n 4 Johann Joachim Winckelmann The History of Ancient Art, |764 chicht der Johann Joachim Winckelmann, C ‘Kunst dee Altonums, Dresden, 1764. Excerpts from the Preface, Book Land Book 1V of The “History of Ancient An, translated by Henry Low Boston, MA, 1880; reprinted in David Irwin, ed., Winckelmann, Writings on Ant, London, 197: pp. to4-7and 11 PREFACE The history of ancient art which | have undertaken to write is not a mere chroni- cle of epochs, and of the changes which occurred within them. I use the term ation which it has in the Greek language; and history in the more extended signifi it is my intention to attempt to present a system, In the first part, the treatise on the art of ancient nations, I have sought to execute this design in regard to the art of each nation individually, but specially in reference to that of the Greek. The second part contains the history of art in a more limited sense, that is to say, as far as external circumstances were concerned, but only in reference to the Greeks and Romans. In both parts, however, the principal object is the essential of art, on which the history of the individual artists has litele bearing. “The History of Artis intended to show the origin, progress, change, and downfall of art, together with the different styles of nations, periods, and artists, and to prove the whole, as faras it is possible, from the ancient monuments now in existence. ‘A few works have been published under the title of a History of Art. Art, however, had but a small share in them, for their authors were not sufficiently familiar with it, and therefore could communicate nothing more than what they had learned from books or hearsay. There is scarcely one who guides us to the essential of art, and into its interior, and those who treat of antiquities cither touch only on those points in which they can exhibit their learning, or, if they speak of att, they do so either in general terms of commendation, or their opinion is based on strange and false grounds. In the large and valuable works descriptive of ancient statues which have hith- certo been published, we seek in vain for research and knowledge in regard to art. ‘The description ofa statue ought to show the cause ofits beauty, and the peculiar- ity in its style. It is necessary, therefore, to touch upon particulars in art before itis possible to arrive at a judgement on works of art. But where are we taught the points in which the beauty of a statue consists? What writer has looked at beauty with an artist's eyes? Descriptions of extant antiquities, of the galleries and villas at Rome, afford quite as little instruction: they rather mislead than instruct.WINCKELMANN Richardson has described the palaces and villas in Rome, and the statues in them, like one who had seen them only ina dream. Many palaces he did not see at all, on account of his brief stay in the city, and some, according to his own state- ment, he visited but once; and yet his work, in despite of its many deficiencies and errors, is the best we have. Montfaucon, having compiled his work at a distance from the treasuries of ancient art, saw with the eyes of others, and formed his opinions from engravings and drawings, by which he has been led into great errors. Hercules and Antacus, in the Palazzo Pitti, Florence, — statue of inferior rank, and of which more than one half is of modem restoration, — is, according to him and Maffei, nothing less than a work of Polyclitus. The statue of Sleep. of black marble, by Algardi, in the Villa Borghese, he pronounces an antique. nistakes of learned men in regard to thingy of antiquity proceed mostly from inattention to restoration, as many of them have been unable to distinguish the repairs by which mutilated and lost portions have been replaced Hence it is difficult, indeed almost impossible, to write in a thorough manner of ancient art, and of unknown antiquities, anywhere but in Rome. Even a resi dence there of two years is insufficient for the purpose, as I learn by the laborious preparation required in my own case From youth upward, a love for art has been my strongest passion; and though. education and circumstances led me in quite another direction, still my natural inclination was constantly manifesting itself. All the pictures and statues, as well as engraved gems and coins, which [ have adduced as proofs, [have myself seen, and seen frequently, and been able to study; but for the purpose of aiding the reader's conception, I have cited, besides these, both gems and coins from books, when- ever the engravings of them were tolerably good. ‘As Greck att is the principal point which this History has in view, I have, conse- quently, been obliged in the chapter upon it to enter more into detail; yet I should have been able to say more if had written for the Greeks, and not in a modern tongue, which imposes on me certain restrictions. For this reason, | have, although reluctantly, left out a Dialogue upon Beauty, after the manner of the Phaednus of Plato, which would have scrved to elucidate my remarks when speak~ ing of it theoretically ‘The History of Art I dedicate to Art and the A\ Anton Raphael Mengs. and especially to my friend, BOOK Et THE ORIGIN OF ART, AND THE CAUSES OF ITS DIFFERENCE AMONG DIFFERENT NATIONS Chapter t: The Shapes with which Art Commenced ‘The arts which are dependent on drawing have, like all inventions, commenced with the necessary; the next object of research was beauty; and, finally, the superfluous followed: these are the three principal stages in art In the infancy of art, its productions are, like the handsomest of human beings at birth, misshapen, and similar one to another, like the seeds of plants of entirely different kinds; but in its bloom and decay, they resemble those mighty streams, 2"4 ART HISTORY AND ITS METHODS which, at the point where they should be the broadest, either dwindle into small rivulets, or totally disappear. The art of drawing among the Egyptians is to be compared to a tree which, though well cultivated, has been checked and arrested in its growth by a worm, or other casualties; for it remained unchanged, precisely the same, yet without attaining its perfection, until the period when Greek kings held sway over them; and the case appears to have been the same with Persian art. Etruscan art, when in its bloom, may be compared to a raging stream, rushing furiously along between crags and over rocks; for the characteristics of its drawing are hardness and exa; geration. But, among the Greeks, the art of drawing resembles a river whose clear waters flow in numerous windings through a fertile vale, and fill its channel, yet do not overfiow. Asart has been devoted principally to the representation of man, we might say of him more correctly than Protagoras did, that *he is the measure and rule of all things’. The most ancient records also teach us, that the carliest essays, especially in the drawing of figures, have represented, not the manner in which a man appears to us, but what he is; not a view of his body, but the outline ofhis shadow. From this simplicity of shape the artist next proceeded to examine proportions; this enquiry taught exactness; the exactness hereby acquired gave confidence, and afterwards success, to his endeavours after grandeur, and at last gradually raised art among the Greeks to the highest beauty. After all the parts constituting grandeur and beauty were united, the artist, in seeking to embellish them, fell into the error of profuseness; art consequently lost its grandeur; and the loss was finally followed by its utter downfall In the course of time, increasing knowledge taught the Etruscan and Greek artists how to forsake the stiff'and motionless conformations of their earliest ey to which the Egyptians adhered ~ compulsorily adhered — and enabled them to express different actions in their figures. But, in art, knowledge precedes beaut ings at the beginning have necessarily a YS, being based on exact, severe rules, its teac niteness, Consequently, the style of drawing was regular, precise and vigorous de but angular; expressive, but hard, and frequently exaggerated ~ as the Etruscan works show. This is just the way in which sculpture has been improved in modem days by the celebrated Michelangelo, Works in this style have been pre- served on relic in marble, and on engraved gems BOOK IV: ART AMONG THE GREEKS Chapter : Grounds and Causes of the Progress and Superiority of Greek Art beyond that of Other Nations ‘The superiority which art acquired among the Greeks is to be ascribed partly to the influence of climate, partly to their constitution and government, and the habits of thinking which originated therefrom, and, in an equal degree also, to respect for the artist, and the use and application of art The arts of sculpture and painting attained among the Greeks a certain excel lence earlier than architecture, because the latter has in it more of the ideal thanWINCKELMANN the two former; it cannot be an imitation of anything actual, and must therefore, of necessity, be based on the general principles and rules of proportion. The two, former, which originated in mere imitation, found all the requisite rules deter- mined in man; whereas, architecture was obliged to discover its own rules by repeated trials, and establish them by general approval ... Chapter n: The Essential of Art But how has it happened, that, while well-grounded elementary treatises on all other departments of knowledge exist, the principles of art and of beauty have been so little investigated? The fault, reader, lies in our innate indolent unwilling- ness to think for ourselves, and in scholastic philosophy. On the one hand, the ancient works of art have been regarded as beauties which one can never hope fally to enjoy, and which on this account easily warm some imaginations, but do not touch the heart; and antiquities have given occasion for the display of reading, only, but have ministered litle nutrient, or absolutely none at all, to the under= standing. On the other hand, philosophy has been practised and taught principally by those who, from reading the works of their gloomy predecessors, have but little room left for the feclings, over which they have, as it were, drawn an insen= sible cuticle, and we have consequently been led through a labyrinth of meta- physical subtlety and wordiness, which have principally served the purpose of producing big books, and disgusting the understanding, Beauty is one of the great mysteries of nature, whose influence we all see and feel; but a general, distinct idea of its essential must be classed among the truths yet undiscovered. Ifthis idea were geometrically clear, men would not differ in their opinions upon the beautifial, and it would be easy to prove what truc beauty is. [In some nations] the climate has not allowed the gende feeling of pure beauty to mature; it has either been confirmed in them by art that is, by constandy and studiously employing their scientific knowledge in the representation of youthful beauties — as in Michelangelo, or become in time utterly corrupted, as was the case with Bemini, by a vulgar flawery of the coarse and uncultivated, in attempt= ing to render everything more intelligible to them, The former busied himself in the contemplation of lofty beauty: Michelangelo, compared with Raphael, is what Thucydides is to Xenophon. The very course which led Michelangelo to impassable places and steep cliffs plunged Bernini, on the contrary, into bogs and poo; for he sought to dignify, as it were, by exaggeration ‘The shape of beauty is either individual ~ that is, confined to an imitation of one = or it isa selection of beautifal parts from many individuals, and their union into one, which we eall ideal, yet with the remark that a thing may be ideal without being beautiful. The form of the Egyptian figures, in which neither s ideal, but still it shapes forth no individu, muscles, tendons, nor veins are indicated, beauty in them; neither can the drapery of Egyptian female figures — which can only be imagined, and consequently is ideal — be termed beautifal ... But nature and the structure of the most beautiful bodies are rarely without fault. They have other bodies, or which may be imagined more perfect. In conformity to this teaching of experience, those wise forms which can cither be found more perfeet76 ART HISTORY AND ITS METHODS artists, the ancients, acted as a skilful gardener does, who ingrafts different shoots of excellent sorts upon the same stock; and, as a bee gathers from many flowers, so were their ideas of beauty not limited to the beautifil in a single individual ~ as at times are the ideas of both ancient and modem poets, and of the majority of artists of the present day ~ but they sought to unite the beautiful parts of many beautiful bodies; this we learn alo from the dialogue between Socrates and the celebrated painter Parthasius. They purified their images from all personal feelings, by which the mind is diverted from the truly beautiful. This selection of the most beautiful parts and their harmonious union in one figure produced ideal beauty — which is therefore no metaphysical abstraction; so that the ideal is not found in every part of the human figure taken separately, but can be ascribed to it only as a whole; for beauties as great as any of those which art has ever produced can be found singly in nature, but, in the entire figure, nature must yield the palm co art...