A HISTORY of Greek vase-painting has been for a long time a desideratum of students of Greek art and antiquity. Many years ago I planned such a work, but the difficulty of the necessary illustration caused the plan to break down. In the meantime an extensive literature has grown up on the subject, mainly in German, but with contributions from other countries. In his first chapter Dr. Buschor has shewn how the result of excavation in Greece and Italy has been to throw our starting-point further and further back, until it lies in the Neolithic age. But it is not only in regard to the earlier phases of Greek vase-painting that research has brought light: the red-figured vase-painting which is one of the most perfect fruits of Greek art in the fifth century has been far more minutely and intensively studied. The result has been to fix the outlines, and more than the outlines, of the history of a fourth great branch of Greek artistic activity; the history of architecture, of sculpture and of coinage having been already thoroughly investigated. And this fourth branch is not merely vase-painting; but since the fresco and other paintings of the great age of Greece have almost entirely perished, we may fairly say that it includes almost all that we can ever know of the history of early Greek painting. Vase-paintings can but feebly image the colouring of the great painters of Greece; but they can give us invaluable information as to the principles of grouping and perspective adopted by them; they can reflect the extreme beauty of their figure-drawing; and they can shew us how they treated subjects from the vast repertory of Greek mythology and poetry.

Most of those who take up the study of Greek art are strongly attracted by vases, the subjects of which are more varied, and the treatment freer than is the case with sculpture. For mythology, religion, athletics, daily life, they are first-hand authorities. Yet one may fairly say that, until a few years ago, satisfactory study of them was impossible. Vase-paintings, in consequence of the shape of the vessels themselves, can very seldom be adequately reproduced by photography. And the published drawings of them, until about 1880, were quite untrustworthy; partly because the draughtsmen had insufficient sense of style, partly because most of the vases in the great museums were more or less restored, often in a most misleading way.

Thus merely to reproduce published engravings of the vases was quite misleading. The truth about them could only be known from a technical examination of the originals scattered through Europe. Yet one must say that in nearly all our English classical books and dictionaries, old engravings are uncritically reproduced. It is a fouling of the springs; and however practically inevitable such a course may often have been, the result is that the reader never knows whether he is treading on firm ice or on a mere crust. Anything more reckless and misleading than the procedure of the publishers and editors of illustrated classical books can scarcely be imagined. The errors resulting can only be weeded out by slow degrees.

Since about 1880 things have slowly mended. The German ArchÆological Institute, and the French and English Societies for the promotion of Hellenic Studies have published really careful drawings of a multitude of vases, Mr. F. Anderson in England being one of the most accurate and careful of the artists employed. In the last few years the catalogues of vases in Berlin, Paris, Munich, London and other places have given authoritative information as to restorations. A fresh era in the knowledge of technique and subject was begun by the magnificent publication of FurtwÄngler and Reichhold, with its splendid plates. At present the most authoritative works on early red-figured vases are those of an Oxford man, Mr. J. D. Beazley, and an American, Mr. J. C. Hoppin. Mr. Beazley has been good enough carefully to revise the present translation.

We have reached a stage at which, for all but specialists, what was most needed was a general history of Greek vases in all their periods, compiled by a trustworthy authority, and so fully illustrated (no easy matter) as to enable a reader to follow the text throughout. Thus would the whole subject be mapped out, and the approach to any particular province be made easy. Such a book is that of Dr. Buschor. His examples are carefully chosen; his text shews full mastery of the subject; and it is very unlikely that his treatment will be superseded for a long time to come. It is, however, a book not adapted for a mere cursory reading, but for careful consideration and study.

I may add a few words by way of introduction to the subject. We may divide the whole history of Greek pottery into two sections, which are separated one from the other by the line which divides primitive from mature Greece, about the middle of the sixth century.

Before that time, before the age of Croesus and the rise of the Persian Empire, the history of Greece is very imperfectly known to us, through the traditions of the temples and the old families, which are seldom wholly to be trusted. Where history is uncertain it is of untold value to have monuments and works of human manufacture to supplement it. These provide a skeleton of fact with which to compare legend and tradition. It is now generally recognized that before writings in the form of inscriptions and coins come into general use, pottery furnishes the most continuous and most trustworthy material for the dating of sites, indications of commercial intercourse, the movements of peoples. In recent years the study of prehistoric Greece has made immense strides, primarily owing to the excavations of Schliemann, Evans and other investigators. The subject seems to fascinate the younger generation of archÆologists; and the pottery found in the graves of the early inhabitants of Greece and Asia Minor has been worked at with great minuteness and to much result. It has revealed to us the outlines of the early history of Crete, the Troad, Laconia, Thessaly, and a number of other districts. Constant comparison with the results of finds in Egypt which can be dated from inscriptions has revealed in a measure the state of the civilization of the Ægean in century beyond century, back to Neolithic times.

When Greek civilization became fully established, in the sixth century, when inscriptions and coins begin to give us far more exact information than that which can be derived from pottery, the interest attaching to the latter does not cease, but it changes in character. We no longer go to it to determine the outlines of the history of civilization. But it has now become a thing precious in itself because of its beauty, its close relation to the poetry, the religion and the life of Greece. The elegant forms of Greek vases and the charm of the designs painted on them have caused them to be sought after by great museums and wealthy collectors. The graves of Italy, Sicily, Hellas, have poured out a constant supply of these works of art, some of them beyond value. Classical archÆologists have naturally given much attention to them; and of late years the assignment of examples to noted masters, and the study of their technique have been zealously prosecuted. They belong too wholly to a civilization which has passed away to be readily understood by ordinary visitors of museums; but those who have once been bitten with their charm find in them an occupation, a delight and a solace which are great helps in life. Greece is the classical land of art in all its forms, and the principles of art which were established by the successive schools of art there can never be wholly neglected. If we set aside the pottery of China and Japan, which is, in another sphere, of unsurpassed beauty, the pottery of Greece is the only perfectly developed and thoroughly consistent pottery in the world; and the noted productions of modern Europe seem in comparison poor and half-civilized.

Dr. Buschor’s general plan has compelled him to write but in a summary way of the works of red-figured style, which are incomparably the most beautiful. In fact, in such small and rough illustrations as are possible in a handbook, their quality could not be reproduced. For them the reader must go on to other works, or visit the vase-rooms of museums. A conspectus of successive styles and periods was all that was possible. And I think that enough is here accomplished to arouse the interest of those who love art and have some sympathy with the Greek spirit.

The old supremacy of the Classics in education has passed away, and in future they will have to hold their own not by prescriptive right but in virtue of their intrinsic value, on which more and more stress is being laid by those who feel what their neglect in the modern world would mean. It is time to strengthen their hold by shewing how they lie at the very root of philosophy, literature and art. Our successors will not be satisfied with drilling boys in Greek and Latin grammar, but will have to insist on the place held by ancient peoples, the Jews, the Greeks and the Romans, in the evolution of all that is valuable and delightful in the modern world. We have to widen the field of Classics, and illustrate the literature from every point of view. And if it be felt that the object of education is not merely to enable boys and girls to earn a living, but to help them to lead a worthy and happy life, then I have no fear that the Classics will be permanently eclipsed.

Mr. Richards’ work as a translator was very difficult. In spite of kindred origin, the German mind in literary production moves on different lines from the English. Not only is the order of words in a sentence different, but the sentences themselves are much more involved, and German scientific writers aim at an exactness in the use of terms which we seldom attempt. Mr. Richards’ version is very accurate; but it must be allowed to be not always easy reading. He preferred to retain as much as possible of the meaning, even if it involved some stiffness in the text. Students will thank him for this; and if the general reader finds that he has to give the text a closer attention than he is used to give to books, he will in fact have his reward.

Dr. Buschor’s work is a solid stone for the temple of knowledge, and the main lines of the subject are now so firmly fixed by induction, that they are not likely to suffer very much change in the future.

P. Gardner.