CHAP. 6.—THE ANTIQUITY OF PAINTING IN ITALY.
But already, in fact, had the art of painting been perfectly
developed in Italy.[1] At all events, there are extant in the
temples at Ardea, at this day, paintings of greater antiquity
than Rome itself; in which, in my opinion, nothing is more
marvellous, than that they should have remained so long
unprotected by a roof, and yet preserving their freshness.[2] At
Lanuvium, too, it is the same, where we see an Atalanta and a
Helena, without drapery, close together, and painted by the
same artist. They are both of the greatest beauty, the former
being evidently the figure of a virgin, and they still remain
uninjured, though the temple is in ruins. The Emperor
Caius,[3] inflamed with lustfulness, attempted to have them
removed, but the nature of the plaster would not admit of it.
There are in existence at Cære,[4] some paintings of a still higher
antiquity. Whoever carefully examines them, will be forced
to admit that no art has arrived more speedily at perfection, seeing that it evidently was not in existence at the time
of the Trojan War.[5]
1. Ajasson remarks, that a great number of paintings have been lately
discovered in the Etruscan tombs, in a very perfect state, and probably of
very high antiquity.—B.
2. There would appear to be still considerable uncertainty respecting
the nature of the materials employed by the ancients, and the manner of
applying them, by which they produced these durable paintings; a
branch of the art which has not been attained in equal perfection by the
moderns.—B.
3. Caligula.
4. See B. iii. c. 8.
5. We have already remarked that painting was practised very extensively
by the Egyptians, probably long before the period of the Trojan
war.—B.