The origin of Statuary, or what we would term its parent—modelling, is of very great antiquity, as we are authoratively informed by the Grecian historians, whose testimony is supported by Monsieur D’Anville and Major Rennel, two of the most eminent geographers of modern times. From them we learn that three massy statues of gold were erected to ornament the temple of Jupiter Belus. Those were erected by the Chaldeans about two thousand two hundred and thirty years before Christ.

There is also sufficient evidence, that the most eminent and intellectual people, subsequent to the Chaldeans, were the Egyptians.

Every individual, who is in the slightest degree conversant with the history of the arts, knows that the Egyptian artisans had from the earliest periods been in the habit of constructing colossal statues of their numerous deities, and also of their benefactors, raised from gratitude and adulation.

To name only a single instance, the immense colossal statue of Memnon, who perished before the fall of Troy, according to Homer: also Ovid, who speaking of his mother Aurora, says,

Professor Flaxman has informed us, that this celebrated statue, had it stood upright, would have measured ninety-three feet and a half high; calculating from the dimensions of its ear, which is three feet long. We are informed by Dr. Rees, in his valuable Cyclopedia, that sculpture in marble was not introduced till eight hundred and seventy-three years before Christ. But having said this much for the origin, let us proceed to the art; and we candidly acknowledge that it is from the lectures of that truly distinguished individual, Professsor Flaxman, we are principally indebted for our information.

Sculpture in Greece remained long in a rude state; but we need not wonder at that, when we reflect that art is only an imitation of nature. Hence it follows that man, in a rude state of nature, for want of proper principles to direct his inquiries, and determine his judgment, is continually liable to errors, physical, moral, and religious;—all his productions, of what kind soever, partake of this primitive imbecility.

The early arts of design in Greece resembled those of other barbarous nations, until the successive intellectual and natural, political and civil advantages of this people raised them above the arts of the surrounding nations. The science employed by the Greeks may be traced in anatomy, geometry, mechanics, and perspective. From their earlier authors and coeval monuments, Homer had described the figure with accuracy, but insufficient for general purposes.

Of Anatomy.—Hippocrates was the first who enumerated the bones, and wrote a compendious account of the principles of the human figure; he described the shoulders, the curves of the ribs, hips and knees; the characters of the arms and legs, in the same simple manner in which they are represented in the basso relievo of the Parthenon, now in the National Gallery of the British Museum.

The ancient artists saw the figure continually exposed in all actions and circumstances, so as to have little occasion for other assistance to perfect their works; and they had also the assistance of casting, drawing, and other subsidiary means. The succeeding ancient anatomists did not describe the human figure more minutely or advantageously for the artist, than had been done by Hippocrates, till the time of Galen, whose external anatomy gave example for that analytical accuracy of arrangement followed by more modern artists. Sculpture, however, profited little from Galen’s labours, for the arts of design were in his time in a retrogade motion towards anterior barbarism.

The anatomical researches from AlcmÆon of Crotona, a disciple of Pythagoras, to those of Hippocrates and his scholars, assisted Phidias and Praxiteles, their contemporaries and successors, in giving select and appropriate forms of body and limbs to their several divinities, whose characters were fixed by the artists from the rhapsodies of Homer, having then become popular among the Athenians.

Phidias was the first in this reformation. Minerva, under his hand, became young and beautiful, who had before been harsh and elderly; and Jupiter was awful, as when his nod shook the poles, but benignant, as when he smiled on his daughter Venus. Apollo and Bacchus then assumed youthful resemblances of their sire; the first more majestic, the latter more feminine; whilst Mercury, as patron of gymnastic exercises, was represented as more robust than his brother. Hercules became gradually more powerful; and the forms of inferior heroes displayed a nearer resemblance to common nature; from which, both sentiment and beauty can alone be given to imitative art. The near approach of ancient art to nature, considering their high advance to accuracy of imitation, should likewise encourage the modern to imitate the ancient artists. The moderns now also enjoy superior auxiliary assistance from engraving, printed books, &c., which the ancients did not possess.

Mechanism of the Human Frame.—The human figure with the limbs extended, may be inclined and bounded by the circle and square; the centre of gravity, its change of situation, is susceptible of description, and may be exemplified in rest and motion;—running, striving, leaping, walking, rising, and falling. Those principles of motion may be exhibited in a skeleton, by the bending of the backbone backwards and forwards, whilst the limbs uniformly describe sections of circles in their motions, constantly moving on their axis.

Dimensions of the Human Figure, as exhibited in Grecian Statuary.—The height, eight heads (or usually ten faces); two heads across the shoulders; one head and a half across the hips; three noses, the thickest part of the thigh; two, to the calf of the leg; one, the narrowest part of the shin, &c. The above is the general proportion of the male figure. The female figure is narrower across the shoulders, and wider across the hips than the male.

The beauty of the human figure is found in its proportion, symmetry, and expression; it really appears that the beauty of the human figure is the chief or ultimate of beauty observed in the visible works of creative Omnipotence. From thence every other species of beauty graduates in just ratios of proportion. From considering the intellectual faculties of man, we assimilate the idea, and connect beauty with utility, as this union of his physical and mental powers unquestionably renders him one of the most beautiful objects in the creation. This consideration leads us involuntarily to a train of thought, suggested by a principle laid down by Plato, “That nothing is beautiful which is not truly good;” which also induces the following corollary, and which is confirmed by reason, and sanctioned by revelation, that perfection of human beauty consists of the most virtuous soul in the most healthy and perfect body.

Inasmuch as painters and sculptors adhered to those principles in their work, they assisted to enforce a popular impression of divine attributes and perfections, even in ages of gross idolatry.

In the highest order of divinities, the energy of intellect was represented above the material accidents of passion and decay.

The statues of the Saturnian family, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto, were the most sublime and mighty of the superior divinities. Apollo, Bacchus, and Mercury, were youthful resemblances of the Saturnian family, in energetic, delicate, and more athletic beauty: Apollo-Belvidere supplies Homer’s description to the sight; he looks indignant, his hair is agitated; he steps forward in the discharge of his shafts; his arrows are hanging on his shoulder.

A youthful and infantine beauty of the highest class distinguish the Cupid of Praxiteles, and the group of Ganymede and the Eagle. The order of heroes or demigods excel in strength, activity, and beauty; Achilles, Ajax, HÆmon, Zethos, and Amphion, are examples in Grecian statuary to establish this remark.

The Giants are human to the waist; their figures terminate in serpentine tails. Ocean and the great Rivers have Herculean forms, and faintly resemble the Saturnian family, and have reclining positions. The Tritons resemble the Fauns in the head, and upper features, with finny tails, and gills on their jaws; their lower parts terminate in the tails of fish.

In the highest class of female characters, the beauty of Juno, is imperious; that of Minerva, wise, as she presides over peaceful arts; or warlike, as the protectress of cities. Venus is the example and patroness of milder beauty and the softer arts of reciprocal communication; of which the Venus Praxiteles and Venus de Medicis are instances. The Greeks had also a Venus Urania, the goddess of hymenial rites and the celestial virtues.

The Graces are three youthful, lovely sisters embracing: they represent the tender affections, as their name implies; while their character gives the epithet graceful to undulatory and easy motion. The universe was peopled by genii, good and evil demons, which comprehends every species and gradation from the most sublime and beautiful in Jupiter and Venus, to the most gross in the Satyr, resembling a goat, and in the terrific Pan.

As the public have now an opportunity of consulting many of the objects above referred to, in our great national gallery in the British Museum, those of our readers who can obtain this advantage will do well to pay a visit to that celebrated depository for the relics of antiquity, where they will have it in their power to convince themselves of the truth of the foregoing remarks.

The progeny of Ham, the son of Noah, we find, peopled Egypt, Medea, Chaldea, Phoenicia, and several other adjoining countries. It will be remembered that two of the three sons of Noah possessed these countries which the folly of idolatry overflowed; whilst it was in the line of Shem alone, that the true faith was continued. The Mosaiac narrative is chiefly descriptive of events which occurred in the posterity of that patriarch, because from it the righteous line of the faithful in Abraham, David, Solomon, and ultimately Christ, proceeded. Thus more than two-thirds of the inhabitants of the world were gross idolators: we often find the Omniscience of the Highest forewarning the sacred line to avoid its fascinations. Nay, when, upon more occasions than one, the descendants of the faithful forgot themselves, and those admonitions of the Creator were neglected, we find the sacred race flying before the face of puny foes, which defeat was declared to be from their having prostrated themselves before strange gods: they were bowed thus low in battle. Not to mention their disobedience immediately beneath Mount Sinai, which protracted their journey through the wilderness to forty years, which, perhaps, under other circumstances, would not have required as many days. All those troubles, their subsequent captivities, and national afflictions, were the produce of disobedience. This is one of those means which retributive justice resorts to punish wilful sin; so, however, it was with the seed of Abraham. And so it is presumed to be with the present race of men; either immediate or remote punishment vindicates the Omnipotence of Heaven. From the frequent maledictions we discover in the sacred volume against idol worship, we cannot doubt that it was peculiarly offensive to the Deity. that the great majority of the world were addicted to this proscribed practice is equally certain. And as the Spirit of Truth had declared in the decalogue, that “It would not be worshipped under any form in the heavens above, in the earth below, or in the waters under the earth;” so was image-worship, and consequently the construction of such things, forbidden.

We discover that as this mania infected all nations, tongues, and people, so did not the Israelites escape it; but immediately after their departure from Egypt we find an exact similitude of the sacred calf of the Egyptians, cast in melted gold, which they constructed below Mount Sinai. In Egypt, metallic statues, as well as those of stone, must have existed anterior to that event, as they actually had done to our own knowledge, and long before idolatry had made its appearance in Egypt, it had existed in Chaldea, as already shown.

As that worship had first its being in Chaldea, so had the art of statuary its origin in that country; it was improved, perhaps, in Egypt, and perfected in Greece, from the time of Pericles to that of Alexander, commonly called the Great.