The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-06-06
improbable as some sllefe." In the

improbable as. some slleEe." In the
somewhat inconclusive nature of the
text of which this is typical there Is
disappointment for the reader who
wants something more thar a history
OF the painters and comment on the
composition Of the pictures. Even a
hypothetic demonstration would have
turned the compilation into a creative
essay. We find Mr.. Aitken guilty OF
a petitio principii for which even his
cultuied criticisms cannot fully atone.
He promises bread and gives only q
book. Perhaps, though, we have read
into the promise more than was
meant. The fault complained OF Is
not a new one.
The Christ Of the catacombs'': IL
any Christian portraiture is "authen-
tic" it must he this of the early days
of the religion. The faith was not Of
the lower classes" only: there were
plenty of cultured, patrician followers
of the Messiah. Nor were persecution
and martyrdom the order OF every
day. Christians in Rome did not live
in a state Of continuous oppression.
but had much more liberty to worship
openly than retrospective fiction and
even history suggest. Even Nero. II
is said, was. like PLATE. almost per-
suaded.' Romans who did not APP
preciate the revolutionary bearing of
the new doctrine would still. in the
easy expansibility of their ideas OF
goodness incline to tolerance. The
unknown god" was not deeply sub
merged in the ancient consciousness
of superior powers readily deified.
Whether meeting in private basi,ica
or surreptitiously in the Catacombs
the Christians had more and better
art han they were credited with a
few decades Of years ago II few
examples OF early Christian art, and
especially pOrtraiture. have come
down to us. the same thing is to he
said OF the pagan art Of the time.
though portrait painting fiourished
throughout the empire"
What has the author TO say ~ the
pictures Of Christ made 1900 years
ago? In a cemetery OF hat time are
! pictures so old. In the catacomb of
Domatilla is AS simple and sincere
a piece or portraiture as one could
wish TO see. n beautiful Christ. The
whole conception is one OF ~quietness
and strength. The brow is
broad and thoughtful. the mouth firm
and courteous. the eyes gentle and
pleading, so kind, so gentle. 40 win
ming. So searching ." Perhaps
these qualities are more in h be-
holders eyes than in the eyes on the
painted surface. for in a decade and
more Of centuries the subterranean
damp and the smoke of many tapers
have spared little more than the OUT
lines of the divine face. But. giving
I the picture the earliest possible date
instead Of the one formerly asCribed
To It. in the third century. one won
ders just how far the artist. unques-
tionably guided by his admiration of
| the qualities to he made To speak out
through the paint. was compelled by
traditional description Of the features.
A century. or two centuries, or even
three, would hardly have been enough
TO silenc or wholly distort the legen-
dairy word pictures. But the empha-
sis must always have been rather upon
the expressive quality %. the features
than upon their physical moulding
n proportions, Even George WASH
ington's portraits were &C idealiZed
hat on credible testimony We do not
see him as he really looked. The
majesty" was there no doubt. the
eye ''kindling" or flashing. the
straight lips. the air Of command
But there il abundant reason TO be-
lieve the face was as much more
rugged than its counterfeit present.
ment as the great Chiefs language
was more of the earth earthly h
reporters less rhetorical than Parson
Weems have set It down. II would
not be- art for arts sake but il
would he mighty pleasing To the gen
eral TO haye along with the series of
pictures Of the Son Of God some
resume Of AZ least the early verbal
reports OF His appearance as He went
among men.
Turning the pages OF Mr.. Athens
beautiful book, where the illustrations
are ordered chronologiCally and by tle
p!ctors' nationality. two observations
emerge and grow: that the face shows
steadily increasing divergence IN de-
tail from the first representation. and
that through the change there endures
a most remarkabl. suhstratum of on
sistency. The old Italian. Spanish.
D I III Gnu iilNI lilHll.'Ns anu IL
moderns too, express "as plainly as
paint can speak the same outshinlns
qualities Of the mind and soul: but not
less insistcnt h a the variations die
tated by the age at which the Christ
L. represented, bearded or not, and the
change OF stress, az In the Transf'gura-
ton, washing Peters feat, in the CRU
oitiNiOn, the Resurrection. and so on.
are racial revelations of portrait"
authorship. Is there not d.scernible op-
position between the p~ortra!ture ruled
by church tradition and hat in which
the pure human is the Inspiration"
Mr.. Athens conventional criticism
Of the pictures is good; his quotations
and references are copious and infor-
native. Thssc things do not, however.
contain the vital essence Of this vo,-
ume; hat is in its r~ev"rential. ""
devotional attitud" toward the place in
the worlds finest art of the worlds
dcares, figure and story. However
fashions in crceds may change il Will
hc a sad period IN maukiud's history
when men cease to see beauty aud
light in that face. II is a sad perioi
IN the worlds history when men ar.
destroying ancient monuments to the
religion Of love whose symbolic core
n is That art. like thai religion. be-