SUMMARY OF THE HISTORY OF PHOENICIAN SCULPTURE. 71 in disengaging the lineaments of any definable type. On a few isolated objects features appear which seem to be characteristic of the race, but then again we are thrown back into doubt by others in which little or nothing of the kind is to be seen. We know how the Phoenicians were dressed, but we should find it difficult to say whether their noses were hooked or straight, whether their mouths were large or small, and by what peculiarity of visage they were distinguished in the markets of Europe from their Greek, Latin, and Etruscan rivals. This vagueness of form is to be explained by the fact that Phoe- nician art never went directly and sincerely to nature in the whole course of its activity. Its eyes were always fixed upon foreign arts, upon those productions of an alien race which might happen to be in vogue for the moment. The terra-cottas will help us to form a true idea as to the order in which those influences succeeded each other. Statuettes in this material are numerous compared with the remains of sculpture in stone ; they form series which are less incomplete and therefore give far better materials for comparison. 1 The people of Arvad, of Gebal, of Tyre and Sidon, were the vassals of Egypt when it was governed by the great Theban dynasties ; many of their people were settled in the Nile valley, and Egyptian works of art must have been common on the Syrian coast, where they must have served as models for the native workmen. But, so far as we know, not a single specimen has come down to us from those distant ages. Some day, perhaps, we may find relics of the time when Phoenicia was an art-province of Egypt ; at present the oldest clay figures we possess are those in which an Assyrian example may be traced. The influence is clear, and yet there is no doubt as to their native character. They were all found in Phoenicia, while both in quality of paste and in choice of type they may be plainly distinguished from similar things produced in Mesopotamia. Nowhere is the influence to which we allude more conspicuous than in the war-chariot reproduced in Fig. 145 of our first volume. 1 In the whole of this inquiry into the style of the Phoenician terra-cottas we shall follow M. HEUZEY step by step. In his Catalogue he has studied them with minute care and the most penetrating sagacity, and has arrived at opinions as to the influence of archaic Greek art upon the art of Phoenicia which we cordially endorse. We refer any reader who may wish to study the question more closely to the pregnant pages in which M. Heuzey sets forth his views.
