of different ages, were all living together. The subject for the competition was an Amazon : the artists themselves were the judges, and the prize was awarded to that statue which each artist placed second to his own. The statue thus ho- noured was by Polycleitus ; the second was by Pheidias ; the third by Ctesilaus ; the fourth by Cydon ; and the fifth by Phradmon. If such a competition took place at all, it must have been toward the close of the life of Pheidias. (Corap. Polycleitus.) The Amazon of Pheidias is highly praised by Lucian (Imag. 4, vol. ii. p. 462). The Amazon of the Vatican, preparing to leap forward, is supposed to be a copy of it. (Mailer, Archäol. d. Kunst, § 121.)
20, 21, 22. Pliny (l. c.) mentions three bronze statues by Plieidias, which were at Rome in his time, but the original position of which is not known, and the subjects of which are not stated : "item duo signa, quae Catulus in eadem aede (sc. Fortunae) posuit palliata, et alterum colossicon nudum."
23. The same writer mentions a marble Venus, of surpassing beauty, by Pheidias, m the portico of Octavia at Rome. He also states that Pheidias put the finishing hand to the celebrated Venus of his disciple Alcamenes. (H.N. xxxvi. 5. s. 4. § 3.)
24. The well-known colossal statue of one of the Dioscuri, with a horse, on the Monte Cavallo at Rome, standing on a base, which is evidently much more recent than the statue, and which bears the inscription Opus Fidiae, is supposed, from the character of the workmanship, to be rightly ascribed to Pheidias ; but antiquarians are by no means unanimous on this point. Possibly it may be the alterum colossicon nudum of which Pliny speaks, (bee Platner and Bimsen, Beschreibung Roms, vol. iii. pt. 2. p. 404 ; Wagner, Kunstblaitt, 1824, Nos. 93, 94, 96—98 ; and the engraving in the plates to Meyer's Kuntsgeschichle, pl. 15.)
Among the statues falsely ascribed to Pheidias, were the Nemesis of Agoracritus, and the Time or Opportunity of Lysippus (Auson. Ep. 12; see the arts). At Patara in Lycia there were statues of Zeus and Apollo, respecting which it was doubted whether they were the works of Pheidias or of Bryaxis. (Clem. Alex. Protrep. p. 30, c; comp. Tzetz. Chill. viii. 33 ; Cedren. p. 255, d. ed. Venet.)
This list of the works of Pheidias clearly proves the absurdity of the statement which was put forth by the depredators of the Elgin marbles, that he never worked in marble. Pliny also expressly states the fact: — "scalpsit et marmora." (H. N. xxxvi. 5. s. 4. § 4.)
Pheidias, like most of the other great artists of Greece, was as much distinguished for accuracy in the minutest details, as for the majesty of his colossal figures ; and, like Lysippus, he amused himself and gave proofs of his skill, by making images of minute objects, such as cicadas, bees, and flies (Julian, Epist. viii. p. 377, a.). This state- ment, however, properly refers to his works in the department of ropevriKri, or caelatura, that is, chasing^ engraving, and embossing in metals; of which art we are informed by Pliny that he was the first great master (II. N. xxxiv. 8. s. 19. § I ; comp. Diet, of Antiq. art. Caelatura). Great parts of the gold on his chryselephantine statues we know to have been chased or embossed, though it is necessary to avoid confounding these ornaments with the polychromic decorations which were also
lavished upon the statues. The shields of the statues of Zeus and Athena were covered with plates of gold, the reliefs in which belong to the department of caelatura, as does the hair of his Athena, and also the sceptre of his Zeus, which was of all sorts of metals. The shield of his Athena Promachus furnishes another example of the art, though the chasing on it was executed not by himself, but by Mys. Chased silver vessels, ascribed to him (whether rightly or not, may well be doubted), were in use in Rome in the time of Martial, who describes the perfectly natural repre- sentation of the fish upon such a vessel, by saying "adde aquam, natabunt" (iii. 35 ; comp. Niceph. Greg. Hist. viii.).
It has been stated already that Pheidias was said to have been a painter before he became a sta- tuary. Pliny states that the temple of the Olym- pian Zeus at Athens was painted by him (H. N. XXXV. 8. s. 34). III. The Art of Pheidias. After the remarks, which have been made incidentally in the two pre- ceding sections of this article, it is unnecessary to say much more upon the characteristics of the art of Pheidias. In one word, its distinguishing cha- racter was ideal beauty, and that of the sublimest order, especially in the representation of divinities, and of subjects connected with their worship. While on the one hand he set himself free from the stiff and unnatural forms which, by a sort of re- ligious precedent, had fettered his predecessors of the archaic or hieratic school, he never, on the other hand, descended to the exact imitation of any human model, however beautiful ; he never repre- sented that distorted action, or expressed that vehe- ment passion, which lie beyond the limits of repose ; nor did he ever approach to that almost meretricious grace, by which some of his greatest followers, if they did not corrupt the art themselves, gave the occasion for its corruption in the hands of their less gifted and spiritual imitators. The analogy be- tween the works of Pheidias and Polycleitus, as compared with those of their successors, on the one hand, and the productions of Aescliylus and So- phocles as compared with those of Euripides, on the other, is too striking not to have been often noticed ; and the difference is doubtless to be traced to the same causes in both instances, causes which were at work in the social life of Greece, and which left their impression upon art, as Avell as upon literature, though the process of corruption, as is na- tural, went on more rapidly in the latter than in the former. In both cases, the first step in the procesg , might be, and has often been, mistaken for a step in advance. There is a refinement in that sort of grace and beauty, which appeals especially to sense and passion, a fuller expression of those emotions with which ordinary human nature sympathises. But this sort of perfection is the ripeness which indicates that decay is about to commence. The mind is pleased, but not elevated : the work is one to be admired but not to be imitated. Thus, while the works of Callimachus, Praxiteles, and Scopas, have sometimes been preferred by the general taste to those of Pheidias, the true artist and the aesthe- tic critic have always regarded tlie latter as the best specimens of ideal sculpture, and the best examples for the student which the whole world affords. Oa the latter point especially the judgment of modern artists, and of scholars who have made art their study, respecting the Elgin marbles, is singularly
