Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

they went out of Egypt, borrowed a large quantity of vases of gold and filver of the Egyptians 9. This fact fhews that gold work must have been then much cultivated among these people. To the testimony of Moses we may join that of Homer. The poet makes mention in the Odyffee, of many prefents which Menelaus had received in Egypt. They consisted of different works in gold, the taste and workmanship of which fuppofed great address and skill. The King of Thebes gave to Menelaus, two large filver tubs, and two beautiful tripods of gold. Alcandra, wife of this monarch, made a prefent to Helen of a gold distaff, and of a magnificent filver basket, the edges of which were fine gold and elegantly wrought1. This union, this mixture of gold with filver appears to me worthy of remark. The art of foldering thefe metals depends on a great number of fciences. This is a proof that the Egyptians had been used a long time to the working of metals. We perceive also in the defign of this basket a fort of taste and a particular kind of finishing.

We ought to refer alfo to the Egyptians that great quantity of trinkets which the Hebrews were provided with in the defert. It is faid that they offered for the making of the works deftined to divine fervice, their bracelets, their earrings, their rings, their clafps, without counting the vases of gold and filver. Mofes made all these trinkets be melted, and converted them to different works proper for the worship of the Almighty. The greatest part of thefe works were gold, and among them they had pieces of great execution and highly finished workmanship. A crown of gold entirely furrounded the ark of alliance. The table of fhewbread was adorned with a border of open chafed gold work ", The chandelier of feven branches appears to me above all worthy of much attention. The defcription which the holy scripture makes of it, gives us an idea of a very ingenious and well-compofed defign. This piece confiderable in it

4 Exod. c.12. V. 35.

Odyff. 1. 4. V. 125. &c.
Ibid. c. 25. V. II.

1 Exod. c. Ibid. v. 24. & 2j.

35. V. 22.

* Ibid. v. 31. &c.

felf,

felf, was of very fine gold beat by the hammers. I pafs over in filence a number of other works equally eftimable for the matter, and for the workmanship which must have been very delicate.

With respect to Asia, gold work was at that time as much cultivated as in Egypt. Profane hiftory furnishes us with fufficient teftimonies which prove that many people in Afia had made a great progress in ingraving, in chafing, and generally in whatever concerned the working of metals. The greatest part of the works cried up by Homer came from Afia. We there remark armours, cups, and vafes of a very elegant defign and a very agreeable taste. Herodotus speaks alfo with great encomiums of the richness and magnificence of the throne on which Midas diftributed juftice. This prince made a prefent of it to the temple of Delphos. 'Tis true Herodotus has not left us a particular defcription of this throne. But as he affures us that the work deferved to be seen, we may conjecture that the workmanship was highly finished. I fhall obferve laftly, that Homer gives in general to the nations of Afia, arms much more ornamental and much more rich than to the Greeks. Those of Glaucus, and of many other chiefs of the Trojan army, were gold. The attention of Homer to cry up these circumftances, proves not only the opulence and luxury of the Afiatics, but also the great knowledge which these people had at that time in works of gold, and the arts which depend on it.

Although my intention was to avoid details, yet I cannot dispense with myself from making fome reflections on the shield of Achilles, a work, the idea of which appears to me admirable, and which would certainly produce a high effect if it was executed. Many reafons engaged me to speak of it under this article. Homer could not take the idea of fuch a work, but from fome models which must have come near it. He has then only followed and embellish

y Exod c. 35. v. 31. & 36.

z See Iliad. I. II. v. 19. l. 23. v. 741. &c.; Odyff. 1. 4. v. 615. &c. l. 15. v. 414. & 459. &c.

L. 1. n. 14.

b Iliad. 1. 6. v. 236. L. 2. B. v. 376. l. 10. v. 439.

ed

ed an art invented before the war of Troy. This poet, as I think I have already remarked, is very exact in not giving to the people of whom he speaks any knowledge that did not belong to the ages in which he places then. A more faithful hiftorian than Virgil, he does not anticipate the times. I think that Homer could have feen only in Afia the models which fuggefted to him the idea of the fhield of Achilles. The Greeks were at that time too rude to give them the honour of fuch a work. With refpect to Egypt, I doubt whether Homer was ever there. Thefe motives, I think, are fufficient to refer to the times and to the people whom I am actually speaking of, the masterpiece which we are going to examine.

I fee no fact in ancient history which can ferve so well as the fhield of Achilles, to make known the state and the progress of arts in the present ages. Without fpeaking of the richness and variety of the defign which runs through that work, we ought to remark, first, the blending the different metals which Homer puts in the compofition of his fhield. Copper, tin, gold, and filver are employed in it. Laftly, we muft obferve, that at that time they knew the art of giving, by the impreffion of fire on metals, and by their mixture, the colour of different objects. Let us add to this the ingraving and the chafing, and we shall agree that the fhield of Achilles formed a very complicated work.

If it is eafy to make known the beauty and the merit of this important piece, it is not the fame as to the mechanism of the work. It is not easy to form a clear and precife idea of it: we do not fufficiently comprehend the manner in which Homer would have us to underftand how it must have been executed. Yet let us fee if, in modern productions, we cannot find fome, whofe composition may affift us to comprehend this kind of work.

Let us call to mind those works in trinkets which they

e Iliad. 1. 18, v. 474. & 475.

VOL. II.

X

made

[ocr errors]

made fome years ago, in which, with the fole help of gold and filver differently mixed, upon a plain and uniform furface, they represented divers subjects. The artifice of these fort of trinkets confifted in the infinite number of little pieces inlaid and foldered on the ground of the work. All these different pieces were ingraved or chafed. The colour and reflection of the metals joined in the design, detached the subjects from the back-ground of the work, and made them ftand forward. We may conjecture, that it was in this tafte nearly, that Homer has imagined the execution of the fhield of Achilles by Vulcan. The field of it was tin, intersected and varied with many pieces of different metals ingraved and carved. Let us give fome examples.

Would Vulcan reprefent oxen? he chofe gold and tin a, that is to fay, a piece of yellow metal and a piece of white metal to diverfify his flock. Was his intention to reprefent a vine loaden with dark-coloured grapes? Gold composed the stem of that vine. It was fupported by props of filver. Pieces of polifhed and imbrowned fteel probably formed the dark-coloured grape. A ditch of the fame

metal furrounded the vineyard. A palifade of tin might ferve for the inclosure. I shall not enter into any very particular details: this flight sketch is fufficient to explain the manner in which I conceive the mechanism of that work. As for the reft, what ideas foever we form of the fhield of Achilles, we may be affured, that the invention of it was great and magnificent. Such a compofition does not permit us to doubt, that, at the time of the war of Troy, goldsmiths work was come to a very great degree of perfection among the people of Afia; for it is always in thefe countries that Homer places the feat of arts and of famous artifts.

Iliad. 1, 18, v. 574.
Ibid.

Ibid. v. 561, &c.

AR

[blocks in formation]

THE origin of painting is one of the most difficult queftions that occurs in the hiftory of the arts. There reigns a very great obfcurity, as to the time of its being invented and put in practice. It is not much more easy to decide to what people we ought to give the honour of it. Sentiments are fo divided about the countries and about the time when this art took its rife. Some have given the honour to the Egyptians; others to the Greeks". It is not here a proper place to examine this point of criticifm. With refpect to the time in which painting took its rife, fome authors pretend that the invention of this art preceded the war of Troy; others think it posterior to that epoch. This is what is to be examined into. But before we give ourselves up to these researches, it is proper, I think, to establish the fenfe of the word by which I understand painting, and to fix the object of the question. I define painting, The art of representing on a plain furface, by means of colours, objects, fuch as they appear to us figured and coloured by nature. From this definition, I fay, and I hope to prove, painting was not known in the ages we are now examining.

The Egyptians boast of having known painting 6000 years before the Greeks. The holy fcripture and profane history equally agree to reject such a chimera. Pliny himself has not made any account of this vain pretenfion, and has not thought it worth his while to dwell upon it".

Plin. 1. 7. fect. 57. p. 417. 1. 35. fect. 5. p. 682.; Ifidor. orig. 1. 19. c. 16. h Ariftotel. Theophraft. apud Plin. 1. 7. p. 417. i Ariftotel. Loco cit.

P. 682.

Theophraft. ibid.; Plin. 1. 35. lect. 6.

I comprehend in this definition the Brooch, attended with the different Thades and the different degrees of colours which are there obferved, béfides the effect of fhades, clairs obscurs, &c.

Pliny 1. 35. fe&t, 5. p. 681.

m

Ibid.

[blocks in formation]
« ElőzőTovább »