beg you may not suspect me of affectation, or that i wish to assume the character of a connoisseur, when i tell you, that i have very great pleasure in contemplating the antique statues and busts, of which there are such numbers in this city. it is a natural curiosity, and i have had it all my life in[2] a strong degree, to see celebrated men, those whose talents and great qualities can alone render the present age an interesting object to posterity, and prevent its being lost, like the dark ages which succeeded the destruction of the roman empire, in the oblivious vortex of time, leaving scarcely a wreck behind. the durable monuments raised to fame by the inspiring genius of pitt, and the invincible spirit of frederick, will command the admiration of future ages, outlive the power of the empires which they aggrandized, and forbid the period in which they flourished, from ever passing away like the baseless fabric of a vision. the busts and statues of those memorable men will be viewed, by succeeding generations, with the same regard and attention which we now bestow on those of cicero and c?sar. we expect to find something peculiarly noble and expressive in features which were animated, and which, we imagine, must[3] have been in some degree modelled, by the sentiments of those to whom they belonged. it is not rank, it is character alone which interests posterity. we know that men may be seated on thrones, who would have been placed more suitably to their talents on the working-table of a taylor; we therefore give little attention to the busts or coins of the vulgar emperors. in the countenance of claudius, we expect nothing more noble than the phlegmatic tranquillity of an acquiescing cuckold; in caligula or nero, the unrelenting frown of a negro-driver, or the insolent air of any unprincipled ruffian in power. even in the high-praised augustus we look for nothing essentially great, nothing superior to what we see in those minions of fortune, who are exalted, by a concurrence of incidents, to a situation in life to which their talents would never have raised them, and which their characters never deserved. in the face of julius[4] we expect to find the traces of deep reflection, magnanimity, and the anxiety natural to the man who had overturned the liberties of his native country, and who must have secretly dreaded the resentment of a spirited people; and in the face of marcus brutus we look for independence, conscious integrity, and a mind capable of the highest effort of virtue.
it is natural to regret, that, of the number of antique statues which have come to us tolerably entire, so great a proportion are representations of gods and goddesses. had they been intended for real persons, we might have had a perfect knowledge of the face and figure of the greatest part of the most distinguished citizens of ancient greece and rome. a man of unrelaxing wisdom would smile with contempt, and ask, if our having perfect representations of all the heroes, poets, and philosophers recorded[5] in history, would make us either wiser or more learned? to which i answer, that there are a great many things, which neither can add to my small stock of learning nor wisdom, and yet give me more pleasure and satisfaction than those which do; and, unfortunately for mankind, the greatest part of them resemble me in this particular.
but though i would with pleasure have given up a great number of the jupiters and apollos and venuses, whose statues we have, in exchange for an equal, or even a smaller, number of mere mortals whom i could name; i by no means consider the statues of those deities as uninteresting. though they are imaginary beings, yet each of them has a distinct character of his own of classical authority, which has long been impressed on our memories; and we assume the right of deciding on the artist’s skill, and applauding[6] or blaming, as he has succeeded or failed in expressing the established character of the god intended. from the ancient artists having exercised their genius in forming the images of an order of beings superior to mankind, another and a greater advantage is supposed to have followed; it prompted the artists to attempt the uniting in one form, the various beauties and excellencies which nature had dispersed in many. this was not so easy a task as may by some be imagined; for that which has a fine effect in one particular face or person, may appear a deformity when combined with a different complexion, different features, or a different shape. it therefore required great judgment and taste to collect those various graces, and combine them with elegance and truth; and repeated efforts of this kind are imagined to have inspired some of the ancient sculptors with sublimer ideas of beauty than nature herself ever[7] exhibited, as appears in some of their works which have reached our own times.
though the works of no modern artist can stand a comparison with the great master-pieces now alluded to, yet nothing can be more absurd than the idea which some people entertain, that all antique statues are of more excellent workmanship than the modern. we see, every day, numberless specimens of every species of sculpture, from the largest statues and bassos-relievos, to the smallest cameos and intaglios, that are undoubtedly antique, and yet far inferior, not only to the works of the best artists of leo the tenth’s time, but also to those of many artists now alive in various parts of europe. the passion for sculpture, which the romans caught from the greeks, became almost universal. statues were not only the chief ornaments of their temples and palaces, but also of the[8] houses of the middle, and even the lowest, order of citizens. they were prompted to adorn them with the figures of a few favourite deities, by religion, as well as vanity: no man, but an atheist or a beggar, could be without them. this being the case, we may easily conceive what graceless divinities many of them must have been; for in this, no doubt, as in every other manufactory, there must occasionally have been bungling workmen employed, even in the most flourishing ?ra of the arts, and goods finished in a very careless and hurried manner, to answer the constant demand, and suit the dimensions of every purse. we must have a very high idea of the number of statues of one kind or other, which were in old rome, when we consider, how many are still to be seen; how many have at different periods been carried away, by the curious, to every country in europe; how many were mutilated and destroyed by the gothic brutality[9] of barbarians, and the ill-directed zeal of the early christians, who thought it a duty to exterminate every image, without distinction of age or sex, and without considering whether they were of god or man. this obliged the wretched heathens to hide the statues of their gods and of their ancestors in the bowels of the earth, where unquestionably great numbers of them still remain. had they not been thus barbarously hewed to pieces, and buried, i had almost said, alive, we might have had several equal to the great master-pieces in the vatican; for it is natural to imagine, that the rage of the zealots would be chiefly directed against those statues which were in the highest estimation with the heathens; and we must likewise imagine, that these would be the pieces which they, on their part, would endeavour, by every possible means, to preserve from their power, and bury in the earth. of those which have been dug[10] up, i shall mention only a very few, beginning with the farnesian hercules, which has been long admired as an exquisite model of masculine strength; yet, admirable as it is, it does not please all the world. i am told that the women in particular find something unsatisfactory, and even odious, in this figure; which, however majestic, is deficient in the charms most agreeable to them, and which might have been expected in the son of jupiter and the beauteous alcmena. a lady whom i accompanied to the farnese palace, turned away from it in disgust. i could not imagine what had shocked her. she told me, after recollection, that she could not bear the stern severity of his countenance, his large brawny limbs, and the club with which he was armed; which gave him more the appearance of one of those giants that, according to the old romances, carried away virgins and shut them up in gloomy castles, than the gallant[11] hercules, the lover of omphale. finally, the lady declared, she was convinced this statue could not be a just representation of hercules; for it was not in the nature of things, that a man so formed could ever have been a reliever of distressed damsels.
without such powerful support as that of the fair sex, i should not have exposed myself to the resentment of connoisseurs, by any expression which they might construe an attack upon this favourite statue; but, with their support, i will venture to assert, that the farnese hercules is faulty both in his form and attitude: the former is too unwieldy for active exertion, and the latter exhibits vigour exhausted. a resting attitude is surely not the most proper in which the all-conquering god of strength could be represented. rest implies fatigue, and fatigue strength exhausted. a reposing hercules is almost a[12] contradiction. invincible activity, and inexhaustible strength, are his characteristics. the ancient artist has erred, not only in giving him an attitude which supposes his strength wants recruiting, but in the nature of the strength itself, the character of which should not be passive, but active.
near to hercules, under the arcades of the same palazzo farnese, is a most beautiful statue of flora. the great advantage which ancient artists had in attending the exercises of the gymnasia, has been repeatedly urged as the reason of their superiority over the moderns in sculpture. we are told, that besides the usual exercises of the gymnasia, all those who proposed to contend at the olympic games, were obliged, by the regulations, to prepare themselves, by exercising publicly for a year at elis; and the statuaries and painters constantly attended on the arena, where[13] they had opportunities of beholding the finest shaped, the most graceful, and most vigorous of the grecian youth employed in those manly sports, in which the power of every muscle was exerted, and all their various actions called forth, and where the human form appeared in an infinite variety of different attitudes. by a constant attendance at such a school, independent of any other circumstance, the artists are supposed to have acquired a more animated, true, and graceful style, than possibly can be caught from viewing the tame, mercenary models, which are exhibited in our academies. on the other hand, i have heard it asserted, that the artist, who formed the farnesian flora, could not have improved his work, or derived any of its excellencies, from the circumstances above enumerated; because the figure is in a standing posture, and clothed. in the light, easy flow of the drapery, and[14] in the contour of the body being as distinctly pronounced through it, as if the figure were naked, the chief merit of this statue is thought to consist. but this reasoning does not seem just; for the daily opportunities the ancient artists had of seeing naked figures, in every variety of action and attitude, must have given them advantages over the moderns, in forming even drapery figures. at sparta, the women, upon particular occasions, danced naked. in their own families; they were seen every day clothed in light draperies; and so secondary was every consideration, even that of decency, to art, that the prettiest virgins of agrigentum, it is recorded, were called upon by the legislature, without distinction, to shew themselves naked to a painter, to enable him to paint a venus. whilst the moderns, therefore, must acknowledge their inferiority to the ancients in the art of sculpture, they may be allowed[15] merit, on account of the cause, to which it seems, in some measure at least, to be owing.
the finest specimens of antique sculpture are to be seen in the vatican. in these the greek artists display an unquestionable superiority over the most successful efforts of the moderns. for me to attempt a description of these master-pieces, which have been described a thousand times, and imitated as often, without once having had justice done them, would be equally vain and superfluous. i confine myself to a very few observations. the most insensible of mankind must be struck with horror at sight of the laocoon. on one of my visits to the vatican, i was accompanied by two persons, who had never been there before: one of them is accused of being perfectly callous to every thing which does not immediately touch his own person; the other is a worthy, good man: the first, after staring for some time with[16] marks of terror at the groupe, at length recovered himself; exclaiming with a laugh,—“egad, i was afraid these d——d serpents would have left the fellows they are devouring, and made a snap at me; but i am happy to recollect they are of marble.”—“i thank you, sir, most heartily,” said the other, “for putting me in mind of that circumstance; till you mentioned it, i was in agony for those two youths.”
nothing can be conceived more admirably executed than this affecting groupe; in all probability, it never would have entered into my own head that it could have been in any respect improved. but when i first had the happiness of becoming acquainted with mr. lock, a period of my life which i shall always recollect with peculiar pleasure, i remember my conversing with him upon this subject; and that gentleman, after mentioning the execution[17] of this piece, in the highest terms of praise, observed that, had the figure of laocoon been alone, it would have been perfect. as a man suffering the most excruciating bodily pain with becoming fortitude, it admits of no improvement; his proportions, his form, his action, his expression, are exquisite. but when his sons appear, he is no longer an insulated, suffering individual, who, when he has met pain and death with dignity, has done all that could be expected from man; he commences father, and a much wider field is opened to the artist. we expect the deepest pathos in the exhibition of the sublimest character that art can offer to the contemplation of the human mind: a father forgetting pain, and instant death, to save his children. this sublime and pathetic the artist either did not see, or despaired of attaining. laocoon’s sufferings are merely corporal; he is deaf to the cries of his agonizing children, who are calling[18] on him for assistance. but had he been throwing a look of anguish upon his sons, had he seemed to have forgotten his own sufferings in theirs, he would have commanded the sympathy of the spectator in a much higher degree. on the whole, mr. lock was of opinion, that the execution of this groupe is perfect, but that the conception is not equal to the execution. i shall leave it to others to decide whether mr. lock, in these observations, spoke like a man of taste: i am sure he spoke like a father. i have sensibility to feel the beauty and justness of the remark, though i had not the ingenuity to make it.
it is disputed whether this groupe was formed from virgil’s description of the death of laocoon and his sons, or the description made from the groupe; it is evident, from their minute resemblance, that one or other must have been the case. the poet mentions a circumstance, which could[19] not be represented by the sculptor; he says that, although every other person around sought safety by flight, the father was attacked by the serpents, while he was advancing to the assistance of his sons—
—auxilio subeuntem ac tela ferentem.
this deficiency in the sculptor’s art would have been finely supplied by the improvement which mr. lock proposed.
reflecting on the dreadful condition of three persons entangled in the horrid twinings of serpents, and after contemplating the varied anguish so strongly expressed in their countenances, it is a relief to turn the eye to the heavenly figure of the apollo. to form an adequate idea of the beauty of this statue, it is absolutely necessary to see it. with all the advantages of colour and life, the human form never appeared so beautiful; and we never can sufficiently admire the artist, who has endowed marble[20] with a finer expression of grace, dignity, and understanding, than ever were seen in living features. in the forming of this inimitable figure, the artist seems to have wrought after an ideal form of beauty, superior to any in nature, and which existed only in his own imagination.
the admired statue of antinous is in the same court. nothing can be more light, elegant, and easy; the proportions are exact, and the execution perfect. it is an exquisite representation of the most beautiful youth that ever lived.
the statue of apollo represents something superior, and the emotions it excites are all of the sublime cast.
