,,religion ,,and ,,art ,,in ,,ancient   
,,greece   ,,by ,,ernest ,a4 ,,gardner  
,,yates ,,professor ,,of ,,archaeology  
,,and ,,public ,,orator ,,in ,,the      
,,university ,,of ,,london2 ,,late      
,,director ,,of ,,the ,,british ,,school
 ,,at ,,athens     ,,london ,,and ,,new 
,,york ,,harper  ,,brothers #de         
,,albemarle ,,street1 ,w4 #aiaj         
,,preface   ,greek religion may be      
studied under various aspects2 and many 
recent contributions to this study have 
been mainly concerned either with the   
remote origin of many of its ceremonies 
in primitive ritual1 or with the manner 
in which some of its obscurer           
manifestations met the deeper spiritual 
needs which did not find satisfaction in
 the official cults4 ,such discussions  
are of the highest interest to the      
anthropologist and to the psychologist2 
but they have the disadvantage of fixing
 our attention too exclusively on what1 
to the ordinary ,greek1 appeared        
accidental or even morbid1 and of making

 us regard the ,olympian pantheon1 with 
its clearly realised figures of the     
gods1 as a mere system imposed more or  
less from outside upon the old rites and
 beliefs of the people4 ,in the province
 of art1 at least1 the ,olympian gods   
are paramount2 and thus we are led to   
appreciate and to understand their      
worship as it affected the religious    
ideals of the people and the services of
 the ,state4 ,for we must remember that 
in the case of religion even more than  
in that of art1 its essential character 
and its influence upon life and thought 
lie rather in its full perfection than  
in its origin4  ,in a short sketch of so
 wide a subject it has seemed           
inadvisable to make any attempt to      
describe the types of the various gods4 
,without full illustration and a        
considerable expenditure of space1 such 
a description would be impracticable1   
and the reader must be referred to the  
ordinary handbooks of the subject4 ,a   
fuller account will be found in ,dr4    

,farnell's ,cults of the ,greek ,states1
 and some selected types are discussed  
with the greatest subtlety and          
understanding in ,brunn's ,griechische  
,gotterideale4 ,in the present volume   
only a few examples are mentioned as    
characteristic of the various periods4  
,it may thus1 ,i trust1 serve as an     
introduction to a more complete study of
 the subject2 and may1 at the same time1
 offer to those who have not the leisure
 or inclination for such further study1 
at least a summary of what we may learn 
from ,greece as to the relations of     
religion and art under the most         
favourable conditions4 ,it is easy1 as  
,aristotle says1 to fill in the details 
if only the outlines are rightly        
drawn--,greek3 doxeie d' an pantos einai
 proagagein kai diorthosai ta kalos     
echonta te perigraphe4     ,,contents   
,,chapter                               
,,page    ,i4  ,,idolatry ,,and         
,,imagination 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 
4 4 4 4 4   #a   ,,ii4  ,,aspects ,,of  

,,religion--,,popular1 ,,official1      
,,poetical1         ,,philosophical  4 4
 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
  #bd  ,,iii4  ,,the ,,conditions ,,of  
,,religious ,,art ,,in ,,greece  4 4 4 4
 4 4 4 4 4  #dh   ,,iv4                 
,,anthropomorphism 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4  #eh    ,v4      
,,idealism 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4  #ge   ,,vi4     
,,individualism  4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4  #id  ,,vii4     
,,personification1 ,,convention1 ,,and  
,,symbolism 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 #ajh      
,,religion ,,and ,,art ,,in ,,ancient   
,,greece     ,,chapter ,i               
,,introduction--,,idolatry ,,and        
,,imagination   ,the relation of        
religion to art has varied greatly among
 different peoples and at different     
periods4 ,at the one extreme is the     
uncompromising puritan spirit1 which    
refuses to admit any devices of human   
skill into the direct relations between 
,god and man1 whether it be in the      

beauty of church or temple1 in the      
ritual of their service1 or in the      
images which they enshrine4 ,other      
religions1 such as those of the ,jews or
 of ,islam1 relegate art to a           
subordinate position2 and while they    
accept its services to decorate the     
buildings and apparatus connected with  
divine worship1 forbid any attempt to   
make a visible representation of the    
deity4 ,modern ,christianity1 while it  
does not1 as a rule1 repeat this        
prohibition1 has varied greatly from    
time to time and from country to country
 as to the extent to which it allows    
such representations4 ,probably the     
better educated or more thoughtful      
individuals would in every case regard  
them merely as symbolic aids to induce  
the concentration and intensity of      
religious ideas and aspirations2 but    
there is no doubt that among the common 
people they tend to become actually     
objects of worship in themselves4 ,it is
 instructive to turn to a system in     

which idolatry1 the worship of images1  
was an essential part of orthodox       
religious observance4 ,it is easy and   
customary with a certain class of minds 
to dismiss all such examples of idolatry
 with a superficial generalisation such 
as the heathen in his blindness bows    
down to stock and stone4 ,but it seems  
worth while to devote a short study to  
an attempt to understand how such a     
system worked in the case of a people   
like the ancient ,greeks1 who possessed 
to a degree that has never been         
surpassed both clearness of intellectual
 perception and a power to embody their 
ideals in artistic form4 ,whether it    
tended to exalt or to debase religion   
may be a doubtful question2 but there   
can be no doubt that it gave an         
inspiration to art which contributed to 
the unrivalled attainments of the       
,greeks in many branches of artistic    
creation4 ,we shall be mainly concerned 
here with the religion of ,greece as it 
affected the art of sculpture2 but      

before attempting a historical summary  
it is necessary for us to understand    
exactly what we mean by the worship of  
representations of the gods1 and to     
consider the nature of the influence    
which such representation must have upon
 artistic activity4  ,idolatry--the     
worship of images--is almost always used
 by us in a bad sense1 owing1 no doubt1 
chiefly to the usage of the word in the 
,jewish scriptures4 ,mr4 ,ruskin1 in his
 chapter on the subject in his ,aratra  
,pentelici1 points out that it may also 
be used in a good sense1 though he      
prefers to use the word imagination in  
this meaning4 ,there is doubtless a     
frequent tendency to failure to    ,look
 through the sign to the thing          
signified1  but there is no essential   
reason why the contemplation of a       
beautiful statue1 embodying a worthy    
conception of the deity1 should not be  
as conducive to a state of worship and  
communion as is an impressive ritual or 
ceremony1 or any other aid to devotion4 

,this view of the matter is expressed by
 some later ,greek writers2 in earlier  
times it was probably unconsciously     
present1 though it is hardly to be found
 in contemporary literature4 ,but it was
 only by slow stages that art came to do
 so direct a service to religious ideas2
 in more primitive times its relation   
was more subordinate4 ,the worship or   
service of images1 even in the highest  
ages of ,greek civilisation1 was much   
more associated with primitive and      
comparatively inartistic figures than   
with the masterpieces of sculpture2 and 
even where these masterpieces were      
actually objects of worship it was often
 from the inheritance of a sanctity     
transferred to them from an earlier     
image rather than for their own artistic
 qualities4 ,it does not1 indeed1 follow
 that the influence of the great        
sculptors upon the religious ideals of  
the people was a negligible quality2 we 
have abundant evidence1 both direct and 
indirect1 that it was very great4 ,but  

it was exercised chiefly by following   
and ennobling traditional notions rather
 than by daring innovation1 and         
therefore can only be understood in     
relation to the general development both
 of religious conceptions and of        
artistic facility4  ,here we shall be   
mainly concerned with art as an         
expression of the religious ideals and  
aspirations of the people1 and as an    
influence upon popular and educated     
opinions and conceptions of the gods4   
,but we must not forget that it is also 
valuable to us as a record of myths and 
beliefs1 and of ritual and customs      
associated with the worship of the gods4
 ,this is the case1 above all1 with     
reliefs and vase-paintings4 ,in them we 
often find representations which do not 
merely illustrate ancient literature1   
but supplement and modify the           
information we derive from classical    
writers4 ,the point of view of the      
artist is often not the same as that of 
the poet or historian1 and it is        

frequently nearer to that of the people1
 and therefore a help in any attempt to 
understand popular beliefs4 ,the        
representations of the gods which we    
find in such works do not often embody  
any lofty ideals or subtle              
characterisation2 but they show us the  
traditional and easily recognisable     
figures in which the gods usually       
occurred to the imagination of the      
,greek people4  ,the association of acts
 of worship with certain specially      
sacred objects or places lies at the    
basis of much religious art1 though very
 often art has little or nothing to do  
with such objects in a primitive stage  
of religious development4 ,stocks and   
stones--the latter often reputed to have
 fallen from heaven1 the former         
sometimes in the shape of a growing     
tree1 sometimes of a mere unwrought     
log--were to be found as the centres of 
religious cult in many of the shrines of
 ,greece4 ,these sacred objects are     
sometimes called fetishes2 and although 

it is perhaps wiser to avoid terms      
belonging properly to the religion of   
modern savages in speaking of ancient   
,greece1 there seems to be an analogy   
between the beliefs and customs that are
 implied4 ,such sacred stocks or stones 
were not regarded merely as symbols of  
certain deities1 but were looked upon as
 having certain occult or magic         
qualities inherent in them1 and as being
 in themselves potent for good or evil4 
,the ceremonies used in their cult      
partook of the nature of magic rather   
than religion1 so far as these consisted
 of anointing them with oil or with     
drink offerings2 such ceremonies might1 
indeed1 be regarded as gratifying to the
 deity worshipped under their form1 when
 they were definitely affiliated to the 
service of an anthropomorphic god2 but  
in a more primitive stage of belief the 
indwelling power probably was not       
associated with any such generalisation 
as is implied in the change from animism
 or polydaemonism to polytheism4 ,we are

 here concerned not with this growth of 
religious feeling1 but rather with its  
influence upon the sacred things that   
were objects of worship and with the    
question how far their sanctity         
encouraged their artistic decoration4   
,it is perhaps easier to realise the    
feeling of a primitive people about this
 matter in the case of a sacred building
 than in that of the actual image of a  
god4 ,a temple does not1 indeed--in     
,greece1 at least--belong to the        
earliest phase of cult2 for it is the   
dwelling of the god1 and its form1 based
 on that of a human dwelling-house1     
implies an anthropomorphic imagination4 
,we find1 however1 in ,homer that the   
gods are actually thought of as         
inhabiting their temples and preferring 
one to another1 ,athena going to ,athens
 and ,aphrodite to ,paphos as her chosen
 abode4 ,it was clearly desirable for   
every city to gain this special favour2 
and an obvious way to do this was to    
make the dwelling-place attractive in   

itself to the deity4 ,this might be done
 not merely by the abundance of         
sacrifices1 but also by the             
architectural beauty of the building    
itself1 and by the richness of the      
offerings it contained4 ,here was1      
therefore1 a very practical reason for  
making the dwelling of the god as       
sumptuous and beautiful as possible1 in 
order that he might be attracted to live
 in it and to give his favour and       
protection to those that dwelt around   
it4 ,doubtless1 as religious ideas      
advanced and the conception of the      
nature of the gods became higher1 there 
came the notion that they did not dwell 
in houses made with hands2 yet a ,greek 
temple1 just like a mediaeval cathedral1
 might be made beautiful as a pleasing  
service and an honour to the deity to   
whom it was dedicated2 and there was a  
continuous tradition in practice from   
the lower conception to the higher1 nor 
is it easy to draw the line at any      
particular stage between the two4  ,if  

we turn now to the sacred image of the  
deity we find the same process going on4
 ,the rude stock or stone was sometimes 
itself the actual recipient of material 
offerings2 or it might be painted with  
some bright and pleasing colour1 or     
wrapped in costly draperies4 ,in most of
 these customs an assumption is implied 
that the object of worship is pleased by
 the same things as please its          
worshippers2 and here we find the germ  
of the anthropomorphic idea4 ,it was    
probably the desire to make the         
offerings and prayers of the worshippers
 perceptible to the power within that   
first led to the addition of human      
features to the shapeless block4 ,just  
as the early ,greeks painted eyes upon  
the prows of their ships1 to enable them
 to find their way through the water1 so
 they carved a head1 with eyes and ears1
 out of the sacred stone or stock1 or   
perhaps added a head to the original    
shapeless mass4 ,we find many primitive 
idols in this form--a cone or column    

with a head and perhaps arms and feet   
added to it2 and the tradition survives 
in the herm1 or in the mask of ,dionysus
 attached to a post1 round which we     
still see the ,maenads dancing on       
fifth-century vases4 ,the notion that   
such carved eyes or ears actually served
 to transmit impressions to the god is  
well illustrated by ,professor ,petrie's
 discovery at ,memphis of a number of   
votive ears of the god1 intended to     
facilitate or to symbolise his reception
 of the prayers of his votaries4 ,in    
fact1 the taunt of the psalmist against 
the images of the heathen--,eyes have   
they1 but they see not2 they have ears1 
and yet they hear not--is not a merely  
rhetorical one1 as it seems to us1 but  
real and practical1 if spoken to men who
 gave their gods ears and eyes that they
 might hear and see4  ,an imagination so
 entirely materialistic may belong to a 
more primitive stage than any we can    
find among the ,greeks4 ,as soon as     
religion has reached the polytheistic   

stage the gods are regarded as          
travelling from image to image1 just as 
they travel from temple to temple4 ,even
 in ,a,eschylus' ,eumenides it will be  
remembered that when ,orestes1 by the   
advice of ,apollo1 clasps as a suppliant
 the ancient image of ,athena at        
,athens1 the goddess comes flying from  
far away in the ,troad when she hears   
the sound of his calling4 ,the exact    
relation of the goddess to the image is 
not1 in all probability1 very clearly   
realised2 but1 so far as one can trace  
it from the ritual procedure1 what      
appears to be implied is that a         
suppliant will have a better chance of  
reaching the deity he addresses if he   
approaches one of the images preferred  
by that deity as the abode of his power2
 often there is one such image preferred
 to all others1 as this early one of    
,athena at ,athens4 ,the deity was not1 
therefore1 regarded as immanent in any  
image--at least1 in classical times2 the
 gods lived in ,olympus1 or possibly    

visited from time to time the people    
whom they favoured1 or went to the great
 festivals that were held in their      
honour4 ,but the various images of them1
 especially the most ancient ones1 that 
were set up in their temples in the     
various cities of ,greece were regarded 
as a means of communication between gods
 and men4 ,the prayer of a worshipper   
addressing such an image will be        
transmitted to the deity whom he        
addresses1 and the deity may even come  
in person to hear him1 if special aid is
 required4 ,a close parallel may be     
found even in modern days4 ,i have known
 of a child1 brought up in the ,roman   
,catholic religion1 who had a particular
 veneration or affection for a certain  
statue of the ,virgin1 and used often to
 address it or1 as she said1 converse   
with it4 ,and she said she had an       
impression that1 if only she could slip 
in unawares1 she might see the ,virgin  
,mary herself approaching or leaving the
 statue1 whether to be transformed into 

it or merely to dwell in it for a time4 
,on ,greek vases we see the same notion 
expressed as in the ,eumenides1 when a  
god or goddess is represented as        
actually present beside the statue to   
which a sacrifice or prayer is being    
offered4  ,in such a stage of religious 
belief or imagination it is clearly of  
high importance that the image of any   
deity should be pleasing to that deity1 
and thereby attract his presence and    
serve as a ready channel of             
communication with him4 ,from the point 
of view of art1 it would seem at first  
sight that the result would be a desire 
to make the image as beautiful as       
possible1 and as worthy an embodiment of
 the deity as the sculptor could devise4
 ,this doubtless was the result in the  
finest period of art in ,greece1 and it 
involved1 as we shall see1 a great deal 
of reciprocal influence on the part of  
religion and art4 ,but in earlier times 
the case is not so simple2 and even in  
statues of the fifth century it is not  

easy to understand the conditions under 
which the sculptor worked without some  
reference to the historical development 
that lay behind him4  ,before the rise  
of sculpture in ,greece1 images of the  
gods1 some of them only rudely          
anthropomorphic1 had long been objects  
of worship2 and it was by no means safe 
in religious matters to depart too      
rashly from the forms consecrated by    
tradition4 ,this was partly owing to the
 feeling that when a certain form had   
been accepted1 and a certain means of   
communication had worked for a long time
 satisfactorily1 it was a dangerous     
thing to make a change which might not  
be agreeable to the powers concerned1   
and which might1 so to speak1 break the 
established connection4 ,but while      
hieratic conservatism tended to preserve
 forms and formulae almost for what we  
may call magic reasons1 there was also a
 sentiment about the matter which gave  
popular support to the tendency4 ,thus  
,pausanias probably expresses a common  

feeling when he says that the images    
made by ,daedalus1 though somewhat      
strange in aspect1 yet seem to be       
distinguished by something in them of   
the divine4  ,it is true that these     
early images attributed to ,daedalus    
showed already a considerable advance on
 the shapeless or roughly shaped stocks 
or stones that had served as the most   
primitive objects of worship2 but it was
 their resemblance to these rather than 
their difference from them that         
impressed the imagination of ,pausanias4
 ,he appreciated them not so much as    
examples of an art that promised much   
for the future1 but rather as linked    
with the past by the tradition of an    
immemorial sanctity4 ,we find1 in fact1 
that the rude early images remained the 
centres of state cult and official      
worship1 as well as of popular          
veneration1 long after the art of       
sculpture had become capable of         
providing their worshippers with more   
adequate embodiments of the gods they   

represented4 ,it was the early image of 
,athena1 not the ,athena ,parthenos by  
,phidias1 that was annually washed in   
the sea1 and for which the peplos was   
woven by the chosen women of ,athens4   
,the connection between art and religion
 is1 in such a case1 reduced to narrow  
limits2 but1 on the other hand1 we hear 
of many instances where new statues of  
the gods were made as temple statues1 to
 be the chief objects of worship and    
centres of cult4 ,and this was sometimes
 done with the official sanction of the 
gods themselves1 as expressed through   
the oracle of ,delphi4  ,the sanctity of
 the old image was sometimes transferred
 to the new one2 a striking example of  
this is seen in the case of ,artemis    
,brauronia on the ,athenian ,acropolis4 
,it had been the custom for the garments
 presented to the goddess by her        
worshippers to be placed upon her       
primitive statue2 and when a new and    
worthier representation of the goddess  
was placed in the temple in the fourth  

century1 we are informed by inscriptions
 that dedicated garments were sometimes 
hung upon it1 even though it was a      
statue from the hand of ,praxiteles4 ,it
 sometimes happened that the old and the
 new statues stood side by side in the  
same temple1 or in adjacent temples1 and
 they seem then to exemplify the two    
kinds of idolatry--the literal and the  
imaginative--the one being the actual   
subject of the rites ceremonially       
observed1 and the other being the       
visible presentment of the deity1 and   
helping the worshipper to concentrate   
his prayers and aspirations4 ,here the  
art of the sculptor had the fullest     
scope1 and it is in such cases that he  
could1 as ,quintilian said of ,phidias1 
make some addition to the received      
religion4  ,this duality was1 however1  
the result of accident rather than the  
normal arrangement1 and1 so long as the 
primitive image remained the official   
object of worship1 it was difficult1 if 
not impossible1 for the new and more    

artistic statue to have its full        
religious effect4 ,in many cases1       
probably in most cases1 it was actually 
substituted1 sooner or later1 for the   
earlier embodiment of the deity4        
,sometimes the early image1 which was   
often of wood1 may have decayed or been 
worn away by the attentions lavished    
upon it2 we hear of a statue of which   
the hand had perished under the kisses  
of the devout4 ,we hear also of cases in
 which it had been entirely lost--for   
instance1 the ,black ,demete of         
,phigalia1 an uncouth image with a      
horse's head2 here1 when a plague had   
warned the people to replace it1 the    
,a,eginetan sculptor ,onatas undertook  
the task2 and he is said to have been   
vouchsafed a vision in sleep which      
enabled him to reproduce exactly this   
unsightly idol4 ,it would not seem that 
such a commission gave much scope to his
 artistic powers2 but it is noteworthy  
that the ,phigalians employed one of the
 most famous sculptors of the day4      

,elsewhere the conditions were more     
favourable1 and it was possible for the 
artist1 while conforming to the accepted
 type1 to give it a more correct form   
and more pleasing features4  ,daedalus1 
we are told--and in this story ,daedalus
 is an impersonation of the art of the  
early sculptors in ,greece--made statues
 of the gods so life-like that they had 
to be chained to their pedestals for    
fear they should run away4 ,it is likely
 that this tale goes back to a genuine  
tradition2 for ,pausanias actually saw  
statues with fetters attached to them in
 several early shrines in ,greece4 ,the 
device is natural enough4 ,daedalus was 
a magician as well as a sculptor2 and if
 he could give his statues eyes that    
they might see1 and ears that they might
 hear1 it was an obvious inference that 
if he gave them legs they might run away
 and desert their shrines and their     
worshippers4  ,we may very likely find  
also in a similar notion the explanation
 of a peculiarity often found in early  

statues of the gods--the well-known     
archaic smile4 ,many explanations1      
technical and otherwise1 have been given
 of this device2 but none of them can   
get over the fact that it was just as   
easy1 or even easier1 for a primitive   
sculptor to make the mouth straight as  
to make it curve up at the ends1 and    
that he often did make it straight4     
,when he does not do so1 it is probably 
done with intention2 and it is quite in 
accordance with the conditions of early 
religious art that he should make the   
image of a deity smile in order that the
 deity himself might smile upon his     
worshippers2 and a pleasant expression  
might also1 by a natural transfer of    
ideas1 be supposed to be pleasing to the
 god1 and so attract him to his statue4 
,we are told that at ,chios there was a 
head of ,artemis set high up1 which     
appeared morose to those entering the   
temple1 but when they left it seemed to 
have become cheerful4 ,this may have    
been originally due to some accident of 

placing or lighting1 but it seems to    
have acquired a religious significance2 
and we can hardly deny a similar        
significance to the smile which we find 
on so many early statues4 ,in some      
cases1 especially in statues of men1 it 
may have been intended merely as a      
device to give expression and life to   
the face2 but it cannot have been a     
matter of indifference to a primitive   
worshipper that his deity should smile  
on him through the face of its visible  
image4 ,this point of view being given1 
it is evidently only a question of how  
far it is within the power of art to    
express the benignity of the god1 and   
later on his character and personality1 
in an adequate manner2 and this power   
depends on the gradual acquisition of   
mastery over form and material1 of      
knowledge and observation of the human  
body and face1 and of the technical     
skill requisite to express this         
knowledge in marble or bronze1 or more  
precious materials such as gold and     

ivory4 ,all this development belongs to 
the history of art1 not to that of      
religion4 ,but before we can pursue the 
investigation any further1 it is        
necessary to consider the different     
sources and channels of religious       
influence on art with which we have to  
deal4     ,,chapter ,,ii  ,,various     
,,aspects ,,of ,,religion   ,religion1  
for our present purpose1 may be         
considered as 7#a7 popular1 7#b7        
official1 7#c7 poetic1 and 7#d7         
philosophical4 ,these four divisions1 or
 rather aspects1 are not1 of course1    
mutually exclusive1 and they act and    
react extensively upon one another2 but1
 in their relations to art1 it is       
convenient to observe the distinction   
between them4  7#a7 ,the beliefs of the 
people are1 of course1 the basis of all 
the others1 though they come to be      
affected by these others in various     
degrees4 ,there is no doubt that the    
people generally believed in the        
sanctity and efficacy of the shapeless  

idols or primitive images1 and this     
belief would tend to support hieratic   
conservatism1 and thus to hinder        
artistic progress4 ,but1 on the other   
hand1 the people of ,greece showed      
throughout their history a tendency to  
an intensely and vividly anthropomorphic
 imagination4 ,this tendency was        
doubtless realised and encouraged by the
 poets1 but it was not created by them1 
any more than by the mythologists who   
defined and systematised it4 ,the exact 
relation of this anthropomorphic        
imagination to the primitive sacred     
stocks and stones is not easy to        
ascertain2 but it seems to have tended1 
on the one hand1 to the realisation of  
the existence of the gods apart from    
such sacred objects1 and thus to reduce 
the stocks and stones to the position of
 symbols--a great advance in religious  
ideals2 and1 on the other hand1 to the  
transformation of the stocks and stones 
into human form1 not merely by giving   
them ears and eyes that they might hear 

and see1 but also by making them take   
the image and character of the deity    
whom they represented4  ,it was         
impossible for any ordinary ,greek to   
think of the gods in other than human   
form4 ,he had1 indeed1 no such definite 
dogma as the ,hebrew statement that ,god
 created man in ,his own image2 for the 
legends about the origin of the human   
race varied considerably and many of    
them represented crude philosophical    
theorising rather than religious belief4
 ,but the monstrous forms which we find 
in ,egypt and ,mesopotamia as           
embodiments of divine power were alien  
to the ,greek imagination2 if we find   
here and there a survival of some       
strange type1 such as the horse-headed  
,demeter at ,phigalia1 it remains       
isolated and has little influence upon  
prevalent beliefs4 ,the ,greek certainly
 thought of his gods as having the same 
human form as himself2 and not the gods 
only1 but also the semi-divine1         
semi-human1 sometimes less than human   

beings with which his imagination       
peopled the woods and mountains and     
seas4 ,his ,nereids had human feet1 not 
fishy tails like our mermaids2 and if   
centaurs and satyrs and some other      
creatures of his imagination showed     
something of the beast within the man in
 their visible shape1 they had little   
about them of the mysterious or the     
unearthly4 ,it would be a great mistake 
to regard all these creatures as mere   
impersonations or abstractions4 ,if a   
pagan suckled in a creed outworn could  
,have sight of ,proteus coming from the 
sea    ,and hear old ,triton blow his   
wreathed horn1  much more were such     
sights and sounds familiar to his       
forefathers1 to whom the same beliefs   
were fresh and real4 ,even to the       
present day ,greek peasants may often be
 found who can tell of such experiences2
 to them1 as to the ,greeks of old1     
desert places and remote woods and      
mountains are terrible1 not because they
 are lonely1 but because when a man is  

alone then is he least alone2 hence the 
panic terror1 the terror of ,pan4  ,the 
same idea1 which later takes the        
religious or philosophic form of the    
belief in the omnipresence of the deity1
 peopled the woods with dryads1 the     
streams and springs with nymphs and     
river-gods1 the seas with ,nereids and  
,tritons4 ,when an artist represented a 
mountain or a river-god1 a nymph or a   
,triton1 or added such figures to a     
scene to indicate its locality by what  
seems to us at first sight a mere       
artistic convention1 he was not         
inventing an impersonation1 but he was  
representing something which1 in the    
imagination of the people1 might        
actually be seen upon the spot--at      
least1 by those whose eyes were opened  
to see it4 ,it was the same gift of     
imagination that made ,blake say3       
',what1' it will be questioned1 'when   
the sun rises1 do you not see a disc of 
fire1 somewhat like a guinea8' ',oh no1 
no6 ,i see an innumerable company of the

 heavenly host1 crying ,holy1 holy1 holy
 is the ,lord ,god ,almighty6 ,i        
question not my corporeal eye1 any more 
than ,i would question a window1        
concerning a sight4 ,i look through it1 
and not with it4'#a  ,footnote #a3      
,blake1 ,aldine edition1 p4 cvi4  ,in   
the case of the gods1 the matter is     
somewhat less simple than in that of all
 these daemonic creatures of the popular
 imagination4 ,gods imply a greater     
power of generalisation and a higher    
stage of religious development4 ,it was 
not thought likely that the gods would  
show themselves to mortal eyes1 as had  
been their habit in the ,golden ,age1   
except perhaps upon some occasion of a  
great national crisis2 and even then it 
was the heroes rather than the gods who 
manifested themselves4 ,but the ordinary
 ,greek believed that the gods actually 
existed in human form1 and even that    
their characters and passions and moods 
were like those of human beings4 ,the   
influence of the poet and the artist    

could not have been so vigorous if it   
had not found1 in the imagination of the
 people1 a suitable and sympathetic     
material4  7#b7 ,official or state      
religion consisted in the main of an    
organisation of popular ritual4 ,there  
was no priestcraft in ,greece1 no       
exclusive caste to whom the worship of  
the gods was assigned1 although1 of     
course1 the right to practise certain   
cults belonged to particular families4  
,but a priesthood1 as a rule1 was a     
political office like any other         
magistracy1 and there was no exclusive  
tradition in the case of the chief cults
 of any ,greek state to keep the point  
of view of the priests different from   
that of the people generally4 ,the      
tendency of state religion was1 as a    
rule1 conservative1 for reasons that we 
have already noticed2 innovations in the
 matter of ritual are dangerous1 for the
 new rite may not please the gods as    
well as the old2 and the same feeling   
applies to the statues that form the    

centres of ritual4 ,pericles1 for       
example1 doubtless wished to make the   
,athena ,parthenos of ,phidias the      
official and visible representation of  
the goddess of ,athens1 and thereby to  
raise the religious ideals of the       
,athenians4 ,in this last part of his   
attempt he was successful2 the statue   
became the pride and glory of the city  
in its fitting shrine1 the ,parthenon2  
but the old image was still preserved in
 the temple of ,athena ,polias1 and     
remained the official centre of worship4
 ,we are not told that ,pericles meant  
to supersede it2 but it is very probable
 that he intended to do so1 and was only
 prevented by the religious conservatism
 that curtailed other plans of his for  
the beautifying of the ,acropolis4 ,on  
the other hand1 there is no evidence    
that in ,greece--at least1 in the best  
period of ,greek art--any statesman held
 the views as to the official religion  
frankly expressed in ,rome1 that it was 
expedient for this religion to be       

accepted by the common people1 but that 
educated men could only reconcile their 
consciences to taking part in it by a   
philosophical interpretation4  ,there is
 something unreal and artificial about  
any such compromise4 ,if ,pericles was  
intimate with ,anaxagoras1 who was      
prosecuted for atheism1 he was also the 
friend of ,phidias1 who expressly said  
that his ,zeus was the ,zeus of ,homer1 
no mere abstract ideal of divinity4 ,if 
this was the case with ,pericles1 who   
held himself aloof from the common      
people1 it must have been much more so  
with other statesmen1 who mingled with  
them more freely1 or even1 like ,nicias1
 shared their superstitions4 ,under such
 conditions the influence of art upon   
the representations of the gods could   
not well go in advance of popular       
conceptions1 though it might accompany  
and direct them4 ,the making of new     
statues of the gods1 to be set up as the
 centres of worship in their temples1 in
 some cases received the formal sanction

 of the ,delphic oracle1 the highest    
official and religious authority4       
,public commissions of this sort are    
common at all times1 but commonest in   
the years immediately succeeding the    
,persian ,wars1 when the spoils of the  
,persians supplied ample resources1 and 
in many cases the ancient temples and   
images had been destroyed2 and at the   
same time the outburst of national      
enthusiasm over the great deliverance   
led to a desire to give due             
thank-offerings to the gods of the      
,hellenic race1 a desire which coincided
 with the ability to fulfil it1 owing to
 the rapid progress of artistic power4  
,such public commissions1 and the       
popular feeling which they expressed1   
offered an inspiration to the artist    
such as has rarely1 if ever1 found a    
parallel4 ,but any great victory or     
deliverance might be commemorated by the
 setting up of statues of the gods to   
whom it was attributed2 and in this way 
the demands of official religion offered

 the sculptor the highest scope for the 
exercise of his art and his imagination4
  7#c7 ,the influence of poetic         
mythology upon art can hardly be        
exaggerated4 ,the statement of          
,herodotus that ,homer and ,hesiod made 
the ,greek theogony1 and assigned to the
 gods their epithets and distinguished  
their prerogatives and their functions1 
and indicated their form1 would not1 of 
course1 be accepted in a literal sense  
by any modern mythologist4 ,but it is   
nevertheless true that the clear and    
vivid personality and individuality     
given to the gods by the epic poets     
affects all later poetry and all ,greek 
art4 ,the imagination of the poets could
 not1 as we have already noticed1 have  
had so deep and wide an influence unless
 it had been based upon popular beliefs 
and conceptions4 ,but it fills these    
conceptions with real and vivid         
character1 so that the gods of ,homer   
are as clearly presented to us as any   
personalities of history or fiction4    

,they are1 indeed1 endowed not only with
 the form1 but with the passions1 and   
some even of the weaknesses of mankind2 
and for this reason the philosophers    
often rejected as unworthy the tales    
that the poets told of the gods4 ,but   
even an artist such as ,phidias         
expressly stated that it was the ,zeus  
of ,homer who inspired his greatest     
work1 quoting the well-known passage in 
the ,iliad in which the god grants the  
prayer of ,thetis3--    ,he said2 and   
his black eyebrows bent2 above his      
deathless head    ,th' ambrosian curls  
flowed2 great heaven shook4             
,descriptive passages such as this are  
not1 indeed1 common1 because1 as        
,lessing clearly pointed out1 the poet  
depends more upon action and its effect 
than on mere enumerative description4   
,even here it is the action of the nod1 
and the shaking of heaven that follows  
it1 that emphasises the impression1     
rather than the mere mention of eyebrows
 or hair4 ,in many other cases the      

distinctive epithet has its value for   
all later art--the cow-eyed ,hera1 the  
grey-eyed ,athena1 the swift messenger  
,hermes2 but1 above all1 it is the      
action and character of the various gods
 that is so clearly realised by the poet
 that his successors cannot1 if they    
wish1 escape from his spell4  ,the      
influence of the various ,greek poets is
 not1 indeed1 for the most part1 to be  
traced in contemporary ,greek art4 ,this
 is obvious in the case of the ,homeric 
poems1 for the art of the time was of a 
purely decorative character1 and was    
quite incapable of representing in any  
adequate way the vivid and lively       
imagination of the poets2 and1 for that 
matter1 for many centuries after the    
date of the composition of the ,iliad   
and ,odyssey1 ,hellenic art made no     
attempt to cope with any so ambitious   
problems4 ,even when the art of         
sculpture had attained to a considerable
 degree of mastery over material and    
expression1 we find its aims and        

conceptions lagging far behind those of 
the poet4 ,this will become clearer     
when1 in the next chapter1 we consider  
the conditions of artistic expression in
 ,greece2 but it must be noted here1 in 
order to prevent possible misconception4
 ,as soon1 however1 as art became       
capable of aiming at something beyond   
perfection of a bodily form--a change   
which1 in spite of ,pausanias'          
admiration of something divine about the
 works of ,daedalus1 can hardly be dated
 earlier than the fifth century         
,b4,c4--the ,homeric conceptions of the 
gods came to have their full effect4    
,zeus1 the king and father of gods and  
men2 ,athena1 the friendly protectress  
of heroes1 irresistible in war1 giver of
 all intellectual and artistic power2   
,apollo1 the archer and musician1 the   
purifier and soothsayer--these and      
others find their first visible         
embodiment in the statues whereby the   
sculptors of the fifth century gave     
expression to the ,homeric conceptions4 

,the tales1 too1 that were told about   
the gods1 some of them trivial enough1  
but others full of religious and ethical
 significance1 had for some time before 
this been common subjects upon reliefs  
and vase-paintings1 and on these also   
the influence of the poets was very     
great4 ,here we have not only the ,iliad
 and ,odyssey to consider1 but many     
other early epics that are now lost to  
us4 ,the vase-painter or sculptor did   
not1 indeed1 merely illustrate these    
stories as a modern artist might2 often 
he had a separate tradition and a       
repertory of subjects belonging to his  
own art1 and developed them along       
different lines from those followed by  
the poets4 ,but although this tradition 
might lead him to choose a version less 
familiar to poetry1 or even to give a   
new form to an old story1 his conception
 was essentially poetical1 in that it   
implied an imaginative realisation of   
the scene or action1 and even of the    
character of the deity or hero          

represented4  ,the conception of the    
gods to be found in other early epics   
probably did not differ essentially from
 that we find in the ,iliad and         
,odyssey2 but with the ,homeric hymns   
and with some of the earlier lyric poets
 we find a change setting in4 ,there    
seems to be a new interest in the       
adventures of the gods themselves1 apart
 from their relation to mankind2        
romantic and even pathetic stories are  
told about them1 implying almost a      
psychological appreciation of their     
personality--the tale of ,demeter's     
mourning for her daughter ,persephone1  
her wanderings and adventures2 of the   
love of ,aphrodite for a mortal2 of how 
,hermes invented the lyre and tricked   
,apollo about his cattle2 of the birth  
of ,apollo and the founding of his      
worship at ,delos and ,delphi2 of the   
marvellous birth of ,athena from the    
head of ,zeus4 ,it is hardly too much to
 say that in the later of these ,homeric
 hymns--those that are mentioned first  

in the above enumeration--an almost     
human interest is given to the gods1 to 
their sufferings and adventures4 ,it is 
the same tendency which we see in the   
lyric poetry of the ,greeks1 with its   
intensely personal note4 ,the reflexion 
of this tendency in art is not1 indeed1 
to be seen until the fourth century2 not
 only the power of expression1 but the  
desire to express such a side of the    
character of the gods seems to be absent
 until this period4  ,it may seem       
curious at first sight that art was so  
slow in this case to follow the lead    
given it by poetry2 but it is to be     
remembered that a power of expression   
such as would have enabled it to do so  
was not attained until the fifth        
century1 and that in this age there was 
an exaltation of national and religious 
enthusiasm1 owing mainly to the         
victories over the ,persians1 which     
checked the tendency to sentiment and   
pathos2 and it was not until this       
vigorous reaction had died away that the

 tendency once more asserted itself4    
,the early fifth century was also marked
 by poets such as ,pindar and           
,a,eschylus1 who raised the religious   
ideals of the nation on to a higher     
plane1 who consciously rejected the less
 worthy conceptions of the gods1 and1   
whether in accordance with the popular  
beliefs or not1 gave expression to a    
higher truth in religion than had       
hitherto been dreamed of4 ,the gods whom
 the sculptors of the fifth century were
 called upon to represent may have been 
the gods of ,homer1 but they were the   
,homeric gods transformed by the        
creative imagination of a more          
reflective age1 and purified by a       
poetic1 if not a philosophic1 idealism4 
,but while ,a,eschylus suggests a deeply
 brooding mind1 tinged with mysticism1  
grappling with dark problems of life and
 fate1#b and so was1 in some ways1      
remote from the clarity and definition  
of sculptural form1 ,sophocles invests  
the conceptions of popular religion with

 a higher spiritual and intellectual    
meaning2 and the artistic side of the   
age is expressed by him in poetry1 much 
as in architecture and sculpture it is  
interpreted by the remains of the       
,parthenon2 there is the same serenity  
and wholeness of work2 power joined to  
purity of taste2 self-restraint2 and a  
sure instinct of symmetry4#c ,sophocles 
was a friend and companion of ,pericles1
 and therefore probably of ,phidias2 and
 in both alike we see the same harmony  
and absence of exaggeration that are    
characteristic of ,greek art at its     
best4 ,in this case we may say with some
 confidence that the poet and the       
sculptor probably influenced each other4
  ,footnote #b3 ,sir ,r4 ,c4 ,jebb in   
,cambridge ,companion to ,greek         
,studies1 p4 #aaj4  ,footnote #c3 ,ibid4
 p4 #aac4  ,it seems a tempting         
hypothesis to see something of the      
influence of ,euripides the human in the
 individualistic tendencies of the art  
of the fourth century2 but it seems     

hardly to be justified by the facts4    
,the influence of his dramas is1 indeed1
 to be seen in later vase-paintings2 but
 this is not a matter with which we are 
here concerned4 ,in his treatment of the
 gods1 ,euripides can hardly be quoted  
as an example of the humanising         
tendency4 ,he resented the notion that  
gods could be unjust or impure2 but the 
purer and more abstract conceptions of  
divinity that appealed to him were      
hardly such as could find expression in 
art2 it has even been said that he      
blurred those ,hellenic ideals which    
were the common man's best without      
definitely replacing them4 ,the bringing
 of these ideals nearer to the common   
life of man finds its poetic inspiration
 rather in the tendency which has       
already been noticed in the ,homeric    
hymns and the lyric poets1 and which    
now1 after the reaction of the fifth    
century1 exerts its full force on the   
art of ,scopas and ,praxiteles4  ,there 
is no need to dwell here on the         

influence of later poets upon religious 
art1 though we shall have to notice     
hereafter the parallel development of   
the representation of the gods in       
,hellenistic sculpture4 ,the            
,alexandrian poets expressed in elegant 
language their learning on matters of   
religion and mythology1 but there was no
 living belief in the subjects which    
they made their theme2 and the art they 
inspired could only show the same       
qualities of a correct and academic     
eclecticism4 ,the idylls of ,theocritus 
find1 indeed1 a parallel in the playful 
treatment of ,satyrs and other subjects 
of a similar character2 but these belong
 to what may be called mythological     
genre rather than to religious art4 ,the
 dramatic vigour and intensity which we 
find in the art of ,pergamon cannot     
easily be traced to the influence of any
 similar development in literature1     
though its artificial and learned       
mythology is such as we find also in the
 work of ,hellenistic poets4  7#d7 ,the 

philosophical aspect of religion had no 
very great influence upon art in        
,greece4 ,we might perhaps expect that1 
so far as the philosophers accepted the 
popular religion1 they would tend to    
purify it and to give it a higher       
meaning1 just as the more thoughtful of 
the poets doubtless assisted the        
idealising tendency of fifth-century    
art4 ,and it might well seem that1 for  
example1 ,plato's theory of ideas       
supplies a more satisfactory basis for  
an idealist art than any other system1  
since it might be maintained that the   
true artist represents not the material 
object which he sees before him1 but the
 ideal prototype of which it is but a   
faint and inadequate reflexion4 ,this   
theory is peculiarly applicable to      
statues of the gods1 and we find it so  
applied by later philosophical and      
rhetorical writers2 for instance1       
,cicero says that ,phidias when he was  
making the statue of ,zeus or of ,athena
 did not derive his image from some     

individual1 but within his own mind     
there was a perfect ideal of beauty2 and
 gazing on this and in contemplation of 
it1 he guided the craft of his hand     
after its likeness4#d ,the same notion  
underlies the saying quoted by ,strabo1 
that ,phidias was either the only man   
that saw1 or the only man that revealed 
to others the images of the gods4#e ,but
 there is no trace or encouragement of  
any such feeling in the philosophic     
literature contemporary with the great  
age of ,greek art4 ,plato expressly     
states that the artist only makes an    
imitation of an imitation2 and the      
higher ideas of divinity preached by    
philosophers did not so much tend to    
ennoble the popular conceptions as to   
substitute others for them4 ,above all1 
the monotheistic idea1 even if          
associated with the name of ,zeus1      
tended to become an abstract conception 
with little relation to the national god
 of ,hellas1 whom ,phidias embodied in  
his ,olympian statue4  ,footnote #d3    

,or4 #b4 #h4  ,footnote #e3 viii4 p4    
#cec4 ,it does not matter whether the   
passage is quoted by ,strabo himself or 
by an interpolator4  ,the philosophic or
 theological conception of a            
monotheistic deity does not1 in fact1   
seem to lend itself at any time to      
impressive artistic representation4 ,we 
may observe the same thing in ,christian
 art1 in which representations of ,god  
the ,father are not very common nor1 as 
a rule1 very expressive of the most     
vivid religious ideals2 while ,christ1  
usually not as ,god1 but as man or      
child1 and the ,virgin ,mary are the    
constant themes of the most devout      
religious art1 not to speak of the      
numerous saints who correspond more or  
less to the gods of a polytheistic      
system4 ,philosophical thought was      
antagonistic to anthropomorphism1 which1
 as we have seen1 was the most          
characteristic feature of popular       
religion in ,greece1 and which was      
essential to ,greek religious art4 ,as  

soon as the human form is a mere symbol1
 no longer regarded as the express image
 of the god and the embodiment of his   
individuality1 it loses touch with      
reality4 ,and this reality in the       
relation of the god to his image must be
 believed in by the people1 and at least
 through the people by the artist1 if   
religious art is to preserve its        
vitality4     ,,chapter ,,iii           
,,conditions ,,of ,,religious ,,art ,,in
 ,,greece   ,the ,greeks possessed1 as  
we have seen1 to an exceptionally high  
degree the vivid anthropomorphic        
imagination necessary for the expression
 of their conception of the gods in     
their art2 we have also noticed the     
conditions which encouraged or          
restricted such representation1 and the 
influences that affected its nature4    
,given the desire to represent the      
character and individuality of the gods 
in human form1 the next question we have
 to consider is how far their art1 and  
especially the art of sculpture1 was    

capable of giving effect to this desire4
 ,the answer lies mainly in the history 
of ,greek sculpture1 which can only be  
touched on here in the barest outline4  
,but1 at the outset1 it is necessary to 
remove a misconception which is         
prevalent at the present day1 and more  
especially in ,england1 owing partly to 
the dominating influence of a great     
critic4 ,mr4 ,ruskin's ,aratra          
,pentelici is full of the most admirable
 and suggestive appreciations of ,greek 
sculpture in its more technical aspects2
 but side by side with them are found   
passages such as the following3 ,there  
is no personal character in true ,greek 
art2 abstract ideas of youth and age1   
strength and swiftness1 virtue and      
vice--yes2 but there is no              
individuality4 ,or again3 ,the ,greek1  
as such1 never expresses personal       
character1 while a ,florentine holds it 
to be the ultimate condition of beauty4 
,if this criticism were just1 it would  
follow that any study of the relation of

 religion to art in ,greece would lose  
most if not all of its interest4 ,but   
anyone who is acquainted with the       
present state of our knowledge of ,greek
 sculpture will not so much feel called 
upon to refute such statements as to    
explain how so strange a misconception  
could have arisen4 ,nor is the          
explanation very far to seek4 ,mr4      
,ruskin was writing for a generation not
 yet penetrated by the constructive     
criticism of recent investigation4 ,its 
conception of the antique in art was    
based mainly on the mass of mechanical  
and academic copies or imitations1 of   
,graeco-,roman date1 with which our     
museums are filled1 and on the influence
 of such sculpture to be seen in the    
work of ,flaxman or ,thorwaldsen4 ,it   
had1 indeed1 learnt from the ,elgin     
marbles that the ,greek sculptors in the
 fifth century possessed a nobility in  
their conception of the human form1 a   
mastery in the treatment of the nude and
 of drapery1 and a skill in marble      

technique of which only a faint         
reflection can be traced in the later   
,graeco-,roman tradition2 but the great 
statues in which the sculptors of the   
fifth century embodied their ideals of  
the gods were either entirely lost or   
preserved only in inadequate copies2 and
 it is only in recent years that the    
discovery of originals or the           
identification of trustworthy copies has
 enabled us to appreciate the intensity 
of expression and of inner life which   
distinguished the work of the great     
sculptors of the fourth century1 such as
 ,scopas1 ,praxiteles1 and ,lysippus4   
,still1 if ,mr4 ,ruskin had1 like ,brunn
 in his ,gotteridealen1 selected heads  
like those of the ,demeter of ,cnidus or
 the ,hera ,farnese to illustrate his   
theme1 instead of a series of heads on  
coins magnified to many times the size  
for which they were designed1 he could  
hardly have written the passages just   
quoted4 ,but the second of those        
passages itself supplies us with another

 clue4 ,in this estimate of ,greek      
sculpture there is throughout implied a 
comparison with ,christian1 and above   
all with ,florentine art1 and its desire
 to         444 bring the invisible full
 into play2   ,let the visible go to the
 dogs2 what matters8  ,it is evident    
that the expression of the invisible1 of
 character and individuality1 will be   
more striking and obvious in an art     
which lets them shine through the flesh 
they fray than in the case of the ,greek
 sculptors whose respect and even       
passionate admiration for the human body
 would not allow them thus to           
transfigure it1 at least in their       
statues of the gods1 and led them to    
seek for subtler methods of expression  
by means of the flesh and in harmony    
with its nature4 ,their expression of   
character and emotion is rendered in    
terms of a beautiful and healthy body4  
,how this end was attained we must      
consider later on2 but there is yet     
another current prejudice in favour of  

this exaggeration of individuality which
 has its influence especially upon      
modern artists4 ,it is sometimes said   
nowadays that a departure from the      
individual model is an attempt to       
improve upon nature1 and is therefore an
 artistic mistake4 ,now the ,greek      
sculptor1 as a rule1 did not work from  
an individual model at all4 ,he trusted 
partly1 especially in earlier times1 to 
the tradition which familiarised him    
with a few fixed types1 on which he made
 variations1 partly to his observation  
and memory trained for generations1 and 
daily supplied with new material in the 
gymnasium where nude youths and men were
 constantly exercising1 or in the       
marketplace where he met his            
fellow-citizens4 ,to see before him1    
whether draped or nude1 the figures he  
wanted for his art1 he had no need to   
pose a model in a studio2 his models    
were at all times around him in his     
daily life4 ,the result was that when he
 wished to represent a youth or a       

maiden1 or even to make a portrait of a 
statesman1 he tended to reproduce the   
type with certain personal modifications
 rather than to produce a portrait in   
the modern sense4 ,but when he came to  
making statues of the gods1 his freedom 
of hand was of incalculable service to  
him in giving a bodily form to his      
imagination2 it enabled him to create   
after nature1 without being dependent on
 an individual model or having to fall  
back upon such vague and generalised    
forms as are sometimes associated with  
an academic or classical art2 for it was
 his own trained observation and memory 
that he called into play1 not a mere    
mechanical system he had learnt from his
 predecessors4 ,in the more             
individualistic art of the fourth       
century1 as we shall see1 it is probable
 that the personal model was of more    
importance1 especially in female        
statues2 but even then it was still     
modified by the tradition and style     
which makes a harmonious whole1 not only

 of each ,greek statue1 but of the      
development of ,hellenic sculpture      
generally4 ,in typical examples of the  
sculpture of the fourth century we find 
not only this harmony and restraint1 and
 the beauty of bodily form in figure as 
well as in features which is generally  
recognised as characteristic of ,greek  
art1 but also an expression of character
 and individuality1 of mood and         
temperament1 of pathos and passion1     
which is none the less intense and real 
because it is expressed by means of the 
perfection of physical form1 not as     
wasting or deforming it4  ,it may be    
asked how the invisible1 mental1 or     
spiritual qualities can be portrayed in 
visible form1 especially if that visible
 form be not overmuch distorted or      
modified1 and in a more general way1 how
 the expression of a statue1 and the    
impression it produces1 can be analysed 
or discussed4 ,for examples of the way  
this can be done1 the reader may be     
referred once more to ,brunn's          

,gotteridealen1 a study of a few        
selected representations of ,greek gods 
in which the character of each is       
brought out by a subtle and             
discriminating analysis of the visible  
forms4 ,here it may suffice to quote    
,brunn's own words from the             
,introduction to that work3 ,the        
spiritual effect produced on us by a    
work of sculpture cannot be comprehended
 as a moral or a metaphysical           
peculiarity1 completely independent of  
corporeal phenomena2 it can become      
intelligible to us only by means of     
tangible sculptural forms1 as the       
exponents of spiritual expression4 ,and 
again3 ,the spiritual understanding of  
ideal artistic creations can only be    
attained on the basis of a thorough     
analysis of their forms2 hence in such a
 study we have to do with no subjective 
fancies1 but an investigation of        
objective artistic principles1 according
 to the method of scientific work4      
,there are various ways in which        

spiritual qualities1 mood1 and character
 may be given material expression in    
harmony with the bodily forms1 not in   
combat with the flesh4 ,there are1 for  
instance1 certain bodily peculiarities  
that usually accompany1 and therefore   
suggest by association1 various         
temperaments or mental qualities2 and1  
moreover1 the actual effect upon the    
features and bearing of certain emotions
 or moods often leaves permanent traces1
 from which a habitual or repeated      
tendency to such emotions or moods can  
be inferred4 ,that certain types of face
 and certain expressions are usually    
associated with certain spiritual or    
mental qualities will hardly be denied2 
and here the method of the ,greek       
artist1 in observing and working from   
memory rather than from a posed model1  
gave him a great advantage in variety   
and freedom in the expression of        
character no less than in the rendering 
of bodily form4 ,if he realised clearly 
the individuality of his gods1 his skill

 and mastery over his material and his  
store of observation gave him a facility
 in giving this individuality a visible 
form which may not be so obvious at     
first sight as the individuality of a   
,florentine or of a modern head1 but    
which is none the less there for those  
who have eyes to see it1 and who can    
accustom themselves to the subtle       
atmosphere of ancient art1 and to the   
moderation and restraint which are      
seldom1 if ever1 violated in its most   
characteristic productions4             
,,chapter ,,iv  ,,anthropomorphism   ,we
 have already noticed the religious     
conceptions and impulses which led to   
the substitution of images in human     
shape for the rude stocks and stones of 
primitive worship4 ,the beginning of the
 change seems to have taken place at an 
early stage in the development of ,greek
 art4 ,in pre-,hellenic times we find   
representation of gods and goddesses in 
human form upon gems and other small    
works of art1 and also in statuettes    

that were either objects of worship or  
dedicated in shrines2 but we have at    
present no evidence as to whether       
monumental images of the gods were made 
in human form1 though some objects of   
worship1 such as the double-axe1 were   
certainly set up in regular shrines4 ,we
 know too little about the religious    
beliefs and customs of this prehistoric 
age to be able to judge whether such    
objects were regarded merely as symbols 
of the deity or as having immanent in   
them some divine or superhuman power2   
but survivals1 especially of an early   
tree and pillar cult1 are probably to be
 traced in historic ,greece1 and even to
 the present day4  ,the ,homeric poems1 
on the other hand1 supply us with little
 or no evidence as to the existence of  
any sculptural representation of the    
gods4 ,although temples are frequently  
mentioned1 we are not informed that any 
of them contained a sacred image1 with  
the apparent exception of the temple of 
,athena at ,troy4 ,there we are told    

that the ,trojan matrons1 in a time of  
stress1 brought a robe to offer to the  
goddess1 and that the priestess ,theano 
placed it upon the knees of             
beauteous-haired ,athene4 ,unless1 as is
 possible1 this is a purely metaphorical
 expression1 it would seem to imply a   
seated statue2 but it is to be noted    
that the ,palladium of ,troy1 the sacred
 image of ,athena which was stolen by   
,ulysses and ,diomed1 and which was     
preserved1 according to conflicting     
traditions1 in one or another shrine in 
later ,greece1 was a standing statue of 
a primitive type4 ,the inconsistency is 
not of great importance1 except as      
showing that the supposed mention of the
 statue of ,athena in the ,iliad had    
little1 if any1 influence on later      
tradition2 and in any case it is        
isolated1 and does not refer to a       
,greek1 but a foreign temple4 ,on the   
other hand1 we find frequent mention in 
later writers of primitive statues of   
the gods which were said to have been   

set up or dedicated by various persons  
in the heroic age4 ,an example is       
offered by the ,trojan ,palladium       
already mentioned2 another was the      
statue of ,artemis carried off from     
,tauris by ,iphigenia and ,orestes2     
rival claimants to this identification  
existed at ,sparta and at ,brauron in   
,attica4 ,the legends of dedication are 
of no historic value2 the story of the  
,palladium itself was unknown to ,homer1
 though it occurred in later epics4 ,all
 that can be asserted of such images is 
that they were of unknown antiquity1 and
 that local patriotism claimed for them 
a heroic origin4 ,much the same may be  
said of ,daedalus4 ,it need not be      
discussed here whether an actual artist 
of this name ever existed4 ,the         
information we have as to ,daedalus is  
of two kinds2 on the one hand1 we find  
tales of a mythical craftsman and       
magician1 to whose invention many of the
 most typical improvements in early     
,greek sculpture are attributed2 on the 

other hand1 we have records of many     
statues of the gods1 extant in          
historical times in various shrines of  
,greece1 which were attributed to him4  
,such attributions are not really of    
greater historical value than the       
traditions of dedication in the heroic  
age which we find elsewhere4 ,the name  
of ,daedalus having once become famous  
in this connection1 it was natural that 
many statues of primitive style and     
unrecorded origin should be attributed  
to him4 ,more importance may be attached
 to the fact that the sculptors who     
actually made some of the early statues 
of the gods in ,athens and in the       
,peloponnesus are described as the      
pupils or by some as the sons or        
companions of ,daedalus4 ,in this way   
his name is associated with some of the 
early schools that had the greatest     
influence in ,greece1 especially on the 
representation of the gods in sculpture4
 ,there are other traditions of early   
schools of sculptors1 the marble workers

 of ,chios1 the bronze founders of      
,samos1 who devoted themselves mainly to
 making statues of the gods1 some of    
which survived throughout historical    
times4 ,when we turn from tradition and 
consider the early examples of statues  
of gods that may still be seen or are   
recorded by extant copies1 we find that 
these fall into two classes4 ,on the one
 hand1 there are more or less exact     
repetitions of the primitive stock or   
stone1 the cylindrical tree-trunk or the
 rectangular block cut from the quarry1 
with the rudest indication of head and  
arms and feet1 deviating as little as   
possible from the original shape of the 
block4 ,when images of this sort were1  
as was often the case1 of wood1 they    
have1 of course1 disappeared2 but we can
 sometimes recognise copies of them upon
 reliefs or in stone4 ,on the other     
hand1 we find another class of images   
which approximate more to the           
attainments of ,daedalus as described by
 rationalising writers of later date4   

,these images are completely in human   
form1 and1 if male1 are usually nude4   
,they have their legs separated in a    
short stride1 the left foot being       
usually advanced2 their arms are either 
set close to their sides1 or one or both
 of them is raised from the elbow2 their
 whole shape suggests a rigid system of 
proportions and a more or less          
conventionalised form4 ,these images    
have no resemblance to the modifications
 of the primitive stocks and stones1 and
 could not well be directly derived from
 them2 they are found in great numbers  
upon many sites of early sanctity in    
,greece itself and in ,greek settlements
 around the ,levant1 notably in ,cyprus1
 ,rhodes1 and ,naucratis in ,egypt4     
,sometimes they seem to represent the   
god1 sometimes the dedicator2 but all   
alike show the attempt of the early     
,greek craftsman to imitate the products
 of more advanced and finished art which
 he saw around him4 ,many of them are   
derived from ,egyptian types2 others    

show the influence of ,mesopotamian art1
 or of the hybrid craftsmanship of      
,phoenicia4 ,the borrowing or imitation 
of such foreign types may at first sight
 appear to show even less promise of    
artistic progress than variations on the
 old native images2 but it is not in its
 origins1 but in its development and    
perfection that the chief excellence of 
,greek art is to be found4  ,the types  
borrowed by sculpture from foreign art  
are almost exclusively of human form4   
,the monstrous mixed forms in which the 
deities of ,egypt or ,mesopotamia often 
found the expression of their superhuman
 and mysterious powers do not seem to   
have appealed to the imagination of the 
,greeks4 ,such mixed forms were1 indeed1
 frequently borrowed by early decorative
 art1 and on ,orientalising vases we    
constantly find human-headed and        
bird-headed quadrupeds1 usually winged1 
and human-headed birds4 ,the delight in 
winged figures generally1 which was     
mainly decorative in early times1 also  

finds its origin in ,oriental woven     
stuffs4 ,greek sculpture adopted and    
translated into stone or bronze some of 
these mixed types--notably the          
human-headed bird and the human-headed  
winged lion2 these it identified as the 
,siren and the ,sphinx of ,greek myth1  
and associated them with the mysteries  
of the tomb4 ,to some other forms1 that 
of the ,centaur and the ,satyr and the  
,triton1 it also gave considerable      
scope4 ,but all these1 if not human1 are
 hardly to be regarded as divine2 they  
are mostly noxious1 and1 even if        
benignant1 do not attain the rank of    
gods4 ,perhaps a nearer approach to     
divine character is to be found in the  
river-gods1 who are often represented as
 bulls with human heads or as human with
 bull's horns2 but here1 too1 we have   
only to deal with minor deities4 ,no    
sculptor represented ,dionysus in this  
way1 even though he was called          
bull-shaped by poets2 nor is the        
horse-god ,posidon even represented as a

 ,centaur4 ,the horse-headed ,demeter of
 ,phigalia remains the strange and      
solitary exception1 however we may      
explain her existence4  ,the process by 
which the early human types were        
gradually improved and made more        
life-like1 by a continuous struggle with
 technical difficulties1 by constant and
 direct observation of nature1 and by   
the building up of an artistic tradition
 in different schools and families1 is a
 question that concerns the history of  
art rather than our present study4 ,but 
it is impossible to distinguish rigidly 
between the two1 because these types1   
whether of the nude standing male       
figure1 of the draped female1 or of the 
seated figure1 are all of them used     
alike to represent human and divine     
personages2 and1 apart from inscriptions
 of dedication or conditions of         
discovery or distinctive attributes1 it 
would often be impossible to tell       
whether any particular statue was meant 
to represent1 for example1 the image of 

a god or a conventional portrait of a   
man4 ,these nude male statues1 commonly 
known by the name of ,apollo1 were      
certainly1 some of them1 made to        
commemorate athletes1 whose images were 
set up either in the place where they   
won their victories or in their native  
town2 others were placed over graves as 
memorials of the dead2 and even in a    
sacred precinct it is sometimes         
uncertain whether the god himself is    
represented or the worshipper who       
dedicates this record of his devotion4  
,at this early period1 therefore1 ,mr4  
,ruskin's strictures as to the          
impossibility of distinguishing the     
individuality of the different gods must
 be admitted1 and even supplemented by  
an admission of the impossibility of    
distinguishing gods and goddesses from  
human beings4 ,the explanation is       
obvious enough4 ,during this age of     
early progress the constant aim of the  
sculptor is to attain to complete       
mastery over the material and to        

perfection of bodily form4 ,in religious
 art1 what corresponds to this is the   
struggle towards anthropomorphism--first
 to represent the gods in human form1   
and then to make that form the most     
perfect that human art can devise4      
,during this stage of artistic and      
religious development the type and the  
ideal cannot be distinguished4 ,it was  
only when a type or a varying series of 
types had been brought to perfection in 
the fifth century1 so as to satisfy the 
demand for a harmonious system of bodily
 proportions1 for beauty of outline and 
dignity of countenance1 that these types
 could be used as a means of expression 
for the religious ideals of the nation4 
,in developing the type the accidental  
has to be discarded1 and with it much of
 the feeling of individuality2 works of 
early archaic art1 for all their        
defects1 often show more sign of        
individual character than the more      
perfect works of the earlier part of the
 fifth century4 ,the attainment of the  

type is followed by an infusion of      
character and individuality1 drawn from 
the artist's trained memory and         
observation with clear artistic         
intention1 not from the mere caprice of 
an accidental recollection or a casual  
peculiarity of a model4 ,the character  
and individuality thus expressed must be
 considered in subsequent chapters2 it  
is only necessary here to distinguish it
 from the suggestion of an individual1  
almost of a caricature1 which we find   
sometimes in archaic art1 and which is  
certainly to be seen occasionally in    
works of ,florentine sculpture4 ,during 
the period of the rise of ,greek        
sculpture the various schools were      
advancing each in its own way towards   
what has been called naturalism in art1 
as opposed to realism on the one side   
and idealism on the other4 ,that is to  
say1 they were striving by constant     
study of the athletic form1 of          
proportions and muscles1 of drapery and 
hair1 to attain to a series of types    

both in harmony with themselves and in  
accordance with nature2 and they were   
too much absorbed in this attempt to go 
far beyond their predecessors in        
rendering the character of the gods     
according to the form consecrated by    
tradition4 ,even in the expression of   
the face the same process is to be      
traced4 ,in early works we find         
sometimes no expression at all1 or an   
apparent stolidity which is really the  
absence of expression2 in the archaic   
smile we see an attempt to enliven the  
face1 and possibly also1 as we have     
noticed1 to express and even to induce  
the benignity of the deity4 ,but this   
attempt1 made with inadequate artistic  
resources1 tends to result in a mere    
grimace2 and as we approach the         
transitional age before the greatest    
period of sculpture1 we often find a    
reaction against any such exaggeration  
of expression in a severity and dignity 
that may have a certain grace of their  
own1 but that are in some sense a       

retrograde movement so far as the       
expression of character is concerned4   
,it follows that the statues of the gods
 dating from this early period1 however 
interesting they might be for the       
history of sculpture1 would not1 even if
 we possessed many more of them than we 
do possess1 throw very much light upon  
the development of the ideas of the     
,greeks concerning their deities4 ,they 
would probably conform to a limited     
number of clearly defined types4 ,the   
most familiar of all1 the standing nude 
male figure1 would1 if beardless1       
usually represent ,apollo1 with a bow or
 a branch of bay1 or sometimes other    
attributes4 ,a similar type1 bearded1   
would stand for ,zeus or ,posidon or    
,hermes1 if provided with thunderbolt or
 eagle1 with trident or fish1 or with a 
caduceus4 ,similar figures might also be
 draped1 and still represent gods2 or1  
if female1 would serve for ,hera1       
,artemis1 ,aphrodite1 and sometimes for 
,athena1 if she was represented without 

her arms and aegis4 ,then1 too1 there   
was the seated type1 usually enveloped  
in full drapery1 which might readily be 
adapted to a statue of any of the chief 
gods4 ,in all of these there is no      
question of distinguishing the gods from
 one another in character and           
individuality2 apart from attributes1   
there is hardly any attempt to          
distinguish gods from men4  ,perhaps the
 earliest class of statues in which we  
find any attempt to give artistic       
expression to superhuman power is that  
in which we see the god in vigorous     
action1 often striking with his         
characteristic weapon3 ,zeus with his   
thunderbolt in his raised right hand1   
,posidon with his trident1 or ,athena   
advancing rapidly with brandished spear 
and shield advanced4 ,but even these    
figures1 apart from their divine        
attributes1 show no essential           
distinction from human combatants4 ,it  
is a significant fact that it is still a
 matter of dispute#f whether one of the 

most famous statues of the early fifth  
century1 the ,choiseul-,gouffier        
,apollo1 represents a god or an athlete4
 ,this is neither because the ,greeks at
 this time idealised their athletes nor 
because they humanised their gods1 but  
because they typified them both2 that is
 to say1 they represented them by a type
 which was the most perfect rendering   
within their power either of man or of  
an anthropomorphic deity4 ,here we have 
the material form provided by means of  
which the ideals of the succeeding      
period were to find their artistic      
expression--such a typical or normal    
human form is1 in fact1 the logical     
expression of anthropomorphism in its   
most literal sense--the making of gods  
after man's image4 ,but those who       
believed rather that man was made after 
,god's image would look to find in the  
prototype something more and higher than
 can be seen in its earthly copy4 ,this 
notion1 even if not formulated by       
philosophy until a later age1 certainly 

underlies the idealistic art of the     
fifth century4  ,footnote #f3 ,even if  
this dispute be regarded as now settled 
by weight of evidence1 the fact that    
such a dispute is possible retains its  
significance4     ,,chapter ,v          
,,idealism   ,the age which followed the
 great ,persian ,wars was the time of   
the highest political1 literary1 and    
intellectual development in ,greece4    
,nor was it unfavourable to strength and
 depth of religious feeling among the   
people4 ,if the more thoughtful among   
them were inclined to doubt whether some
 of the stories told about the gods were
 either probable or edifying1 these were
 the very men who1 on the other hand1   
were most capable of appreciating the   
higher and nobler conceptions of the    
gods which we find in contemporary      
poets4 ,and the great delivery from the 
,persians not only gave the ,greeks a   
confidence in themselves which justly   
increased their national pride and      
thereby strengthened their national     

ideals1 but it also gave occasion to a  
confidence in the gods and a gratitude  
to them which found expression in       
numerous buildings and offerings4 ,all  
this religious activity could not fail  
to have considerable influence upon the 
common people2 and in some cases1 as at 
,athens1 there was the necessity of     
replacing the temples and statues that  
had been destroyed or carried off by the
 ,persian invader4 ,at the time when a  
demand occurred for new statues of the  
gods1 the rapid progress of the art of  
sculpture made it inevitable that these 
new statues should not be mere          
reproductions or reminiscences of the   
ones they replaced1 but fresh and       
original conceptions1 worthy of the     
increased skill of the artist and of the
 nobler ideals of the people4 ,and by   
one of those coincidences which we meet 
so often both in the history of art and 
in that of literature1 just at the time 
when the material conditions1 the spirit
 of the people1 and the rapid advance of

 art gave the utmost scope for artistic 
creation1 there arose the man of        
transcendent genius to give full        
expression to the religious and artistic
 aspirations of the time4 ,the age of   
,pericles was also the age of ,phidias4 
,it is true that there was an interval  
between the defeat of the ,persians and 
the period of highest attainment in     
,greece2 and during this interval many  
temples were built or rebuilt1 and many 
statues were set up as objects of       
worship or as dedications to the gods4  
,some of these may have anticipated to a
 certain extent the work of ,phidias2   
several of them were of colossal size1  
like his chief masterpieces1 and thus1  
even from the technical point of view1  
may have prepared the way before him2   
one1 the ,apollo by ,calamis at         
,apollonia1 was about forty-five feet   
high1 and so actually rivalled the ,zeus
 and ,athena of ,phidias in size4 ,but  
of these statues we know little or      
nothing4 ,as to the two most famous     

works of ,phidias himself1 the ,athena  
,parthenos within the ,parthenon at     
,athens and the ,zeus at ,olympia1 we   
are better informed1 so far as elaborate
 descriptions and the somewhat          
rhetorical appreciations of later       
writers are concerned2 and we possess   
some extant copies which tell us        
something of their pose and attributes4 
,but any notion we may form as to their 
true artistic and religious character   
must be mainly dependent upon our       
imagination2 and even for their relation
 to the religious ideals of the people  
we are dependent for the most part upon 
indirect evidence4 ,though the art of   
sculpture was so closely bound up with  
the life of the people in ,greece1 we   
find very few references to its greatest
 works2 it is evident that the          
,athenians1 for example1 took the       
greatest pride in the buildings that    
adorned their ,acropolis and in the     
sculptures they contained2 yet when     
,pericles1 as reported by ,thucydides1  

speaks of the statue of the ,athena     
,parthenos1 it is only to reckon the    
gold of her drapery as part of the      
possible resources of the state4 ,we    
know that in the eyes of ,pericles and  
of his hearers the preciousness of the  
material was only an incident in the    
artistic character of the work2 but what
 is felt most deeply is often the least 
spoken about4 ,later descriptions1 such 
as that of ,pausanias1 lay emphasis on  
the details and accessories of the      
statue1 the ornamentation of helmet and 
shield and sandals2 they lay themselves 
open to the stricture of ,lucian on such
 as can neither see nor praise the whole
 beauty of the ,olympian ,zeus1 great   
and noble as it is1 nor describe it to  
others that do not know it1 but admire  
the accurate work and fine polish of his
 footstool and the good proportions of  
the basis1 enumerating all such details 
with the utmost care4 ,at the same time 
even such information as they give us is
 welcome1 since it aids our imagination 

to reconstruct the appearance of the    
whole4 ,these great chryselephantine    
statues were placed within the cella of 
a temple1 lighted only through the door 
and by some infiltration through the    
marble roof1 and their effect was       
calculated for these conditions4 ,the   
rich tone and subtle reflections of the 
ivory and the gold1 mingled with        
coloured inlays of enamel or precious   
stones1 and tempered and harmonised by a
 dim religious light1 must have been    
most impressive2 and the grandeur of the
 figures was enhanced by their colossal 
size4 ,but in all this we are still     
dealing only with conditions and        
accessories1 not with the art itself and
 the religious ideals which it          
expressed4 ,these are perhaps easier for
 us to appreciate in the case of the    
,zeus than of the ,athena1 though we are
 better provided with copies of the     
latter4 ,we are accustomed in our own   
religious art to the attempt to express 
divinity in the form of a mature man of 

unspeakable majesty and benignity4 ,to  
the ,greeks1 indeed1 the human figure of
 ,zeus was not merely an incarnation1   
but the actual form of the god himself2 
the god was not thought of as having    
taken upon himself the sorrows and the  
weaknesses of our mortal nature1 but as 
sharing only its ideal perfection4 ,yet 
that the effect was not altogether      
dissimilar is shown by such a passage as
 that we find in ,dion ,chrysostom3 ,a  
man whose soul is utterly immersed in   
toil1 who has suffered many disasters   
and sorrows1 and cannot even enjoy sweet
 sleep1 even such an one1 ,i think1 if  
he stood face to face with this statue1 
would forget all the dangers and        
difficulties of this mortal life3 such  
the vision you1 ,phidias1 have invented 
and devised1 a sight 'to lull all pain  
and anger1 and bring forgetfulness of   
every sorrow4'  ,the same writer        
elsewhere puts into the mouth of        
,phidias an explanation of how he had   
attempted to embody in his statue the   

current conception of the god1 and even 
the epithets that belonged to his       
worship4 ,my ,zeus1 says the sculptor1  
is peaceful and altogether gentle1 as   
the guardian of a ,hellas free from     
factions and of one mind with itself4   
,him1 taking counsel with my art1 and   
with the wise and noble ,elean state1 ,i
 set up in his temple1 mild and majestic
 in a form free from all sorrow1 as the 
giver of life and livelihood and all    
good things1 the common father of men1  
their saviour and their guardian1 so far
 as it is possible for a mortal man to  
conceive and to copy his divine and     
inexpressible nature4 ,and consider     
whether you will not find the image     
according with all the epithets of the  
god2 ,zeus alone is called the father of
 gods and their only king1 and also god 
of the city and of friendship and       
society1 and of suppliants too and      
strangers1 the giver of harvest1 and by 
innumerable other titles4 ,and for one  
whose aim it was to display all these   

qualities without speaking1 is not my   
art successful8 ,the strength of the    
form and its imposing proportions show  
the power to rule and the king2 the     
gentle and amiable character shows the  
father and his care2 the majesty and    
severity show the god of the city and of
 law2 and of the kinship of men and gods
 the similarity of their shape serves as
 a symbol4 ,his protective friendship of
 suppliants and strangers and fugitives 
and such like is seen in his kindliness 
and his evident gentleness and goodness4
 ,and an image of the giver of          
possessions and harvest is seen in the  
simplicity and magnanimity displayed in 
his form2 he seems just like one who    
would give and be generous of good      
things4 ,all this1 in short1 ,i imitated
 as far as possible1 being unable to    
express it in speech4 ,this description 
is1 of course1 the work of a late and   
rhetorical author1 but it is the work of
 a man who was familiar with these great
 statues that are now lost to us1 and   

was capable of appreciating them4 ,his  
criticism may not be so thorough and    
subtle as the analysis of the ,greek    
type of ,zeus made by ,brunn in his     
,gotteridealen2 but it is based on      
similar principles1 the observation of  
the physical type and the spiritual     
expression which serves best to embody  
the majesty and benignity of the god4   
,after all1 we come back perhaps to the 
saying of ,phidias himself1 and his     
quotation from ,homer2 here1 too1 it is 
the brow of the god that is emphasised1 
and the nod that shook ,olympus while it
 granted a prayer4 ,it is in such       
effects rather than in any detailed     
description that it is possible to      
realise the nature of a great work of   
art4  ,what success in the attainment of
 its aim was here reached by the art of 
the sculptor may perhaps best be        
estimated from the often quoted sentence
 of ,quintilian1 perhaps the noblest    
praise ever accorded to an artist by a  
critic3 ,the beauty of the statue even  

made some addition to the received      
religion2 the majesty of the work was   
equal to the god4 ,we might indeed1     
without irreverence1 impute to ,phidias 
the words uttered in a very different   
sense by one who later gave a new and   
higher interpretation to a formula of   
the received religion in ,greece3 ,whom 
therefore ye ignorantly worship1 ,him   
declare ,i unto you4  ,the other great  
,phidian ideal1 that of ,athena1 was    
represented by several statues1 both in 
,athens and in other cities4 ,as to     
these we have a certain amount of       
information1 and even a certain number  
of copies1 which show us the pose and   
the accessories of the various statues2 
some of the better ones even suffice to 
give us some notion of the beauty of    
their original4 ,we have also           
descriptions by ancient writers1 which  
tell us1 as in the case of the ,olympian
 ,zeus1 much about the decoration of the
 statue2 but we have not in this case   
any appreciations of the effect upon    

those who saw it4 ,the ideal of ,athena 
is in some ways more difficult for us to
 comprehend than that of ,zeus1 partly  
because it is less universally human1   
and more peculiarly characteristic of   
,greece and even of ,athens4 ,the notion
 of the mother goddess is common to most
 religions2 that of the queen and       
huntress1 chaste and fair is at least   
familiar to us in literature1 and       
readily commends itself to the          
imagination4 ,but ,athena1 though she   
has something of both these characters1 
has a nature different from both4 ,it is
 impossible to derive her varied        
mythological functions from any one     
origin2 but here it is not the origin of
 her worship that concerns us1 rather   
its meaning and influence as these      
affected the people of her chosen city4 
,just as ,zeus was the ideal of all that
 was best in the ,hellenic conception of
 manhood and the god of a united        
,hellas1 so ,athena is especially the   
goddess of ,athens1 the giver and       

fosterer of all those qualities that    
made the ,athenians what they were1 the 
creatress of that ideal city sketched in
 the wonderful speeches of ,pericles4   
,her gifts are the arts of war and      
peace1 and all artistic and intellectual
 activity1 as well as the olive and     
other characteristic products of ,attic 
soil1 and the clear and luminous air and
 stimulating climate which ,attic       
writers are never tired of extolling1   
and of associating with the peculiar    
genius of the ,athenian race4 ,one can  
imagine how ,dion ,chrysostom might have
 recognised the expression of these     
various qualities in the broad and      
majestic1 yet keenly intellectual brow1 
in the wide and clear eyes1 and in other
 features2 but the extant copies of the 
,athena ,parthenos cannot do more than  
assist our imagination in realising how 
the sculptor represented the goddess of 
,athens4 ,here1 too1 as in the case of  
the ,zeus1 it is difficult for us to    
avoid the error of regarding the statue 

as a mere philosophical abstraction1 an 
impersonation of the qualities it       
represents4 ,athena in later art1 as set
 up in libraries and museums1 was       
doubtless such an impersonation1 just as
 she is in modern art unreal and        
comparatively uninteresting4 ,but the   
,athenian believed intensely in the     
existence of his goddess4 ,he believed  
that the ceremonies connected with her  
ancient image were necessary to the     
continuance of her favour to her city   
and people1 and that the new temples and
 statues set up in her honour would     
still further delight her and ensure her
 protection and her abode among her     
grateful worshippers4 ,the statue by    
,phidias within the ,parthenon offered  
not merely that form in which she would 
choose to appear if she showed herself  
to mortal eyes1 but actually showed her 
form as she had revealed it to the      
sculptor4 ,to look upon such an image   
helped the worshipper as much           
as--perhaps more than--any service or   

ritual to bring himself into communion  
with the goddess1 and to fit himself1 as
 a citizen of her chosen city1 to carry 
out her will in contributing his best   
efforts to its supremacy in politics1 in
 literature1 and in art4 ,if a work of  
art could have this actual influence    
upon religious emotion1 and through it  
upon practical life1 it may be said to  
have attained the utmost that any human 
effort can achieve in the service of    
,god4  ,the religious influence of art  
in the fifth century is1 as we have     
seen1 closely associated with the state2
 the ,athena ,parthenos and the         
,olympian ,zeus appealed to their       
worshippers as citizens of ,athens and  
as members of the privileged ,hellenic  
race4 ,it would be easy to trace a      
similar character in almost all the     
great statues of gods that are recorded 
as belonging to this period4 ,thus the  
,dionysus of ,alcamenes is not the      
dreamy god of wine and pleasure that we 
find at a later age1 but an august      

figure1 bearded and enthroned1 the giver
 of the riches of the earth and the     
wine1 the god in whose honour all the   
great ,dionysian festivals were held2   
the same sculptor's ,hermes is the      
guardian of ways and gates1 the giver of
 increase to flocks1 not the youthful   
and athletic messenger of the gods4     
,hephaestus1 too1 especially when       
associated with ,athena1 is the patron  
and teacher of all handicrafts1 himself 
the ideal artisan1 practical and genial1
 but with none of his godhead lost in a 
too human individuality2 even his       
lameness--characteristic of the smith in
 all folk-lore--is lightly indicated1   
not dwelt on as an interesting motive4  
,various statues of particular gods may1
 of course1 emphasise one side or       
another of their functions4 ,athena may 
be worshipped and represented as goddess
 of ,victory or of ,health2 but here1   
too1 it is usually some recognised state
 cult that underlies the representation4
 ,outside ,athens we find the same      

conditions4 ,to take only one instance1 
the colossal gold and ivory ,hera of    
,argos1 made by the chief ,argive master
 ,polyclitus1 is the great goddess of   
the city1 just as ,athena is of ,athens4
 ,she was represented as the bride of   
,zeus1 who annually renewed her         
maidenhood at the great ,argive festival
 of the divine marriage2 and we cannot  
doubt that ,polyclitus expressed in this
 statue1 which was hardly less famous   
than the masterpieces of ,phidias1 all  
the essential features of the great     
religious ideals that underlay this     
primitive rite4 ,his ,hera had neither  
the warlike nor the intellectual and    
spiritual characteristics of the ,attic 
,athena2 but she was the goddess of     
womanly grace and beauty in the bride1  
and embodied that perfection of physical
 form which ,argive art sought also in  
its athletic figures1 and which was in a
 sense a part of the religion that found
 expression in the great athletic games4
 ,some gods--,apollo1 for example--seem 

in fifth-century statues to have a more 
individual character4 ,just as in       
earlier times the name ,apollo serves to
 cover a multitude of statues of which  
some may be meant to represent          
individual men1 so even in the age of   
,phidias we sometimes meet with a figure
 of athletic type or of youthful beauty 
as to which it is possible to doubt     
whether it is an ,apollo2 this may be   
partly the result of the great          
popularity of the type in all ages of   
,greek sculpture which led to its more  
rapid development and earlier           
individualisation4 ,but the ,apollo of  
this period is never the mere dreamy    
youth of later time2 it has been well   
said that he is the god who1 in the     
mythical athletic contest1 could surpass
 ,hermes in the foot-race and ,ares in  
boxing2 the embodiment of all-round     
physical and intellectual excellence1   
the combination of music and gymnastic1 
which again brings us back to a national
 ,hellenic ideal4 ,throughout the       

representations of the gods in the art  
of the fifth century we find the same   
essential character4 ,they embody in    
themselves the expression1 by means of  
the most perfect physical forms1 of the 
qualities attributed to the god himself1
 or given by him to his worshippers4    
,they are no impersonal abstraction of  
these qualities1 but are real and living
 beings1 in whom these qualities exist  
to a degree impossible for a mere       
mortal4 ,but1 on the other hand1 they   
have nothing of the passions and        
emotions1 the weaknesses and            
imperfections of mortal nature4 ,in this
 they are inconsistent1 perhaps1 with   
that ,homeric presentment of the gods   
which the greatest artists consciously  
set before themselves4 ,but we cannot   
wonder that an age of such clear and    
lofty intellectual and moral perceptions
 should have rejected what it felt to be
 unworthy in the current notions of the 
gods1 and should have selected only what
 it felt to be truly divine4 ,art did   

not1 however1 remain very long upon its 
highest level of religious feeling2 but 
in ,greece1 by a fortunate coincidence1 
the age of the greatest religious ideals
 was also that of the highest perfection
 of physical type in art as well as of  
technical skill in execution4 ,we do not
 therefore find in this age that the    
sculptor lacks the power to express his 
ideas1 or that his ideas are too strong 
for the forms in which they are         
expressed2 there is rather that perfect 
harmony between the two that1 here as   
elsewhere1 is characteristic of         
,hellenic art4     ,,chapter ,,vi       
,,individualism   ,the great religious  
ideals of the fifth century were1 as we 
have seen1 closely bound up with the    
subordination of the individual to the  
,state2 and their expression in         
sculpture was also due in almost every  
case to the employment of the artist by 
the community4 ,in the fourth century1  
on the other hand1 we find on every side
 a stronger assertion of individuality4 

,it was a commonplace among ,attic      
orators in the fourth century to        
contrast the private luxury and         
ostentation of their own day with the   
simplicity of life among the great men  
of the earlier age1 whose houses could  
not be distinguished from those of the  
common people1 though their public      
buildings and the temples they raised to
 the gods were of unparalleled          
splendour4 ,in religion1 and above all  
in religious art1 we find something of  
the same tendency4 ,there are few if any
 records of the dedication during the   
fourth century of those great statues of
 the chief gods which were looked back  
to by all subsequent generations as the 
embodiment of a national ideal4 ,but    
there were1 perhaps1 more statues of the
 gods made in the fourth century which  
were the objects not merely of artistic 
admiration1 but of intense and sometimes
 morbid personal devotion4 ,the mere    
list of the gods preferred for          
representation is an indication in      

itself2 while in the fifth century1     
,zeus and ,athena and ,hera1 the great  
gods of the ,state or of the ,hellenic  
race1 are the subjects of the most      
famous statues1 in the fourth century it
 is rather ,aphrodite and ,dionysus and 
,asclepius1 those whose gifts contribute
 to individual happiness or enjoyment1  
that offer most scope to the powers of  
the artist4  ,and the sculptors         
themselves1 in the fourth century1 show 
more individuality of style4 ,in the    
latter part of the fifth century the    
genius of ,phidias had so dominated     
religious art that the works of his     
successors1 men like ,alcamenes and     
,agoracritus1 could hardly be           
distinguished from his4 ,but the great  
sculptors of the fourth century1 ,scopas
 and ,praxiteles and ,lysippus1 not to  
mention others of less note1 devoted    
themselves not so much to the expression
 through perfect physical form of great 
religious ideals1 but to a realisation  
of the character and1 so to speak1 the  

personality of the gods whom they       
portrayed4 ,and they did this by the    
same means by which they expressed in   
their art the characters and passions of
 heroes or of men1 thereby removing the 
gods from the sphere of passionless     
benignity and power which is assigned to
 them by the art of the fifth century4  
,such a treatment evidently gave more   
scope for variety in the styles of the  
sculptors2 and although we can sometimes
 trace the influence of one upon        
another1 yet each clearly shows his own 
characteristics4 ,we are expressly told 
of ,praxiteles that he showed the most  
admirable skill in infusing into his    
marble works the passions and emotions  
of the soul2 and the extant remains of  
the statues made by ,scopas and         
,lysippus show that they also1 each in  
his own way1 attained the same results4 
,if the sculpture of the fifth century  
was ethical1 expressing noble ideals of 
character whether in gods or men1 that  
of the fourth century may be called     

psychological4 ,it is not content with  
character2 it expresses also mood and   
even passion1 and thereby gives more    
prominence to individuality4 ,at first  
sight it is not easy to realise how this
 change came to affect the              
representations of the gods4 ,the gods  
of ,homer are1 indeed1 full of          
individual character2 but we have seen  
how in the fifth century1 though the    
greatest sculptors declared it was the  
gods of ,homer that they represented1   
these representations were idealised and
 raised above those human touches in    
which the individuality is most         
conspicuous4 ,there was1 in the ,homeric
 hymns and in the lyric poets1 a delight
 in details of incident and in personal 
peculiarities and even in romantic tales
 about the gods2 and in the fourth      
century1 when the high idealisation of  
the preceding age is no longer so strong
 in its influence1 we find a similar    
tendency in art as well4 ,while the     
great statues of the gods in the fifth  

century are almost all represented as   
either enthroned or standing1 not       
employed in any particular action or    
function1 the most characteristic       
examples of the statues of gods made in 
the fourth century have almost all some 
definite motive4 ,we may take as an     
example what was perhaps the most famous
 statue of antiquity1 the ,aphrodite by 
,praxiteles at ,cnidus4 ,the goddess is 
represented as nude2 and it is often    
said that goddesses would not have been 
so represented in the fifth century4 ,it
 is true that full drapery seems more   
consistent with the dignified and august
 figures of ,phidian art4 ,but if the   
religious type had required that        
,phidias should make a nude goddess1 we 
may be sure he would have made her naked
 and unashamed1 with no more            
self-consciousness than a nude ,apollo2 
above all1 he would not have thought it 
necessary to provide a motive for her   
nudity4 ,with ,praxiteles it is         
otherwise4 ,he represents the goddess as

 preparing for the bath1 and just       
letting her last garment slip from her  
hand on to a vase that stands beside    
her2 and1 in addition to this provision 
of a motive--an excuse1 one might almost
 say--for representing her without her  
clothes1 he hints1 from the instinctive 
gesture of her other hand which she     
holds before her body1 at a             
half-conscious shrinking from exposure1 
a feeling of modesty which1 however     
suitable to a woman1 is by no means     
consistent with a high ideal of the     
goddess4 ,the face and figure are of    
extraordinary physical beauty of type1  
of a breadth and nobility which contrast
 with the smaller1 prettier1 and less   
dignified forms of later art2 the       
gesture1 too1 has not the conscious     
coquetry which we see in such a work as 
the ,venus de' ,medici4 ,but1 on the    
other hand1 we must recognise that the  
statue represents the goddess under a   
human rather than a divine aspect1 that 
even her mood and feeling of timidity   

are portrayed in a manner which1 however
 charming in itself1 is totally         
inconsistent with her worship as a great
 goddess4 ,we are not surprised to hear 
that this statue inspired a personal    
passion2 she is the goddess of love1 and
 is represented as not beyond the reach 
of human attraction2 but she is brought 
down to the level of mortals1 rather    
than capable of raising mortals to a    
higher sphere by her contemplation4 ,it 
is the same1 though perhaps to a less   
degree1 with other statues of the gods  
made in the fourth century4 ,the motives
 with which the later ,greeks went to   
visit the great statues of the ,phidian 
age were1 as we have seen1 to a great   
extent religious1 and their             
contemplation was regarded to some      
extent as a service2 here we have       
idolatry in its highest form4 ,but those
 who went to see the ,aphrodite of      
,cnidus went chiefly to enjoy the beauty
 of the statue2 and although this may be
 the best thing from the artistic point 

of view1 it certainly has not the same  
religious import4  ,there is another    
element in the individuality of         
fourth-century statues which may appeal 
to modern artists1 and which certainly  
did appeal--in an inverted manner--to   
early ,christian writers of invectives  
against pagan idolatry4 ,it was said    
that ,phryne had posed as a model for   
the ,cnidian ,aphrodite of ,praxiteles2 
and the character of the goddess was    
inferred from that of her votary4 ,it is
 clear that a ,greek artist could not   
have1 in the case of a nude female      
statue1 the same choice of types        
constantly present to his observation   
and his memory as he had in the case of 
male statues2 and the individuality of  
the model1 however beautiful1 would thus
 tend to assert itself against the type4
 ,thus personality and individual       
character1 the ultimate condition of    
beauty1 to use ,mr4 ,ruskin's words1 in 
modern as in ,tuscan art1 comes much    
nearer to expression in the fourth      

century than in the fifth4 ,but a study 
of such a statue as the ,cnidian        
,aphrodite shows us nevertheless that in
 the beauty of the type and the         
avoidance of the accidental1 the art of 
,praxiteles was as far removed from     
realism as it was from the vague        
generalisation of ,graeco-,roman and    
modern pseudo-classical art4 ,it is full
 of life and individuality1 but it is   
the individuality of a character        
realised within his mind by the artist1 
not merely copied from the human model  
he set before him4  ,another method by  
which the motive becomes prominent in   
the art of the fourth century is to be  
seen in the interpretation of           
mythological conceptions4 ,these are    
realised and embodied in statues2 but   
the statues offer a new1 sometimes1 it  
seems1 almost an accidental and trifling
 version of a solemn religious          
conception2 it appears as if the artist 
were playing with a mythological        
subject4 ,thus in the statue made by    

,praxiteles of ,apollo ,sauroktonos1 the
 lizard-slayer1 the god stands with an  
arrow in his hand1 as if trying to catch
 with it a lizard who runs up a tree2 it
 suggests a boyish game rather than the 
epithet of a god4 ,again1 the worship of
 ,artemis ,brauronia at ,athens was one 
of the oldest and most sacred cults in  
the city1 and women at marriage and at  
other critical times of their life used 
to offer her their garments1 thereby    
bringing themselves into close contact  
with the goddess and claiming her       
special protection1 the garments being  
actually placed on the old image4 ,if1  
as is probable1 the ,artemis of ,gabii  
is a copy of the statue substituted by  
,praxiteles for this old image1 we see  
there the goddess1 as a graceful girlish
 figure1 fastening a cloak upon her     
shoulder4 ,this may be taken as         
symbolical of the earlier custom of     
placing the garments on the statue2 but 
we have evidence that the worshippers   
were not content with such a symbolic   

contact1 but had the actual garments    
placed on the new statue as they had    
been on the old4 ,here we have probably 
a case of unsuccessful substitution2 the
 artistic representation did not suffice
 to replace the actual rite4 ,but the   
representation itself is doubtless      
intended in a way which1 however        
graceful1 does not represent any deep   
religious feeling2 one feels that the   
artist found the subject a convenient   
one as an artistic motive1 rather than  
that he had any deep religious idea to  
express4  ,we must not1 however1 go too 
far in denying religious ideals to the  
fourth century altogether4 ,some of the 
gods1 who came very near to the life of 
man1 but who were nevertheless          
worshipped with a real belief in their  
power and benevolence1 found at this    
time their fullest expression in art4   
,an example may be seen in the ,demeter 
of ,cnidus1 the mother sorrowing for her
 daughter1 whose suffering brings her   
into close sympathy with human weakness1

 and whose mysteries1 perhaps more than 
any other ,hellenic service1 brought men
 and women into personal communion with 
the gods4 ,we may take as another       
instance the head of ,asclepius from    
,melos in the ,british ,museum4 ,here1  
as ,brunn has pointed out in his        
admirable analysis of its forms1 we may 
recognise not so much the god as the    
half-human1 half-divine physician1 a    
genial and friendly spirit who persuades
 rather than commands4 ,the expression  
is not only intellectual1 but has also  
an infinite gentleness1 as of one not   
himself unacquainted with mortal pain   
and sorrow2 and such a conception1 as we
 know from ,christian art1 often appeals
 to those who find the majesty of ,zeus 
too distant1 the idea of his godhead too
 abstract4 ,in such almost human ideals 
the individuality of the fourth century 
finds its full scope1 as in other       
half-human creations of the artist's    
imagination4 ,apollo as the inspired    
musician or--if we accept the derivation

 of the ,apollo ,belvedere from a       
fourth-century original--as the         
disdainful archer1 ,hermes1 the         
protector and playmate of his little    
brother ,dionysus1 and many other such  
representations of the gods in their    
personal moods and characteristic       
actions1 seem in many ways less divine1 
less full of religious feeling than such
 an ,asclepius2 if the great gods are   
brought too near to human passions and  
weaknesses1 they cannot but lose much of
 their divinity4  ,one might easily     
multiply examples of similar motives in 
the statues of the gods made in the     
fourth century2 but we should find the  
same underlying principles in all cases4
 ,the gods are indeed more clearly      
realised as having personal character   
and individuality1 and for this reason  
they may sometimes inspire keener       
personal feelings of worship or even of 
romantic devotion4 ,but the older and   
higher conceptions of the gods1 as an   
essential part of the ,state religion1  

and as embodying the ideals of the race 
or of the city1 are no longer to be     
found1 except in a somewhat lifeless    
continuance of the fifth-century        
tradition4 ,the intensity of expression 
which we find in human heroes is1       
indeed1 expressed also in such types as 
that of ,apollo the musician or of      
,dionysus the god of inspired           
enthusiasm4 ,but this tendency is not   
fully developed until a later age4 ,the 
subtle distinctions of character between
 the different gods are1 on the other   
hand1 now most keenly observed and most 
skilfully rendered4 ,but in spite of    
this1 one does not feel that the artist 
has the same belief in the gods and in  
their power as we can see in the        
,phidian age4 ,if his artistic          
attainment is possibly more skilful1 the
 religious import of his work is        
certainly less4     ,,chapter ,,vii     
,,personification1 ,,convention1 ,,and  
,,symbolism   ,in the ,hellenistic age  
we find the ,greek types of the gods    

adapting themselves to new conditions   
and new meanings4 ,with the conquests of
 ,alexander1 ,greek language and        
civilisation spread over the ,eastern   
world2 and with them went the artistic  
forms of the ,greek pantheon1 though    
often to be modified by local beliefs or
 influences4 ,similarly1 when at a later
 time the ,roman conquest of ,greece    
spread ,hellenic influence to the ,west1
 there also the types of the ,greek     
deities came to be adopted or adapted to
 new mythological meanings4 ,greek art  
practically became cosmopolitan2 its    
influence was broadened2 but at the same
 time its essential nature1 in its      
harmony with the imagination of the     
,hellenic race1 was lost or obscured4   
,it becomes more intelligible to us for 
this very reason1 but at the same time  
less instructive in its relation to     
religious conceptions4  ,in the art of  
the ,hellenistic and ,graeco-,roman age 
we find two main tendencies1 the one    
towards academic generalisation1 and the

 other towards excessive realism1 often 
coupled with a theatrical or sensational
 treatment4 ,this latter is the more    
interesting to us1 partly because it is 
in itself more original1 partly because 
it is more in accordance with modern    
artistic practice4 ,the two tendencies  
are by no means rigidly distinguished2  
for example1 we often find a theatrical 
treatment combined with academic work2  
and throughout are to be seen traces of 
eclecticism--that is to say1 of the     
habit of imitating or reproducing1 often
 in an unintelligent manner1 the devices
 and even the style of earlier art4 ,it 
does not follow that no great works of  
art were made in the ,hellenistic age2  
the fine traditions of the fifth and    
fourth centuries were not easily lost4  
,but the inspiration of the subject1 so 
far as it still exists1 comes from new  
and different sources4  ,if we consider 
first the statues of the older gods of  
,greece1 we often find in them the      
individualistic tendencies of the fourth

 century carried to a further           
pitch--sometimes to an extreme--in the  
sentimental or passionate works of the  
,hellenistic age2 there is often        
something affected or dramatic about    
them1 as if they were not merely        
realised as expressing their individual 
character in their mood or action1 but  
acting their part as the representative 
of such a character2 in fact1 they tend 
to embody impersonations rather than to 
express personalities4 ,one might almost
 repeat here much that has been said    
about the gods in the fourth century1   
but that there is often1 in this case1 a
 touch of exaggeration which is avoided 
by the finer artistic instinct and      
appreciation of harmony that mark the   
work of earlier sculptors2 and joined   
with this we often find a love of       
display and a seeking after effect which
 imply that the artist thinks more of   
his skill than of the idea he is        
striving to express4  ,we can trace in  
the ,hellenistic age not only the       

traditions of earlier art1 but the      
direct influence of the masters of the  
fourth century1 the ,praxitelean cult of
 beauty for its own sake1 the passion   
and dramatic force of ,scopas1 and the  
preference for allegorical subjects and 
for statues of colossal size which we   
may see1 as well as many higher         
qualities1 in the art of ,lysippus4 ,we 
have already noticed how in the ,apollo 
,belvedere there is an impression of    
theatrical posing which was probably    
either introduced by the copyist or at  
any rate much exaggerated by him in     
imitating an earlier type2 and how in   
the ,venus de' ,medici we find a crude  
insistence on a gesture of mock modesty 
which is a mere travesty of the hint at 
half-conscious shrinking from exposure  
which we see in the ,cnidian ,aphrodite4
 ,even in a statue which1 like the      
,aphrodite of ,melos1 shows an endeavour
 to return to the nobler ideals and more
 dignified and simple forms of an       
earlier age1 there is something         

artificial and conventional about both  
figure and drapery2 and one feels that  
the sculptor1 though both his aims and  
his attainments are of the highest1 is  
trying rather to reflect the best       
influences of his predecessors than to  
embody a present religious conception4  
,the influence upon art of religious    
personifications is perhaps stronger    
than any other during this period4      
,there had1 indeed1 been such           
personifications at an earlier time1    
such as the statue by ,cephisodotus of  
,peace nursing the infant ,wealth4 ,the 
most interesting example of such        
personification may be seen in the      
figures of cities1 or1 to speak more    
accurately1 of the ,fortunes of cities1 
such as the ,antioch of ,eutychides4    
,the influence of the city or state upon
 religious art was conspicuous in the   
fifth century2 but here we find the city
 itself or its presiding genius         
represented in a statue which seems at  
first sight a mere allegory of its      

situation4 ,the way in which the figure 
is seated1 half turned on herself1 and  
with her feet resting upon the shoulder 
of the river that swims below her1 seems
 to suggest an artificially invented    
symbolism2 yet we are expressly told    
that this statue received great         
veneration from the natives of the      
district4 ,in the decay of the belief in
 the gods1 there seems to have been a   
craving for nearer and more real objects
 of worship4  ,we can see the same      
tendency in a more extreme form in the  
deification of human beings4 ,though    
some examples of this occur earlier1    
especially in the case of the heroes or 
founders of cities1 these are not placed
 on a level with the gods2 but the      
worship of ,alexander1 and in imitation 
of him1 of his successors1 placed him in
 a distinctly divine rank4 ,it is       
difficult to say how far this was due to
 non-,hellenic influences4 ,in the case 
of ,alexander1 with his marvellous1     
almost superhuman achievements1 and his 

final solution of the great drama of the
 contest of ,east and ,west1 such       
idealisation is easy to understand2 and 
we find not only that ,alexander is     
himself represented as a god1 but that  
his expression and cast of features come
 to affect the sculpture of his age1    
even in the representations of the gods 
themselves4 ,on coins1 too1 his head    
occurs2 an honour that before his time  
was not given to mere mortals4 ,in other
 cases this worship of men reached a    
pitch which was a matter of shame to the
 later ,greeks2 thus ,demetrius         
,poliorcetes1 when he gave ,athens back 
her freedom1 was welcomed at the city   
with divine honours4 ,even hymns were   
composed in his honour1 of which we find
 specimens preserved4#g ,after welcoming
 his advent at the same time as that of 
,demeter1 the poet addresses him        
thus3--,other gods are either far away1 
or they have no ears1 or they exist not1
 or have no care for us4 ,but we see    
thee1 a present deity1 not of wood or   

stone1 but real2 therefore we pray to   
thee4 ,it is true that such             
materialistic and atheistic expressions 
were probably reprobated by many at the 
time1 as well as by later writers2 but  
the mere possibility of their public    
enunciation shows how far the ,athenians
 had gone from their old religious      
beliefs4  ,footnote #g3 ,athen41 ,,vi1  
#fc4  ,allegorical impersonations1 such 
as that of ,antioch1 are religious      
conceptions of a high order compared to 
this4 ,nevertheless1 one feels that such
 impersonations can have no separate    
divine existence apart from the city or 
the people whom they represent4 ,they   
are on a different plane of religious   
belief from ,athena1 for example1 as the
 goddess of the city4 ,the goddess was1 
indeed1 in some ways representative of  
what was best in her chosen people2 but 
she was not a mere symbol of its        
character and its greatness4 ,she       
existed before it1 and would continue   
though it should disappear from the     

earth1 unlike the ,fortune of ,antioch1 
whose very existence was bound up with  
that of the city she represented4       
,another example of personification may 
be seen in the recumbent figures of     
river-gods--notably that of the ,nile1  
with his sixteen cubits1 as babies1     
playing around him4 ,river-gods were    
indeed an object of worship from early  
times in ,greece1 and so appear on coins
 and elsewhere2 but this figure of the  
,nile1 a product of ,alexandrian art1 is
 not like the earlier gods1 who were    
looked upon as the givers of increase   
and fertility2 it is a mere allegorical 
impersonation of the river1 such as     
might be made by a modern artist who    
made no pretence to believe in the      
existence of such an anthropomorphic    
river-god4 ,it cannot be counted as     
religious art at all4 ,and the          
attributes and accessories of such a    
figure1 the crocodile and hippopotamus1 
the sphinx and corn and horn of plenty1 
are all of them symbolic allusions such 

as are suitable to such a frigid        
personification4 ,the art of ,alexandria
 is full of such devices2 that of       
,pergamon is more vigorous and dramatic2
 but in both alike we find the influence
 of a learned study of mythology1 full  
of quaint and far-fetched allusions and 
symbols4 ,the culmination of this       
learned mythology is to be seen in the  
great altar of ,pergamon1 on which the  
gods who are in combat with the giants  
include not only all figures1           
appropriate and inappropriate1 from the 
,hellenic pantheon1 but many other      
deities whose right of admission to that
 pantheon is more than doubtful4 ,the   
figures of the gods no longer correspond
 to the belief in any real divinities1  
but are either mere artistic types1     
repeated again and again in accordance  
with convention1 or else they are       
regarded as symbols representing        
different aspects of divine power4      
,symbolism of this kind is a common     
symptom of the decay of religious faith4

 ,the more thoughtful or educated       
classes1 who follow the speculations of 
philosophers as to the nature of the    
deity1 find it possible to reconcile    
these speculations with the forms of    
popular religion by accepting the forms 
in a symbolic sense4 ,the common people1
 on the other hand1 finding the old     
forms inadequate to satisfy their       
religious aspirations1 import new and   
strange divinities1 whose cult is often 
mixed with magic or mystic rites4 ,here1
 too1 the symbols have a meaning other  
than what appears to the uninitiated    
eye1 and the province of art1 which     
approaches the mind through the senses1 
is closely circumscribed4 ,a statue or  
other work of art which needs           
explanation of its allusions1 which does
 not express an ideal that appeals      
directly to the imagination of the      
people1 has lost touch with religion1   
and cannot to any appreciable extent    
influence it or be influenced by it4    
,the age of idolatry in the higher      

sense1 of a religious imagination that  
enables the artist to bring the people  
nearer to their gods1 or even the gods  
nearer to the heart of the people1 has  
passed away1 and in its place we find   
either a superstitious clinging to the  
magic power of the early objects of     
worship1 or a mere acceptance1 as       
conventional symbols1 of forms that bear
 no direct relation to anything that is 
believed in as real4  ,our brief        
historical survey has shown us how the  
,greeks1 starting from a belief1 such as
 is common to many primitive religions1 
in the superhuman powers or sanctity of 
certain objects1 were enabled by their  
vivid anthropomorphic imagination first 
to think of the gods as in like form to 
themselves1 and then to make their      
images in human shape4 ,and as their art
 progressed towards the power of making 
a physical type of perfect beauty to    
serve as the means of expression of this
 human form divine1 and also to skill in
 expressing character by means of human 

features and figures1 it became possible
 for them to embody in their great      
statues the various ideals of divinity  
which belonged to their chief gods4     
,here the skill of the artist would have
 availed little or nothing if he had not
 shared with the people for whom he     
worked a belief in the reality of these 
ideals1 not merely as philosophic       
aspects of the divine nature1 but as    
real beings who were able to help and to
 inspire1 and to manifest themselves to 
their worshippers in this human form4   
,the next step is towards an even more  
vivid realisation of the personality of 
the gods2 but by bringing them nearer to
 human level it made the worship of     
their images less easy to accept in a   
literal sense to the more thoughtful1   
while such worship tended1 with the     
common people1 to enter upon a more     
material and less exalted phase4 ,the   
result was a tendency towards symbolism 
in which the symbol itself was regarded 
as a mere convention1 and the           

inspiration and actual communion with   
men1 vouchsafed by the gods through     
their ideal images1 was no longer sought
 after4 ,when any means of communion    
between god and man1 whether by means of
 a solemn service or by means of an     
image which the god himself accepts as  
his earthly representative1 ceases to be
 felt as anything more than a human     
device1 its religious power must fail4  
,when1 on the other hand1 we find a     
union of religion and art to provide a  
means for this divine intercourse1 we   
may recognise idolatry in its highest   
form1 the use of images not merely as   
accessories of religious service1 but as
 providing in themselves a channel of   
worship and inspiration4     ,,william  
,,brendon ,,and ,,son1 ,,ltd4           
,,printers1 ,,plymouth     ,harper's    
,library of ,living ,thought  ,foolscap 
#hvo1 gilt tops1 decorative covers1     
richly gilt backs ,per ,volume3 ,cloth  
#bs4 #f;d4 net1 ,leather #cs4 #f;d4 net 
,original research of great             

importance4--,times  ,,crete1 ,,the     
,,forerunner ,,of ,,greece ,,by ,c4 ,h4 
,hawes1 ,m4,a4  ,harriet ,b4 ,hawes1    
,m4,a4 ,with ,map1 ,plans1 etc4 ,preface
 by ,arthur ,j4 ,evans1 ,d4,litt41      
,f4,r4,s41 ,etc4  ,mr4 and ,mrs4 ,hawes 
have a fascinating story to tell--the   
story of the unfolding of a great       
civilisation which flourished in ,crete 
before ,abraham was born4 ,reading these
 deeply interesting pages we seem to get
 right back into the dawn of history4   
,we seem to enter into the feelings of  
the inhabitants when the ships of the   
sea-rovers hove in sight4 ,here a       
carpenter's kit lies concealed in a     
cranny2 there a carefully mended anvil  
stands at the door of the village       
smithy4 ,in the palace at ,knossos the  
system of drainage is superior to any   
known in ,europe between that day and   
the last century4 ,most wonderful of all
 is the art2 two small ivory figures of 
youths leaping1 display a life and      
freedom nothing short of marvellous4    

,evening ,standard     ,harper's        
,library of ,living ,thought  ,now      
,ready  ,algernon ,charles ,swinburne   
,,three ,,plays ,,of ,,shakespeare  ,leo
 ,tolstoy   ,,the ,,teaching ,,of       
,,jesus  ,w4 ,m4 ,flinders ,petrie      
,,personal ,,religion ,,in ,,egypt      
,,before ,,christianity  ,sir ,oliver   
,lodge1 ,f4,r4,s4   ,,the ,,ether ,,of  
,,space4 ,illustrated  ,prof4 ,william  
,wrede 7,university of ,breslau7   ,,the
 ,,origin ,,of ,,the ,,new ,,testament  
,prof4 ,c4 ,h4 ,becker 7,colonial       
,institute1 ,hamburg7   ,,christianity  
,,and ,,islam  ,prof4 ,svante ,arrhenius
 7,nobel ,institute1 ,stockholm7   ,,the
 ,,life ,,of ,,the ,,universe4 #b vols4 
,illustrated  ,prof4 ,arnold ,meyer     
7,university of ,zurich7   ,,jesus ,,or 
,,paul8  ,prof4 ,d4 ,a4 ,bertholet      
7,university of ,basle7   ,,the         
,,transmigration ,,of ,,souls  ,prof4   
,reinhold ,seeberg 7,university of      
,berlin7   ,,revelation ,,and           
,,inspiration  ,prof4 ,johannes ,weiss  

7,university of ,heidelberg7   ,,paul   
,,and ,,jesus  ,prof4 ,rudolf ,eucken   
7,university of ,jena7   ,,christianity 
,,and ,,the ,,new ,,idealism  ,prof4 ,p4
 ,vinogradoff 7,oxford ,university7     
,,roman ,,law ,,in ,,mediaeval ,,europe 
,sir ,william ,crookes1 ,,ll4,d41       
,f4,r4,s4   ,,diamonds4 ,illustrated    
,c4 ,h4 ,hawes1 ,m4,a41 and ,harriet    
,boyd ,hawes1 ,m4,a4   ,,crete1 ,,the   
,,forerunner ,,of ,,greece  ,sir        
,william ,a4 ,tilden4 ,f4,r4,s4   ,,the 
,,elements3 ,,speculations ,,as ,,to    
,,their ,,nature ,,and ,,origin  ,prof4 
,ernest ,a4 ,gardner 7,university of    
,london7   ,,religion ,,and ,,art ,,in  
,,ancient ,,greece  ,other volumes will 
be duly announced ,please write for a   
prospectus  ,june1 #aiaj4 ,,harper      
,,brothers #de ,albemarle ,street1      
,london4 ,w4 3 3 ,franklin ,square4 ,new
 ,york4