which at the time of Winckelmann, and almost in our own time, were considered Etruscan; it fills up an immense gap, in the history of the development of Greek art, for between the productions of the earliest and those of the perfect period, we can place only, more frequently by the aid of simple conjectures, vases, medals, engraved stones, which are doubtless very curious, and very important, but which from their nature and their size, can never give of the art which produced them, but a too imperfect and too confused an idea; it restores in fine to the history of the arts of the ancients an entire school, a school as fruitful as it was celebrated, which, up to this time had but a place in the recollections of the past: three important results of this discovery, which without doubt deserved to be pointed out to your attention, with all the interest which is connected with it, and with all the details necessary to imprint them on your memory.

I ought not to conclude these observations, without pointing out here some of the principal monuments belonging to the same style, and very probably produced in this intermediate period, when art, furnished with every resource, was exercised in all its skill, but under the influence of the system and, very probably, in the school I have spoken of. In point of statues, I shall particularly point out the figures called those of Hope, as they are to be frequently seen on Roman Medals of large bronze, on Greek Mosaics, on engraved stones, and on several statues, two among others at the Villa Albani, and at the Villa Rospigliosi, at Rome. I shall also mention the Diana and the Minerva, from Herculaneum, the so-called Vestale Giustiniani and the Barberini muse, which is an Apollo Musagetes, these last statues marking in a most palpable manner the progress of art, and the transition from a narrow and mannered style to a large and grand style. With regard to bas-reliefs, one of the most remarkable in every respect is that of the Museum of the Capitol, which represents three figures of women draped, preceded by a naked satyr, with the name of the author of this monument, Callimachus. The draperies of the three women exhibit those numerous regular and rigid folds, which partake entirely of the Æginetan school. The postures of these personages belong to the same style, though somewhat less rigid and forced; they walk on the tops of their toes, their fingers are long and straight, as in the most ancient works of art; but at the same time there is in the general movement

of these figures more nature and truth, more just proportions, truer forms, and in the features of the face, particularly in the face of the Faun, a sentiment of beauty, already carried to a certain degree of the ideal, which proves that art was from that moment beginning to cast off the last links of its antique and sacred chain. We have now arrived at that point when there was nothing wanting to art but a great man in order to accomplish its entire destiny. This man was Phidias, and our next lecture shall be devoted entirely to an examination of the life and works of this artist, so eminent for the qualities of his genius, and who was not the less favoured by fortune, for he was born at Athens, and lived under Pericles.

TWELFTH LECTURE.

Of Phidias Examination of some circumstances of his life, on the determination of which depends the order of his principal works-Details on his works-The Minerva of the Parthenon-The Jupiter Olympius-Idea which ought to be formed of the style of the school of Phidias-Sculptures of the Parthenon-Conclusion.

THERE are some men, whose name is a source of glory to the whole human race, whose history does not belong alone to the country or the age which produced them, but to every country and to every age. Such certainly is Phidias, who first carried imitation to the highest degree of perfection which it ever attained to, and who has remained for so many centuries the greatest name in the history of art, and one of the greatest names in the whole civilised world. But the very place which Phidias occupies in this history, and the importance which for this reason alone he obtained in that of his age and of his country, require that, before speaking of his works, I should introduce some circumstances of his life, which are necessary to know in order to fix the period of his principal works, and which are also deserving of interest, even if it were on account of the historic difficulties which are to be met with, and for the sake of the great man they are concerned about. Phidias was an Athenian, the son of Charmidas, and first cousin of Pananus, a celebrated painter whom he employed as fellow-labourer in several of his works; his master was Hippias, who is only known for this reason, and Ageladas of Argos, the head of the most celebrated school of his time. The exact period of his birth is unknown, as well as that of his first works, and the employment of his first years; but from the great number, and the importance of the works which occupied the last portion of his life, which closed on the first year of the 87th Olympiad, 432 B.C., and from the very nature of the works which were the beginning of his reputation, viz., statues consecrated in memory of the victories of Marathon and Platea, and made from the booty of these victories, his birth cannot be referred to a later date than the 72nd or earlier than the 70th Olympiad,

that is to say that he must be placed, according to all appearance, between the years 490 and 498 B.C. If the date of his birth is unknown, if the order of his works is uncertain, there is not much more certainty with regard to the manner and place of his death, and with regard to the period of the execution of his Jupiter Olympius; this is even one of the most difficult, and the most debated of all questions relative to Phidias; and as it is also that which is of most importance and interest with respect to the history of art itself, it is right that we should dwell for a moment on it. According to very different narratives, and, in all appearance equally worthy of credit, Phidias, accused of having appropriated to himself a part of the gold destined to form the mantle of the Minerva of the Parthenon, was cast into prison, where he died, according to Plutarch, whence he escaped according to Philochorus, and took refuge among the Eleans, and it was then that he undertook for the latter his Jupiter Olympius, after which he died, if we must believe the same Philochorus, by the hands of the Eleans themselves. This last circumstance, though entirely wanting in circumstantial evidence, and in all appearance apocryphal, has however caused a second accusation of fraud to be surmised under which Phidias must have fallen; and a modern historian has even gone further, affirming in the most solemn tone, and in the most positive terms, that Phidias, twice convicted of a disgraceful crime, was hanged as a thief. There are some people always ready to vilify genius, and who consider it a fortunate chance when they have it in their power to hang a man of genius, were it even in effigy or on paper. But fortunately, these evidences of culpable levity, and disgraceful partiality, only bring odium on the writer who admits them in his writings; the memory of Phidias never had to suffer, even in ancient times, from the injustice or ignorance of his detractors, and the respect due to his genius has been only increased by the interest attached to his misfortunes.

The most detailed narrative, the most deserving of credit in every respect, and also confirmed in several circumstances by other testimonies, is that of Plutarch, who relates that Phidias having become, on account of his intimate connection with Pericles, the object of those political animosities which the latter had drawn on himself, was accused by the enemies of Pericles of having appropriated to his own uses a portion of the gold destined for the drapery of Minerva. But, as Pericles

had for a long time foreseen that it was possible an accusation of that kind might be proposed by his adversaries, and received by the people, Phidias had, according to his instructions, so arranged things that the mantle of the statue could be taken off, which was done; and the mantle of Minerva, carried into the assembly and weighed before the eyes of the people, confounded the insolence of the accusers, and quashed the accusation. But animosity, repelled on this ground, was not crushed, and there are, as is well known, never wanting pretexts unjust or legitimate, to political animosities. Independently of the friendship of Pericles, which was already for Phidias a great crime in the eyes of the adversaries of the former, the artist possessed, in the eyes of his own rivals, a far greater fault still, in his very superiority, in the number, splendour, and fame of his works. They sought means of attacking him in a composition with which he had adorned the shield of his Minerva. The subject was, the combat of the Athenian heroes against the Amazons, a subject which has since become so popular, and so frequently reproduced, doubtless after the model of Phidias, on a number of monuments of art, painted vases, bas-reliefs, terra cottas. In this composition Phidias had represented himself as a bald old man raising a stone with both hands, and Pericles was also represented upon it with features of the most perfect beauty, fighting against an Amazon, and brandishing his lance on a level with his face, so as to conceal a portion of it. His enemies attacked him for this profane license, of having dared to introduce his own image and that of Pericles among the heroic figures employed for the decoration of a sacred monument. This time the accusation was admitted, and Phidias, cast into prison, died there of disease, according to one tradition, or, according to another narrative, of poison prepared by the enemies of Pericles, in order that the latter should be found guilty of the death of his friend. Such is the version of Plutarch, which, in my opinion, is, with the exception of the last circumstance, the sole authentic, and the sole deserving of credence. From this we learn that Phidias, at the period when he had finished his Minerva was already advanced in years, since he represented himself as a bald old man; and as we know that this statue was placed, and dedicated in the temple of Parthenon, the third year of the 85th Olympiad, 438 B.C., he must have been about fifty-eight or sixty, if he was born, as we have presumed,