DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.22421#0130
66
THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
Letter III.
inferior class; arguments, however, which do not sufficiently
account for the peculiarities I have mentioned. If, on the other
hand, we admit the supposition that this relic is rather a specimen
of the retrospective influence of the Attic school of the time of
Phidias upon the Ionic, the question as to date becomes of second-
ary importance, though there is sufficient argument, in the circum-
stance of the Persians playing so important a part in the sculptures
themselves, against assigning so late a date as that of Alexander
the Great. From many grounds it appears probable that these
sculptures date from the first decennial of the 4th century B.C., a
time when the domination of the Persians in the Greek colonies of
Asia Minor had, in consequence of the enmity between Athens
and Sparta, been newly strengthened, and when it may be ima-
gined that one of the last descendants of Harpagus, whose race
reigned in Lycia until 388 B.C., may have desired to commemorate
the conquest of the country by his progenitors by the erection of
this trophy, which would serve at the same time as a standing
memorial to the natives.
The conclusion thus arrived at of the later date of this work of
art has in no way altered my conviction of the influence exercised
by the early Ionic school of sculpture upon the Attic school at the
time of Phidias, for which the following reasons may be given,
viz.: the early developed and general cultivation of the Ionic race
evident from the fact that Homer flourished in the 10th century
B.C., and also the early development of the art of architecture
proved by the erection of such colossal edifices as the Temple of
Juno at Samos, and that of Diana at Ephesus, about 580 years
B.C.; and, furthermore, the fact that the pediments of these
temples required to be filled with sculptures upon a colossal scale.
It is true that sculpture attained its high degree of development
far later than architecture, yet a very early cultivation of the art
is, in the absence of larger works of antiquity, proved by many of
the Electrum coins of the Ionic cities, which exhibit great beauty
and freedom on the obverse, while, at the same time, the qua-
dratum incusum (sunk impression) on the reverse bears witness to
their great antiquity. Numismatics, in assigning the date of these
coins to the 6th century B.C., have perhaps gone a little too far
back, but, at all events, they may be ascribed to the beginning of
the 5th century. Nevertheless, as the history of art universally
THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
Letter III.
inferior class; arguments, however, which do not sufficiently
account for the peculiarities I have mentioned. If, on the other
hand, we admit the supposition that this relic is rather a specimen
of the retrospective influence of the Attic school of the time of
Phidias upon the Ionic, the question as to date becomes of second-
ary importance, though there is sufficient argument, in the circum-
stance of the Persians playing so important a part in the sculptures
themselves, against assigning so late a date as that of Alexander
the Great. From many grounds it appears probable that these
sculptures date from the first decennial of the 4th century B.C., a
time when the domination of the Persians in the Greek colonies of
Asia Minor had, in consequence of the enmity between Athens
and Sparta, been newly strengthened, and when it may be ima-
gined that one of the last descendants of Harpagus, whose race
reigned in Lycia until 388 B.C., may have desired to commemorate
the conquest of the country by his progenitors by the erection of
this trophy, which would serve at the same time as a standing
memorial to the natives.
The conclusion thus arrived at of the later date of this work of
art has in no way altered my conviction of the influence exercised
by the early Ionic school of sculpture upon the Attic school at the
time of Phidias, for which the following reasons may be given,
viz.: the early developed and general cultivation of the Ionic race
evident from the fact that Homer flourished in the 10th century
B.C., and also the early development of the art of architecture
proved by the erection of such colossal edifices as the Temple of
Juno at Samos, and that of Diana at Ephesus, about 580 years
B.C.; and, furthermore, the fact that the pediments of these
temples required to be filled with sculptures upon a colossal scale.
It is true that sculpture attained its high degree of development
far later than architecture, yet a very early cultivation of the art
is, in the absence of larger works of antiquity, proved by many of
the Electrum coins of the Ionic cities, which exhibit great beauty
and freedom on the obverse, while, at the same time, the qua-
dratum incusum (sunk impression) on the reverse bears witness to
their great antiquity. Numismatics, in assigning the date of these
coins to the 6th century B.C., have perhaps gone a little too far
back, but, at all events, they may be ascribed to the beginning of
the 5th century. Nevertheless, as the history of art universally