CHAPTER XV

THE MODERN BRITISH SCHOOL

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

This is an English book. It is written for men and women who look upon the world from the distinctive standpoint arising from the use of a common language. At the head of a chapter devoted to sculpture in modern England, let it be said, definitely and defiantly, that _there is an English school_.

The proposition is by no means as sure of general acceptance as it should be. There are many critics who appear to doubt the existence of English sculpture. They seem to regard Paris as the only source of modern work and the English school as a mere branch of the French. The real truth is that, apart from technique, the English sculptor has little to learn from his Continental neighbour. We are not writing of clay-thumbers or marble-chippers, who work for the promise of a measure of material prosperity. We have in mind earnest craftsmen who turn to sculpture naturally—joying in an art which enables them to give form to the thoughts and feelings astir around them. Great Britain has no cause to fear a comparison between the number of such men working in England and France. Owing to the lack of a gallery like the Luxembourg and the absence of the magnificent facilities offered by the Salons, the quality and the quantity of the work produced by the English school is hard to gauge. Nevertheless, it exists. When the English National Gallery is rebuilt according to Barry’s design and the two glazed loggie, flanking the main entrance and each running for 300 feet by 15 along the face of the building, are filled with British sculpture, doubt will be impossible.

Nor is this all. English sculpture is, in a very true sense, a national art. Not as we should apply the term to the art of seventeenth-century Holland or Ancient Athens, but in the sense that modern French sculpture is national. In both England and France, a body of sculptors has arisen, able and anxious to express to the full individualities which have been moulded by the influences among which it works.

As we have seen, this became possible in France about the middle of the last century. In England the growth of a similar movement may be traced back some thirty years. A convenient date is 1877, when Sir Frederic Leighton exhibited his epoch-making bronze “Athlete struggling with a Python.”

After the death of Flaxman, the English sculptors drifted into the same blind alley in which most of the Frenchmen found themselves. For fifty years they made little or no effort to rid themselves of the false canons of Canova and the philo-Hellenes. Westmacott, MacDowell, and Wyatt, to mention three English sculptors, all based their style upon that of the Venetian master. Arguing from the supreme achievements of the Greeks, they chose to imitate the classic manner as closely as possible. Their technique was Greek; their subjects were Greek; everything was Greek except their habits of thought and feeling. To Canova and Thorvaldsen, the ideas of Winckelmann and Lessing had come with the freshness of a newly discovered truth. They had the stimulating force of novelty. During the following fifty years, however, the pseudo-Greek canon was merely accepted as a convenient form which at least had the merit of sparing the artist the trouble of fresh invention.

The consequences, as far as English sculpture is concerned, can best be realized from a visit to the Gibson Gallery at Burlington House, London.

Gibson, who was born in 1790, was, perhaps, the most popular of Canova’s English pupils—assuming that he did not forfeit all claim to be regarded as an Englishman during his twenty-seven years’ stay in Rome. Upon his death, in 1866, he bequeathed the contents of his studio to the British public, and they are now housed in the Diploma Gallery at the Royal Academy. Gibson is perhaps best known through his “Venus.” It created a stir at the time of its first exhibition, owing to the sculptor’s attempt to popularize “tinted” sculpture, in imitation of the classical fashion. The statue was designed to stand in a pale purple-blue niche. The hair and eyes of the goddess were decidedly coloured, the body being stained a rose tint. Gibson, however, failed to persuade the public and the sculptors of his age that any departure from an absolute dependence upon pure form was desirable. The “Tinted Venus” was the first and the last of its race.

An equally illuminating example of Gibson’s style can be seen at the Tate Gallery. This is the group, “Hylas and the Nymphs,” modelled in 1826. The technical industry of the sculptor and his feeling for sculptural form are obvious at once. But no one, comparing the “Hylas” with the modern works of the British school which surround it, can fail to see the sickly conventionalism with which it is imbued. Notice, for instance, the modelling of the limbs of the two nymphs, and compare them with those of the boy. Surely any imaginative sculptor of the modern school would insist, above all, upon the obvious contrast between the male and the female form, seeing that the story of Hylas itself depends upon this very point. Gibson, however, practically models the male and the female limbs, the male and the female flesh, alike. Hylas has not the legs of a youth, nor have the nymphs, who have been smitten by his beauty, the legs of women. Gibson has chosen to adopt a conventional compromise, unrelated to anything in nature, and selected for no other reason than a fancied resemblance to the Greek style. The three figures are graceful enough. But they are unsatisfying in the last degree to all who have felt the far more potent emotions arising from a rigid adherence to nature. Hence “Hylas and the Nymphs” and the works in the Gibson Gallery remain as perpetual memorials of all that the artists of our own day had to rid themselves before the rebirth of English sculpture was possible.

Matters improved very little during the thirty years following the production of Gibson’s “Hylas.” What can we learn from the exhibitions of 1851 and 1862, which may be fairly taken to represent the apotheosis of mid-Victorian artistic taste?

In his official guide to the Fine Art Section of 1862 the editor, F. T. Palgrave—of “Golden Treasury” fame—refers to sculpture as “the forlorn hope of modern art,” and proceeds to answer the question “whence this deathly decline?” The exhibition contained examples of all that was best in English sculpture to that time. “The Falling Titan,” by Banks, now in the Diploma Gallery; the “Thetis and Achilles” relief, now in the Tate Gallery; Nollekens’ “Cupid and Psyche” Joseph’s ”Wilberforce” (Westminster Abbey), and works by Flaxman, Westmacott, Chantrey, Wyatt, Watson and Park represented the earlier masters. Sculptures by Armstead, Baily, Foley, Gibson, MacDowell, Marshall, Woolner and the younger Westmacott witnessed to the achievements of the living. Yet Palgrave could only grieve over the decline in natural taste and the entire absence of that healthy severity and earnestness of spirit in which sculpture flourishes. “Serious as the subject claims to be,” says Palgrave, “I confess it is difficult to think of Nollekens’ ‘Venus,’ Canova’s ‘Venus,’ Thorvaldsen’s ‘Venus,’ Gibson’s ‘Venus,’ everybody’s ‘Venus’ with due decorum. One fancies one healthy, modern laugh would clear the air of these idle images—one agrees with the honest old woman in the play who preferred a roast duck to all the birds in the heathen mythology.”

In the “Albert Memorial” erected in Kensington Gardens, London, “by the Queen and people of a grateful country,” we have a concrete example of what was in Palgrave’s mind when he wrote.

Prince Consort was himself a man of real artistic perception. By his magnificent work in connection with the 1851 Exhibition he had done an immense amount to raise the standard of taste in England. Funds were not wanting. £50,000 was subscribed by the nation and at least another £60,000 was raised by public subscription. The Eleanor Cross was designed by Sir Gilbert Scott and all the leading sculptors were invited to co-operate. If the mid-Victorians had had it in them to produce a noble work, surely we should have seen the result in the “Albert Memorial.” An examination only confirms the general impression which every Londoner has about the monument. The “Asia” by Foley, for instance; the “Africa” by Theed; the “Agriculture” by the elder Thornycroft—in none of these can we see any clear evidence that the sculptors had yet rid themselves of the conventions which had been hampering them for at least fifty years.

THE RISE OF NATURALISM

Nevertheless, among those engaged upon the Albert Memorial were men who were to see the advent of a new spirit. Foley himself, who died in 1874, lived to carve the fine equestrian statue of Sir James Outram. This was one of the earliest works to show a clear trace of the return to the observation of nature, which was necessary if the English sculptors were to follow the lead given by Carpeaux in France. Even in H. H. Armstead’s work upon the frieze running round the podium of the Albert Memorial there are traces of a largeness and vigour of treatment indicative of better things. Both, however, were born too early to give English sculptors a decisive lead.

Strangely enough at the very time the sculptors of England were working upon the Albert Memorial, one of the greatest geniuses in the history of English sculpture was working upon another national monument. We mean Alfred Stevens, the sculptor of the “Wellington Memorial” in St. Paul’s Cathedral—the most complete piece of decorative sculpture ever set up in this country.

Born in 1817, Stevens went to Italy in 1833. He spent a portion of the nine years he lived there in Thorvaldsen’s studio, but his first study was painting. On his return to England he became a teacher of architectural drawing at Somerset House and then started a career as a decorative designer. Helped by such followers as Godfrey Sykes and Moody, who carried his principles into the Government art school, Stevens founded a school of domestic decorators which influenced decorative art in England through the remainder of the nineteenth century. A brilliant example of this side of Stevens’s genius is furnished by the magnificent “Fireplace” at Dorchester House.

Stevens’s great chance as a sculptor came in 1856 when he secured the commission for the Wellington Memorial. Such a group as the “Truth tearing out the tongue of Falsehood” is alone sufficient to prove how far Stevens was ahead of the English sculptors of his time in originality of treatment and breadth of design. It is true that the sculptor’s indebtedness to Michael Angelo is obvious, but the work of Stevens does not show any slavish copying of the great Florentine. The English sculptor has merely solved his problem by the light of Angelo’s experience. He has sought to reach the boldness of mass and line which he found in the master’s sculpture. A certain naturalism, also derived from his study of Renaissance art, together with its magnificently bold design and architectural fitness, gives the Wellington Memorial a unique place in the history of English sculpture. Nevertheless, Alfred Stevens was the Baptist of English Naturalism. He died—a voice crying in the wilderness. So little was his work esteemed that the Wellington Memorial itself was not brought up from the crypt and placed in the nave of the Cathedral, where it could be seen, until long after the sculptor’s death in 1875.

In spite of Stevens’s apparent failure, the elements of a regenerated school of English sculpture existed. It only needed a man of real artistic influence and established reputation to focus attention upon the possibility of better things. In view of the position which the sister art of painting held in England, it is not surprising that the lead came from two painters. Both were men of commanding personality, and both were in the very prime of their artistic careers. The one was G. F. Watts, the other, of course, was Frederic Leighton.

Watts’s bronze bust, “Clytie,” was modelled some years before Leighton’s “Athlete Struggling with a Python,” and never aroused the enthusiastic admiration which fell to the later work. Nevertheless, the “Clytie”—it can be seen at the Tate Gallery—was a work of real beauty and power. Moreover, it displayed a naturalism which distinguished it from almost all the plastic art produced in England earlier in the century. This alone entitles G. F. Watts to an honourable place in the history of the renascence of English sculpture.

Leighton’s “Athlete and Python” was a far more ambitious work than Watts’s “Clytie.” It began as a small study, and the story goes that Dalou—some say Legros—persuaded Leighton to carry out the design in life-size. Three years later it was ready.

Probably sheer beauty of formal design was Leighton’s chief aim. But what struck his contemporaries was the finely vigorous pose, the splendid rendering of energetic movement and the magnificent naturalism with which an unfamiliar subject was rendered. The man holds the creature at arm’s-length, striving to prevent the thrust of the ugly jaws, which threaten death if once they can bring the full weight of the crushing coils to bear. The reception accorded to Leighton’s “Athlete and Python” was such that it is no exaggeration to date the model school of English sculpture from its exhibition. Appropriately enough, it became the first purchase under the bequest of the sculptor, Chantrey.

But all great artistic revivals are two-sided. There must be a spiritual stimulus as well as a technical. If the first may be credited to Leighton as far as the revival of English sculpture is concerned, the improvement in technique is undoubtedly traceable to Jules Dalou, the French sculptor. Our readers will remember how Dalou fled from Paris, on account of his connection with the Commune. During his stay in England he was persuaded to conduct the modelling class at South Kensington. The influence of his technical example and forceful personality began to show itself at once. Dalou made South Kensington one of the first centres of sculptural training in the world. When he returned to Paris, he was succeeded by Professor Lanteri—the sculptor of the virile “Head of a Peasant,” in the Tate Gallery—whose influence has since rivalled that of Dalou. Both were magnificently facile workers in clay. By continued practical demonstration they proved to the younger English sculptors the inestimable value of ease in modelling. The English school, as a whole, is still behind the French in facility of execution, but Dalou and Lanteri have done very much to remedy the defect.

The Dalou influence was continued in the second great training school of London—the Lambeth School of Art—by his pupil, W. S. Frith. The success of Mr. Sparks’ school may be judged from the fact that Alfred Gilbert, Frampton, Goscombe John, Harry Bates, Pomeroy and Roscoe Mullins all graduated there. Indeed, at one time, studentship at Lambeth seemed a necessary preliminary for all sculptors of ambition. Year after year, the gold medal at the Royal Academy and the £200 travelling scholarship were taken by Lambeth students.

If South Kensington and Lambeth have shared the honour of laying the foundations of the art education of the younger English sculptors, there are few cases in which the Academy schools cannot claim to have completed the task. The fact is often forgotten by the Academy’s many detractors. Under the present system, any sculptor of real promise can practically command a complete art education. The schools are free, the professors being the members of the Academy, who take monthly turns in the schools. Admission is by examination—that for a sculptor entailing the presentation of an anatomical drawing, showing bones and muscles, a model in the round of an undraped antique, and a life-sized medallion from the living model.

In many respects the Academy system is superior to that of the École des Beaux Arts. Such a judge as Mr. Edwin Abbey has even recommended American art students to choose London in preference to Paris on this account. “In Paris,” he says, “all the personality is rubbed out of a student. French methods and technique are hammered into him so unceasingly that he departs a mere reflection of the movement of the latest school. In London there is more catholicity in art matters; originality is strongly encouraged, and the student, particularly at the Royal Academy, is given every chance to develop along individual lines.”

This is proved by the fact that almost all the foremost English sculptors have been trained in the Academy schools. In France, men of pronounced originality like Rodin and Dalou become anti-Academic by instinct. In England, some men leave the beaten track which every academic course must follow, more readily than others. But even the most pronounced innovators seem able to benefit from the influence of the Academicians during their studentship.

Still the distinction between the sculptors who preserve the academic spirit throughout their careers and those who prefer to rely upon their native individuality does exist. It furnishes a convenient method for dividing the modern English school into two distinct parts. Among the first may be reckoned Thomas Brock and Hamo Thornycroft, while the second, and more important class, is headed by Alfred Gilbert, and includes Onslow Ford, Harry Bates, Frampton and Swan.

Thomas Brock was born in 1847. He was a pupil of Foley and, therefore, came sufficiently under the influence of the mid-Victorian school to mark a transition rather than a break from the older traditions. To-day he is pre-eminently the “safe” man in English sculpture—a fact which accounts for his receiving the commission for the Queen Victoria Memorial to be erected in front of Buckingham Palace. But Brock’s “safeness” does not prevent him executing work of real beauty. The “Eve,” in the Tate Gallery, is a work which any school of sculpture would be proud to claim. It shows the Mother of Men as a frail girl. She realizes for the first time what the loss of primal innocence entails and, with bowed head, moves slowly from the garden. The design is one of the most beautiful in English sculpture. The grace of line displayed in the treatment of the abdomen—so beautiful in womanhood—and the pose of the lower limbs are beyond criticism. If the “Eve” has a fault it is that the subject is clearly susceptible of highly dramatic treatment. In Mr. Brock’s statue there is no attempt to express the intensity of passion which a sculptor of the temper of Rodin would have regarded as the one thing worth rendering.

If Thomas Brock stands for the English academic ideal on its romantic side, Hamo Thornycroft represents the more naturalistic side of the same movement.

W. Hamo Thornycroft—who must be distinguished from his father, the sculptor of a group on the Albert Memorial—was born in 1850. His first exhibited work dates from 1871. A year later, he entered the Academy schools, gaining the gold medal in 1874, with his group “A warrior bearing his Wounded Son from Battle,” one of the very finest works which ever gained a studentship. It was no empty triumph. The young Thornycroft defeated no less an opponent than Alfred Gilbert, and his design challenged attention against such an exhibit as Stevens’s model for the Wellington Memorial. A man capable of such work in his student days was bound to go far.

“The Mower” (Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool) shows to what the virile naturalism of Thornycroft led. There is no sculpture which contains more of the thoroughly British spirit. Englishmen have little natural affection for the Whistler method of dashing off a “Harmony” in a couple of days and charging 300 guineas for it. They like to detect some definite proof of high thinking and strenuous workmanship in their art as in everything else. A sculpture of Thornycroft always leaves this impression. Added to that we feel that the artist is working towards a definite end, sufficiently ideal to demand effort, yet near enough to earth to come within his powers.

In the original sketch model of “The Mower,” the upper part of the figure was draped. Thornycroft, however, finally discarded the shirt. He evidently felt that the subject could be treated in a thoroughly modern manner without departing altogether from the classical method. He succeeded in producing a statue which is neither conventional nor iconoclastic.

Whether this is to be counted a virtue or a vice depends upon the critic’s temperament, but the question is, perhaps, worthy of examination.

Meunier, the Belgian sculptor, has modelled a bronze “Mower,” which Thornycroft’s statue irresistibly recalls. A comparison of the two works not only throws a searching light upon the whole school of sculpture which the Englishman represents, but, incidentally, brings into relief the leading characteristics of Meunier’s own work. No excuse is, therefore, necessary for interrupting our general survey of British sculpture with a reference to a sister school which really merits a chapter to itself.

Meunier is a man who has devoted himself to themes suggested by the colliery and artizan life of his country.

Brought up in the Belgian Black Country, the sombre gloom of the life there became part of his very being. After a period of continuous struggle against poverty and sickness, he turned to sculpture at the age of fifty, under the influence of the achievements of Rodin. As a result, we see in Meunier’s “Mower” the thought and emotion of a man who feels the beautiful misery of labour in the depths of his soul. The intense human pathos enshrined in the bronze is something which the English sculptor neither feels nor seeks to express.

In saying this we are in no sense disparaging Mr. Thornycroft’s work. True, he makes no attempt to suggest the vague poetry with which Meunier invests his Flemish or Walloon labourers. But, at any rate, the classic severity with which he has treated an essentially modern theme strikes us as thoroughly honest. There is no trace of a pose. Thornycroft has set down what he saw and what he felt. The hint of the Greek manner in the representation of the English labourer only reminds us that the sculptor who would express the beauty of the male form to-day is faced with the very task which the Athenian essayed 2000 years ago.

Leighton’s “Athlete and Python,” Brock’s “Eve” and Thornycroft’s “Mower” must, then, be compared with the works of such Frenchmen as Chapu, Idrac and Dubois. From the three Englishmen we turn naturally enough to the sculptors who represent the movement in English art corresponding to the anti-academic revolt in France. The characteristic common to Leighton, Brock, and Thornycroft is a certain emotional restraint. They seem to content themselves with the truthful representation of natural beauty. From none of the three do we gain the impression of a forceful individuality striving after self-expression. Nevertheless, there is a movement in English art comparable with the anti-academic revolt in France.

THE GROWTH OF INDIVIDUALISM

Alfred Gilbert is the Carpeaux and the Rodin of English sculpture. The analogy must not be pressed too closely. But, as the first sculptor to widen the bounds of his art by arousing his fellows to a sense of fresh technical possibilities, the influence of Alfred Gilbert may rightly be compared with that of Carpeaux. Through the constancy and power with which he has asseverated his belief in sculpture as a means of emotional expression, Gilbert ranks as the English Rodin.

Unlike Rodin, Gilbert has never severed his connection with the academic school. Indeed, the Professorship of Sculpture at the Royal Academy was actually revived in his favour in 1901. But Gilbert’s artistic creed is essentially Rodinesque. Again and again he has preached from the text:

“Be your own star.”

Again and again he has impressed upon the sculptors of to-morrow the vital truth—that the future lies with men who will dare to put themselves into marble and bronze. He has never tired of reiterating his belief that for the sculptor:

“Strength is from within, and one against the world will always win.”

Born in 1854, Alfred Gilbert realized his vocation in early youth. As a boy it is said that he carved heads of walking sticks for his schoolmates. He confesses himself that he hired a small room near Aldenham School at 1_s_. a week as a studio. Coming up to London, he finally entered the Royal Academy schools and joined Sir Edgar Boehm—Queen Victoria’s sculptor in ordinary—as an “improver.” After losing the R.A. Gold Medal to Thornycroft, he crossed to Paris, studying at the École des Beaux Arts.

Gilbert has put on record his reasons for leaving France. They are thoroughly typical of the sculptor. Finding the influences at work were too potent to allow of the due assertion of his own personality, he determined to go to Italy—a stronghold of individualism. “In Florence,” he tells us, “I saw, for the first time in my life, the works of the fathers of the Renaissance, and I was struck by the absolute independence and freedom of thought and truthful representation of the ideas they possessed. So impressed was I with the fact that their representations were not mere photographs and yet so true to nature, that they seemed to reveal to me what I then understood as style, but which I have since learnt to regard as the expression of an individuality.”

This is the essence of the artistic philosophy of Alfred Gilbert. It adumbrates a high ideal, but allied with sane craftsmanship, it is one which has always served the sculptor who honestly strove to put its precepts into practice. What has been the outcome in Gilbert’s case?

There is a strain of pathos in the answer. No sculptor of our day has had more abundant opportunities. Yet, somehow, Fortune has proved a fickle jade to Gilbert. This is particularly the case with his larger works.

The Shaftesbury Memorial, in Piccadilly Circus, should be regarded by every Londoner as an epoch-making work. It compares with Stevens’s monument to the Duke of Wellington in the wealth, imagination and craftsmanship lavished upon it. In point of fact, it is held in universal disregard. Not one Londoner in a thousand even troubles to remember the name of the sculptor.

The Shaftesbury Memorial was conceived under an unlucky star. Alfred Gilbert was about thirty years of age when the commission reached him. He accepted it as the chance of a lifetime. The design has always been admitted to be a masterpiece, but throughout its erection, the Memorial was dogged by misfortune, until, as it stands to-day it can hardly be said to represent the sculptor’s idea at all. This is due to causes largely outside his control. It is true that the aluminium figure of the archer which surmounts it has darkened and has lost its first silvery lightness. It may be alleged that Gilbert should have foreseen the eventuality. But in several material respects the Memorial differs entirely from what he proposed. At the very last moment a new base was added at the request of a party of humanitarians who were anxious that the thirsty Londoner might not be disappointed. Alfred Gilbert’s design did not contemplate this, but the London County Council held that, since the monument had taken the form of a fountain, it was only logical—logical, forsooth!—that water should be there for man and beast. Later the design was shorn of its ground-floor—which was to have been a bronze basin. This space is now occupied by the steps. The sculptor contemplated the water from the fountain playing into the basin. The change actually reduced the structure by six feet. Finally, the cry of a too large water bill was raised, and the jets of all shapes and forms, which were to have played among the fishes that form the principal part of the decorative scheme, were reduced to the present trickle.

Our readers may remember how the artists of Florence turned out to debate what site the “David” of the youthful Michael Angelo was to occupy. A less tragic note would sound through the story of the Shaftesbury Memorial if the sculptor had had to deal with a similar body of men, instead of a committee chosen for its ability to collect subscriptions and a soulless corporation like the London County Council.

In the nature of things it is hard to illustrate the whole of a full and vigorous personality from one or two of his works. Perhaps Gilbert, in his double capacity of craftsman and imaginative designer, can best be judged from the Tomb of the late Duke of Clarence, in the Memorial Chapel, Windsor. It has a double interest, inasmuch as it reveals at once the strength and the weakness of his method.

Directly after the sad death of the Prince in 1892, the sculptor was called to Sandringham. He arrived on the Saturday and learnt the wishes of the present King and Queen. During the Sunday night Gilbert conceived and designed the whole monument. Three days later he submitted the completed sketch.

He knew the Wolsey Chapel in which the tomb was to be placed to be of Gothic design and, consequently, determined upon a sarcophagus, surrounded by an open-work grille, such as Peter Vischer might have chosen. As it is to be seen to-day, the recumbent figure of the Prince lies upon the bier. Two angels kneel, the one at the head, the other at the feet. With beautiful fancy, Gilbert has carved the first holding a crown above the dead man’s head—the crown of immortality, which prince, peer and peasant can earn. The angel at the base of the sarcophagus places a broken wreath on the feet—in memory of a death upon the eve of marriage.

The figure of the “Saint George” is one of a series of Patron Saints introduced into the grille. St. Nicholas, St. Edward the Confessor, St. Barbara, and St. George are included, the selection depending upon some legendary connection with the Royal House of Britain.

The “Saint George” was exhibited in the form of a statuette at the Royal Academy. The poetical design and fine craftsmanship aroused general enthusiasm. What could be more charming, for example, than the grace with which Gilbert has played with his pretty fancy of basing the armour of the Saint upon forms suggested by the sea-shells? Yet there is nothing oppressive in the sculptor’s use of this idea. It is never permitted to interfere with the main lines of the figure. The insistence upon the shell-like forms has, rather, a fugal charm, the fancy being treated now in one part of the design, now in another, a slightly varying form here, answering a similar one there, until all have been interwoven into one beautiful complexity.

Unfortunately, the praise that is due to a work as beautiful as the “Saint George” cannot be given to the Clarence Memorial as a whole. Indeed, in its place, the effect of the statuette, instead of being heightened, is diminished. The instance is typical of the impression left by the complete work. Brilliantly imaginative as the general conception was, the original ideas have not fused into that grand unity which is the last test of the greatest works of art. Between the first conception of a great memorial—say the Medici Chapel, the Tomb of Maximilian, or the Clarence Memorial—and the final result, there is a great gulf fixed. More than imaginative craftsmanship is required to bridge this. The task calls for unswerving patience and not a little business tact. In one or another of these faculties, Gilbert seems to be lacking. The imagination and craftsmanship which produce a work like the “Saint George” flag before a commission of the first magnitude is completed. An artistic creed like Alfred Gilbert’s is a magnificent thing. But it needs to be allied with strength of character and a rigid self-criticism. Had the English sculptor added a measure of the nature of Michael Angelo to the strain of rich poetry and high artistic ideality with which he has been endowed, England would have been able to boast a genius of the first order. As things are, it can be grateful for—an Alfred Gilbert.

The sculptor who shared with Alfred Gilbert the honour of having been the earliest Englishman to express through marble and bronze the whole of a rich poetical philosophy was Onslow Ford. Born in 1852 and sending his first work of sculpture to the Academy in 1875, Onslow Ford received his early training as a painter. Indeed, he never had any systematic instruction as a sculptor. He came into notice by winning the “Rowland Hill” competition, the result being the statue which stands behind the Royal Exchange, within a stone’s-throw of Dalou’s charming bronze fountain, “Maternity.”

Very shortly after he carved the magnificent marble “Henry Irving as Hamlet,” now at the Guildhall, the property of the Corporation of London. The “Henry Irving” is one of the most complete efforts in English art. The beauty of the design and the powerful modelling of the face and hands, place the statue in the very forefront of modern English sculpture. Added to this is the magnificent realism with which the sculptor has preserved the sense of theatrical portraiture. The figure is not Henry Irving; nor is it Hamlet. The imaginative insight of the artist has been able to reach an absolute fusion of the two ideas. It really is “Henry Irving as Hamlet.”

No reference to the genius of Onslow Ford would be complete without a word as to his statuettes, particularly as “sculpture in little” may well prove to be the means whereby the English sculptor will regain the attention of the art-buyer in the near future.

One of Onslow Ford’s most charming efforts in this direction is the delightfully whimsical “Folly.” It represents a figure with the adolescent charms of budding womanhood balancing herself on the edge of a precipitous rock. Toes clutching at the slippery edge—a fancy which is characteristic of Onslow Ford—“Folly” is calling to the foolish to follow the dream picture she can see in the distance. The charm of the little work lies in the freshness of the conception, the perfect balance of the figure and the beautiful realism with which form and flesh have been rendered. “The Egyptian Singer” (Tate Gallery) is an equally charming example of the sculptor’s art.

Onslow Ford died in 1901. A sculptor of almost equal genius, though of less prolific accomplishment, was lost to English sculpture at an equally early age. We are referring to Harry Bates (1847-1899). There are two fine examples of his work at the Tate Gallery, London. Note the grace with which the artist’s imagination has given a new turn to so hackneyed a theme as the myth of Pandora: Bates’s “Pandora” is less an illustration of the Greek story than it is of an episode in the life-history of a woman of to-day. A sweet, virginal figure, she is opening the box in which Fate has hidden the unknown, without a premonition of the sorrows which must attend the revelation of the secret.

The equally well-known “Hounds in Leash,” was sculptured by Bates to prove that he was as much at home in treating a subject requiring the expression of vigorous action as he was in the treatment of figures at rest.

There are many sculptors in England at the present time who would claim attention were our survey an exhaustive one. This, of course, is not our purpose. It will therefore suffice to recall two other works in proof of the intense individualism of latter-day sculpture in Great Britain.

The first is J. M. Swan’s charming statuette “Orpheus,” exhibited in the Royal Academy of 1895.

J. M. Swan is, of course, the painter. He studied first at Lambeth, then at the Academy and finally at Paris, where he came under the influence of Frémiet, the animal sculptor. It is as a sculptor of animals that Swan has made his reputation. Indeed he may be roughly labelled as the English Barye.

Note how delightfully the sinuousness of the lithe figure of the “Orpheus” is rendered. Here we have the spirit, not the echo, of the Greek myth. Like Barye, Swan is a realist, though his method is the reverse of realistic, since he is more concerned with the masses than the details. Swan’s supreme gift lies in his power to detect character in the whole of the human and animal form. His charm depends on the delightfully individualistic methods by which he expresses his insight. None of his statuettes ever strike us as coming from another man’s studio.

An equally strong individualistic note is struck in George Frampton’s “Mysteriarch.”

This beautiful marble was exhibited in the Academy of 1893. It affords a fine example of the sculptor’s art at its best. The bust is set in front of a gilded disc supported upon an architecturally treated screen, the figure being cut, Florentine fashion, just below the shoulders. The treatment of the subject is in a high degree imaginative, while the subtlety with which the serene severity of the face is rendered proves the possession of fine technical powers.

George Frampton was born in 1860. He studied, like Harry Bates, under Mr. Frith at Lambeth, passed on to the Academy school, and finished by gaining the Gold Medal in 1887. He has since acted as an art adviser to the Technical Education Board of the London County Council, a position which has enabled him to give a wide currency to very definite artistic ideals. He is one of the men with whom the future of English sculpture rests.

This brief sketch of modern British sculpture completes our task. Our aim has been to map out the entire history of the art. In our view the study of the development of sculpture in terms of isolated craftsmen would have involved a basic fallacy. The individual is no more than the crest of a wave in the sea of mental, emotional and physical energy, whence art arises. We have, therefore, been content to note the various forms in which a common temper has found expression.

Doubtless it would have been possible to trace an international traffic in thought and emotion. Its main channels might have been correlated with the manifestations of an international art spirit. We have preferred to avoid the standpoint of cosmopolitanism and individualism alike, choosing the middle position—that of nationalism. The proposition that every great art is essentially a national art may be disputed. But it has the merit of not requiring actual demonstration. Most of us _feel_ that the artist must draw the greater part of his inspiration from the men and women with whom he lives and to whom he appeals. The only thing to avoid is a too narrow use of the word. “National” does not connote a merely territorial or a supposed racial bond. Coleridge defined the term for all time when he wrote: “I, for one, do not call the sod under my feet my country; but language, religion, laws, government, blood, identity in these make men of one country.”

That art alone is truly living which is a record and an interpretation of national life—an epitome of the loves and the hates, the sorrows and the joys, the caprices and the enthusiasms, of men like ourselves.

We have demonstrated that the marbles and the bronzes of the greater schools of sculpture of the past answer to this supreme test. Surely this justifies the proposition with which we started—“that they are not dead things which may be left to gather dust in unfrequented museums and galleries.”

One further claim upon the affection and regard of this restless century may be made. Much of the greatest sculpture speaks of other days than ours. It tells of times

“Before this strange disease of modern life, With its sick hurry, its divided aims, Its heads o’ertax’d, its palsied hearts, was rife.”

LIST OF BOOKS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

STURGIS (Russell). Annotated Bibliography of Fine Art, Boston (Mass.). 1897 QUARITCH (Bernard). Catalogue of Works on the Fine Arts (London). 1904 JELLINEK (Arthur L.). Art Bibliography. 1902

GREEK SCULPTURE IN GENERAL

JONES (Henry Stuart). Select Passages from Ancient Writers illustrative of the History of Greek Sculpture (with a Translation). 1895 FRAZER (J. G.). Pausanias (translated). 1900 GARDNER (Percy) and IMHOOF-BLUMER. A numismatic Commentary on Pausanias, &c. 1887 GARDNER (Ernest Arthur). Ancient Athens (Illustrated). 1902 COLLIGNON (Maxime). La Polychromie dans la Sculpture Grecque. 1898 COLLIGNON (Maxime). Manual of Mythology in relation to Greek Art. 1890 LÖWY. Inschriften griechischer Bildhauer. 1885 Journal of Hellenic Studies. Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies. 1880, &c. American Journal of Archæology (Baltimore). 1885, &c. FURTWAENGLER (Adolf). Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture Translated by Eugénie Sellers (Illustrated). 1895 GARDNER (Ernest Arthur). A Handbook of Greek Sculpture. 1905 COLLIGNON (Maxime). Histoire de la Sculpture Grecque (Illustrated). 1892-93 MURRAY (Alexander Stuart). A History of Greek Sculpture (Illustrated). 1890 AMELUNG and HOLTZINGER. Museums and Ruins of Rome (edited by Mrs. Strong) BRITISH MUSEUM. Official Guide to Sculpture Galleries. MURRAY (A. Stuart). Greek Bronzes (Portfolio). 1899 WALTERS (Henry Beauchamp). Catalogue of the Bronzes British Museum (Illustrated). 1899 PERROT (Georges) and CHIPIEZ (Charles). Histoire de L’Art dans L’Antiquité. 1891 Les Fouilles de Delphes, vol. ii. Sculpture PARIS (Pierre). Polyclete (Les Artistes Célèbres). 1895 MURRAY (A. Stuart). The Sculptures of the Parthenon (Illustrated). 1903 WALDSTEIN (Charles). Essays on the Art of Phidias. 1885 COLLIGNON (Maxime). Phidias (Les Artistes Célèbres). 1886 DEFRASSE (A.). and LECHAT (H.) Épidaure—Restauration et description des principaux monuments du Sanctuaire d’Asclépios (Illustrated). 1895 GARDNER (Percy). Sculptured Tombs of Hellas (Illustrated). 1896 PERROT (George). Praxitèle (Les Grands Artistes Series) (Illustrated). 1905 CURTIUS (E.) and ADLER (F.). Olympia (Illustrated). 1898 HAMDI BEY and REINACH (T.). Necropole la Royale á Sidon (Illustrated). 1892-6 COLLIGNON (Maxime). Lysippe (Les Grands Artistes Series) (Illustrated). 1905

POST-ALEXANDRIAN AND ROMAN SCULPTURE

BEVAN (E. R.). House of Seleucus. 1902 COLLIGNON (Maxime). Pergame (Restauration par E. Pontremoli) (Illustrated). 1900 TORR (C.). Rhodes in Ancient Times. 1885 MAHAFFY (J. P.). Empire of Ptolemies. 1895 WICKHOFF (Franz). Roman Art. Translated by Mrs. S. A. Strong (Illustrated). 1900 MRS. S. A. STRONG. Roman Art (Illustrated). 1907 SYMONDS (J. A.). Antinous, from Italian Sketches and Studies. 1898

ITALIAN SCULPTURE IN GENERAL

VASARI. The Lives of the Painters and Sculptors. SYMONDS (J. A.). Renaissance in Italy (vol. iv. The Fine Arts). 1877 VENTURI (A.). Storia dell Arte Italiana (Illustrated). 1901 BODE (Wilhelm). Renaissance Bronzes (Illustrated). 1907 PERKINS (C. C.). Italian Sculpture. 1883 REYMOND (Marcel). La Sculpture Florentine (Illustrated). 1897 FREEMAN (L. J.). Italian Sculpture of the Renaissance. 1901

THE PISANI AND THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY

CONWAY (W. Martin). Early Tuscan Art. From the Twelfth to the Fifteenth Centuries (Illustrated). 1902 WEIR (J. P.). Photographs of Baptistery Gates (L. Ghiberti), Yale College. 1873 DOUGLAS (R. L.). History of Siena. Chapter upon Jacopo della Quercia LORD BALCARRES. Donatello (Illustrated). 1903 CRUTWELL (Maud). Luca and Andrea della Robbia (Illustrated). 1902

MICHAEL ANGELO AND THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY

SYMONDS (J. A.). Life of Michael Angelo (Illustrated). 1893 HOLROYD (C). Michael Angelo, with translation of Life by Condivi. 1903 BENVENUTO CELLINI. Autobiography. Translated by J. A. Symonds DESJARDINS. Jean Bologne—La Vie et l’œuvre FRASCHETTI (S). Il Bernini (Illustrated). 1900 SCULPTURE OF MONARCHICAL FRANCE HEADLAM (Cecil). Peter Vischer (Handbook of the Great Craftsmen). 1906 GONSE (Louis). French Sculpture in the Fourteenth Century. 1895 GONSE (Louis). Chefs d’œuvres des Musée de France (Illustrated). 1900-4 PATTISON (Mrs. E. F. S.) (Lady Dilke). Renaissance of Art in France (Illustrated). 1879 LISTER (Reginald). Jean Goujon (Illustrated). 1903 AUQUIER (Philipe). Pierre Puget (Les Grands Artistes Series) (Illustrated). PATTISON (Mrs. E. F. S.) (Lady Dilke). French Sculptors of the Eighteenth Century (Illustrated). 1900 TARBÉ (Prosper). Vie et œuvres de Pigalle (Illustrated). 1859 THIRION (Henri). Les Adam et Clodion (Illustrated). 1885 DIERKS. Life of Houdon (In German). 1887 POST-REVOLUTIONARY SCULPTURE CICOGNARA. Works of Canova (Illustrated). 1876 PLON (Eugene). Thorvaldsen. Life and Works. Translated by Mrs. Cashel Hoey (Illustrated). 1874 HAMERTON (P. G.). Life of Rude (Modern Frenchman). 1878 FOURCAUD (L. de.). Life of Rude (Illustrated). 1904 SCOTT (W. B.). British School of Sculpture. 1872 COLVIN (Sidney). Flaxman. 1876

MODERN SCULPTURE

BROWNELL (W. C.). French Art. 1902 CLARÉTIE (J.). Contemporary Sculpture (Illustrated). 1881-7 ARSÈNE (Alexandre). Life of A. L. Barye (Illustrated). 1889 CHESNAU (E.). Le Statuaire de J. B. Carpeaux (Illustrated). 1880 DREYFOUS (M.). Dalou. La vie et son Œuvre (Illustrated). 1903 LAWTON (F.). Life of Rodin (Illustrated). 1906 MAUCLAIR (C.). Rodin. 1905 SPIELMANN (M. H.). British Sculptures and Sculptors of To-day (Illustrated). 1901 HATTON (Joseph). Alfred Gilbert. Art Journal (Illustrated). 1903 ARMSTRONG (W.). Life of Stevens. 1881 STANNUS (Hugh). Alfred Stevens (Illustrated). 1891 WILLARD (A. R.). History of Modern Italian Art (Illustrated). 1900 TAFT (L.). History of American Sculpture (Illustrated). 1903 DESTREE (O. G.). Sculpture in Belgium (Portfolio) (Illustrated). 1905 LEMONNIER (Camille). Constantin Meunier (Illustrated). 1904 WIEGAND (Otto). German Sculpture.

INDEX

Abbey, Edwin, 289 Academy, Royal Foundation of, 258, 261 Schools, 289, 290, 294 Medals, 261, 289, 291, 294, 302 Exhibits at, 297, 299, 301 Accademia delle Belle Arti, 204 Achæan League, 108 Acropolis at Athens, 12, 27, 77, 260 At Pergamus, 91 Ægospotami, 47, 194 Æschylus, 8, 194 Ætolian League, 109 “Africa,” by Theed, 285 Agasias, 69 Agatharchus, painter, 56 Ageladas, 23 “Age of Brass,” by Rodin, 273, 275 Agesander, 94 “Agias” of Lysippus, 73 Agostino di Duccio, 186 “Agriculture,” by Thornycroft (the elder), 285 Alaric, 139 Albert Memorial, 284, 285 Alcamenes, 36, 50 “Pentathlon Winner” of, 23 Alcibiades, 56 Alexander the Great, 66 Portrait by Lysippus, 78 Alexander of Pheræ, 66 Alexandria, sculpture of, 97, 98 “The Nile,” 97, 98 Conquest by Rome, 116 Alexandrian Empire, 84, 85 Allée d’Eau at Versailles, 239 Altar of Zeus. _See_ Zeus Aluminium, 296 Aldenham School Alfred Gilbert at, 294 Amboise, Cardinal of, 228 American sculpture. _See_ Preface Amphion, 97 Anet, Castle of, 230 Angelico, Fra, 165, 184 Angelo. _See_ Michael Angelo Angers, David d’, 265 Anne of Brittany, 226 Antigonus, 86 Antinopolis, 137 Antinous, 137, 138 Antioch, on the Orontes, 86, 87 Antiochus IV., 88 Antipater, 86 Apamea, City of, 87 Aphrodite Hellenistic conception of, 111 “Aphrodite of Cnidus,” 61-64, 96, 228 Comparison with “Venus of Medici,” 112 Compared with Canova’s “Venus,” 249, 250 Apollo Type fixed by Praxiteles, 57 “Apollo Belvedere,” 105, 108, 228 Count Stroganoff’s statuette, 106-107 Comparison with Pergamene style, 107 Popularity in eighteenth century, 248 “Apollo and Daphne” by Bernini, 218 “Apollo and the Nymphs,” by Girardon, 237-239 “Apoxyomenus” of Lysippus, 68-70, 74, 75 Ara Pacis, of Augustus, 130 Aratus, 108 Archaistic art, 12, 122 Architecture, 12, 29, 145, 146, 149, 152, 198, 222 “Ares Ludovisi,” 71 Argos, 108 Second to Athens as an artistic centre, 22, 31 “Ariadne” in Vatican, 228 Aristogiton, 13 Aristonidas of Rhodes, 103 Armourers, Guild of, Florence, 172 Armstead, H. H., 284, 285 Artemesia, 48, 49 “Artemis of Versailles,” 106 Asceticism In Gothic art, 152 In Italian Renaissance, 165, 173, 177 In French sculpture, 231 “Asclepius,” British Museum, 42 “Asia,” by Foley, 285 Aspasia, 60 Assisi, Francis of, 156-157, 161 Assisi, Upper Church at, 157 “Athamas,” Statue by Aristonidas, 103 Athena, 27 Polias, 30 Parthenos, 8, 28-32, 35, 119 “Lemnian Athena,” of Phidias, 77 “Triumph of Athena,” at Pergamus, 92, 112 Athenodorus, 94 Athens, 8, 22, 44, 77, 84 Influence of Ionia, 11, 12 Painted dedicatory statues from Acropolis, 12-13 Superiority over Dorian School, 22-24 Effects of Persian invasion, 25, 28 Parthenon, 27-33 Decline of Empire, 44-49 “Athens, the school of Hellas,” 47, 48 Ceramicus at, 54-55 Growth of individualism in, 53-56 Women in, 58-60, 110-112 Historical circumstances (362-338 B.C.), 66-68 Influence upon Alexandrian Empire, 84, 85 In Hellenistic times, 101-102, 114 Plundered by Sulla, 119 Visited by Roman Republicans, 118 Rebuilt, by Hadrian, 137, 138 Athens Museum, 12, 13, 103 “Athlete struggling with Python,” by Leighton, 281, 287, 288, 293 Athletic statuary Influence upon Hellenic art, 14-24, 169 In fourth century, 67-69 Attalus I., 91 Augustus Cæsar, 124, 131 Augustan Rome last Hellenistic centre, 127 “Organiser of Roman Imperialism,” 124, 125, 129, 130 Statue of, in Vatican, 125, 127, 128 Ara Pacis of, 130 Aurelius, Marcus Equestrian statue of, 139 German invasion under, 139 Austrian ascendency in Italy, 200, 218 Autobiography of Cellini, 203, 204, 205-209, 228-229 Avila, Convent of St. Joseph, 217

Babou de la Bourdaisière, 225 Babylonia, 7, 11, 35, 266 Baily, E. H., 284 Banks, Thomas, 284 Baptistery at Florence, 162, 199, 275 Barbara, St., 297 Barberini Maffeo, 214 Bargello, 173, 210 Baroco style. _Also see_ Bernini, 216 Barye, 265, 267, 301 “Centaur and Lapith,” 266 Bates, Harry, 288, 290, 302 “Pandora,” 300 Baudelaire, 275 Bayeaux, 148 Bedford, Duke of, 259 Belgian school, 237, 292, 293 Bellini, Giovanni, 184 “Belvedere Apollo.” _See_ Apollo Bentivoglio, 181 Berlin Museum, 92 Bernini and the Catholic reaction, 198, 200, 212-218 Rebuilds St. Peter’s, 214 “St. Teresa,” by, 216-217 “Apollo and Daphne,” by, 218 Fountains by, 218 Visit to France, 235 Influence upon Puget, 237 “Birth of Venus,” by Botticelli, 196 Boehm, Sir Edgar, 294 Boethus of Chalcedon, 115 Bologna, 181 Bologna, Giovanni, 198, 200, 203, 218 “Mercury,” by, 210 “Rape of Sabine Women,” by, 211 Influence upon French School, 211 Characteristics of his art, 210-212 Bontemps, 227 Borghese, Pauline, 249-250 Borgia, Cæsar, 200 Borgia, Francis, 215 Boscoreale, 115 Botticelli, 184, 187, 196, 222, 232 Boucher, 243 Bourges, 148, 150 “Boy strangling Goose,” 115 Brennus, 106 British Museum, 77, 230, 258 British school, 256-262, 280-302 Northern art, characteristics of, 221-224 Italian influence in sixteenth century, 256-257 Historical circumstances during seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,257, 258 Society of Dilettanti, 258-260 Pseudo-Greek canon, effects of, 260-262, 281, 293 Mid-Victorian, 283-285 Comparison with French, 257, 280, 281, 293 Naturalistic revival, 285-293 Growth of individualism, 293-302 Brock, Thomas, 290, 293 “Eve,” 290 Victoria Memorial, 290 Bronze, 24, 103, 105, 120, 121 Compared with marble, 68 Original Greek, 102, 115, 121 Casting of Cellini’s “Perseus,” 205-209 Brotherhood of San Michele, 171 Brunelleschi, Filippo, 163, 173 Bruni d’Arezzo, Leonardo, 166 “Bruno, St.” by Houdon, 244 Buonarroti, Ludovico, 185 Burlington House, 282 Byron, 89, 266 Byzantine art, 140, 141, 155

Cæsar, Julius, 119 Founder of Roman Imperialism, 124, 129 Portrait bust, 125, 126, 130 Calydonian boar, 72 Canova, 244-256, 262 His Hellenism compared with Donatello’s, 174 A borrowed Hellenism, 247, 254, 262, 281 “Cupid and Psyche,” 249 “Pauline Borghese,” 249, 250 Napoleon, statue of, 250 Flaxman compared with, 261, 262 French School, influence on, 263, 271 British School, influence on, 281-284 “Cantoria,” by Luca della Robbia, 178, 179 By Donatella, 178 Caracalla, Baths of, 97 Carpeaux, 265, 267, 268, 271, 285 Art training, 267 “Flora,” by, 267, 274 “Dance,” by, 268 Caraffa, 213 Carrara marble mines, 154, 191 Carrier-Belleuse, 273 Catholic Church Attitude of early Church towards sculpture, 140, 141 Gothic Art, influence on, 146-152, 165 Italian Platonists, 174 Patrons of sculptors in fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, 190, 191, 199 Catholic reaction, 198, 200, 212-218 Historical circumstances, 212-214 Effect on sculpture, 214-218 Ideals of, 215-216 Effect on sculpture, 216-217 and Puget, 237 Cella of Parthenon, 29 Cellini, Benvenuto, 198, 200, 203-210, 218 Early life, 204 French visit, 205, 228, 257 “Perseus,” 205-210 “Jove,” silver statue of, 229 Michael Angelo compared with, 210 “Centaur and Lapith,” by Barye, 266 Ceramicus, 54, 55 Cerigotto bronze, 102 Chæronea, 66, 67 Chambord, Châteaux of, 227 “Chant du Départ,” by Rude, 255, 267 Chantrey, Sir F., 284 Chantrey Bequest, 288 Chapu, Henri, 293 “Charioteer of Delphi,” 14 Mausoleum, comparison with Delphi Charioteer, 50 Chares of Lindus, 104 Charles the Great, 145, 146, 234 Charles V., 202, 213 Charles VIII., 225, 228 Chartres, 148, 150 Chatsworth, 252 Chiarmonti, “Daughter of Niobe,” 51 Child with Lantern, Terme Museum, 115 Chios, 12 Christianity Attitude towards sculpture, 117, 140, 141, 224 _See also_ Catholic Church Chryselephantine statues, 36, 56 Athena Parthenos, 28 Zeus at Olympia, 36 Hera at Argos, 36 Asclepius at Epidaurus, 42 Cimon, 26, 27, 181 Cipriani, 260 Cithæron, 97 City-state system Civic pride in fifth-century Greece, 15, 16, 26, 27, 33, 41, 108, 153 Necessity for physical fitness in Greece, 16, 17, 18, 67, 68, 69 Decline of civic pride, 46, 48, 49, 67 Political circumstances in fourth century, 46, 47, 67 Effects on sculpture, 69, 79, 80 Hellenistic age, 108, 109, 110 In France, 147, 148 In Northern Italy, 153, 154, 160, 166, 169, 181, 199, 200, 214 Clarence, Duke of, 297 Clarence Memorial, Windsor, 297-299 Clement VII., 191, 192 Clement XIII., 244 Clermont, 147 Clodion (Claude, François Michel), 243 Cluet, Jean, 225 Cluny Museum, 243 Cnidus. _See_ Praxiteles’ Aphrodite Cockerell, C. R., 50 Colbert, 235, 236 Colleoni Monument, by Verocchio and Leopardi, 139, 180 Collignon, Maxime, 129 Colombe, Michel Tomb of Francis II. of Brittany, 225 Founder of School of Tours, 225 Colossus at Rhodes, 104 Colour in statuary Athenian dedicatory, 13 Parthenon, 29 Mausoleum, 50 Aphrodite of Cnidus, 62 Sidon Sarcophagi, 76 “Augustus” in Vatican, 127, 128 Collignon’s “Polychromie dans la Sculpture Grecque,” 129 Evidence from wall paintings at Pompeii and Herculaneum, 129 “Tinted Venus,” by Gibson, 282 Commune, 272 Company of Jesus. _See_ Jesuits Condé, Hotel de, 235 Condivi, 188-189 Congreve, 114 Constable de Bourbon, 204 Constantine, 140 Constantinople, 76, 140 Convent of St. Paul, Parma, 195 Copenhagen, 251 Corinth, 119 Correggio, 184, 195, 222, 277 Corupedion, Battle of, 86 Cos, 61 Cosimo de Medici, 181-182, 192, 201 Cosimo, Piero di, 187 Cosmopolitanism, influence of modern, 110, 246, 302 Council of Trent, 202, 213 Cour des Comptes, Paris, 275 Cousin, 227 “Creation Panel” in Ghiberti’s Baptistery gates, 165 Cresilas, 77 Criticism, modern sculptural, 70-76 Critius, 14 Crusades, 147, 154 “Cupid and Psyche,” by Canova, 249 “Cupid and Psyche,” by Thorvaldsen, 251 “Cupid, The Winged,” Mr. Pierpont Morgan’s, 115

Dalou, Jules Pierre Puget and, 237 École des Beaux Arts, 271, 272, 289, 290 “Triumph of Silenus,” 272 Rodin, connection with, 271 Visit to England, 272, 287, 288 “Maternity” by, 299 “Danaid, Fallen,” by Rodin, 274 “Dance,” by Carpeaux, 268 Dante, influence on Rodin, 275 Dashwood, Sir Francis, 259 “David,” by Donatello, 173, 174, 188 By Michael Angelo, 185-188, 296 David d’Angers, 265 David (painter), 253 “Dawn,” by Michael Angelo, 193, 194, 196, 278 “Death of Socrates,” 54 Dedicatory offerings, Greek, 13, 18 Delacroix, 264, 266 Delafosse, 239 Delphi, 73, 106, 119 Demetrius, of Alopece, 79 Demosthenes, 66, 67 Devonshire, Duke of, 252 “Dexileus Relief,” 54 “Diadumenus” of Polyclitus, 22 “Diana,” archaistic, Naples, 12 “Diana,” by Houdon, 244 Diana of Poitiers, 230-231, 232 Statue of, in Louvre, 230 Diappus, his “Perixyomenus,” 74, 75 Dijon, 255 Diocletian, 140 Dionysus, Theatre of, 67 Diploma Gallery, London, 282, 284 Dirce, 97 “Discobolus” of Myron, 15, 21, 23 “Standing Discobolus,” 23 Donatello, 168-174 Assists Ghiberti, 164, 168 Burgher patrons, 169, 170, 199 Or San Michele, 172 “St. Mark,” its Gothic character, 172, 173 “St. George,” 172, 173 “David,” 173, 188 Platonism, influence of, 173-176 Pisani, comparison with, 177, 178 Cantoria, 178 Luca della Robbia and, 178 Rodin, compared with, 278, 279 Dorchester House, 286 Dorian invasion, 9 Dorian sculptors, 22 _See also_ Polyclitus “Doryphorus” of Polyclitus, 22 Drama, Greek, 8 Drapery, 31, 152 Dresden Gallery, 194 Dubois, Paul, 270, 293 Duomo at Florence, 187, 195 Durer, 224 “Dying Gaul,” 88-93 Inspired by Gaulish invasion, 89, 90 Compared with later Pergamene art, 92, 93 “Dying Jocasta,” 103, 104

Eastern Empire. _See_ Byzantium École des Beaux Arts Rude’s opinion, 254 Influence on French sculpture, 269-272 Rodin and, 274 Compared with Royal Academy, 289 Alfred Gilbert and, 294, 295 Egypt Ancient, 7, 9, 11, 35 Ptolemaic age, 97, 98 Hadrian, time of, 137 “Egyptian Singer,” by Onslow Ford, 300 Elgin marbles, 30, 31, 260 Elgin, Thomas, Earl of, 260 Elusis, Sacred Way to, 54 Epheboi, 67 Epidaurus Chryselephantine statue of Asclepius at, 42 “Eros” of Praxiteles, 60 Of Thespiae, by Praxiteles, 61 Of Centocelle, 61 ’Estampe, Madame D., 229 Este family, 181 Eumenes II., 91 Euphranor, 36 Eutychides of Sicyon, 87 “Eve,” by Brock, 290, 293 Exhibitions of 1851 and 1862, 283, 284 Falconet, Etienne Maurice, 242 “L’amour Menaçant,” 242, 243 Falguière, 270 Falieri, Senator, 249 “Falling Titan,” by Banks, 284 “Farnese Bull,” 97 “Farnese Hercules,” 101, 102 “Fates, The Three,” from Parthenon pediment, 31, 112 Feltre, Vittorino of, 174-175 Ferrara, 160, 181 Ferruccio, Francesco, 187 Fireplace, by Alfred Stevens, at Dorchester House, 286 Flaxman Connection with Neo-classical revival, 246, 247, 254, 261, 262 Early life, 261 Wedgwood, association with, 261 “Michael and Satan,” 261 Homeric illustrations, 262 Elgin marbles, opinion upon, 260 Successors of, 281, 284 “Flora,” by Carpeaux, 267, 274 Florence Struggles between Empire and Papacy, 153 Rise of city-state system, 153 Contention between city and city, 160, 169 Centre of intellectual activity in Italy, 160 Influence of Pisani upon sculpture, 157, 158, 164 Increase in trade and wealth, 169 Burghers’ pride in city, 169 Florentine guilds, their political influence, 169 Commissions for Baptistery gates, 162-164, 166, 169 Or San Michele, Oratory of, 171 Commissions for statuary on, Or San Michele, 172, 199 Cathedral, building of, 171 Luca della Robbia’s “Cantoria,” 178, 179 Influence of Medici family, 181, 191, 192, 196, 199, 203 Lorenzo the Magnificent, 182 State commissions Michael Angelo’s “David,” 185-187 Siege of, 196 Extinction of republic, 199 Loss of liberty, 200, 201 Decline of burgher class, 201 Cellini at, 205, 209 Sends craftsmen to France, 228 National Museum, 163 Foley, 284 “Asia” in Albert Memorial, 285 “Sir James Outram,” 285 “Folly,” by Onslow Ford, 300 Fontenoy, 241 Ford, Onslow, 290 “Rowland Hill” competition, 299 “Henry Irving as Hamlet,” 299 Statuettes “Folly” and “Egyptian Singer,” 300 Fontainebleau School of, 205 Palace of, 227-229 Fountain of the Dragon at Versailles, 238, 239 Fountain of Innocents, by Goujon, 230 Fountain of Trevi, by Bernini, 218 Fouquet, 225 Frémiet, 301 Fragonard, 240, 242 Frampton, George, 290 Art training, 288, 302 “Mysteriarch,” 301, 302 London County Council, connection with, 302 France Northern mysticism, 221-224 Communal life, rise of, 147 Cathedrals built by lay guilds, 148 Catholic Church, influence of, 148 Cathedrals compared with Greek temples, 148-151 Italian circumstances more favourable to sculpture, 152, 153 Refuses anti-Humanistic creed of Reformation, 213, 224 Italian Renaissance, influence of, 211, 213, 225, 228 Tours, school of, 225, 226 Political circumstances after 1515 A.D., 226, 227 Francis I., “Creator of French Sculpture,” 227-229 Cellini at Court of Francis I., 205, 228, 229 Fontainebleau, school of, 205, 229 Goujon, First French sculptor, 230 Influence of women upon art, 230-233, 241, 243 Louis Quatorze, political circumstances under, 234 Versailles, 234-236, 237-239 Puget and Louis Quatorze, 236 Influence of Bernini and Catholic reaction, 237 Louis Quinze and Louis Seize, 239-245 Popularity of single figures and statuettes, 240, 242, 243 Pigalle and Saxe Memorial, 241, 242 Eighteenth-century sculpture, characteristics of, 243 Revolution, 253-256 Pseudo-Hellenic school, 263-264 Renascence of individualism, 263, 265-268 Academic sculptors of to-day, 268-272 Dalou and Rodin, 271-279 Modern French sculpture compared with British, 280, 281 Francis I. In Italy, 213 Cellini at court of, 205, 228, 229 “Creator of French sculpture,” 227, 234 His buildings, 227-229 Francis of Assisi Love of Nature, 156, 157 Influence upon Naturalism, 157 Andrea Pisano, and, 156, 158, 161 Franciscans compared with Jesuits, 214, 215 Friedland, 255 Frieze of Parthenon Use of colour, 29 Panathenaic procession, 30, 31 Frith, W. S., 288, 302 Frost, K. T., criticism upon “Apoxyomenus,” 69, 75 Fürtwangler, Professor Upon Stroganoff Bronze, 107 Upon bust of “Julius Cæsar,” footnote, 125

Gaillon, Châteaux of, 228 Gainsborough, 256, 262 Galérie des Glaces, Versailles, 240 Gardner, Mr. E. A., 50 Gardner, Mr. Percy, 73 “Gate of Hell,” by Rodin, 274-277 Gaulish invasion Of Asia Minor, 90-92, 106 Of Greece, 106 Of Rome, 139, 146 Pergamene art, effects on, 88-93 Hellenistic art, effects on, 105-108 “Dying Gaul,” 89 “Gaul killing his wife,” 89 Genoa, 153, 154 “George, St.” by Gilbert, 297, 298 Gericault, 266 Germany Mysticism in, 221-223 Protestantism in, 213 Sculpture after Reformation, 223, 224, 298 Modern sculpture, preface, 298 Ghiberti, Lorenzo, 162-173, 184 Early life and art education, 162 Baptistery Gates competition, 162-164 “Gates of Paradise,” 164-168, 275 Pictorial quality in his art, 165, 167, 172 Revolt against asceticism, 165, 177, 178 Donatello compared with, 168, 172 Or San Michele commissions, 170-173 “John the Baptist,” 171 “Saint Matthew,” 172 Gibbons, Grinling, 257 Gibson, John Visit to Rome, 247, 282 “Tinted Venus,” 282, 284 “Hylas and the Nymphs,” 282, 283 Gibson Gallery, Burlington House, 282, 283 Gilbert, Alfred, 293-299 Early life, 294 Lambeth School of Art, 288, 289 Royal Academy Schools, 291, 294 France, visit to, 294, 295 Florence, visit to, 295 Shaftesbury Memorial, 295, 296 Clarence Memorial, 297-299 “Saint George,” 297, 298 The Carpeaux and Rodin of British sculpture, 290, 293, 299 Ginevra, Maria, 207 Giorgione’s “Venus,” 194 Giotto Andrea Pisano, influence upon, 157, 161 Ghiberti compared with, 165 Bernini compared with, 214, 215 Giovanni de Medici, 181 Giuliano, Duke of Nemours, tomb of, 192-197 Girardon, Francis Giovanni Bologna, influence upon, 211 Inspector of Sculpture at Versailles, 237 Versailles Gardens, 238, 239 “Apollo and Nymphs,” 237, 238 “Rape of Proserpine,” 211 “Fountaine en Pyramide,” 239 Glycon, 101 Goethe, 248 Goldsmithery, influence upon sculpture, 162, 205 Gonzaga, Family of, 175, 181 Goscombe John, _see_ John Gothic art, 145-154 Mysticism in Northern Europe, 152, 153, 221-223 Dates from about 1000 A.D., 145, 146 Historical circumstances, 146, 147 Cathedrals, 147, 148 Compared with Hellenic, 148-153 Compared with Italian, 152, 153, 177, 178 Sculpture, 149-151 Drapery in, 152 Rodin and, 279 Goujon, Jean Employed by Francis I., 227, 257 Fountain of the Innocents, 230 “Diana” from Anet, 230 Diana of Poitiers, and, 230-233 Gozzoli, 164 Græco-Roman style, 116, 118, 120-131, 155, 156 Grand Prix de Rome, 244, 254, 269 Greek colonies, 11 Greek sculpture, _see_ Hellenic and Hellenistic Gregory VII., 147 Gregory XIII., 198 Guido Reni, worship of Byzantine “Madonna della Guardia,” 10 Guildhall, 299 Guilds, Florentine Giovanni de Medici, leader of lesser, 181 Commission Baptistery gates, 162 164, 166, 171 Commission Or San Michele statuary, 172 Guinigi, Paolo, 178 Guise, Hotel de, 235

Hadrian Trajan’s policy, reaction against, 137 Effect on sculpture, 138 His buildings, 137 Athens, visit to, 138 Antinous and, 137, 138 Hamdi Bey, 76 Hamilton, Lady, 232 Hannibal, 123 Harmodius, 13 Statue, by Cretius and Nesiotes, 14 “Head of Peasant,” by Lanteri, 288 Heine, 221, 266 Hellenic age of Greece, 6-80 Early beginnings, 6-11 Growth of Naturalism, 11-14 Effect of athleticism, 14-24, 69 Effect of religious beliefs, 16, 33-43, 217 Effect of civic ideals, 15, 16, 32, 33, 109 Comparison of philosophy with mysticism of North, 221-223 Persian invasion, 26-28, 91, 106 The fifth century “The golden age,” 41, 45, 46, 183 Athens, “The School of Hellas,” 47, 48 Transition to fourth century, 44-46 Historical circumstances in fourth century, 46-49, 66-68 Growth of individualism, 44-49, 53-56, 110 More passionate note, 49-53 Home life, 55, 56 Womanhood, 58-64 Reaction against fourth-century individualism, 65-69 Portraiture, 77-80 Transition to Hellenistic, 80, 83, 84 Winckelmann upon Hellenism, 248 Sculpture compared with Bernini’s, 217 Sculptures compared with Rodin’s, 279 Hellenistic age of Greece, 97-116 Definition and comparison with Hellenic, 84, 99-101 Historical circumstances during, 84-87, 106, 108, 109 Decline of patriotism, 110 Growth of individualism, 109, 110 Comparison with twentieth-century ideals, 110 Womanhood and home life, 110-113 Sphere of Greek influence widened, 84, 85 Absence of artists of first order, 99, 100 Lesser intensity of motion, 113-116 Tendency towards theatricalism, 96, 97 Decline of fine critical faculty, 104 Growth of allegory, 115 Followers of Lysippus, 100-104 Followers of Praxiteles, 105-108 Conquest by Rome, 116 Influence upon Roman art, 118, 119 Henry II. of France, 230 Tomb by Germain Pilon, 225 Henry IV. of Germany, 153 Henry IV. of France, 233, 234 Henry VII., tomb in Westminster Abbey, 256 Henry VIII. of England, 256 Hephaestus, 29, 31 Hera, 35 Chryselephantine statue of, by Polyclitus, 36, 38 “Of Samos, Louvre,” 11 “Ludovisi,” 41 “Barberine,” 42 Heræa of Elis, 17 Herculaneum, 129 Hercules Type fixed by Lysippus, 101 Statue at Lansdowne House, 74 “Farnese,” 101, 102 “Commodus,” 228 “Hermaphroditus,” of Praxiteles, 194 Hermes Type fixed by Praxiteles, 57 “Bearded Hermes,” of fifth century, 57 “Hermes,” of Praxiteles, 46, 57, 58, 195 Compared with “Belvedere Apollo,” 107 Hermitage, 244 Hetaerae, 59, 60 Hieron of Syracuse, 14 Hobbs, 147 Holbein, 224 Holland, 222, 281 Holy Roman Empire, 153 Home life in Greece Sacrificed in fifth century, 55 In fourth century, 56 In Hellenistic time, 110 Homer, 8, 34, 114 Influence on sculpture, 35, 36, 42 Flaxman’s Homeric illustrations, 262 Hope, Thomas, 251 Houdon, Jean-Antoine An eighteenth-century artist, 243, 244 Visit to Italy, 244 “Saint Bruno,” 244 “Diana,” 244 “Voltaire,” 244, 245 “Hounds in Leash,” by Harry Bates, 300 Hugo, Victor, 264, 266 Humann, Carl, 92 “Hylas and Nymphs,” by Gibson, 282, 283

Ictinus, 28, 32 Idealistic school of Praxiteles contrasted with realistic school of Lysippus, 70 Idrac, Antoine, 270, 293 “Mercury inventing the Caduceus,” 270 Ignatius of Loyola, 215, 216 Ilaria del Carretto, Tomb by Quercia, 178 “Immaculate Conception,” by Puget, 236-237 Imperialism Failure of, in Athens, 44-49 Roman, 117-141 Founded by Julius Cæsar, 129 Effect on sculpture, 130 Climax under Trajan, 132-136 Effect on sculpture, 131, 135, 136 Reaction under Hadrian, 136 Effect on sculpture, 138 Downfall of, 139, 140 Effect on portraiture, 140 British, 133-136, 257, 258 Impressionist sculpture compared with Impressionist painting, 278 India, 84, 133 Individualism In fifth-century Hellas, 15-17, 109, 110 Growth of, in fourth century, 44, 49, 55, 56 Effects on sculpture, 49-53, 54, 55, 69, 75 In Hellenistic age, 101, 109, 110 Effects on sculpture, 110-113 Absent in Roman Empire, 130-132, 136 In Italian city-states, 176, 177 Modern individualism, 109, 110, 262, 264 Effects on French sculpture, 265, 266 Of Rodin, 273, 279 Effects on English sculpture, 293, 302 Innsbruck, 223 Ionia, 11 Ipsus, Battle of, 86 “Irving, Henry, as Hamlet,” by Onslow Ford, 299 Isis, Temple of, 98 Italy Philosophy compared with Northern mysticism, 152, 153, 221-223 Circumstances after twelfth century, compared with French, 152-154 Struggles between Emperor and Pope and city and city, 153, 160 Pisa, 154-158 Slow growth of sculpture compared with Greece, 159-160 All centres of culture assist in moulding Italian Renaissance, 160 Florence, 161-173, 181, 182 Platonists, 173-178, 188 Indebtedness to Greek sculpture, 174, 176 Individualism in, 176, 177 Educational ideals, 174, 175 Status of sculptors compared with Gothic, 177, 187 The Medici, 181, 182 Michael Angelo, 183-197 Catholic Church in fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, 190 Political circumstances in early sixteenth century, 194-197 Political circumstances between 1527 and 1580 A.D., 198-203 Absence of political stability, 200 Decline in morality, 201 Cellini, 203-210 Catholic Reaction, 212-218 During Austrian ascendency, 200, 218 Canova, 246-256 Influence upon France, 228, 237 Influence upon England, 256, 257 Ivory, 36, 38

Jacopo della Quercia. _See_ Quercia Jahn, Otto, 128 “Jason,” by Thorvaldsen, 251 Jerusalem, capture of, 154 Jesuits, 213, 215 “John the Baptist,” by Ghiberti, 171 John of Douay. _See_ Giovanni da Bologna, 210 John, Goscombe, 288 “John, Saint,” by Dubois, 270 By Rodin, 273, 277 Joseph’s “Wilberforce,” 284 Julius II., Tomb of, 189-191 Juste, Jean, 225, 226

King Arthur, by Peter Vischer, 223-224 Kipling, Rudyard, Comparison with sculptor of Nerva, 134, 135 Kneller (painter), 259 “Kiss, The,” by Rodin, 275, 276

Lambeaux, Jef. (Belgian sculptor), 237 Lambeth School of Art, 288, 289 “L’amour Menaçant,” by Falconet, 242 Lansdowne House, statue of Heracles, 74 Lanteri, Professor, 288 Laocoon Group, 93-97, 228 “Laocoon” of Lessing, 248 Lastricali, Alessandro, 207 Laurion silver mines, 67 Le Brun, Charles, 237, 240 Legros, A., 287 Leighton, Lord, 281, 287 “Athlete struggling with Python,” 281, 287, 288, 293 Lemoyne, 242 Lennox, Charles, Duke of Richmond, 260 Le Notre, André, 238 Leopardi, The Colleoni Monument, 180 Leo X., 97, 190, 192 Lessing, 248, 255, 260, 282 Library of Hadrian, 137 Lichfield Cathedral, 148 “Lion,” by Barye, in Louvre, 266 Lippi, Filippino, 187 Liverpool Walker Art Gallery, 291 Livia, Villa of, 128 Loggia dei Lanzi, 187, 202, 209 Lombardy, 145 London County Council, 296, 302 Lorenzo de Medici Pericles of Italian Renaissance, 181, 182 Sculptors at his court, 182, 185, 187, 188 Medici tombs, 192 Lorenzo of Urbino, 192 Tomb in Medici Chapel, 192-197 Statue by Michael Angelo, 195 Louis XI., 225 Louis XII., 227, 228 Tomb of Jean Juste, 225-226

Louis XIV. Political circumstances under, 233, 234 Necessity for extreme centralisation, 233, 234 Building of Versailles, 234, 236, 240 Gardens of Versailles, 238, 239 Pierre Puget and, 236, 237 Marquise de Montespan and, 232, 233 Louis XV. Popularity of single figures and statuettes, 240 Pigalle and, 241, 242 Louvre Works in, 106, 236, 242, 244, 254, 266, 267 Preferred by Colbert to Versailles, 235, 236 Dalou, curator of, 272 Lovelace, 257 Luca della Robbia Singing Gallery (Cantoria), 178, 179 “Visitation” at Pistoja, 179 Humanity of his religion, 179 Comparison with Donatello, 179 Relation to Michael Angelo, 184 Lucca, 154 Lucian, 36, 79 Ludovisi Villa, 89-90 Leubke, Dr., and “Ares Ludovisi,” 72 Luther, 224 Luxembourg, works in, 270, 272, 273 Value to French sculpture, 280, 281 Lycæan Gymnasium, Athens, 67 Lycurgus (The Athenian), 66, 67 Lysimachus, 86, 90 Lysippus, 65-80 Historical circumstances of his age, 66-68 Effect on sculpture, 68, 69 “Apoxyomenus,” 68-75 Characteristics of his style, 68, 70-75 Portraiture of, 77-80 Portrait of Alexander, 78, 79 “Ares Ludovisi,” 72 “Agias,” 73, 74 “Cerigotto Bronze,” 103 Hercules, type fixed by, 101 His preference for bronze, 68 Followers of, 79, 84, 100, 104, 120 Lysistratus of Sicyon, 79

Macedonia. _See_ Alexander MacDowell, Patrick, 281, 284 “Madonna,” by Ugolino, 171 “Madonna della Guardia,” 10 Mæcenas, 125 Malatesta, Signor, 163 Magliabecchian Library, 162 Maison Carré at Nîmes, 137 Mantegna, 184 Mantinea, Battle of, 66 Mantua, 174, 175, 181 Marathon, 26, 28 Marble Copies of bronze originals, 24, 68, 90, 105, 120 Pentelic, 29 Praxiteles’ use of, 58 Bronze preferred by Polyclitus and Lysippus, 68 In “Dying Gaul,” 90 Marcus Aurelius, 139 “Mark, St.,” by Donatello, 172 Maria della Vittoria, St., 216, 217 Marius, 124 “Marseillaise,” by Rude. _See_ Chant du Départ Marshall, W. Calder, 284 “Maternity,” by Dalou, 299 Matilda, 153 “Matthew St.,” by Ghiberti, 172 Mausoleum Of Halicarnassus, 48, 49 “Charioteer,” 50, 74 Mausolus, statue of, 50 Maximilian, tomb of, 223-224, 298 Mazarin, 234 Mazzini on Italian liberty and art, 200, 201, 218 Medici Family Donatello and, 173 Relation to Florentine art, 181, 182 Medici Chapel, 189, 191-197 Michael Angelo and, 187, 188, 191, 192 The Papacy and, 191, 192 In sixteenth century, 199 Patron of Cellini, 205 Catherine of Medici, 225 “Meleager,” 71, 72 Melos, 42, 112 Menelaus, 122 “Menelaus and Patroclus,” 53, 75 Mengs, Raphael, 246 “Mercury,” by Pigalle, 242 “Mercury inventing the Caduceus,” by Idrac, 270 Metal additions in statuary, 29, 76 Metopes, Parthenon, 29, 30 Meunier, 292, 293 Michel, Claude François. _See_ Clodion “Michael and Satan,” by Flaxman, 261 Michael Angelo, 183-197 Laocoon group, opinion upon, 94 Donatello’s “St. Mark,” opinion of, 172 Apotheosis of Italian sculpture compared with Shakespeare and Phidias, 161, 183 Historical circumstances of, 181, 182, 194, 196, 197 Why worked early sixteenth century, 161, 180-184 Early life, 184 Court of Lorenzo de Medici, 185 “David,” 185-188 “Pieta,” 188, 189 Work for Papacy, 190, 218, 247, 250 Tomb of Julius II., 189-191 Medici Tombs, 191-197 Artistic philosophy of, 192, 193 Preference for male form, 193, 194 Savonarola, influence of, 196 Correggio, comparison with, 195 Cellini and Bologna, comparisons with, 203, 210, 211, 212, 218 Rodin’s impressionism compared with Angelo’s method, 278 Alfred Stevens and, 286 Milan, 153, 160, 181, 201, 228 “Milo of Crotona,” by Puget, 236 Milton, 256 Mithridates, 119, 124 Mona Fiore da Castel del Rio, 206 Monciatto, Francesco, 187 Moneychangers, Guild of, Florence, 171 Montefeltro, 181 Montespan, Marquise de, 232, 233 Montesquieu, 232 Moody, the decorator, 286 Moricière, General de la, 270 “Moses,” from Tomb of Julius II., 190, 191 “Mower,” by Meunier, 292, 293 “Mower,” by Thornycroft, 291, 292, 293 Mullins, Roscoe, 288 Murray, Dr., 122 Museo di Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence, 179 Musée des Arts Décoratifs, 275 Music, 149, 217, 223 Mycenæan age, preface, 7, 9 Myron, 31, 36 “Discobolus” 15, 20-22, 23-24 “Mysteriarch,” by Frampton, 301

Nantes, Cathedral of, 270 Naples, 160 National Museum, 12, 14, 97, 129, 173 Napoleon, 250, 251, 254, 264 Colossal statue by Canova, 250 “Narcissus” at Naples Museum, 173 National Assembly, 253 National Gallery, London, 187, 281 Nationalism, preface Definition of, 302, 303 In Greece and N. Italy. _See under_ City-state system In seventeenth-century France, 226, 227, 234 Of to-day, compared with Hellenic, 245, 281 Naturalism Growth in Greece, 11-14 Absence in Byzantine Art, 140 Growth in Italy, 155-158 Influence of Francis of Assisi, 156, 157 In modern French sculpture, 265-267 In modern English sculpture, 285-288 Naxos, 12 “Neapolitan Fisher Boy,” by Rude, 254 By Carpeaux, 267 “Necropole Royale de Sidon,” 76 Neo-classical Revival, 246-252 Nerva, 131, 132 Comparison with “Augustus” and “Antinous,” 131, 138 Sculptor of, comparison with Kipling, 134, 135 Nesiotes, 14 Netherlands, 145 Nicea, decree of Council at, 141 Nicholas V., 190 Nicias, painter of Praxiteles’ statuary, 62 Nietzsche upon Greek art, 15 “Night,” by Michael Angelo, 193-197, 278 Nightingale Monument, by Roubilliac, 257 “Nile,” statue of, 97, 98 Nîmes, Maison Carré at, 137 Niobe Group, 51-53 Authorship doubtful, 51, 75 Historical circumstances of, 46-49, 195 Copies of Greek originals, 51 Compared with Pergamene and Rhodian art, 52, 97 Noailles, Hotel de, 235 Nollekens, 284 Normandy, 145 Northern Europe, Mysticism of, 221-223 Effect on sculpture, 222-223 Nôtre Dame, 148

Olympia, 57, 119 Olympian Games. _See_ Athletic Statues Opera del Duomo, Florence, 187 Opera House, Paris, 268 Orcagna, 170, 171 “Orestes and Electra,” 122 “Orpheus,” by Swan, 301 Or San Michele, 168-173, 179, 180, 199 “Outram, Sir James,” statue by Foley, 285

Padua, 175 “Paetus and Arria,” 89 Painting, influence on Renaissance sculpture, 157, 161, 167 Pajou, 257 Palgrave, F. T., 283, 284 Palazzo Vecchio, 187 Pan-Athenaic procession on Parthenon frieze, 30 Panathenaic Stadion, Athens, 67 Pan-Hellenic League, 27 Pantheon, Paris, 276 “Pandora,” by Bates, 300 Paola and Francesca, 275 Papacy. _See_ Catholic Church Paris, 254, 289 Park (sculptor), 284 Paros, 12 Parthenon, 28-33 Gothic Cathedral compared, 147-149 Statuary on, 29-31, 150-151 Parthian War, 133, 137 Parma, 195 Pasiteles, school of, 121-123 Pater, Walter, 80, 96, 126 Pauline Borghese, Statue by Canova, 249-250 Pausanias, 120 “Zeus,” by Phidias, 37, 38 “Hermes” of Praxiteles, 57 Scopas and Temple of Athena at Tegea, 72 Library of Hadrian, 137 Paul III., 213 Pavilion de Flora, Paris, 267 Peloponnesian War, 114 Pentathlon, 20, 24 “Pentathlon Winner” of Alcamenes, 23 Pentelicus, Marble Quarries, 29 Pergamus, Kingdom of, 88-93 Gaulish invasion, 90, 91, 107 Effect on sculpture, 88-92 “Dying Gaul,” 88-92 Altar of Zeus, 91-93 Loss of emotional balance, 92, 93 Absence of great masters, 100 Comparison with Hellenistic Greece, 100 Willed by Attalus III. to Rome, 116 Pericles, 26 Characterised, 77 Statue by Cresilas, 77-79, 126, 127 Creator of Parthenon, 32 His political purpose, 32, 33, 46 Compared with Lorenzo de Medici, 181, 182 “Perixyomenus” of Diappus, 74 “Perseus and Andromeda,” by Puget, 236 “Perseus,” by Cellini, 205-210 Persia, 26-28, 84, 91, 106 Perugino, 179 Pharsalia, 124 Phidias, 84, 161 Argive School, connection with, 23 Early life, 28 Parthenon, 28-32 Athena, statue of, 28, 29 Pedimental groups, 29, 30, 31 Frieze, 29, 30, 31 Metopes, 29, 30 Zeus, chryselephantine statue of, 36-38, 41 Death at Elis, 31 Praxiteles, compared with, 64, 114, 195 Gothic sculptors, compared with, 151 Giotto, compared with, 157 Rodin and, 279 Philetairus, 90 Philip of Macedon, 66 Philippe, Louis, 255 Philosophy, Hellenic, 39, 40, 221-223 Phocion, 67 Statue of, 77, 78 “Augustus,” compared with, 127 “St. Mark,” by Donatello, compared with, 173 Phryne, 59-61 “Eros” of Praxiteles and, 60, 61 “Aphrodite of Cnidus” and, 61-63 French courtesans compared with, 232, 233 Pauline Borghese compared with, 249, 250 Piero di Cosimo, 187 “Pieta” of Michael Angelo, 188-189 Pigalle, Jean Baptiste, 241 Tomb of Marshal de Saxe, 241-242 “Mercury,” in Louvre, 242 Pilon, Germain, 225, 226, 227 Pisa, 153, 154-158 Second crusade, 154 Growth of prosperity, 154 Really an aristocracy, 154, 169 Sculpture, eclectic character of, 155, 156, 174 Captured by Florence, 169 Fifteenth-century Italian sculpture compared with, 177, 178 Pisano, Niccola Architect, 155 Græco-Roman influences, 155, 156 Gothic sculpture compared, 155 Quercia compared with, 178 Giovanni, compared with Niccola, 156, 157 Gothic influences, 156 Andrea, compared with Niccola, 157, 158 Giotto, influence of, 157 Pictorial character of work, 158 Florentine Baptistery, 158, 162, 164 Pisistratus, 12, 13, 154 Pius IV., 213 Platonists, Italian influence of, 173-179 Plessis, Hotel du, 235 Pliny, 73, 120 Lysippus and followers, 70, 74, 79 Hellenistic realists, 103 Rhodian Colossus, 104 Pasiteles, 121, 122 Plutarch, 78 Poetry, 217, 223 Pollaiuolo, 184 Polyclitus Head of Dorian school, 22, 23 Compared with Phidias, 31 Compared with Praxiteles, 64 Compared with Lysippus, 68, 69 “Hera,” chryselephantine statue of, 36, 38, 41, 42, 157 “Diadumenus,” 22 “Doryphorus,” 22, 23 Preference for bronze, 22, 68 Polydorus, 94 Polygnotus, 114 Polyzalus, 14 Pomeroy, F. W., 288 Pompadour, Madame de, 243 Pompeii, evidence of wall paintings as to colouring statuary, 129 “Narcissus,” found at, 173 Pope’s “Rape of the Lock,” 114 Porte de l’Enfer. _See_ “Gate of Hell,” by Rodin Portraiture Greek, 77-79 Fifth century compared with fourth and Hellenistic, 77-79 Hellenic compared with Roman, 125, 127, 131, 132 Roman, 125-136 “Julius Cæsar” and “Augustus” compared with “Pericles” and “Phocion,” 125-127 Imperialism and Roman, 131-136, 140 Comparison with style of Kipling, 134, 135 “Nerva,” statue of, 131, 132, 135 “Voltaire,” by Houdon, 244, 245 Poseidon and Athena on Parthenon pediment, 29, 31 Poussin, Nicolas, 240 Pradier, 265 Praxiteles Historical circumstances, 44-49 Social circumstances, 55, 56, 58, 59 Characteristics of his art, 57, 61, 63, 64, 211 Lyrical note in art of, 54 Influence of Greek womanhood, 58-60, 110, 111 Phryne and, 60-63, 232, 249 Female form, preference for, 193, 194 Marble, preference for, 58 “Hermes,” 57, 107, 120 “Hermaphroditus,” 194 “Aphrodite of Cnidus,” 61-63, 111, 195 “Barberine Hera,” 42 Ceramicus, statue in, 55 Lysippus, compared with, 65, 66 Michael Angelo, compared with, 193-195 Followers of, 84, 105-115 Primaticcio, 228, 229, 257 “Prince,” Terme Museum, 121 Prince Consort, 284 Prix de Rome, Grand, 244, 254, 267, 269 Propylæa, 77 Ptolemy, 86 Puget, Pierre His early life, 237, 251 Visit to Italy, 237 Connection with Louis XIV., 236 Influenced by Catholic reaction, 237 “Milo of Crotona,” 236 “Perseus and Andromeda,” 236 “Immaculate Conception,” 237 Introducer of “morbidezza,” 237 Pythis, 50

Quercia, Jacopo della Competes for Baptistery gates commission, 163, 169 Compared with the Pisani, 177 Tomb of Ilaria del Carretto by, 178, 226 Quincey, De, 115

Rambouillet, Madame de, 232 “Rape of Proserpine,” by Girardon, 211 Raphael 184, 228, 250, 261 Rasbourg, Van, 273 Ravenna, basilicas of, 145 Realism In art of Lysippus, 65-80 In Hellenistic art, 101-104 In Roman portraiture, 131, 135 Modern French realists, 272 Reformation, 213, 224 Religion Greek, 16, 34, 35, 36, 39, 222, 223 Early images, 8-11, 18, 19 Religious statuary in Fifth Century, 28, 29, 33-43 Compared with Gothic, 148, 152 Sense of, dulled in Fourth Century, 63 Effect on sculpture, 41, 42, 57, 63 Christianity, influence of, 43, 140, 141 Gothic, 145-154, 222, 223 Effect on sculpture, 149-152 Italian, 153, 157, 179, 196, 202 Reformation, effects of, 213, 224 Catholic reaction, effects of, 212-218, 237 Rembrandt, 222, 261 Revolution, French, 253, 264 Reynolds, Sir J., 256, 262 Rheims, 148 Robbia, The della. _See_ Luca della Robbia Rhodes, 93-97, 100 Compared with Hellenistic Greece, 100 Influence upon Rome, 120 “Laocoon group,” 93-97 “Farnese Bull,” 97 “Colossus” at, 104 Richelieu, Cardinal, 234 Richmond, Charles Duke of, 260 Robespierre, 256 Rochester, 46, 257 Rodin Early life, 272 Fails to enter École des Beaux Arts, 271 Pupil of Barye, 266, 272, 273 “Age of Brass,” 273, 275 “St. John the Baptist,” 273, 277 “The Kiss,” 275-276 “The Thinker,” 276 “Danaid,” 274 “Gate of Hell” (Porte de l’Enfer), 274-276 Attitude towards human form, 277 Impressionism compared with Rosso’s, 278, 279 Philosophy based on Dante and Baudelaire, 275 Sympathy with Gothic ideal, 279 Compared with English sculptors, 290-291 Influence upon Meunier, 292 Roman Catholic Church. _See_ Catholic Church Romantic movement, 264 Effect on sculpture, 265, 266 Rome Conquest of Greece, Syria, Egypt, 116 Republican age, 117-125 Culture borrowed from Greece, 118-121 School of Pasiteles, 121-123 Imperialism, rise of, 124-131 Augustan age, 129, 130 Climax under Trajan, 131-136 Effect on sculpture, 131, 136 Portraiture, 125-127, 131-136, 140 Reaction under Hadrian, 136-138 Reversion to Greek models, 137, 138 Post-Hadrian sculpture, 138, 139 Germanic invasion, 139, 140, 146 Christianity, influence of, 140, 141 Pisani, influence of Roman art upon, 155 Michael Angelo in, 190, 191 Sack of, 198, 199, 204 Morality, decline of in sixteenth century, 196, 201, 202 Effect on sculpture, 202, 203 Catholic Reaction, 212, 218 Historical circumstances, 212-214 Ideals of, 215, 216 Effect on sculpture, 214, 218 Austrian ascendency, 200, 218 Neo-classical revival, 247, 251, 252, 261 Romney, 232 Roselli, Cosimo, 187 Rosso, Il (painter), 205, 228, 229 Rosso (sculptor), 278, 279 Roubilliac, 257 Rouen, 230 “Rowland Hill,” by Onslow Ford, 299 Royal Exchange, 299 Rude, François, 253-256 Early life, 254 École des Beaux Arts, and 254 French sculpture, after, 265 “Neapolitan Fisher Boy,” by, 254 “Chant du Départ,” 255, 267 Master of Carpeaux, 267 Rue de l’Université, Paris, 275

“Sabine Women,” by David, 253 “Sacrifice of Isaac,” by Brunelleschi and by Ghiberti, 163 Saida (Sidon), 76 Salamis, 26, 28 Salisbury Cathedral, 148 Salon, 265, 273, 274 Salon of Venus at Versailles, 239 Salvestro, the jeweller, 187 Samos, 77 Sandwich, fourth Earl of, 259 San Gallo, Giuliano di, 187 Santa Sophia, 145 “Sarcophagus of Alexander,” 76 Sarcophagi, Roman Pisa, 155 Sarto, Andrea del, 257 “Satyr and Nymph,” by Clodion, 243 “Satyr with Flute,” by Clodion, 243 Savonarola, 195-196 Saxe, Marshal de, tomb by Pigalle, 241 Schubart, Baron de, 251 Science, growth of, in fifth-century Greece, 39-41 Scholasticism, 165 Scopas, 42, 44 Historical circumstances, 45-49 Growth of individualism, 53-56 Passionate note in his art, 53, 64, 75, 101 Athenian by adoption, 48 Temple of Athena at Tegea, 48, 72, 73 Mausoleum, 49-51 “Menelaus and Patroclus,” 53, 75 “Niobe,” 51-53, 75, 195 “Ares Ludovisi,” 71, 72, 74 “Meleager,” 72-74 “Venus of Milo,” 113 Scotland, 213, 258 Scott, Sir Gilbert, 284 Scott, Sir W., 266 Sculpture and Sculptors Prehistoric, 6 Birth of the art, 7-11 Limitations compared with painting and poetry, 167, 197, 222, 223 Impressionism in, 278, 279 Sculptors’ dependence upon human form, 16, 17, 18, 69, 152, 164, 165, 172, 193, 194, 215, 216, 277 Sculptor’s relation to his age, 4, 302, 303 Settignano quarries, 184 Seleucia in Pieria, 87 Seleucus, Empire of, 83, 86-88, 116 Seleucus Nicator, 86 “Seated Boxer,” Terme Museum, 121 Sepulchral statuary Greek legislation against, 54, 55 Ceramicus at Athens, 54, 55 Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, 49-51 “Sarcophagus of Alexander,” 76 Roman sarcophagi at Pisa, 155 Tomb of Ilaria del Carretto, 178 Tomb of Julius II., 190, 191 Medici tombs, 191-197 Tomb of Maximilian, 223, 224 Tombs at St. Denis, royal, 225, 226 Tomb of Marshal de Saxe, 241 Duke of Clarence Memorial, 297, 298 Sforza, family of, 181 Shelley, 264 Shakespeare, 46, 114, 183, 256 Shaftesbury Memorial, by A. Gilbert, 295, 296 Sicyon, 79, 87, 108 Signorelli, 179 Siena, 160, 163, 171, 178 Silk Merchants’ Guild of Florence, 171 Simonetta, La Bella, 232 Sistine Chapel, 191 Skeuotheke of Philo, 66 Society of Dilettanti, 8, 260 Socrates, 210 Sophocles, 114 Statue of, 77, 78, 173 Soranzo, Giacomo, 201 Sosthenes, 106 South Kensington School of Art, 272, 288 Spain, 213 Sparks (Lambeth School of Art), 288 Sparta Insistence upon physical fitness, 17-19 Patronise Olympian games, 20 Argive school, relationship with, 22-24 Spartan supremacy, age of, 46, 48 Imitated in revolutionary France, 253 “Spartan Girl,” 17, 122 “Spring,” by Botticelli, 196 St. Angelo, Castle of, 204, 205 St. Denis, royal tombs at, 225, 226 St. Maclou, 230 St. Paul’s Cathedral, 285 St. Peter’s, Rome, 190, 214 Statuettes, modern, 299 “Stephen, St.,” by Ghiberti, 172 Stevens, Alfred Visit to Italy, 285 Decorative designer, 286 Fireplace at Dorchester House, 286 Michael Angelo, indebtedness to, 286 Wellington Memorial, 285, 286, 291, 295 “Baptist of English Naturalism,” 286, 287 Stone, Nicholas, 257 Stroganoff, Count Sargei, bronze statuette of, 106 Strozzi, epigram on Angelo’s “Night,” 197 Sully, 234 Swan, J. M., 290, 301 Sykes, Godfrey, 286 Symonds, J. A., 196, 277 Syracuse, 14, 47, 119 Syria. _See also_ Seleucus, empire of, 84, 124

Tate Gallery, 282, 284, 287, 288, 290, 300 Taygetus, Mount, 18 Tegea, Temple of Athena Alea at, 48, 72 Temple Statuary. _See_ under Religion Terme Museum, Rome, 115, 121 Terra-cotta, 179 Theban supremacy, 46, 48, 66 Theed, “Africa,” in Albert Memorial, 285 Theodora, Empress, decree regarding sculpture, 141 Theresa, Saint, 216, 217 Statue, by Bernini, 216, 217 “Theseus,” from Parthenon, 31, 248 Thespiae, “Eros” of, 61 Thetis, Temple of, 238 “Thetis and Achilles,” by Banks, 284 “Thinker,” by Rodin, 276 Thomson, James, 95, 105 Thornycroft, the elder, 285, 291 Thornycroft, W. Hamo, 290-293 Defeats Gilbert for Academy Gold Medal, 291 “Warrior bearing Wounded Son from Battle,” 291 “Mower,” 291-293 Thorvaldsen A borrowed Hellenism, 174, 247, 254, 262, 281 Early life, 251 Visit to Rome, 247, 251, 261 Compared with Flaxman, 261, 262 “Jason,” 251 “Cupid and Psyche,” 251 “Venus,” 252, 284 Thrasymedes of Paros, 42 “Three Fates” from Parthenon, 31, 261 Throne Room at Versailles, 239 “Tiber,” 98 “Tinted Venus,” by Gibson, 282, 284 Titian, 184 Titus, Baths of, 94 Tomb of Francis II. of Brittany, by Colombe, 225 Torrigiano, 256, 257 Toto, Antonio, 257 Tours, school of, 225 Trajan, 132, 133, 137 Transtevere, Vicolo delle Palme in, 68 Trent, Council of, 202 “Triumph of Athena” from Pergamus, 92 “Triumph of Silenus,” by Dalou, 272 “Truth tearing out Tongue of Falsehood,” by Stevens, 286 Tuileries, palace of, 267 Turner (painter), 264, 266, 277 Turquet, M., 273 “Tyche of Antioch,” 87, 96

Uccello, 164 “Ugolino and his Sons,” by Carpeaux, 267 Urban VIII., 214 Urbino, 181

Vasari, 173 Vatican, works at, 24, 51, 62, 68, 71, 87, 89, 97, 105, 122, 125, 131, 138, 190, 191 Venice, 160, 200, 251 Venus. _See also_ Aphrodite Of Capua, 113 Of Medici, 112, 261 Of Milo, 71, 112, 113 By Thorvaldsen, 252 In mid-Victorian times, 284 Verocchio, Andrea del, 179-180, 184 “Doubting Thomas,” by, 179-180 Colleoni monument, by Leopardi and, 180 Versailles, palace of, 234-240 Historical necessity for, 234, 235 Palaces of nobility at, 235 Preferred by Louis to Louvre, 235, 236 Sculpture at, 211, 237-239 Victoria Memorial, 290, 294 Villevieille, Marquis de, 244, 245 Vinci, Leonardo da, 184, 187 Virgil, 94, 95, 125, 129, 175 Virgin, Michael Angelo upon the, 188-189 Vischer, Peter, 223, 225, 297, 298 Maximilian Tomb, 223, 224, 226 Age of reformation, 224, 297 Visconti, family of, 181 Vittorino of Feltre, 174-175 “Voltaire,” by Houdon, 244-245

Waldstein, Dr. and “Ares Ludovisi,” 72 Walker Art Gallery, 291 Wallace Collection, 243 Walpole, Sir Robert, 258 Walpole, Horace, 259 “Warrior bearing Wounded Son from Battle,” by Hamo Thornycroft, 291 Watteau, 240, 242 Watts, G. F., 165 “Clytie,” 287 Watson (sculptor), 284 Watson, William, 149 Wedgwood, 261 Wellington Memorial, by Stevens, 285, 286 Westmacott, 281, 284 Westminster Abbey, 257, 284 Westphalia, Peace of, 234 Whistler, 291 Wickhoff, on Roman portraiture, 131 “Wilberforce,” by Joseph, 284 Wilton, 260 Winckelmann, 246, 248, 255, 260, 261, 281 Windsor, Clarence Memorial at, 297-299 Wolsey, Cardinal, 256 Wolsey Chapel, Windsor, 297 Women Physical training of Greek, 17 Position in fifth century B.C., 58, 59 Effect upon sculpture, 17, 42, 58, 111 During fourth century, B.C., 60, 61 Effect upon sculpture, 60, 64, 111, 233, 249, 250 During Hellenistic age, 110-111 Effect upon sculpture, 111-113 During French monarchy, 230-232 Influence upon sculptors, 233, 241-243 Pauline Borghese and Canova, 249, 250 Wood, Early Temple statues in Greece, 8, 9 Wool Merchants Guild of Florence, 172 Woolner, 284 Wordsworth, 157 Wren, Sir C., 256 Wyatt, 281, 284

Zethus, 97 Zeus, 33-36 On Parthenon pediment and frieze, 29-31 Chryselephantine statue, by Phidias, 36-43 Otricoli, 41, 42 Altar of, at Pergamus, 91-93, 112, 130

Printed by BALLANTYNE & CO. LIMITED Tavistock Street, London