n monuments, and which readily
accounts for the imperfect arrangement of their figures.

Deficient in conception, and above all in a proper knowledge of
grouping, they were unable to form those combinations which give true
expression; every picture was made up of isolated parts, put together
according to some general notions, but without harmony, or
preconceived effect. The human face, the whole body, and everything
they introduced, were composed in the same manner, of separate members
placed together one by one according to their relative situations: the
eye, the nose, and other features composed a face, but the expression
of feelings and passions was entirely wanting; and the countenance of
the King, whether charging an enemy's phalanx in the heat of battle,
or peaceably offering incense in a sombre temple, presented the same
outline and the same inanimate look. The peculiarity of the front view
of an eye, introduced in a profile, is thus accounted for: it was the
ordinary representation of that feature added to a profile, and no
allowance was made for any change in the position of the head.

It was the same with drapery: the figure was first drawn, and the
drapery then added, not as part of the whole, but as an accessory;
they had no general conception, no previous idea of the effect
required to distinguish the warrior or the priest, beyond the
impressions received from costume, or from the subject of which they
formed a part, and the same figure was dressed according to the
character it was intended to perform. Every portion of a picture was
conceived by itself, and inserted as it was wanted to complete the
scene; and when the walls of the building, where a subject was to be
drawn, had been accurately ruled with squares, the figures were
introduced, and fitted to this mechanical arrangement. The members
were appended to the body, and these squares regulated their form and
distribution, in whatever posture they might be placed.

As long as this conventional system continued, no great change could
take place, beyond a slight variation in the proportions, which at one
period became more elongated, particularly in the reign of the second
Remeses; but still the general form and character of the figures
continued the same, which led to the remark of Plato, "that the
pictures and statues made ten thousand years ago, are in no one
particular better or worse than what they now make." And taken in this
limited sense--that