DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.14144#0171
ROMAN LOVE OF THE ANTIQUE.
i3S
CHAPTER XII.
ARCHAISTIC {PSEUDO-ARCHAIC) ART.
THE term arcliaisiic, i.e. pseudo-archaic, is applied to a class of imita-
tions in which not so much individual works of art as particular
styles and types are copied. They are for the most part the pro-
ductions of artists of an advanced period, who divest themselves as
far as they are able of their superior knowledge and freer style, and
affect the rude and cramped manner of an earlier and less skilful age.
It is a constantly recurring phenomenon in the history of mankind
that the wealthy and luxurious of an over-refined era conceive a
passionate love for all that savours of the primitive simplicity and
rudeness of primaeval life.1 This longing of the sated and jaded
palate for coarse and simple food is particularly observable in the
Emperors Augustus and Hadrian, and the beau moudc of Rome saw
beauty through their masters' eyes. Hadrian's morbid taste, which,
careless of beaut}-, sought only the antique, led him back even to
Egyptian art. During the reigns of these monarchs, therefore, the
copyists were employed in reproducing, not the noblest or the most
beautiful, but the most ancient, and even the most grotesque pro-
ductions of earlier times. A still more fruitful source of archaistic
imitation than even imperial caprice was religious reverence for
antiquity. The rude idols, which were little more than symbols, were
hallowed by the pious veneration of past ages, and retained a magic
influence over the minds of succeeding generations. The Muse of
Religion is always fondly looking back to a time of purer, firmer faith,
and loves to surround herself with the objects which have come down
i3S
CHAPTER XII.
ARCHAISTIC {PSEUDO-ARCHAIC) ART.
THE term arcliaisiic, i.e. pseudo-archaic, is applied to a class of imita-
tions in which not so much individual works of art as particular
styles and types are copied. They are for the most part the pro-
ductions of artists of an advanced period, who divest themselves as
far as they are able of their superior knowledge and freer style, and
affect the rude and cramped manner of an earlier and less skilful age.
It is a constantly recurring phenomenon in the history of mankind
that the wealthy and luxurious of an over-refined era conceive a
passionate love for all that savours of the primitive simplicity and
rudeness of primaeval life.1 This longing of the sated and jaded
palate for coarse and simple food is particularly observable in the
Emperors Augustus and Hadrian, and the beau moudc of Rome saw
beauty through their masters' eyes. Hadrian's morbid taste, which,
careless of beaut}-, sought only the antique, led him back even to
Egyptian art. During the reigns of these monarchs, therefore, the
copyists were employed in reproducing, not the noblest or the most
beautiful, but the most ancient, and even the most grotesque pro-
ductions of earlier times. A still more fruitful source of archaistic
imitation than even imperial caprice was religious reverence for
antiquity. The rude idols, which were little more than symbols, were
hallowed by the pious veneration of past ages, and retained a magic
influence over the minds of succeeding generations. The Muse of
Religion is always fondly looking back to a time of purer, firmer faith,
and loves to surround herself with the objects which have come down