( ioi ) 



CHAPTER IX. 



APPENDIX. 



Those who write with thorough knowledge upon 

 ancient art are few. The very thoughtful and serious 

 work of Winkelmann is a document of the highest 

 value for reference about the Greeks. He says that among 

 them the study of the nature of animals was no less 

 the aim of their artists than of their philosophers. 



In spite of having approached those ancient works 

 with a mind predisposed in their favour, it has been 

 impossible for me to be convinced as to the form 

 characterising those animals which they have generally 

 desired to make other than accessories, so entirely have 

 they neglected what Pliny calls parengon, that is to 

 say, a mediocre object to enhance the value of the 

 principal subject. 



M. Lens, in his work upon the costume and 

 garments, frankly complains of the defects of certain 

 ancient productions arising from the ignorance of 

 their authors about everything outside human nature. 

 Winkelmann throws all the blame upon the bad 

 translation of the engravers, and appeals to the real 

 monuments. 



I have visited, in Italy, the works cited, and despite 

 the affirmation, according to Pliny, that Calamis very 

 adequately represented horses, the fact appears to me 

 disputable, because the author displays the same 

 admiration for the lion of the Pyreus of Athens 

 decorating the entry of the Arsenal at Venice. He 

 ranks it among the handsomest monuments of this class, 

 whilst admitting the ideal side of these antique figures, 

 which distinguishes them from living lions. I have just 

 seen this monument at Venice, and can affirm that this 

 heraldic lion can only be classified as mythological. 



