[YOUR LAST NAME] 1 [YOUR NAME] [PROFESSOR’S NAME] [COURSE NAME] [DATE] Classical Sculpture Classical sculpture did not appear from nothing; its genesis was not that of Athena’s birth from the head of Zeus, but a rather more sedate process. The roots of classical sculpture are, surprisingly, to be found in Egypt. The Egyptians had highly developed sculpture, most of which had religious implications, as can be seen by the hieroglyphic inscriptions on many of the pieces (Wilkinson, 34-37). Subjects of sculptures included the numerous gods and goddesses of the Egyptian pantheon, pharoahs (who were considered divine) and slaves and other figures created for inclusion in burials; these sculptures, along with real items (e.g., chariots) would become part of the deceased’s “estate” in the afterlife (ibid., 64). The majority of Egyptian sculptures were all in the same style, regardless of whether they represented an animal-headed god, a king, or a scribe. The typical pose was frontal and standing, with the arms hanging close to the body, the hands with clenched fists, the left foot slightly advanced, and an ambiguous facial expression. It must be noted that this “typical Egyptian style” is much more a product of the Egyptian belief system and its associated symbology than the artistic imagination or technical competence of Egyptian artisans (ibid.,

[YOUR LAST NAME] 2 88). The influence of this Egyptian style can be seen on some of the earliest Greek sculptures, particularly those of two important Greek styles. The first of these is the kouros, a figure of a young nude male and the second is the kore, a figure of a young clothed female (Richter, 102-106). The earliest known versions of the kouros and kore are clearly derivatives of Egyptian sculptures. Apart from the difference in subjects (youths rather than religious figures), the Greeks made few innovations. One that is worth mentioning is the characteristic nudity of the kouros, as nudity is almost completely absent in any form of Egyptian art (Wilkinson, op.cit., 204). Differences between the Greek and Egyptian belief systems were responsible, in part, for a divergence in style that resulted, ultimately, in the classical style of sculpture. As has been mentioned before, the Egyptian gods and goddesses were hybrid beings, humans with the heads of animals (e.g., Bast, a goddess with a cat’s head, Anubis, a god with a jackal’s head) or vice versa (e.g., the Sphinx at Giza, a lion with a man’s head). The Greeks, conversely, believed that their deities had human forms (Stewart, 34). The human nature of the Greek gods is reinforced in their mythology. Zeus’ dalliances with human females produced many offspring; some, such as Helen of Troy (her mother was Ledo; Hamilton, 156), produced mythologies of their own. Others, such as Hephaestos, the god of the forge, manifested human characteristics. He was depicted as crippled, in contrast to Apollo, the god of the sun, who is depicted as the ideal of masculine beauty.

[YOUR LAST NAME] 3 The Greeks had fascinations with two aspects of mathematics: geometry and certain aspects of number theory. Greek geometry was highly advanced. In approximately 250 BC, Aristarchos of Samos was able to compute, with great accuracy, not only the size of the earth, but also the respective distances to the moon and sun in terms of the earth’s radius (Heath, 321-325). Greek study of geometric figures such as pentagons and pentagrams led to the discovery of the so-called golden ratio or golden section. In brief, two quantities, a and b, are said to be in this ratio, g, if: (a+b)/a = a/b = g An approximation of this ratio is: 1 - √5 / 2 This ratio appears in nature (e.g., in the chambers of certain seashells) and also occurs in many forms of art, including, notably, and for the purposes of the instant discussion, the proportions of the Parthenon (Lendvai 67-71). A related notion was the Greek fascination with the human form. Even though they did not practice dissection, they measured the proportions of the body, and studied it with the same fascination they applied to geometric figures and certain numerical phenomena (Kleiner, 126). The combination of these influences resulted in the spectacularly lifelike Greek sculptures that are paradigmatic of the classical period. The Greeks used not only lifelike

[YOUR LAST NAME] 4 representations of the human form, but placed them in lifelike poses as well, departing from the single, rigidly defined pose that had been so characteristics of the original Egyptian influences. One very natural pose used by the Greeks involved the subject’s weight being placed almost entirely on one foot, leaving one knee slightly bent. This pose, referred to as the contrapposto, has remained a standard pose in sculpture since then. In addition to the use of this realistic pose, the Greeks also made use of accurate representations of the effect that gravity would have on muscles and the body overall when standing or sitting in certain poses, adding further realism. Some of the Greek designs did not lend themselves to representations in marble, as the weight of marble would cause the statue to fall or crack. Some statues, therefore, were created in bronze. Unfortunately, many of these bronze statues were melted down to make weapons, and, as a result, the original designs are known to us only from later copies (often on a much smaller scale than the original), descriptions, or drawings (Richter, op. cit., 436-441). Even though the human body clearly does not observe the golden ratio, this ratio was used in defining the “enclosing space” used to define many sculptures. The implementation of this ration resulted in works of art that combined not only the perfect representation of the human form, but also a highly pleasing aesthetic that could be viewed from any angle (ibid., 509). At its peak, Greek sculpture was a diverse art. Sculptors produced not only traditional

[YOUR LAST NAME] 5 subjects (e.g., the kouros and kore) but also also representations of mythological entities and athletes. With respect to the latter, Myron’s (480-444 BC) representation of a discus thrower is not only the unofficial “symbol” of classical sculpture, but has survived the intervening millennia to become a symbol for athletic excellence as well. The Greeks, obviously, were not on the only classical sculptors. The Romans took note of the work of the Greeks, and began to copy and adapt it for their own purposes. One well known use of sculpture in Rome in portraiture. One obvious example is that of sculptures of the Roman emperors and other key figures. A lesser known, but equally important example, comes from sculptures of upper class citizens. In fact, one of the most stunning examples of Roman sculpture was discovered in Egypt, known as the “green man.” It is a fragment of a larger piece-only the head remains. It is, therefore, the bust of a somewhat fleshy, bald, Roman citizen carved in greenish granite (nothing is known about him). What is so striking is the realism-when viewed in its display case in Berlin’s Egyptian Museum, almost all who observe it linger a moment, waiting for him to speak! (cf., Schiffhausen 26-28). This sculpture is a good example of the relationship between Greek and Roman sculpture. The Romans adapted the “technology” of Greek sculpture, but used it for their own purposes. The “green man” is hardly an example of an ideal human figure (he was probably a successful Roman businessman who feasted too much), but the sculpture is, nonetheless exemplary in its accuracy. Rome has also served as an important conduit. As mentioned above. many Greek

[YOUR LAST NAME] 6 sculptures were lost or destroyed. They are known to us only through Roman copies (Kleiner 202). The existence of these copies and Roman works derived from them is also an invaluable tool in performing an analysis of the evolution of the classical style that took place with the decline of the Greeks and rise of the Romans. Roman art, of course, is the cornerstone of the art of the Renaissance. It really goes without saying that the sculptures of both Michaelangelo and Leonardo are nothing if not continuations of this tradition. The former’s iconic statue of David can be traced all the way back to the kouros (with, of course, an important exception being the addition of the fig leaf, reflecting a modesty that was not a factor millennia before) Leondaro’s Vitruvian Man is a clear homage to Greek geometric ideals, where as the Milanese Horse continues the tradition of lifelike poses (a careful observer will note that the horse is caught in mid-stride, with two hooves off the ground) and exquisite anatomical detail, which is also known to us from the sketches he made while designing it. There is, finally, some irony to be found in modern classical sculpture. The Moscow metro station “Revolution Square” is known for its bronzes, done very much in the classical style, of workers and academics: the backbone of the Marxist/Leninist revolution that dispensed with the ruling class and religion (Maksimova 31). These spectacular statues, differing very little from their classical antecedents with the exception of clothing (Moscow is a cold place!) can be traced to figures of deities, emperors and businessmen-the exact things the revolution sought to eliminate!

[YOUR LAST NAME] 7 REFERENCES Hamilton, Edith. Mythology. New York: Warner Books. 1999. Print. Heath, Thomas. A Manual of Greek Mathematics. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. 2003. Print. Kleiner, Diana. Roman Sculpture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 1994. Print. Lendvai, Erno. The Golden Ratio in Art. Budapest, Hungary: Kiado. 1971. Print. Maksimova, Svetlana. Visitor’s Guide to the Moscow Metro. Moscow, Russia: OVIR. 1999. Print. Richter, Gisella. Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 1975. Print. Schiffhausen, Renate. A Guide to the Egyptian Museum. Berlin, Germany: Kunst and Kultur. 2003. Print. Stewart, Andrew. Greek Sculpture: An Exploration. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. 1990. Print. Wilkinson, Richard H. Reading Egyptian Art. London, UK: Thames and Hudson. 1994. Print.