DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.14144#0172
136
ARCIIAISTIC ART.
from that better and holier age. The very sense of our own sorrow-
ful scepticism inclines us to invest with a peculiar sanctity whatever
has been hallowed by the undoubting worship of our forefathers. It
is the same feeling which leads us to guard against any attempt to
change the phraseology of our Bible, to cling with tender reverence
to the prayers of our Church, the products of a more believing age —
to think that there breathes in them an evOsov, a spirit of faith and
holiness, not always to be found in the polished diction of ' enlightened'
divines of our own day. When /Eschylus was asked by his brothers
to write a new paean, he replied that the old one of Tynnichus was
the best:1 that a paean by himself would fare as new statues by the
side of more ancient ones ; for the latter, with all their simplicity, were
regarded as divine, while the more carefully executed modern works
were admired indeed for their skilful execution, but produced far less
the impression of godhead.2 Even Pausanias, who lived nearly to the
end of the second century of the Christian era, recognised the divinity
of the grotesque and clumsy images ascribed to Daedalus.3 It is not
to be wondered at, therefore, that side by side with the ever-progressive
secular art, which changed with the changing views and tastes and
the growing skill of the times, the fabrication of religious, or rather
hieratic, images was carried on, in which the artist deviated as
little as possible from the ancient form. We have already seen one
example of this tendency in the copy which Onatas the /Eginetan made
after the Persian war, of the Black Demeter with the horse's head.1
Another is the strange figure of Athene on the Panathenasan oil-jars,7'
which remained unchanged when Athenian art was at its height. It
is evident that it was in this guise that the pious worshippers of the
1 Socrates (Plato, Ion, 534 D) gives Tyn-
nichus as a remarkable example of an in-
significant person divinely inspired: 'Hjuel?
Ot <lkov0v7€S tibwfifV OTl 011% ovToi tlaiv 01
ravTa Xiyovrts ovrw iroWov &tta, ols ¥OVS f*y
icapioTiv iU1 6 &ebs avros toriv 6 5ia
tovtuv 5e (pdtyyfTcu irpbs T^ias. M f yiffToi'
oe t e KjUtj p to v t^j Koycp T vvv i\o s o
XaXKiScus, os a Wo /j.€vou5ey ttwitot1
€7roi7j(T€ irotrj/za, utov Tis av a£(W(T€ie
Hvqaiyvai rbv 5e ira'iuiva (naiuva) t)V
"°"T" <55ou<ri axtSSi/ ti iravraiv /ic-
\9p «iUifTi» artx"''" 'itttp aorbs
fupTjjua Ti Muiiraf.
' The best testimony of this is Tynni-
chus the Chalcidian, who never composed
a poem worthy of mention except the pa;an
which we all sing, almost the most beautiful
of all songs, which, as he himself says, was
really an invention of the Muses.'
9 Tavia yap Kal arc-Ais W1W0U)ll4va Qfia mklttoBut
Ti Si numt ir.pie'pyiut cipyaafit'i'a 0aVJK~£ta0eU lUf
Beoxi Si So£av rjTTov i \ <it\
3 Vide supra, p. 18.
4 Vide supra, p. 86.
5 Vide supra, lig. 35, p. 102.
ARCIIAISTIC ART.
from that better and holier age. The very sense of our own sorrow-
ful scepticism inclines us to invest with a peculiar sanctity whatever
has been hallowed by the undoubting worship of our forefathers. It
is the same feeling which leads us to guard against any attempt to
change the phraseology of our Bible, to cling with tender reverence
to the prayers of our Church, the products of a more believing age —
to think that there breathes in them an evOsov, a spirit of faith and
holiness, not always to be found in the polished diction of ' enlightened'
divines of our own day. When /Eschylus was asked by his brothers
to write a new paean, he replied that the old one of Tynnichus was
the best:1 that a paean by himself would fare as new statues by the
side of more ancient ones ; for the latter, with all their simplicity, were
regarded as divine, while the more carefully executed modern works
were admired indeed for their skilful execution, but produced far less
the impression of godhead.2 Even Pausanias, who lived nearly to the
end of the second century of the Christian era, recognised the divinity
of the grotesque and clumsy images ascribed to Daedalus.3 It is not
to be wondered at, therefore, that side by side with the ever-progressive
secular art, which changed with the changing views and tastes and
the growing skill of the times, the fabrication of religious, or rather
hieratic, images was carried on, in which the artist deviated as
little as possible from the ancient form. We have already seen one
example of this tendency in the copy which Onatas the /Eginetan made
after the Persian war, of the Black Demeter with the horse's head.1
Another is the strange figure of Athene on the Panathenasan oil-jars,7'
which remained unchanged when Athenian art was at its height. It
is evident that it was in this guise that the pious worshippers of the
1 Socrates (Plato, Ion, 534 D) gives Tyn-
nichus as a remarkable example of an in-
significant person divinely inspired: 'Hjuel?
Ot <lkov0v7€S tibwfifV OTl 011% ovToi tlaiv 01
ravTa Xiyovrts ovrw iroWov &tta, ols ¥OVS f*y
icapioTiv iU1 6 &ebs avros toriv 6 5ia
tovtuv 5e (pdtyyfTcu irpbs T^ias. M f yiffToi'
oe t e KjUtj p to v t^j Koycp T vvv i\o s o
XaXKiScus, os a Wo /j.€vou5ey ttwitot1
€7roi7j(T€ irotrj/za, utov Tis av a£(W(T€ie
Hvqaiyvai rbv 5e ira'iuiva (naiuva) t)V
"°"T" <55ou<ri axtSSi/ ti iravraiv /ic-
\9p «iUifTi» artx"''" 'itttp aorbs
fupTjjua Ti Muiiraf.
' The best testimony of this is Tynni-
chus the Chalcidian, who never composed
a poem worthy of mention except the pa;an
which we all sing, almost the most beautiful
of all songs, which, as he himself says, was
really an invention of the Muses.'
9 Tavia yap Kal arc-Ais W1W0U)ll4va Qfia mklttoBut
Ti Si numt ir.pie'pyiut cipyaafit'i'a 0aVJK~£ta0eU lUf
Beoxi Si So£av rjTTov i \ <it\
3 Vide supra, p. 18.
4 Vide supra, p. 86.
5 Vide supra, lig. 35, p. 102.