As far As we can tell from modern testing methods- it was common practice based on residue and traces found on many ancient statues- that yes! Many were in fact painted. Periods, cultures etc. vary- some were bright and somewhat fanciful, others seem to be colored in what we believe are more “realistic” color pallets. The “sterile/clean/simple white” we associate with these classic works- isn’t likely what most looked like new. Just as if an alien landed at the Apollo site on the moon- they wouldn’t find an American flag in red, white, and blue- but would find a white flag which radiation (such as from the sun) and other factors over time had made white!
Or perhaps more relatable to many- the same that very old lawn furniture or car upholstery- if not protected from the sun- loses its color and patterns over time. You may never have seen an all white lawn chair or Toyota Tercel interior- but you also haven’t likely seen one that was left in the elements for thousands of years. A decade or two can often be more than enough to make many colors turn almost white.
It goes back further; pillars and statues in Egypt were also painted... and then there's an argument over where they learned how to do that. Dyes were the original purpose of what tade/globalization has become and, in particular, it was things you could use to make blues that made it such. Blue was rare, even rarer was being able to get a guy to make blue+red=purple, which is why purple was considered reserved for royalty.
I don't know about drawings but none of the statues were nude. They were painted, and some had skin tight armor to show off muscles. If you see a penis on a statue, that's Renaissance. The Renaissance people thought the ancient statues were nude so they copied it. But they weren't nude. So we have a bunch of nude statues for no reason.
Comments