DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4923#0005
[ 4 1
sentations of the head, however, the Egyptian character has in this
case entirely flown. No. XII. is singular as showing a thoroughly
foreign manner in the application and combination of details
originally Egyptian. " Are these," asks Mr. Newton, " dedicated
during the time when the island was subjected to Amasis, or
are any of them memorials of that earlier subjection of Cyprus
which, as may be inferred from Egyptian monuments, had taken
place as early as the reign of Thothmcs III., or even earlier ?"
Seeing that the movement of Amasis had for its tendency at
least as much to Hellenize Egypt as to Egyptianizc Hellas ; see-
ing also that by the date of that movement a Hellenic art, more
original and more freely developed than this, was already grow-
ing up elsewhere ; and seeing that the Assyrian influences, which
are to be traced as well as Egyptian ones in the art of Cyprus,
must of course have been introduced before the downfall of the
Assyrian empire, and therefore long before the time of Amasis—
seeing all this, does not the earlier date, that of the conquest
ascribed to Thothmcs III., or to the beginning of the nineteenth
dynasty, become the probable one for such a wave of Egyptian
influence as these sculptures attest ?
Plates XIV. XV. XVI. and the right hand figure of plate
XIX. are the examples that seem most plainly to show a wave of
Assyriau influence passing over the art of the island. Still,
beneath this too there is the peculiar, experimental, and local
something of which we have spoken. It is not only the peculiar
cast of features, the receding forehead, the high cheek-bones and
sunken cheeks, the thick protruding nose, chin, and lips, which
constitute a type apart. That, travellers say, is the type of the
Cypriot population to this hour. It is the beginning of experi-
ment and emancipation, the immobile and abstract hieratic types
passing into new phases, the Egyptian and Asiatic becoming
Greek. It seems to be Greek art dawning under our eyes.
There is a point in the progress of the style where these sculp-
tures closely resemble examples of the most archaic Greek
work found in other places—a point where archaic Greek and
Etruscan and this are almost indistinguishable—with the set
unmeaning smile of the mouth, and the more or less rigid
attachment of the arms to the body, according to the traditional
helplessness of the art before the innovations of Daedalus.
M. Longperier (Journal Asialiquc, 1858) and Mr. Newton*
(Academy, Dec. 15th, 1872) have pointed out the very singular
similarity that exists, in more points than one, between this
Cyprian statuary and Etruscan statuary found at Cervetri.
The left hand figure on plate XVII. seems to be a typical
example of an archaic or hieratic style, deliberately kept up for
religious purposes in a comparatively late period when it would
naturally have been obsolete. The dove on the wrist of the figure
points in this case, as in others, to the priesthood of Venus.
Plate XVIII. represents by far the largest and most
important head of the whole collection, and seems again to
show the Assyrian influence in the head-dress and conventional
treatment of the beard. General di Cesnola calculates the
height of the body to which it must have belonged as forty feet.
It must thus have been the dominant statue," whomsoever
representing or by whomsoever dedicated, of the temple.
After two plates of miscellaneous archaic figures, we
come to the figures of Herakles, Some of these are colossal,
some small, and all of nearly the same type—an extremely
archaic type scarcely approximate to even the earliest Greek
types on the vases. Notice the rigid conventional and semi-
Egyptian treatment of the lion's skin, head, and claws, the quiver
and club. The adventure of the cattle of Geryones is that one of
the labours of Herakles which seems to have found favour with
these artists. Plate XXIII. shows mutilated figures of the three-
• To Mr. C. T. Newton and Mr. li. S. Poole, of the British Museum, I cannot
but express my thanks, in this place, for their friendly assistance in the prepara-
tion of the present sketch.
bodied monster, executed in various sizes; and plate XXIV. is a
singularly spirited relief from the pedestal of the largest of them,
in which Herakles, in the upper stage, is seen shooting the dog
Orthros with his arrows; while on the lower stage, apparently,
Eurytion is trying to protect his master's herd.
We have placed next two pieces that seem concerned with
the temple service or rites of Aphrodite. There is a player
(twice over, pis. XIII. and XXV.) on the double pipes, with his
<jtofi{3cia, or leather mouthstrap; there is a man carrying the
leather A<tk6s, or wine-skin; there is (pi. XXVI.) a clever little
figure of a priestess of Aphrodite lifting her skirts as she dances
in an elaborate dress.
Then follows a series of heads, wonderfully well preserved, but
parted from their trunks. Plates XXVIII.-XXXI. inclusive
are principally examples of the conventional or hieratic Cyprian
style which we have already pointed out, based apparently
upon Assyrian precedent, only with a variety and experimental
tendency in the convention which you do not find in its proto-
type. It will be observed that the artists, though they regularly
treat hair and beard in an abstract or schematic way, hardly
ever use the same kind of abstraction or mode of schematism
twice, but show a curious and inexhaustible versatility in
inventing new patterns for the expression of hair in stone.
At Plate XXXII. we have reached another and freer style-
The Daedalian influence has made itself felt in Cyprus at last.
The hieratic principles are shaken off, or at least other principles
are introduced alongside of them, and the Cyprian artist sets
himself, as the Hellenic artist proper has long begun to do, to
represent nature as she is. These heads belong to a large num-
ber executed in a free or Helleniziug style. It is reasonable to
suppose that Evagoras would have been the great promoter of
this innovation in the arts of his country, and that the ex-
amples of free style which we have may range from his time
clown to that of the Roman Empire. The two fragments on
Plate XXXIII. are pretty good work. The fragment of a kneel-
ing archer of the next plate is better still. No. XXXV. only
looks good at first sight. By this time we have reached Roman
days, and the singular sketch in relief on Plate XXXVI. must
be very late Roman indeed.
But the real interest of the collection lies, as we have seen,
in its oldest portions. Though there are examples that run
down through all ages from possibly the most primitive till the
Roman, there are none that rival the Greek work of the central
states and noblest ages. Greek art, liaving germinated here and
at other such points of contact with the East, attained its full
flower at Athens and elsewhere. The Hellenic genius, once
fertilized from the East, developed itself at home. The art of
Cyprus, by the days of the Hellenic culmination in the hands
of Phidias and his contemporaries and afterwards, is either that
of an imitative and third-rate provincial school, or that of an
archaic and traditional school; and it shows the two schools
working side by side. For the old priestly types and semi-
Asiatic conceptions evidently perpetuated themselves in Cyprus,
in spite of any Helleniziug dynast, long after they had been
ennobled or grown out of elsewhere. So probably did the old
fashions of vase moulding and decorating, and the making of
household images.
So that it is impossible to be sure of the actual comparative
age of some of these objects, however old and primitive they
look. Of the vast antiquity of the types to which many of
the objects belong, however, there can be no doubt whatever.
There can be no doubt, as we hope to have in some degree
made evident, of the high consequence of these discoveries
for the science of antiquity and the knowledge of Greek reli-
gion and art, and of the fruitful study which they offer to the
student of history and archaiology.
SIDNEY COLVI.V.
sentations of the head, however, the Egyptian character has in this
case entirely flown. No. XII. is singular as showing a thoroughly
foreign manner in the application and combination of details
originally Egyptian. " Are these," asks Mr. Newton, " dedicated
during the time when the island was subjected to Amasis, or
are any of them memorials of that earlier subjection of Cyprus
which, as may be inferred from Egyptian monuments, had taken
place as early as the reign of Thothmcs III., or even earlier ?"
Seeing that the movement of Amasis had for its tendency at
least as much to Hellenize Egypt as to Egyptianizc Hellas ; see-
ing also that by the date of that movement a Hellenic art, more
original and more freely developed than this, was already grow-
ing up elsewhere ; and seeing that the Assyrian influences, which
are to be traced as well as Egyptian ones in the art of Cyprus,
must of course have been introduced before the downfall of the
Assyrian empire, and therefore long before the time of Amasis—
seeing all this, does not the earlier date, that of the conquest
ascribed to Thothmcs III., or to the beginning of the nineteenth
dynasty, become the probable one for such a wave of Egyptian
influence as these sculptures attest ?
Plates XIV. XV. XVI. and the right hand figure of plate
XIX. are the examples that seem most plainly to show a wave of
Assyriau influence passing over the art of the island. Still,
beneath this too there is the peculiar, experimental, and local
something of which we have spoken. It is not only the peculiar
cast of features, the receding forehead, the high cheek-bones and
sunken cheeks, the thick protruding nose, chin, and lips, which
constitute a type apart. That, travellers say, is the type of the
Cypriot population to this hour. It is the beginning of experi-
ment and emancipation, the immobile and abstract hieratic types
passing into new phases, the Egyptian and Asiatic becoming
Greek. It seems to be Greek art dawning under our eyes.
There is a point in the progress of the style where these sculp-
tures closely resemble examples of the most archaic Greek
work found in other places—a point where archaic Greek and
Etruscan and this are almost indistinguishable—with the set
unmeaning smile of the mouth, and the more or less rigid
attachment of the arms to the body, according to the traditional
helplessness of the art before the innovations of Daedalus.
M. Longperier (Journal Asialiquc, 1858) and Mr. Newton*
(Academy, Dec. 15th, 1872) have pointed out the very singular
similarity that exists, in more points than one, between this
Cyprian statuary and Etruscan statuary found at Cervetri.
The left hand figure on plate XVII. seems to be a typical
example of an archaic or hieratic style, deliberately kept up for
religious purposes in a comparatively late period when it would
naturally have been obsolete. The dove on the wrist of the figure
points in this case, as in others, to the priesthood of Venus.
Plate XVIII. represents by far the largest and most
important head of the whole collection, and seems again to
show the Assyrian influence in the head-dress and conventional
treatment of the beard. General di Cesnola calculates the
height of the body to which it must have belonged as forty feet.
It must thus have been the dominant statue," whomsoever
representing or by whomsoever dedicated, of the temple.
After two plates of miscellaneous archaic figures, we
come to the figures of Herakles, Some of these are colossal,
some small, and all of nearly the same type—an extremely
archaic type scarcely approximate to even the earliest Greek
types on the vases. Notice the rigid conventional and semi-
Egyptian treatment of the lion's skin, head, and claws, the quiver
and club. The adventure of the cattle of Geryones is that one of
the labours of Herakles which seems to have found favour with
these artists. Plate XXIII. shows mutilated figures of the three-
• To Mr. C. T. Newton and Mr. li. S. Poole, of the British Museum, I cannot
but express my thanks, in this place, for their friendly assistance in the prepara-
tion of the present sketch.
bodied monster, executed in various sizes; and plate XXIV. is a
singularly spirited relief from the pedestal of the largest of them,
in which Herakles, in the upper stage, is seen shooting the dog
Orthros with his arrows; while on the lower stage, apparently,
Eurytion is trying to protect his master's herd.
We have placed next two pieces that seem concerned with
the temple service or rites of Aphrodite. There is a player
(twice over, pis. XIII. and XXV.) on the double pipes, with his
<jtofi{3cia, or leather mouthstrap; there is a man carrying the
leather A<tk6s, or wine-skin; there is (pi. XXVI.) a clever little
figure of a priestess of Aphrodite lifting her skirts as she dances
in an elaborate dress.
Then follows a series of heads, wonderfully well preserved, but
parted from their trunks. Plates XXVIII.-XXXI. inclusive
are principally examples of the conventional or hieratic Cyprian
style which we have already pointed out, based apparently
upon Assyrian precedent, only with a variety and experimental
tendency in the convention which you do not find in its proto-
type. It will be observed that the artists, though they regularly
treat hair and beard in an abstract or schematic way, hardly
ever use the same kind of abstraction or mode of schematism
twice, but show a curious and inexhaustible versatility in
inventing new patterns for the expression of hair in stone.
At Plate XXXII. we have reached another and freer style-
The Daedalian influence has made itself felt in Cyprus at last.
The hieratic principles are shaken off, or at least other principles
are introduced alongside of them, and the Cyprian artist sets
himself, as the Hellenic artist proper has long begun to do, to
represent nature as she is. These heads belong to a large num-
ber executed in a free or Helleniziug style. It is reasonable to
suppose that Evagoras would have been the great promoter of
this innovation in the arts of his country, and that the ex-
amples of free style which we have may range from his time
clown to that of the Roman Empire. The two fragments on
Plate XXXIII. are pretty good work. The fragment of a kneel-
ing archer of the next plate is better still. No. XXXV. only
looks good at first sight. By this time we have reached Roman
days, and the singular sketch in relief on Plate XXXVI. must
be very late Roman indeed.
But the real interest of the collection lies, as we have seen,
in its oldest portions. Though there are examples that run
down through all ages from possibly the most primitive till the
Roman, there are none that rival the Greek work of the central
states and noblest ages. Greek art, liaving germinated here and
at other such points of contact with the East, attained its full
flower at Athens and elsewhere. The Hellenic genius, once
fertilized from the East, developed itself at home. The art of
Cyprus, by the days of the Hellenic culmination in the hands
of Phidias and his contemporaries and afterwards, is either that
of an imitative and third-rate provincial school, or that of an
archaic and traditional school; and it shows the two schools
working side by side. For the old priestly types and semi-
Asiatic conceptions evidently perpetuated themselves in Cyprus,
in spite of any Helleniziug dynast, long after they had been
ennobled or grown out of elsewhere. So probably did the old
fashions of vase moulding and decorating, and the making of
household images.
So that it is impossible to be sure of the actual comparative
age of some of these objects, however old and primitive they
look. Of the vast antiquity of the types to which many of
the objects belong, however, there can be no doubt whatever.
There can be no doubt, as we hope to have in some degree
made evident, of the high consequence of these discoveries
for the science of antiquity and the knowledge of Greek reli-
gion and art, and of the fruitful study which they offer to the
student of history and archaiology.
SIDNEY COLVI.V.