will account for the correctness of the general proportions, which would be thus ascertained from nature. Also we can detect no theory of proportional parts different from what could thus be obtained, while those details which theory would preserve, but which could not be thus measured, are Of anatomical knowledge, as is evident from their works, they possessed no more than a view of the living form, in its simplest relations, could give. On this subject it is frequently maintained that the Egyptian artists had carefully studied the structure of the inferior animals, as instanced, it is said, in existing specimens; the hypothesis may be true, but certainly the proof adduced is not to be admitted. Less of restriction undoubtedly has been imposed, and more play of imitation allowed in the one case, but equal breadth and correctness of parts, are to be met with in their representations of the human as of the brute form; witness the head and shoulders of the Sphinx, and of the Memnon, compared with the lions of the capitol, and others at Rome, so justly admired as the finest examples in this department. arts. In fine, when we contemplate Egypt, if not the parent, at least the earliest nurse of art-when we view her advances in improvement previous to the existence of many other ancient nations-when we examine her early monuments-we are struck with wonder and astonishment. But comparing her with herself -the reign of Sesostris with the dynasty of the Ptolemies, a most melancholy falling off from early promise is remarked,-every nation whom she had taught had now outstripped her. Nor is it difficult to trace the cause-convention and prescription, and intellectual tyranny, had assumed uncontrolled empire over her The first principles were bad, because not founded in nature; the imperfect models thus produced, by superstition consecrated and rendered permanent-fixed barriers to improvement. The genius of her institutions was to rest satisfied at a point of the easiest access, and thus in science and in art she was condemned to a hopeless and eternal mediocrity. Assuming the era of Egyptian art as the first lucid point in the history of ancient knowledge, we remark the rays of intelligence thus concentrated to diverge in opposite directions, eastward over the regions of Southern Asia, and westward over part of Europe. Here in Greece and in Italy, the day spring was hailed by minds who rejoiced in its beams, and lighted up its splendours. But in the numerous and ill explored monuments of Persia and of Hindostan, the vestiges of this early illumination are too few and too faint to enable us, with any degree of accuracy, to determine its progress or extent. This consideration alone, would not however have prevented an attempt, had such an inquiry promised any illustration of the general subject: for whatever might have been the refinement of these countries, their arts, like wandering streams, gradually lessening as they recede from the parent source, must be regarded merely as derivations. From the peculiar interest of the subject, we might enlarge on the state of art among the Jews; but this would likewise be to deviate from strict order and utility. Much learned conjecture might be quoted, and opinions brought to pass in review, amusing perhaps, but hardly instructive. The Bible, the best authority, informs us that Moses was the most accomplished of his nation, and adds, by way of eminence, that he was skilled in all the learning of the Egyptians. From the same source the arts of his people were derived; they had been the bondmen of Pharaoh, and knowledge was cheaply purchased by temporary slavery. The scriptures every where confirm these views; the molten calf of the wilderness was evidently a symbol of the Egyptian Apis, and would necessarily resemble its prototype in form and workmanship, and points out beyond dispute the character and origin of Jewish art. The descriptions which occur posterior to this in other parts, both of the historical and pro phetical books, show that taste was not refined by the lapse of time. Every passage, in fact, proves the reverse, and that art among the Israelites quickly lost the severe and simple grandeur which their residence in Egypt might have fostered. Witness the relievos on the Arch of Titus, the sole vestiges of Jewish art in existence. SECTION II. Etruscan Sculpture. The origin of the ancient inhabitants of Etruria involves a question of more than usual intricacy, even among those historical inquiries where materials are scanty, or if abundant, perplexing and inconsistent. Here both species of difficulty are to be encountered. A few scattered rays only of certain knowledge break through the gloom of time, and the still deeper obscurity accumulated by conjecture and hypothesis. These dispersed lights we shall endeavour to concentrate and to direct steadily on the subject, free from all adventitious shades of theory or opinion, in order that the reader may be enabled to judge of the real influence exerted by this people on the progress of ancient art. It is universally conceded, with some exceptions as to the extent of their dominion, that the Etruscans or Thyrreneans possessed at an early period the empire of Italy, and much of the refinement of the ancient world. But of their power and of their skill a few imperfect remains alone exist; while their scanty annals have reached us through the medium of the narratives of the Romans their conquerors, or of the Greeks their rivals. Of these relations the writers are divided be tween two general opinions: one party affirms that the Thyrreneans, assuming the name from their leader, came originally and immediately from Lydia; in opposition, it is asserted that Etruria was first peopled by the wandering tribes of the Pelasgic race who finally and at different times settled in Italy. On these two opinions, or modifications of them, modern authors have erected various, and in many respects conflicting systems into which we do not enter. At the same time, to adopt exclusively either the Eastern or Grecian colonization of the Etruscan states, will neither accord with contemporary, nor explain subsequent events. Under those circumstances, an endeaYour to reconcile the discrepancies of statements which doubtless were drawn from purer and more extensive sources than can now be consulted, appears the only advisable proceeding. Of the Nomadic nations who first inhabited Greece, the Hellenic and Pelasgic races were the most power ful, distinguished by different character and separate descent. The former, conspicuous for attachment to eir native soil, made early improvement in the noble attainments which are fostered by settled habits; the latter, of a wandering disposition and uncultivated manners, never became eminent either in Greece or in Italy. But there is undoubted evidence, not denied by any party, that the Etruscans had attained a degree of skill in the arts, opulence, security, and wisdom in their institutions, while the Greeks were yet in a state of pastoral rudeness. Into Etruria, therefore, the most ignorant of the roving tribes of Greece could not introduce that science and refinement unknown in their native country; nor, as distant colonies, is it reasonable to suppose they could have outstripped the parent state, except by union with a more refined pecple previously occupying the seats into which they were received. On the other hand, the mythology of Etruria is identical with that of Greece, not merely in the general similarity which indicates a common though remote origin, but exhibiting a system adopted in a state of relative perfection. Again, Etruscan monuments commemorate the earliest achievements in Grecian history prior even to the war of Troy, and of which no trace is to be found in the records of Grecian art. These facts point to one only consistent and rational conclusion; namely, that there were two migrations of colonists into Etruria at distant intervals and from distant settlements. This view reconciles the seeming disagreement of the classic authorities. It would appear, then, that the north-western shores of Italy were peopled as early as any part of Europe, and from the same eastern sources. These colonies, attaching themselves to commerce, naturally kept alive or improved whatever of knowledge they previously possessed in peaceful studies, to which the predatory, pastoral, and wandering life of other tribes, though perhaps established at the same time, proved fatal. These original settlers, who arrived directly from the east, appear to have been joined before the time of the Trojan expedition by numerous bands of the wandering Pelasgi. The two nations seem to have gradually coalesced, the warlike habits of the Greeks enabling the Etruscans to subjugate almost the whole of the peninsula, from the confines of Liguria to the straits of Messina; while the refinement of the latter could not fail to effect a favourable change on the character of the former. It was an error very likely to be committed, to date the commencement of the nation from the rise of the empire, and to confound intellectual with political power. The Etruscans would learn from their allies the new and more lovely modifications of older superstitions; and, to a people who had made some progress in the exercises of imagination, powerful charms would be presented, in the early records of Greece, where, to use the expression of Strabo, all is marvellous and tragic land. Ancient historians of the greatest fidelity and research have praised the wise legislation and equitable government of the Etruscans. The whole of Etruria was separated into twelve divisions, over each of which presided a chief magistrate or Leucomon. From this supreme council of twelve, the members chose a king, or more properly commander-in-chief, who, in war, conducted to the field the united armies of the republic. The election of these governors was vested in the people, and the nation is said to have cherished an almost personal hostility to hereditary kings. The constitution of the Etruscan state thus combined the dignity and union of aristocracy, with the energy and freedom of popular government. It was the former in the executive, the latter in principle. To this admirable polity, to the security which it assured, to the emulation it excited, is chiefly to be attributed the early progress of the Etruscans in art and elegance. A principle is thus ascertained which fully accounts for the superiority of this people, and which furnishes another proof of the influence, insisted upon in the commencement of this essay, that political institu exercise over the character and prod of nation. al genius. We do not enter, therefore, into farther discussion on the origin of the inhabitants, by exhibiting the various arguments in support of the view we have embraced, which might be deduced from a comparison of ancient authors-from the analogies of the Greek and aboriginal dialects of Italy-from the evident union of the Cadmean with a more decidedly oriental, and consequently more ancient character in the Etrusco-Pelasgic alphabet-from the style, and in some instances, as at Pæstum, the situation of Etruscan architectural remains. It is sufficient for the reader to bear in mind, that sculpture in Etruria had attained a degree of excellence prior to any extensive cultivation of the art in Greece. The remains of Etruscan sculpture are not numer. ous, and of these some are of doubtful authenticity. The works of national art, taken in general, consist of coins or medals-statues of bronze and marble relievos-sculptures-gems-engraved bronze-and bronze and paintings. The coins or medals of the various Etrurian cities are not only the most numerous, but the most ancient remains of their arts. By means of these, many difficult points in the history and geography of ancient Italy have been, or may be explained. As evidence by which to judge of the refinement and skill of these early ages, many are to be regarded as wonderful examples of beautiful design and delicacy of execution. They are of two kinds, either mythological or merely symbolical in their representations, and appear all to have been cast of a composition, not a pure metal. As mistakes are likely to occur from confounding the colonial Greek or Phoenician coins with the genuine Etruscan, no observations should be regarded founded on specimens without inscriptions. The practice of constantly placing inscriptions on their works, seems never to have been omitted by the artists of Tuscany, and furnishes a very probable presumption respecting the authenticity of their labours. or rather mouth of a well. To these recent discoveries have made several additions. Engraving on gems seems to have been brought to some degree of perfection at an early period both in Italy and Greece. Of this minute art, probably the oldest specimen now in existence represents five of the seven chiefs who fought against Thebes. It is a cornelian 7 tenths by 5 tenths of an inch in the diagonals of the oval facet on which the figures are engraved, three seated and two standing, each having his name affixed. The composition is extremely inartificial, but not unpleasing, although by no means indicating a refined knowledge. Other Etruscan gems, however, have been found, which equal the most exquisite performances of ancient art,-such as the cornelian representing Tydeus drawing the arrow from his leg; and Peleus dressing his hair, engraved on an agate. These three, and Etruscan gems in general, are of that form called Scarabei, from their resemblance to a beetle, being oval, flat on the engraved side, and convex on the back. Each is pierced through the longer diameter, leaving it doubtful whether worn suspended as an amulet from the neck, or on the finger as a ring. which is also the most numerous class, comprises engraved bronzes or pateræ. These, it is well known, were round, flat and shallow dishes, from which was poured wine or water during the sacrifices. The short tapering handle, round which sometimes is Etruscan pateræ are not quite circular, but have a brought the shallow brim, so that it forms part of the cup. This handle is peculiar to Etruscan workmanand from four to six inches in diameter, is engraved ship. On the bottom inside, which is perfectly flat, in deep, broad, and bold lines, usually some mythological composition. Of these designs the style is firmness and correctness of hand; with more of power simple-the lines few and straight, but exhibiting than grace of expression or attitude. These make a near approach to our outline engravings, except that the strokes have much more force. Indeed we remember to have examined one at Bologna, representing the birth of Minerva, from which the brim had been removed, and being put through a printing press in the usual way, had given off a very good impression exhibited along with the original. One of the most curious remains of Etruscan art, Etruscan statues are either of bronze or marble, each of which classes may be again subdivided according to the magnitude of the works. Of bronze figures in miniature, resemblance both of men and animals, examples are commonly to be met with in museums. These probably are images of the household deities, and not unfrequently seem to have been. To examine the Etruscan paintings hardly falls unornaments merely; but from specimens so minute, it is not easy to deduce any certain or useful conclusions. Of bronze statues the size of life, there are very few, and of these scarcely one has escaped suspicion as to its antiquity. Of the marble statues, whether large or small, it is exceedingly difficult to pronounce whether they be Etruscan or Greek. Relievos bearing the general character of Etruscan are found in Rome, Florence, and other parts of Italy. Of these works, the most ancient are doubtless sepulchral monuments, erected prior to the practice of cremation, as a mode of sepulture; but we have also sarcophagi belonging to the latest era, when the artists of Etruria may be considered as almost colonial Greeks. Intermediate between these two are various mythological relievos and altars. Of these Winkleman selects as genuine four, now, if we remember aright, in the museum of the capitol. Apotheosis of Isis; a round altar with three figures; a square altar with the labours of Hercules; and another round altar, der our present limits. With a few imperfect sepul chral remains at Tarquinia, they are to be found only on vases; if, indeed, these latter are not properly to be considered as belonging to the colonial Greek school. For our own part, we are persuaded that not one of the Necro-Etruscan vases, as they are commonly styled, is of a date anterior to the consular government. Funeral ceremonies among the ancient inhabitants of Italy consisted in simple inhumation, and it was not till after their intercourse with Greece that the burning of the body, and the consequent use of urns were introduced. True, vases of magnificent design and large capacity, appear to have been consecrated in temples, and employed as ornaments in houses; but granting some of these to have reached our time, the nature of the subjects represented, or the style of the design, shows that they cannot be of a higher antiquity than the date assigned. Regarded as works of art, these productions can hardly be admired sufficiently. The pictorial representations are of two kinds, monochromatic shadows, usually black upon a light ground, or monochromatic outlines in similar style; or the order is reversed, the ground being dark, the figures light, but whole pieces are never executed after this method. Of these two manners, the outline figures present the more perfect specimens of design, and when the difficulty of tracing an outline at a single stroke in a pigment which admitted of no repetition, and on a surface from which no line once impressed could be effaced-we compare the correctness, truth, beauty, grace of the forms and expression, we are forced to ascribe no ordinary skill and dexterity to the artist, and no common taste and refinement to the age and nation in which such works could be produced. One general observation, however, may be recorded; taking these remains universally, the delineations are inferior to the perceptions of the abstract beauty of forms, perceivable in the shape of the vases themselves; whence perhaps the conclusion may be ventured, that the Etruscans were greater in sculpture than in painting. These observations do not invalidate the high antiquity of Greek vases. From the spirit of some of the preceding remarks, it might be inferred that little certainty can be obtain ed in this inquiry; that much doubt, difficulty, and obscurity is involved in the history of Etruscan sculpture, no one who has studied the subject will deny. But it is equally true, that these doubts and difficulties arise as much from the absurd opinions and interminable wanderings of those who have pretended to elucidate matters, as from any erroneous principles in the real grounds of judgment. Writers have ventured upon this theme, which requires both taste and knowledge of practical art, who were mere antiquarians; what is even worse, each has his favourite theory to make good. Laying aside all prepossessions, therefore, and with some experience in the application of those principles on which works of art are to be discriminated, we shall find, not only that there is a certain and definite style which peculiarly distinguishes Etruscan design, but also that the remaining labours of this school may be regularly classed, from the degree or kind of excellence which they exhibit. Art contains within itself, and, if rightly interro gated, will always furnish precepts by which its own productions may be discriminated. In searching for these principles, we must carefully compare the monuments of different nations and those of the same people with each other. We shall thus be able to detect certain peculiarities of mode-of expression of form-certain specialities in the relation between fancy and feeling and nature, which constitute what is termed a national style, or, in other words, characterize the national genius. Thus, if we place in contrast certain sculptures found in Italy with others of any age from Greece, there will be perceived considerable diversity in the relations just mentioned, clearly indicating a mental as well as mechanical diversity. These remains, history informs us, can be ascribed only to the early inhabitants of Etruria, and to this diversity is given the name of the Etruscan style. Again, compared among themselves, these remains exhibit intrinsic distinctions of manner or excellence, which enable the examinator to assign them to their respective ages. We thus discover three epochs of art among the Etruscans. The first or ancient style commences with the origin of the people. It has been assimilated to the Egyptian, but the resemblance is not more than that general similarity which characterizes the infancy of invention. in every nation. Yet there are distinctions to be traced which clearly discriminate the two manners. In the earliest monuments of Tuscany may be perceived an unfettered imagination essaying its powers in modes feeble indeed, but varied;-no systematic, as in eastern art, no conventional representation. In Egyptian sculpture every thing seems to spring from a foreign impulse, whose object is not the advancement of art, or the imitation of nature;-in Italian statuary, all wears the impress of native volition. The characteristics of the first epoch are rigidity-ignorance of the naked-feebleness of relief-perceptions of beauty, especially in the forms of the head, exceedingly imperfect. The contours are composed nearly of straight lines, the limbs are without joints, and the action forced, yet destitute of movement. The face is an imperfect oval, elongated at the base, and ending in a peak. The eyes, long and narrow, are placed oblique; as is likewise the mouth, the external angles in both being drawn downwards. The features are flat; and here the meagreness of relief is chiefly apparent, the eye-balls being nearly on a level with the frontal bone. The general effect thus remains without power, while the individual forms are far from pleasing. Yet there is frequently a robustness of design, a vigour and firmness of handling, which, though destitute of grace, seem to contain the rudiments of those forcible, masculine, even exaggerated conceptions and execution, the peculiar characteristics of Tuscan art in every succeeding age. The style of the second epoch marks these characteristics in their full display: the former feebleness begins to disappear; and in the few remaining examples, though we cannot trace improvement in all its stages, it may be ascertained that melioration commenced by adding boldness to the relief. The cause of this it is perhaps easy to discover in the practice of engraving on precious stones, to which the artists of Etruria were attached from an early period. These works being executed, as they now are, by means of a wheel, depth of depression could be easily made on the ground, while the figures were thus more fully relieved. Observing the powerful effect obtained, the application of the improvement to works of sculpture generally was obvious. But by such a style of execution, the former defects in design would be rendered only the more apparent. Hence would quickly follow improvement in the forms, in the study of nature, and in truth of expression. It is difficult in art, as in every human pursuit, to preserve the just mean. The Tuscans carried to an extreme the discovery which had conducted to bolder practice. All oon becomes forced, violent, and exaggerated. The action is constrained, the movement unnatural; the whole aim is effect, and to this every feeling of truth or of simplicity is sacrificed. The proportions are robust beyond those of nature; the muscles are constantly in action, and the retiring curves are so deeply impressed, that breadth of parts is every where cut up by alternate ridges and hollows. The bones are learnedly, but so strongly pronounced, as to render the whole effect harsh, dry, and mannered. A want of character is the necessary consequence; for the forced and violent in art always ! proceed from inability to express the workings of the mind in any other manner than by their most sensible and least intellectual signs. The Etruscan style of sculpture is in fact similar to their architecture. There is strength, and massiveness and power; there is also vigour of conception, and play of execution: but there is wanting delicacy of proportion, nice discrimination of character, and all the pleasing proprie ty and repose of the sweet and gracious in art. The genuine style of sculpture among the ancient Etrurians belongs to the second epoch. In examining its characteristics, we can hardly persuade ourselves that these are not derived from the works produced in the same country during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The analogy observable in the national genius at such a distance of time, and after so many vicissitudes, moral, intellectual, and political, is remarkable, and may hereafter demand our notice. The third epoch embraces that period which marked the gradual disappearance of the Etruscans from among the nations of Italy. Their political empire merged in the rising dominion of the Romans; the discriminative character of their genius was lost in the arts of the colonial Greeks. In the monuments of this era, the ancient style is still to be distinguished; for though the Italians now become imitators of the past, and rivals of the living Greeks, yet the national style was never entirely abandoned. During the early portion of this division many excellent works appear to have been executed, and to these the Latin poets and historians seem to refer. Judging from the most perfect remains, the proportions were rendered more light and graceful, the forms and expression of the heads more beautiful, the execution was softened indeed yet still retained a degree of exaggeration and harshness. The melioration was temporary; and perhaps it is not fancy alone which discerns, in the successions of subsequent feebleness, the gradual approaches of political depression. superior to those of the mother country. The Greeks rapidly improved, but discovered slowly. The progress already made by the Etruscan, was therefore early appreciated by the Dorian colonists of southern Italy; a foundation was thus obtained on which the fervent genius of the latter quickly raised a superstructure of beauty and excellence surpassing any example in the parent state. In the first era of their art then, the advantages were imparted, not received by the Etruscans. In regard to the dates and duration of these divisions in the history of art, they seem nearly to have coincided with as many revolutions in the political annals of the nation. From a small state on the northwest coast, the Etruscan gradually extended its empire from sea to sea, and from one extremity of Italy to the other. This the era of their greatest dominion corresponded with the infancy of their arts, or at least with their first degree of refinement. By the expulsion or conquest of the Siculi, this complete subjuga tion of the Peninsula appears to have been effected about 80 years before the Trojan war. The Etruscan dominions then consisted of three portions, Etruria Circumpadana, Media, to which properly belong the name, and Campania. The last, containing the whole of the country south of the Tiber, was neither a secure uor a permanent conquest. The Dorians who landed in Italy about 130 years before the taking of Troy, together with the ancient inhabitants, attacked and gradually reduced the Etruscan power on this side. The Etruscan medals, however, which are found in all the remotest parts of the present kingdom of Naples, attest the ancient dominion of that nation. In this southern portion of their empire the Etruscan first mingled their arts with those of Greece. To this union we ascribe the excellence of the sculptors of Magna Grecia, when, at a period long subsequent, the schools of Rhegium and Crotona supplied masters On the north the Etruscans had continually to combat against the Ligurians and Gauls. By those persevering enemies that division of their empire called Circumpadana was at length reduced. The coins, however, still found along the shores of the Adriatic, bear witness to the arts and sciences of Etruria. We thus arrive at the second epoch in the political history of this interesting people, when shut up within the boundaries of Etruria Media, their ancient seat, and where their admirable polity was best organized, they enjoyed freedom and security. This era, which corresponds not with their political grandeur, coincides with their greatest and most original acquirements in the arts. This was the reign of their second style, bold, masculine, and energetic, it was calculated to awe and astonish, rather than to sooth or delight the mind. Their architecture partook of the same character as their sculpture. The order, which still bears their name, sufficiently evinces the massive and powerful structures which it was destined to adorn or sustain. The noblest of all architectural inventions, the Grecian Doric, has been derived from this source. Even yet in modern Tuscany, the traces of her ancient inhabitants remain, like those gigantic skeletons of animals described by naturalists, but no longer existing among the orders of life, and which nature created in her primeval strength. While each of the twelve capitals of Etruria was a school of art at once the rival and the friend of her compeers-each exciting the industry and directing the advance of the other-each the Athens of ancient Italy; Rome, animated by the brutal spirit of military conquest, broke in upon these intellectual and refined labours. But force was no match for science; the Romans suffered severely from the first effects of their temerity. The opportunity, however, of crushing the growing pest was allowed to pass away; and Etruria, with her free institutions, her elective magistracy, her solemn insignia, fell beneath the rude despotism of Rome. Thus terminated, 480 years after the foundation of Rome, the second era of Tuscan art. For some time afterwards indeed, we may discover that sculpture was practised to considerable extent. But it soon ceased to be marked by national character. The Roman dominion now embraced the circuit of Italy, and all former distinctions were lost. The Greek colonist, and the Tuscan freeman was alike the vassal of Rome From this period we again trace the union of the arts of the two nations, and Greece now repaid what she formerly borrowed, for soon after the reduction of the Etruscan republics, we conceive the finest specimens of their sculpture now remaining to have been produced. But their common masters did not foster the arts as internal and native ornaments of their empire, although they could place a meretricious value upon them, as the spoils of war, as the prize of the captor, |