GBEEK ART. 216 GREEK ART. for details, and many accessories are rendered entirely in this wa}', especially in the earlier art, while in the Hellenistic period vc find very low relief employed to assist the painter. The Greek attitude toward the use of color was very different from that which now prevails; but the statues from the Acropolis and the beautifully tinted Alexander sarcophagus at Constantinople show that Greek taste in this regard was at least as good as our own. In sketching the histors' of Greek art, it is convenient to distinguish the following periods (see Arcii-Eology ) : I. The Archaic Period, extending to about B.C. 480, the era of the Persian wars. II. The Attic Period, from about B.C. 480 to B.C. 323, during which the centre of Greek life is Athens. III. The Hellenistic Period, which ends with the Roman Conquest (B.C. 146). IV. The Roman Period, which may be extended to the foundation of Constantinople { a.d. 330 ) , though constructive Greek art ceased long be- fore. These divisions are in their nature arbitrary, and no sharp line divides one from the other. Archaic I'eriod (till B.C. 480 ) . This period may be conveniently divided into two parts: (a) The era of the formation of types and schools, and (b) the period of developed archaism, from about B.C. 5.50 to B.C. 480. Formative Period. — The eailiest Doric temples and other monuments of Greek art do not belong nineh before the year B.C. 700, unless Professor Diirpfeld is right in assigning the Heneum at Olyiiipia to a date not far from B.C. 1000. The evidence here is very uncertain; but even if it is accepted, the building stands alone. The ear- liest sculptures in the round are probal)ly not earlier than B.C. 650, though here any positive date is unattainable. All the evidence shows that the artists were not confined to any one part of Greece, but that a general activity devel- oped throughout the Greek world, using much the same tyjjes, but treating them with certain differences. Much has already been accomplished in distinguishing the several local schools and identifying their products, Their characteristics, however, are so dependent on details that their discussion lies outside the scope of this article, and it will be more convenient to consider the works with reference to tyjjes rather than schools. Statues may be male or female, draped or nude, standing or seated. An examination of the monuments .shows that not all the possible variations were adopted by these early artists. The standing figure, if male, is usually niide; if female. dra]ied; while the seated figures are generally clothed. The male standing figure bears a striking resemblance to the Egyptian statues in its pose, and the suggestion may have come from Egypt, with which the Greeks of the sev- enth century carried on an active trade; but the Greek artist, even at first, is no mere copyist, but endeavors to embody in' the traditional form his own observations. These so-called '.pollo' st.atues stand firmly on both feet, with the left foot advanced and the arms close to the sides. Little by little we may observe greater freedom, the arms are worked free from the body, though the hands are still pressed to the thighs, and a greater care in modeling, which seeks to bring out the muscles and bones, is manifest. Later in the period the type is modi tied, as in such a iigure as the Calf-I5earer of the Acropolis, where the position of the hands has been completely altered, and the artist is fast freeing himself from some of the established conventionalities. The draped female statues arc scarcely more, at first, than slabs of stone carved into a rude out- line of the human form. The head and long locks of hair, the arms at the sides, and the two feet side by side just showing beneath the long robe, are the only details attempted. The body is clothed in a long garment, girded at the waist and hanging perfectly straight to the feet. Prob- ably the ancient color indicated detail that has now disappeared. A good example is the native statue of Nicandra, at Delos. Later more care is used in the treatment of the drajiery, and the style begins which is best represented in the sixth centurj- by the Acropolis 'Jlaidens' (K6pai). The seated dra|)ed figures are best represented by the figures from Brancliidie in the British Museum. Draped in large mantles, whose stiff folds are barely indicated in low relief, their hands resting on their knees, they sit in their high-backed thrones, without life or dignity, though recalling in their pose some of the earlier Babj'lonian work. Miile sculpture in the round is developing through modifications of stereotyped forms, a greater advance seems to have been made in re- liefs, especially in those of an architectural char- acter. These are typified by the metopes of the oldest temple of Selinus, in Sicily, which, in spite of their ugliness, at least show some freedom in design. Even more interesting, though no more beautiful, are the remains of pediments in 'poros' stone found on the Acropolis. They are among the earliest s]jeciiiiens of Attic art, and show it even then possessing characteristics of its own. .mong these is the heavy, build of the figures, which appears also in the 'Calf-Bearer,' and seems to cling to the Athenian School through- out the sixth century, if not longer. At the very end of this period a work survives which can at least be dated approximately — viz. the great Temple of Artemis at Ephesus. which w^as rebuilt during the reign of Cra?sus (B.C. 560-46). The Ionic columns of this temple were adorned with sculptures in relief u])on the lower drum, some of the fragments of which are now in the British iluseum. They show an advanced technique, and give promise of high future development. Developed Arehaisni. — With the period of de- veloped archaism come the beginnings of real lieaiity and charm in the products of Greek sculp- ture. True, there are still serious technical de- fects, but the artists are fast emerging from the trammels of formalism, and already show much simplicity and devotion., combined with a true Greek grace and sense of proportion. The nude male type still clings to the old position, but the artist is now able to render the muscles better, to free the arms from the sides, and give some expression to the face. It is. however, in the draped female statue that the greatest ad- vance is made, apparently by the Ionian artists of the Cyclades. especially of Chios. They de- veloped the deep cutting of the folds of the drapery, and the change which this brought about is well indicated in the important series of statues discovered on the Acropolis of Athens. The gen-
