cherished it in some degree, even in their remoter provinces. But instead of preserving the graceful or even the grand style of the Greeks, we find that the Roman sculptures degenerated into the huge harsh style of the Egyptians. Throughout the continent of Europe war and civil commotion almost destroyed the taste for the fine arts, yet upon the remote isle of Britain, the Roman invaders introduced a rude species of sculpture, which was cultivated during the comparative quiet that succeeded the conquest. When Etius withdrew his last legion from their shores, the Britons turned their attention to the pursuits of peace, and according to the "venerable Bede," they erected upon what is called Ludgate Hill, a brazen statue of colossal dimensions of king Lud.

When the Saxons succeeded the Romans, they too took up the art of sculpture, but grace, symmetry, and correct proportions, were entirely neglected. Every thing from the chisel partook of the wildness of their native character, and the images of their various gods were huge unshapen monsters, and could hardly claim admission among the true productions of the sculptor's art. Peace made something of a change in their manners and their sculptures, and when the Normans invaded Britain, the Saxons had begun to cultivate the arts with considerable success. Their new masters, fierce and rude as were the original Saxons, rather suppressed than encouraged the progress of sculpture. They erected fanes for worship, in which was displayed architectural beauty far superior to that of the Saxons, but the sculptures which adorned the Norman tombs in the days of William the Conqueror and his suc

cessors, present stiff and coarse images; yet, it must be confessed that they were more natural and intelligent in their appearance than their pre decessors.

CHAPTER III.

Sculpture during the middle Ages-Sculptured Capital in France -Donati-Michael Angiolo and his Works-Torrigiano-His Treatment in Spain, and Death in the Inquisition-Decline of the Art till the Time of Canova-His early Productions and those of riper Years compared-Statue of Religion-Other Works by Canova.

DURING the middle ages-the period commonly called the dark ages of the world, extending from the fifth or sixth, to the twelfth century of our era, art, science, religion, and literature were all neglected, and in many parts of Europe were completely buried in a rayless night of ignorance. The only power that kept alive the spark of learning and fostered the weak and degenerate child of Grecian art, was the spirit of Christianity; and to its influence is the world indebted for that effulgent day of knowledge which now beams upon mankind in meridian splendor. Under its guidance, architecture progressed in beauty, and erected temples and shrines dedicated to the worship of the true God. That religious spirit that was the principal creative power of Grecian sculpture, fostered the art to some extent during the middle ages, and sculptures, having a devout meaning, adorned the sacred edifices. These, and these only, are the faint

lines of intellectual light which beautify the sombre page of that period. As a specimen of the style of sculpture on the Continent about the middle of the eighth century, and not long preceding the time of Charlemagne, we give the subjoined cut. It represents the capital of a col

Sculpture in the eighth Century.

umn, erected in France about the year 760, in commemoration of some remarkable act of interposition of one of the saints in defending a monastery from the attack of a band of Norman brigands. It will be observed that a halo surrounds the head of each of the human figures, (who are portrayed in a sitting posture, and reading,) which appendage was always attached to representations of any of the evangelists. This sculpture undoubtedly is intended to represent two of the four writers of the gospels, or of the primitive Christian apostles. With the exception of this and the comparatively rude sculptures which adorned the Christian churches, we find but lit

tle of interest connected with the art, till its permanent revival in Italy by Michael Angiolo Buonarotti toward the close of the fifteenth century.

Among the earliest professors who strove to rescue sculpture from total oblivion, and co-operated powerfully in giving the fine arts an impulse, was Donato de Bardi, who was born at Florence in 1383. Nicholas Pisani, who received the appellation of "Restorer of the fine taste in sculpture," Agostino Saneze, Andre Ugolino, and two or three others preceded Donato, but their attempts were feeble. The principal sculptures of this artist were executed in bronze. One of these statues-a St. Mark-is said to have been so admirably executed, that on first seeing it, Michael Angiolo addressed it in these emphatic words:-"Marco, par che non mi parli?" "Mark why do you not speak to me." Many other sculptors of less note succeeded Donato, but none appeared worthy to wear the mantle of Praxiteles, until that remarkable man, Michael Angiolo, entered the arena of art. great and universal genius not only succeeded in almost equalling the grand and beautiful of the Grecian models, but he stands unrivalled among modern artists. Although he practised. Painting and Architecture with eminent success, yet he considered sculpture as his profession, and at the close of a long life (ninety years) he expressed a regret at not having made sculpture his sole study and pursuit. In many instances he renounced the imitations of the antique, and struck out a new path and style, origi. nating in his own imagination. Like his paint-. ings, his statues have a grandeur of expression, yet every part is subservient to the strictest

This

rules of natural symmetrical proportions. Although many of his works want that purity of style awarded to the age of Praxiteles and Lysippus, yet he never degenerates into coarseness or insipidity.

His first work of much celebrity, was the Madonna with a dead Christ. It is called by the Italians la Pieta, and bears evidence of great skill in the composition and labor in the finish. The statue which he sculptured for the tomb of Lorenzo de Medici, was his next triumph over the difficulties which he was obliged to encounter. An English writer says of it, "there is a degree of sublimity and awful grandeur about this statue which almost puts it beyond the pale of descriptive criticism."

Counter to this majestic work is his Venus, erroneously called the Venus di Medici. Of this the same writer says: "It possesses a degree of luxurious beauty and flowing ease in outline, which would almost forbid us to suppose that it could have originated with the same hand or period as the one to which we have just referred. In the Venus di Medici, we evidently feel that we are looking on an ideal form of beauty-a figure created by the hand of art, and arranged according to its most elaborate rules; but in the richly luxuriant outline of this sculptured effigy we feel that we are gazing on an exquisitely proportioned but yet natural portraiture of a human being. In short, the Venus di Medici is the creation of a sculptor, while the Venus of Michael Angiolo appears to be the production of a Promethean pencil, wanting but the last breath of inspiration to cause the marble mass to start into life." Innumerable copies in plaster have been