Читать книгу Historic Ornament - James M Ward - Страница 15

Table of Contents

The Chaldeans or Babylonians and the Assyrians came from one great stock, the Assyrians being mostly colonists from Babylonia. The original inhabitants of Chaldea spoke a Semitic dialect. At an early date Eastern Chaldea was invaded by the Sumerians or Accadians, a Turanian race which is supposed to have come from the plateau of Central Asia. The two languages were used side by side, the Semitic as the common tongue, and the Accadian as a literary language. The earliest known king of Chaldea was named Eannadu (B.C. 4500). The Chaldeans advanced slowly along the Tigris and pushed their kingdom towards Assyria in the north, where they built the cities of Ashur (Kal’at Sherkât), Calah (Nimroud), and Ninua (Nineveh).

The northern portion of the Chaldeo-Assyrian empire asserted its independence about 1700 B.C., and Assyria became a separate kingdom. From B.C. 1275, when Tukulti-Adar I., the Assyrian king, conquered Babylonia, down to the destruction of Nineveh, B.C. 609, the Chaldean kingdom took a place of secondary importance, while Assyria became the greatest power of Western Asia.

Tiglath-Pileser I. (B.C. 1100), and Ashur-nasir-pal (B.C. 885), were amongst the greatest kings of Assyria. The latter was a great builder. He built the great palace at Calah (Nimroud), the place to which he removed his seat of government from Ashur. Assyrian art reached a high state of development in his reign. His son and successor, Shalmaneser II. (B.C. 860-825) was no less powerful; he extended his kingdom by wars from the Persian Gulf to the Armenian mountains, and from Media to the Mediterranean. Jehu, King of Israel, sent him tribute. After his death Assyria declined and shrank within its borders, but under Tiglath-Pileser III. regained its lost ground again (B.C. 745). Sargon, the “Son of no one” (B.C. 722-705), usurps the throne, makes great wars, is the first King of Assyria that comes in contact with the Egyptians. He built the great palace at Khorsabad, which in late years has been excavated. Sennacherib, his son, succeeded him, whose wars with Hezekiah, King of Judah, are recorded in the Bible in the Book of Kings. He built a great palace at Nineveh, many of the wall slabs of which are now in the British Museum.

The death of the succeeding monarch, Esarhaddon, took place before he had completed his great palace at Calah (Nimroud). Another palace supposed to be his has lately been excavated at Nineveh. It lies buried under the mound of Nebi Yunus. The Assyrian kings were great builders of palaces. Each one, it appears, thought it his duty either to add a large portion to a palace of his predecessor, or to build a new one for himself. Ashur-bani-pal, who reigned for forty-two years (B.C. 668-626), was one of the most powerful and most cruel of all the Assyrian monarchs. His victory over the Elamites is depicted on the sculptured slabs that enrich the Ninevite gallery of the British Museum. At his death the Assyrian power was broken up, partly by the Scythian hordes that swept over that part of Asia, and partly by the Medes. Nineveh was besieged by Cyaxares of Media, and by Nabopolassar, an Assyrian general who held command in Babylonia. It was at length captured and destroyed (B.C. 609). The whole empire was then divided between the Medes and the Babylonians. The new Babylonian empire lasted seventy years, and in the reign of its last king, Nabonidus, when under the command of Belshazzar, his son, Babylon was captured by Cyrus of Persia (B.C. 539). From this time until its subjugation by Alexander the Great Babylon was under the Persians.

Fig. 154.—A Winged Bull, Assyria. (M)

The religion of the Chaldeo-Assyrian nation was the worship of the sun, moon, stars, and the various powers of nature. Their chief gods were Shamash, the sun; Sin, the moon; Marduk, a sun-god, the carrier of prayers from earth to heaven; Anum, the sky god; Bel, the god of the earth; and Ea, the god of great knowledge: the last three were the Trinity. Other gods were Dagon, the fish-god; Ishtar, their Venus; Nabu, their Mercury and scribe of the gods; Rammânu, the god of wind and thunder; and Negral, the god of war and hunting.

The Assyrian and Babylonian people have a proverbial name for being a warlike and cruel race, in opposition to their contemporaries, the more peaceful and gentle Egyptians. At the same time they have the reputation of being highly skilled in arts and sciences.

Fig. 155.—Demons, from the Palace of Assurbanipal, British Museum. (P. & C.)

The greatness of the Chaldeans in astronomy, in astrology, and as wise men generally, is too well known to be repeated. Their skill in the arts of building, sculpture, in the use of metals, in pottery, tiles, gem cutting, painting, embroidery and weaving, excites our wonder and admiration.

Fig. 156.—A Griffon in the Egyptian Style. (M.)

The art of the Assyrians is intensely earnest and full of realism, vigorous in the highest degree, and true art of its kind. It is the art of a people who were brave and powerful, and of princes that were despotic and stern. The keynote of their art was force, whether displayed in its physical and realistic aspects, in the sculptural representations of ferocious animals, as their lions and dogs, or embodied in their mysterious and wonderful creations of human-headed bulls, and other monsters and demons (Figs. 154, 155), or in the haughty self-consciousness of strength and power, with which their sculptors sought to invest the representations of the monarchs going forth to battle or to the lion hunt (Fig. 163); everywhere, in the higher aspects of Assyrian art, physical force, or personal force of will, is the culminating point of expression aimed at in all their efforts.

The sculptured lion of the Egyptians is couchant, half slumbering; the Assyrian lion is rampant and roaring for his prey. The simile may be used to illustrate the characteristic difference of the Art of both countries. The Assyrian made his art minister to his worldly uses and delights, the Egyptian lavished his on the tomb and for the hereafter.

The Assyrian religion and the Chaldean magicians’ and astrologers’ exposition of its mysteries, doubtless gave the subject-matter for the creation of those strange combinations of chimeras, monsters, and bi-form deities that are so common in Assyrian art.

The griffons and other curious hybrid creatures of the Middle Ages, and those that adorn the Gothic buildings of our own days, can be traced to their birthplace in Assyrian art.

Fig. 157—Eagle-headed Divinity from Nimroud, with the Sacred Tree. (P. & C.)

Fig. 158.—Figure of a Goddess in Act of Adoration, British Museum. (P. & C.)

The great god of the Assyrians was named Assur, the all-powerful god of battles. In his name all kinds of cruelty and torture were practised on heretics and apostates, and in his name, and to extend his kingdom of Assyria, the Ninevite kings found their excuses to make war with nations far and near. He seems to have been a later creation of the Assyrian gods, but became supreme as Nineveh rose in power. He was supposed to have descended from Sin, the moon-god. The winged-globe, with the god in the centre holding the bow and arrow, or thunder-bolt (Fig. 159), is by some thought to be a representation of Assur. A similar figure is seen at the top of the Assyrian standard, as the “Director of Armies” (Fig. 161). This figure in the centre of the ring or solar disk, who is evidently divine, by reason of his feathered lower garment, and his wings that raise him in mid-air, above all humanity, is quite likely to be the original type of the later Persian supreme god, Athurâ-Mazda (see Fig. 243), and the emblematic symbol of his divinity is quite likely to have been designed and adapted from the winged disk or “globe” of the Egyptians.

Fig. 159—The Winged Globe with the Figure of a God. (P. & C.)

Fig. 160.—The Winged Globe; from Layard. (P. & C.)

The winged globe (Fig. 160) of the Assyrians is an imitation of that of Egypt; this emblem having found its way into Assyria on many carvings in ivory and on articles in bronze, carried hither by the trading Phœnicians from Egypt, and the emblem in question was, according to Perrot, appropriated by the Assyrians.

Fig. 161.—The Assyrian Standard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 162.—Dagon, the Fish-God. (P. & C.)

In their ornament and decoration they were more free and natural than the Egyptians, and the execution was careful and refined, as witnessed by their bronze bowls, gem-engraving, and the patterns on the enamelled bricks.

Fig. 163.—Assurbanipal Attacked by Lions, British Museum. (P. & C.)

The bronze gates from Balâwât in the British Museum are examples of highly skilful repoussé work. Their palaces must have presented a gorgeous and glittering appearance in their rich colouring and enamelled brilliancy. Although not a single specimen of Assyrian weaving has been discovered, we have abundant and sufficient evidence from the sculptured patterns of textiles and embroideries on the kings’ robes and wall decorations that both weaving and embroidery must have been one of their most glorious arts.

The Asiatic love of colour would lead us to suppose that these embroideries were excessively rich in colour (Figs. 162A, 163A, 164, 165) as they were in design.

The details of this embroidery design (Fig. 162A) are well drawn, and the design is full of rich variety without heaviness or too much crowding. The king is seen twice represented in the circle doing homage to the sacred tree and to the winged disk; and in other places he is between two genii or deities; combats of lions and bulls, palmate borders, fir-cones, and spirals, with bands that divide the work in varied spaces, complete these rich designs in embroidery, which are among the very finest efforts of Assyrian decorative art.

Fig. 162A.—Embroidery upon a Royal Mantle; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 163A.—Embroidery on the upper part of a Royal Mantle; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Details of embroidery patterns are shown at Figs. 164, 165.

The sills or thresholds of the doors of the palaces were sometimes sculptured in low relief on large slabs of alabaster stone. The design is evidently copied from an embroidered carpet; perhaps the central part of the one given (Fig. 166) is a copy from a fabric woven in the loom, and the border, enlarged at Fig. 167, would have its original in embroidery.

Fig. 164.—Detail of Embroidery; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 165.—Detail of Embroidery; from Layard. (P. & C.)

The figure of the plan and elevation of part of a Chaldean façade in enamelled bricks, from Warka, is decorated with patterns that, no doubt, had their origin in weaving and matting (Fig. 168). The surface of this façade is composed of terra-cotta cones, with their bases turned outwards. These bases were previously dipped in enamelled colours before they were inserted into the clay cement; so they form a kind of terra-cotta mosaic work (Loftus).

Fig. 166.—Sill of a Door from Khorsabad: Length, 40 ins. (P. & C.)

The land of Chaldea was devoid of stone for building purposes, but extremely rich in immense banks of clay, which was used for brick making from the earliest times in Chaldea. The Chaldean brick is rather more than one English foot square, and about four inches in thickness; of a dark red colour to light yellow. Nearly all of them have an inscription with the name of the king, &c. (Fig. 169).

Fig. 167.—Fragment of Border of Fig. 166; from a Threshold of Khorsabad. (P. & C.)

The brick from Erech, or ancient Warka, gives a good idea of one of the oldest forms of Chaldean writing known (Fig. 170). It consists of an abridgment of the representation of natural objects, as all alphabets in their original state were merely pictures or pictographs. This inscription shows the stage of conventional signs or ideographic writing before it underwent the change into the cuneiform, or wedge-shaped writing of the Assyrians.

Fig. 168.—Plan and Elevation of Part of a Façade at Warka; from Loftus. (P. & C.)

Some of the bricks were made wedge-shaped, for use in the building of arches and vaults. The common bricks were sometimes used in the crude state, or unburnt, and burnt. Enamelled bricks were greatly used in Chaldea, but the clay of which they were made was softer and more friable. This was used purposely, so that the enamel would sink deeper into the soft material, and thereby make a more lasting surface protection.

Fig. 169.—Babylonian Brick, 16 ins. square, 4 ins. thick. (P. & C.)

Fig. 170.—Brick from Erech. (P. & C.)

Assyria copied most of her art and sciences from her older sister in civilisation, and had the advantage over Chaldea in a good supply of building stone, that formed the substructural bed for the clay deposits. This was a sulphate of chalk known as alabaster, grey in colour, and easy to work. The great wall slabs used for the bas-reliefs and the winged bulls and other statuary, were carved out of this material; but the Assyrians used bricks for the main structure of their buildings, like the Chaldeans. Timber was scarce in Assyria, but was used very much in the palaces. It was brought from the mountains of Upper Mesopotamia, on the left bank of the Tigris, and, later, cedar and other woods were transported from the forests of Lebanon for the beams of the palaces and temples. All kinds of metals, burnished and unburnished, were used as decorative accessories, especially by the Chaldeans.

Fig. 171.—One of the Gates of the Harumat, Dur-Sarginu. (M.)

The historians’ descriptions, the foundations that have been excavated, and the sculptured buildings on the bas-reliefs, are the materials, together with well-preserved fragments of architecture, which archæologists and architects have used to enable them to restore some of the wonderful temples and palaces of ancient Assyria (Fig. 172).

Fig. 172.—Interior of a Temple, after Layard’s Restoration.

The bird’s-eye view of the palace of Dur-Sarginu will give a good idea of the typical Assyrian palaces (Fig. 174), and the triumphal gate with its man-headed winged bulls at the base and sides (Fig. 173), and also the other gate at Fig. 172, both with their crenallated battlements, serve to show the imposing character of these edifices. It will be noticed from the bird’s-eye view and the gateways that the general character of Assyrian architecture was rectangular in the highest degree. The arch and vaulted structures were known to the Assyrians, who used them to great advantage (Figs. 175 and 250), and much more so than the Egyptians, although the latter people occasionally employed them.

Fig. 173.—Triumphal Gate at the entrance of the Palace. (M.)

The Chaldeans, as would naturally be expected, used the arch construction very much in their brick buildings, as it would be the only means of carrying roofs and upper floors, where stone and timber could not easily be obtained (Fig. 175).

Fig. 174.—The Royal Palace of Dur-Sarginu (Sargon’s Palace); restored by Chipiez. (M.)

Fig. 175.—A Bedroom in the Harem at Dur-Sarginu (Sargon’s Palace). (M.)

The use of the column in Chaldea is proved by the bas-reliefs before it developed itself in Assyria; but in either country it was not an important feature in the architecture, being mostly used for awnings supporting light tents or tabernacles; sometimes, indeed, used in a disengaged way, as proved by the views of small temples on the bas-reliefs (Figs. 176, 177, 178). The use of the column was not in accord with the principles of their architecture, and was only to be found in small porches, or in an engaged way against outer walls and piers (Fig. 179). The only capital found in a fragment, and restored by Place, is shown at Fig. 181, and two bases (Figs. 180 and 182). From these remains it is assumed that the shaft was smooth and cylindrical.

Fig. 176.—Temple on the bank of a river, Khorsabad, from Batta. (P. & C.)

Fig. 177.—Capital of Temple at Fig. 176. (P. & C.)

Fig. 178.—Capital. (P. & C.)

An incipient form of the Ionic volute is seen at Fig. 177 in the capital of the small columns to the little temple (Fig. 176).

The kings of Assyria had in their palaces a great deal of luxurious furniture. The couches, chairs, and tables were made of wood, with bronze fittings, and decorated with ivory, gold, and lapis lazuli. The bas-relief in the British Museum representing Assurbanipal and his queen at a banquet (Figs. 183 and 184) will give a good idea of the extreme richness in design and decoration of these sumptuous articles of furniture (Fig. 185).

Bronze sockets (Fig. 186) and all kinds of fragments in metal and ivory fittings, and decorations corresponding to the designs on the bas-reliefs, all indicate that the anathemas of the prophet Nahum (Nahum ii. 9) gave a good picture of Nineveh’s richness in the sumptuary arts. “Take ye the spoil of silver,” he exclaims, “take the spoil of gold; for there is none end of the store and glory out of all the pleasant furniture.”

Fig. 179.—Fragment of an Assyrian Building from a bas-relief, B.M. (P. & C.)

Fig. 180.—Ornamented Base of Limestone. (P. & C.)

Animals have been represented with such faithfulness, especially in their most vigorous and ferocious aspects, by the sculptors of Assyria, that in any notice of Assyrian art they must have a place. Lions especially were rendered in all their ferociousness, and were the favourite game for kingly sport (Figs. 187, 188, 189). Lions were kept in cages, and let out when the monarch decided to have a day’s hunting (Fig. 187). Dogs were specially trained for lion-hunting (Fig. 190).

Fig. 181.—Assyrian Capital compiled from Place. (P. & C.)

Fig. 182.—Winged Sphinx carrying Base of Capital. Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 183.—Assurbanipal and his Queen feasting in the gardens of the Harem after the battle. The head of Teuman, the Elamite King, hangs on the left on the sacred tree. (M.)

Fig. 184.—The Feast of Assurbanipal. (B.M.) (P. & C.) Enlarged detail of Fig. 183, showing the Assyrian Furniture. Drawn by Gautier.

Fig. 185.—Assyrian Stool; from Layard. (P. & C.)

We add two illustrations of the sphinx variety of fantastic animals; one is the most remarkable creation of all the fantastic animals of Assyria (Fig. 192). It has the horns of a ram, a bull’s head, a bird’s beak; body, tail, and fore-legs of a lion; and the hind-legs and wings of the eagle. The Andro-Sphinx (Fig. 193) from the robe of Assurbanipal foreshadows the fabulous centaurs of Grecian art. Other bi-form creations have been found in Assyrian art bearing a close resemblance to the Greek centaur.

Fig. 186.—Bronze Foot of a Piece of Furniture.

Fig. 187.—Lion coming out of his Cage. (B.M.) (P. & C.)

The purely ornamental forms from the vegetable world that have been used in Assyrian and Chaldean art are limited in number. The daisy or rosette is the commonest (Figs. 194 and 198). In the illustration of the “Lion and Lioness in a Park” (Fig. 188) the daisy is beautifully though conventionally rendered; the large leaves at the bottom are typically the common daisy leaves; the vine is no less well executed, and the lioness on the same bas-relief is treated with consummate skill. The vine is also seen to great advantage in its conventional treatment at Figs. 184 and 188.

Fig. 188.—Lion and Lioness in a Park. (B.M.) (P. & C.)

Fig. 189.—Combat between a Lion and a Unicorn; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 190.—Dog used for Lion Hunting. (M.)

Fig. 191.—Chariot Horses; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 192.—Fantastic Animal, drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)

There is an Assyrian ornament called the “knop and flower” ornament, which occurs in various forms and in endless profusion in Egyptian, Assyrian, Persian, and Greek, and even is copied down to Indian and Roman ornament. It may be native, or some forms of it at least, to Assyrian ornament, but is undoubtedly Egyptian in its earliest source; we have spoken of it before in our notice of Egyptian ornament as being derived from the lotus (page 90). It appears on the rich border of the carved threshold (Fig. 167); the flower there is undoubtedly a lotus, and the bud or “knop” may be a representation of a “fir-cone,” or may be meant for the closed lotus-bud. Another form of the same elements occurs at Fig. 195, in a beautiful design enclosed in a square, forming one of the central patterns of a similar sill or threshold, and this form of it would doubtless also be used for a ceiling decoration of the palaces. A bouquet of similar flowers is seen at Fig. 196 of the date of Assurbanipal (885-860 B.C.). It is very difficult to say whether this bouquet represents the lotus or not, as, according to the testimony of Layard, the lotus flower is only to be found on the most recent of Assyrian monuments dating from the eighth and seventh centuries B.C., at the time when Assyria had invaded and occupied the Delta of Egypt. If not the lotus flower, something very like has been found on monuments in Assyria much older than these dates.

Fig. 193.—Andro-Sphinx, Robe of Assurbanipal; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 194.—Detail from the Enamelled Archivolt, Khorsabad; from Place. (P. & C.)

As the result of some recent scientific examinations into the origin of pattern, some investigators have decided that the “knop and flower” patterns of Assyrian ornament (Figs. 167, 195, and 198) are but evolutions of tassels, and knotted fringes of matting and embroideries, just because they bear a not very clear resemblance to such trimmings as we see on the tabernacle on the Balâwât gates (Fig. 197), &c. We admit that there is a fancied resemblance in many ornamental forms to patterns that have been evolved from constructed articles, especially from woven and matted examples, but it is an insult to the intelligence of an artist to ask him to believe that the beautiful and clearly distinctive floral bud and palmate borders in Egyptian, Assyrian, and Greek art have resulted from tyings and knottings of the fringed ends of mats, when one can clearly see the daisy—in some cases turned to a disk—the palm, and, above all, the lotus, almost naturally drawn and modelled; even the connecting lines of flower and buds, where scientific connection with the fringed-end idea seems the strongest in the eyes of the evolutionist, will be found on examination to be always used in the exact reverse way to that which is formed by the constructive joinings of the knotted fringe. (See Figs. 198 and 167.)

Fig. 195.—Rosette of Lotus Flowers and Buds. (P. & C.)

Fig. 196.—Bouquet of Flowers and Buds; from Layard. (P. & C.)

Fig. 197.—Tabernacle from the Balâwât Gates. (B.M.) (P. & C.)

Date, B.C. 859 to 824.]

It will require an amazing quantity of scientific proof to get rid of the lotus in Egyptian ornament, and much also to turn it and the daisy into tassel knots in Assyrian ornament, when we have overwhelming evidence as to the natural representations of such floral forms, as well as the conventional designs derived from them, on the very oldest monuments in both countries.

Fig. 198.—Painted Ornament on Plaster; from Layard. (P. & C.)

The “Sacred Tree,” or “Tree of Life,” is often represented in Assyrian art, and under different forms, but generally with a king or some divinity on either side of it, paying homage (Figs. 157, 162A, 208).

An enlarged portion of it is seen at Fig. 199.

Fig. 199.—Upper Portion of a Tree of Life; from Layard. (P. & C.)

The exact meaning of the “Sacred Tree” has not yet been satisfactorily explained, but, at any rate, it seems likely enough that it represents a palm-tree, shown by the palmate head and by the conventional markings on the trunk, no doubt meant for the bark roughening lines. The surrounding palmates may be meant to represent a leafy enclosure for the sacred tree in the centre, or the whole thing may be a conventional picture of a sacred grove.

Owing to the comparative lateness of the universal use of the lotus in Assyrian art, we can well imagine that this flower form was introduced into Assyria by the articles in bronze, ivory, and other material by the Phœnician traders, that were both of Egyptian and Phœnician design, as there was scarcely an article of commerce on which the lotus was not represented in those early days of Phœnician trade (900 to 300 B.C.)

Fig. 200.—Guilloche Ornament on Enamelled Brick. (B.M.) (P. & C.)

Fig. 201.—Ivory Plaque; Actual Size. Drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)

Another very characteristic ornament of the Assyrian decorations is the double-interlacing meander, or guilloche (Figs. 200 and 201). It is generally found in combination with the other ornaments just spoken of, both on tiles and in ivory engraving. It is sometimes called “cable ornament” or “snare-work,” from the appearance it has to a rope or cable twisted around the eyes of posts. It has been used very much by the Greeks and Romans.

Fig. 202.—Ivory Plaque found at Nimroud. (B.M.) (P. & C.)

The art of ivory carving and engraving was practised in Assyria, judging from some plaques and carvings that have been found that are distinctly Assyrian in motive and design (Fig. 201), and from many elephants’ tusks that have come to light from the ruins of the buried palaces; but it has been clearly established that the art was first introduced into Assyria by the importation of the Egyptian plaques and other carvings, and also by the imitations of Egyptian articles made by Phœnician artists, and probably sold to the Assyrians as the product of Egypt.

Fig. 202, a small plaque, is quite likely to be one of these imitations of Egyptian design with the lotus-tree of life which rests on a support or top of a capital. This form of lotus capital is found everywhere in Cyprus, and in all countries where Phœnician trade extended. It is distinctly Egyptian in origin, and more than likely is the origin of the Ionic volute capital of the Greeks. The small and beautifully carved sphinx (Fig. 203) is one of the many Egyptian ivories that had found its way to Assyria, and is immeasurably superior in workmanship to any of the Assyrian carvings.

Fig. 203.—Ivory Fragment in British Museum; Actual Size. Drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)

It may be remarked here that the Assyrian artist excelled in the flat or engraved treatment of his designs in nearly every branch of art, but was inferior in workmanship to the Egyptian in carved work in the round; though in expressing intense life, virility, and movement, especially in the representation of animals, he was superior to the Egyptian artist.

Fig. 204.—Bronze Platter, 9 ins. diameter. (B.M.) Drawn by Wallet. (P. & C.)

There is one important product of Assyrian art that deserves notice—the exquisite bronze bowls, cups, and platters, made in repoussé and finished off with the engraver’s burin (Fig. 204, 205). In these products we may recognise the renaissance of Assyrian art, based on the art of the Egyptians. That they must have had their origin in Assyria no one can doubt, when we think that the working in bronze was so well known in Assyria and Babylonia; for example, we quote the magnificent Balâwât plates, of repoussé bronze, of Shalmaneser II. (B.C. 859-824) now in the British Museum; and although the designs on some of them are distinctly Egyptian (Fig. 204), not one specimen of such bowls or platters has yet been found in the Valley of the Nile.

Fig. 205.—Bronze Cup, diameter 11 ins.; from Layard.

It may be reasonably assumed that the Egyptian motives were copied from ivories or painted vases brought to Assyria by the Phœnicians, and that those master workers in bronze, the Assyrians, copied such designs on their platters and cups, and afterwards introduced their own distinctive designs, as may be seen in Fig. 205, a design which is Assyrian in every detail, with no Egyptian trace. Designs like the latter disprove the theory that these bronze bowls and dishes were altogether made in workshops of Tyre and Byblos, but undoubtedly the Phœnician artists—who really invented nothing—may have in their turn copied these designs on their wares, when they found such handy and portable goods might be easily transported, and would be sure to find a ready market in other countries bordering on the Mediterranean, as we shall see when treating of Phœnician Art. The importance of the design on such handy and indestructible articles on the art of the Greeks, Cypriots, and Etruscans, not only from the workmanship point of view, but from the themes portrayed on them suggesting ornament, and other subject matter, perhaps religious motives as well, to the rising civilisation of the countries named, can hardly be exaggerated.

Fig. 206.—Border of a Bronze Cup; from Layard. (P. & C.)

In painting on plaster (Fig. 198) or enamelling on tiles (Figs. 194 and 200) and bricks, the Babylonians and Assyrians used very few colours, not more than five or six, but they used them with great advantage and decorative effect, and always in flat tints. Their painted figures were, as a rule, not intended for any other meaning than their geometric ornament, and merely used as units in the ornamental scheme (Fig. 194). The colours were: blue from the lapis lazuli; yellow, an antimoniate of lead and a little tin; white, an oxide of tin; black, an animal charcoal; red, an oxide of iron; and another blue from the oxide of copper completes, as near as possible, the range of their palette.

Fig. 207.

Cylinder; from Soldi.

(P. & C.)

Fig. 208.—Assyrian Cylinder. Worship of Sacred Tree. (B.M.) (P. & C.)

The nearly universal colour of the groundwork was blue, a deep dark blue from the lapis lazuli. At Khorsabad M. Place found a mass of powdered blue, over two pounds in weight, that was found to be made from the lapis lazuli for the purpose of enamelling. The main portion of the decoration was yellow, but often white was used with black outlines, and red sparingly. A green tint was less common, but was supposed to be obtained from a mixture of the yellow and copper blue oxide.

Remains of pottery are not very plentiful, and the forms have nothing distinctive that calls for special notice. The vessels, such as vases, cups, and buckets of bronze, are elegant in form and decoration (Fig. 209).

Jewellery and personal decoration have only been found in a limited quantity, and not of a very good quality in design or material: the bas-reliefs furnish our best information on what existed in these articles.