naming the artist, I, 25.1; _cf._ I. 28.2. The inscribed base was found
in Athens in 1888: Ἀρχαιολογικὸν Δελτίον, 1889, pp. 36 f. (Lolling).
A terminal portrait of Perikles, extant in several copies, has been
identified as a copy of this work, _e. g._, one in the British Museum:
_B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 549; Furtw., _Mp._, Pl. VII, opp. p. 118
(profile, fig, 46, p. 119); Hekler, _op. cit._, Pl. 4 a.; F. W., 481.
Another replica is in the Vatican: Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, 276, and
Nachtraege, II, p. 471; Visconti, _Iconogr. gr._, I, Pl. XV; B. B.,
156; Hekler, _op. cit._, Pl. 4 b. However, Hitz.-Bluemn., I, p. 307,
_ad loc._ Paus., think that the word ἀνδριάς used by Pausanias can not
apply to a terminal bust; Furtw., _Mp._, p. 117, n. 4, says that the
word does not necessarily mean a whole statue. _Cf._ Bernouilli, _Jb._,
XI, 1896, pp. 107 f.; Furtw., _Mp._, pp. 117 f.
[519] See _I. G. B._, 62, 63.
[520] _Philopseudes_, 18 f.
[521] Αὐτοανθρώπῳ ὅμοιον, §18.
[522] A good example of a Roman copy (from the age of Hadrian) of an
original iconic athlete statue in bronze from the end of the fourth
century B. C., is a bearded head in the Museo Chiaramonti; its swollen
ears and the deep furrow in the hair for the metal crown show that it
is from the statue of a victor. See Amelung, _Vat._, I, p. 483, no. 257
and Tafelbd., I, Pl. 50; Arndt-Bruckmann, _Gr. und Roem. Portr._, Pls.
223-4.
[523] XXXV, 153. Jex-Blake, p. 176, justly remarks that this invention
had nothing to do with the custom of taking death-masks.
[524] Xen., _Symp._, IV, 17: θαλλοφόρους γὰρ τῇ Ἀθηνᾷ τοὺς καλοὺς
γέροντας ἐκλέγονται κ. τ. λ.; _cf._ Aristoph., _Vesp._, 544, and
Athen., XIII, 20 (p. 565) and scholion.
[525] XIII, 90 (p. 609 e, f); here he quotes a history of Arkadia by
Nikias.
[526] Athen., XIII, 20 (pp. 565 f and 566 a); _cf._, Theophr., _apud_
Athen., XIII, 90 (pp. 609 f, 610 a).
[527] Athen., XIII, 90 (p. 610a): here Athenæus is also quoting
Theophrastos. In XIII, 20 (p. 565), he quotes Herakleides Lembos as
saying that in Sparta the handsomest man and woman were especially
honored.
[528] Hdt., V, 47; Eustath. _ad_ Iliad, III, p. 383, 43; Foerster, 138.
[529] P., IX, 22.1.
[530] P., VII, 24.4; _cf._, VIII, 47.3, for a similar custom at Tegea.
[531] See O. Mueller, _Die Dorier_^1, 1824, II, p. 238 (quoted by
Krause, I, p. 37, n. 19). For references to contests of beauty in
Greece, see _ibid._, pp. 33-38.
[532] On this subject, see the recent essay by W. H. Goodyear,
Lessing’s Essay on the Laocoön and its Influence on the Criticism of
Art and Literature, _Brooklyn Museum Quarterly_, Oct. 1917, pp. 228-9.
[533] Thus we have Polykleitos of Argos and Patrokles, perhaps his
brother; Naukydes of Argos and Daidalos of Sikyon, sons of Patrokles;
the younger Polykleitos—who called himself an Argive—the brother of
Naukydes; Alypos of Sikyon, the pupil of Naukydes; etc. Statues by all
these sculptors except Patrokles are known to have stood in Olympia.
[534] _Hbk._^2, p. 254.
[535] His criticism of painting occurs in _Poet._, 1448a, 5,
1450a, 26, and _Polit._, V, 1340a, 35. In _Eth_., VI, 1141a, 10,
he says that Pheidias and Polykleitos were masters in marble and
bronze respectively. For a discussion of Aristotle’s æsthetics of
painting and sculpture, see M. Carroll, in _Publ. of Geo. Washington
University_, Philol. and Lit. Series, I, 1 (Nov., 1905), pp. 1-10;
and for both Aristotle and Plato on art, see Kalkman, _50stes Berl.
Winckelmannsprogr._, 1890 (Proport. des Gesichts), pp. 3 f. and notes.
[536] I, 5, 1361b; Oppian, _Kyneget._, I, 89-90, speaks of the
similarly well-developed bodies of hunters.
[537] _Mem._, III, 10.6-8. For his visit to the painter Parrhasios, see
_ibid._, 10.1-5.
[538] Following the suggestion of Klein, II, p. 143, and W. L.
Westermann, _Class. Rev._, XIX, 1905, pp. 323-5. The latter gives
several examples of similarly shortened forms of names and believes the
passage in Xenophon emphasizes the fact that Polykleitos was employed
at Athens. Plato frequently mentions Polykleitos by his full name: _e.
g._, _Protag._, 328 C (sons of Polykleitos), 311 C (Polykleitos and
Pheidias). P. Gardner justly observes that the statues of Polykleitos
“however beautiful, are scarcely life-like:” _Prince. Gk. Art._, p. 15,
n. 1; _Grammar_, p. 17.
[539] II, 17: τὰ σκέλη μὲν παχύνονται, τοὺς ὤμους δὲ λεπτύνονται, κ.
τ. λ.
[540] See schol. on Plato, _Amatores_, p. 135 E; _cf._ Epiktetos,
_Encheir._, Ch. 29.
[541] P., VI, 10.5; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 97; Foerster, 240; _cf._ Krause,
_Olympia_, pp. 302 f.
[542] His date is uncertain: P., VI, 15.9; Hyde, 149; Foerster, 767-772.
[543] P., VI, 3.2; he won at Olympia some time between Ols. (?) 99 and
102 (= 384 and 372 B. C.): Hyde, 23; Foerster, 335.
[544] P., I, 29.5: Hdt., VI, 92; IX, 75; _cf._ Krause, I, pp. 495-6.
[545] _E. g._, Phaÿllos of Kroton was famed for his fleetness, his
jumping, and his throwing the diskos. See Aristoph., _Acharn._, 212;
_Vespes_, 1206; _A. G._, App. 297; _cf._ Hdt., VIII, 47; P., X, 9.2. He
won at Delphi only.
[546] _E. g._, Myron at Delphi: Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 57; Alkamenes,
_ibid._, XXXIV, 72; etc.
[547] 656 E, 657 A.
[548] Pliny, _H. N._, XXXVI, 39. These works were probably critical as
well as descriptive.
[549] _E. g._, of Pasiteles, XXXVI, 39; of Arkesilaos, XXXVI, 41; of
Koponios, _ibid._
[550] 18(70). In this passage he also gives similar judgments on
several painters. On Cicero on art, see Grant Showerman, _Proceed.
Amer. Philol. Ass’n_, XXXIV, 1903, pp. xxxv f. He shows that Cicero’s
references to art proceed from his instinct as a stylist and not from
any enthusiasm for art itself.
[551] _Imag._, 6, p. 464. His eclectic statue is made up of works by
Praxiteles, Alkamenes, Pheidias, and Kalamis.
[552] _Rhetorum praeceptor_, 9-10. He spells the two first names
Ἡγησίας, Κράτης.
[553] XXXVI, 37. For careful judgments of Pliny’s work, see Jex-Blake,
pp. xci f.: Kalkmann, _Die Quellen der Kunstgeschichte des Plinius_,
1898; Robert, _Archaeologische Maerchen_, 1886, pp. 28 f.; F.
Muenzer, _Hermes_, XXX, 1895, pp. 499 f. (and _Beitraege zur Kritik
der Naturgesch. des Plinius_, 1897); Botsford and Sihler, _Hellenic
Civilization_, 1915, pp. 551-8 (= Translation by Jex-Blake of Pliny,
XXXIV, 53-84 [sculptors], revised by E. G. Sihler); pp. 558-567 (=
Pliny, XXXV, 15, and 53-97 [painters], revised by E. G. S.). For short
estimate of Pliny’s work, see Mackail, _Latin Literatures_, 1895, p.
197.
[554] See his characterization of the great Greek painters and
sculptors in _Inst. Orat._, XII, Ch. 9.
[555] Also in the work of H. Stuart Jones, _Select Passages from
Anc. Writers Illustrative of the Hist. of Gk. Sculpt._, 1895; _cf._,
A history of classical writers on art from Xenokrates to Pliny, in
Jex-Blake, pp. xvi-xci; _cf._ Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, _Antigonos von
Karystos_ (Kiessling and Wilamowitz, _Philolog. Untersuchungen_, IV,
1881), pp. 7 f.; P. Gardner, _Principles of Greek Art_, Ch. II, pp. 13
f. (Ancient Critics on Art); etc.
[556] _A. Pl._, 2; Bergk, _P. l. G._, III^4, no. 149, p. 498.
Theognetos won in Ol. 76 (= 476 B. C.): P., VI, 9.1; _Oxy. Pap._, Hyde,
83; Foerster, 193 and 193 N.
[557] _H. N._, XXXIV, 88. Kallias won in Ol. 77 (= 472 B. C.): P., VI,
6.1; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208; _Inschr. v. Ol._, no. 146.
[558] _Ibid._, XXXIV, 71.
[559] Kalamis made the horses and jockeys, Onatas the chariot: P., VI,
12.1; Hiero won twice in the horse-race and once in the chariot-race in
Ols. 76-78 (= 476-468 B. C.): _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 105; Foerster, 199,
209, 215.
[560] VI, 6.6. He won in Ols. 74, 76-7 (= 484, 476-472 B. C.): _Oxy.
Pap._; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207.
[561] VI, 4.4. He won in Ols. 81 and 82 (= 456-452 B. C.): _Oxy. Pap._;
Hyde, 38; Foerster, 202, 203.
[562] VI, 9.3. He won in Ol. 83 (= 448 B. C.): _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 88:
Foerster, 285.
[563] V, 27.3.
[564] Bulle, p. 104, remarks that up to the present no single Roman
copy can be _proved_ to be that of an Olympic victor statue. This fact
must be constantly borne in mind.
[565] No. 6439; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, pp. 299-300 and fig.;
_Ausgr. v. Ol._, V, Pls. XXI, XXII, and p. 14; _Funde v. Ol._, Pl.
XXIII, and p. 16; _Bronz. v. Ol._, Textbd., pp. 10-11; Tafelbd., Pl.
II, 2 and 2a; Boetticher, _Olympia_, Pl. XI, 1; Baum., p. 1104 00,
figs. 1296, a and b; F. W., no. 323; Bulle, 235 and fig. 154, on p.
501; von Mach, 482; B. B., 247.
[566] Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschr. d. Glyptothek_,^2 1910, no. 457, pp.
398 f.; Furtw., _Mp._, p. 291; _Mw._, p. 507; F. W., no. 216; B. B.,
8; Bulle, 207 (front and side); Kekulé, _A. Z._, XLI, 1883, Pl. XIV,
3, p. 246; H. Schrader, _Jh. oest. arch. Inst._, 1911, p. 74; Hauser,
_R. M._, X, 1895, pp. 103 f. Kekulé, because of its similarity to the
_Apollo_ of the West Gable, derived it from the art of the Olympia
pediment sculptures; Flasch, _Verh. d. 29sten Philologenversamml._,
Innsbruck, 1874, p. 162, and Brunn, _Beschr. d. Glypt._^5, no. 302, and
_Sitzb. Muen. Akad._, 1892, p. 658, classed it as Polykleitan; Bulle
calls it Attic-Argive without Polykleitan influence, while Furtwaengler
finds it Polykleitan-Attic. The latter gives several replicas, two of
green and black basalt respectively, in the Museo delle Terme, and a
marble head in the Museo Chiaramonti, no. 475. Bulle gives the height
of the Munich head as 0.23 meter.
[567] Αἰδώς; _cf._ _decor_, applied to the work of Polykleitos by
Quintilian: _Inst. Orat._, XII, 9. 7-8; _cf._ also Vitruvius, _de
Arch._, I, 2.
[568] Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkm. d. gr. und roem. Skulpt._, Hdausgabe,^3
1911, p. 102, n. 1. He adds that it is _das Ideal von Reinheit,
Unschuld, liebenswuerdig edler Groesse, eines der herrlichsten
griechischen Originale, die uns erhalten sind_. It is photographed
_ibid._, figs. 30, 31. In the _Beschr. d. Glypt._, p. 399, he says it
is _das edelste und vollendetste Werk, das die Glyptothek besitzt—ihr
kostbarster Schatz_, etc.
[569] Formerly in the Coll. Tyszkiewicz: B. B., 324, (two views);
Bulle, 206 (two views); von Mach, 481 (two views); _Mon. Piot_, I,
1894, pp. 77 f. (E. Michon) and Pls. X, XI; S. Reinach, _Têtes_, Pl. 72
and p. 58; Kalkmann, Prop. d. Gesichts, p. 27 (vignette); Collignon,
II, Frontispiece and p. 169; Gardner, _Sculpt._, Pl. XL; Furtw., _Mp._,
pp. 290-1 and Pl. XIV; _Mw._, p. 507. The best illustration of the head
is given by de Ridder, _Les Bronzes antiques du Louvre_, I, 1913, Pl. I
(and text p. 8, on no. 4). It is 0.33 meter in height (Bulle).
[570] Preface to Furtw., _Mp._, p. xiii.
[571] So Furtw., _l. c._; Bulle, however, sees in it only Attic work
and finds it slightly coarser and harder than the Munich head described.
[572] Invent. 5633; _Bronzi d’Ercol._, I, 73, 74; D. Comparetti e G. de
Petra, _La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni_, 1883, XI, 1; B. B., 323 (two
views); Rayet, II, Pl. 67; Furtw., _Mp._, p. 291; _Mw._, p. 508; the
latter believes that it, like the preceding two heads, is Polykleitan
and Attic.
[573] _Bedeutung der Gymnastik in d. gr. Kunst_, 1905; _cf._ also
Gardner, _Sculpt._, p. 23, and _Hbk._, p. 215.
[574] Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkmaeler_, already cited, p. 63, n. 3.
(Translated under the title _Greek and Roman Sculpture_ by H. Taylor,
1914; p. 119.)
[575] See F. W. G. Foat, Anthropometry of Greek Statues, _J. H. S._,
XXXV, 1915, pp. 225 f. (p. 226).
[576] Plato, _Phileb._, 64 E, regarded μετριότης and συμμετρία as
qualities of beauty and virtue; _cf._ Aristotle, _Metaphys._, X, 3.7,
and _Nicom. Eth._, V, 5.14, 1133b. Vitruvius, _de Arch._, I, 2, makes
symmetry in architecture a quality of _eurythmia: Item symmetria est ex
ipsius operis membris conveniens consensus ex partibusque separatis ad
universae figurae speciem ratae partis responsus_.
[577] I, 2: _Haec [eurythmia] efficitur, cum membra operis convenientia
sunt, altitudinis ad latitudinem, latitudinis ad longitudinem, et ad
summam omnia respondent suae symmetriae_; _cf._ III, 1; Lucian, _pro
Imag._, 14 (ῥυθμίζειν τὸ ἄγαλμα); Clem. Alex., _Paedagog._, 3.11 and 64
(εὐρυθμὸς καὶ καλὸς ἀνδριάς); Xen., _Mem._, III, 10.9 (ῥυθμός, of
corselets); Plut., _de Educ. puer._, 11 (τῶν σωμάτων εὐρυθμία); Diod.,
I, 97. 6 (ῥυθμὸς ἀνδριάντων, _i. e._, rhythmic order or grace in
statuary): _id._, II, 56.4.
[578] Vitruv., III, 1: _<proportio>, quae graece ἀναλογία dicitur.
Proportio est ratae partis membrorum in omni opere totiusque
commodulatio, ex qua ratio efficitur symmetriarum._
[579] _H. N._, XXXIV, 65.
[580] _Op. cit., _e. g._ _Op. cit._, XXXV, 67 and 128.
[581] Ueber die Kunsturteile bei Plinius, _Ber. ueber d. Verhandl. d.
k. saechs. Ges. d. Wiss. zu Leipzig_, II, 1850, p. 131; _cf._ H. L.
Urlichs, _Ueber griech. Kunstschriftsteller_ (Diss. inaug., Wuerzburg,
1887).
[582] _Principles of Greek Art_, 1914, p. 20 (= _Grammar of Greek Art_,
1905, p. 22).
[583] Quoted by Gardner, _op. cit._, p. 22 (= _Grammar_, p. 23), from
two papers by H. Brunn, Ueber tektonischen Styl in der griech. Plastik
und Malerei, in _Sitzb. Muen. Akad._, 1883, pp. 299 f., 1884, pp. 507
f. Overbeck, I, pp. 266-277, explains rhythm in art as the _Ordnung
der Bewegung_, in accordance with the definition of Plato: τῇ δὴ τῆς
κινήσεως τάξει ῥυθμὸς ὄνομα εἴη: _de Leg._, 665 A.
[584] _H. N._, XXXIV, 58 (S. Q., 533): _Numerosior in arte quam
Polyclitus et in symmetria diligentior_. The interpretation of this
disputed passage depends, of course, on the meaning of _numerosior_,
and whether we accept the curious statement of the manuscript that
Myron surpassed Poykleitos in symmetry, or, by omitting the _et_
(with Sillig), make it mean just the contrary and in harmony with the
usual ancient view that symmetry was the salient characteristic of
Polykleitan art. The passage, then, would contrast the symmetry of
Polykleitos with the variety of Myron. This accords with Pliny’s use of
_numerosus_ elsewhere (_e. g._, XXXV, 130 and 138), which always refers
to number. See Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 275 (note).
[585] _Op. cit._, XXXIV, 65, he says: _Nova intactaque ratione
quadratas veterum staturas permutando_.
[586] _Op. cit._, XXXV, 67.
[587] VIII. I. 47.
[588] The Egyptians divided the front view of the body into 19 parts
(or 21 parts and a quarter, including the height of the head-dress):
Diod., 1, 98. See Lepsius, _Monum. funéraires de l’Égypte_ (figure,
reproduced in Dar.-Sagl, I, 2, p. 892, fig. 1125); _cf._ his _Descript.
de l’Égypte_, IV, LXII; Wilkinson, _History of Egypt_, p. 113, Pl. IV;
these references are given by Foat, _op. cit._, p. 225, n. 1.
[589] Vitruv., I, 2. However, in thus following the statement of the
Roman architect, it must be said that the attempt to recover and
establish such a canon in Greek architecture is still unproved. The
subject is complicated and has led to very different views. Thus,
while many scholars have defended the theory of the canon (_e. g._,
Pennethorne, _Geom. and Optics of Anc. Arch._, 1878; Penrose, in
Whibley, _Comp. to Gk. Stud._^1, 1905, pp. 220-1; Ferguson, _Hist.
Arch._, ed. 1887, I, p. 251; P. Gardner, _Princ. Gk. Art._, p. 21;
Statham, _Short Crit. Hist. Arch._, 1912, p. 130), others are opposed,
and believe that design in Greek architecture was a matter of feeling,
and that the orders were first reduced to formulæ in Roman days
(_e. g._, A. K. Porter, _Med. Arch._, 1909, I, 9; Goodyear, _Greek
Refinements, Studies in Temperamental Arch._, 1912, esp. p. 83, quoting
Joseph Hoffer from _Wiener Bauzeitung_, 1838). See on the subject a
recent article by my pupil, Dr. A. W. Barker, in _A. J. A._, XXII,
1918, pp. 1 f., in which the above and other references are given.
[590] Gardner, _Sculpt._, pp. 22-3, says: “Paradoxical as it may seem
at first sight, the very freedom of Greek sculpture is to a great
extent due to its close adherence to tradition.” He shows how the free
play of imagination depends on external conditions and tradition.
[591] _E. g._, Vitruv., I, 2; especially these words: _Ut in hominis
corpore e cubito, pede, palmo, digito, ceterisque particulis (partibus)
symmetria est eurythmiae qualitas_; also III, 1: _Pes vero altitudinis
corporis sextae_ <_partis_>; _cubitum quartae; pectus item quartae_,
etc. Also Philostr., _Imag._, Proem.; the third-century A. D. (?)
treatise called _de Physiognomia_; St. Augustine, _de Civ. Dei_, XV,
26. 1; the poet Martianus Capella, of the middle of the fifth century
A. D., who says, VII, 739: _septem corporis partes hominem perficiunt_;
etc.
[592] Die Proportionen des Gesichts in der griechischen Kunst (=
_53stes Berliner Wincklemanns programm_, 1893).
[593] _Gestalt des Menschen_, in _Verh. d. Berl. Anthrop. Gesell._,
1895. This work is based on the older investigations of C. Schmidt,
_Proportionsschluessel_, 1849, and of C. Carus, _Die Proportionslehre
der menschlichen Gestalt_, 1874. See also P. Richer, _Canon des
proportions du corps humain_, 1893; E. Duhousset, Proportions
artistiques et anthropométrie scientifique, _Gaz. B-A._, III, Pér. 3, 1
90, pp. 59 f.; E. Guillaume, art. Canon, _Dict. de l’Acad. des B-A._;
E. Gebhard, in Dar.-Sagl., I, 2, pp. 891-892; _cf._ Collignon, I, pp.
490 f.
[594] F. W. G. Foat, _op. cit._, offers a scheme or typical design,
based on wide data, which will serve as a universal basis for securing
facts about any statue under examination.
[595] On the influence of such canons of proportion on contemporary
artists, see Balcarres, _Evolution of Italian Sculpture_, p. 128.
[596] _Cf._ Vitruvius, quoted above. The scholion on Pindar, _Ol._,
VII, Argum., Boeckh, p. 158, speaks of πηχῶν τεσσάρων δακτύλων πέντε as
the height of the statue of Diagoras at Olympia, etc.
[597] Vitruvius, _de Arch._, VII, Praef., 14, lists writers who
_praecepta symmetriarum conscripserunt_. See V. Mortet, _Rev. Arch._,
Sér. IV, XIII, 1909, pp. 46 f, and figs. 1 and 2. In this discussion
of ancient canons he shows that the chief ratio was that of the head
to the height of the body; the proportion of 8 heads to the body was
that adopted by da Vinci and J. Cousin: 7 to 8 is found in the figures
of the Parthenon frieze; a little under 7 in the _Diadoumenos_ of
Polykleitos.
[598] See Furtw., _Mp._, pp. 49-52. As examples, he gives the statue of
Apollo from the Tiber now in the Museo delle Terme: _Mp._, pp. 50-51,
figs. 8 and 9; _cf._ _R. M._, 1891, pp. 302, 377 and Pls. X-XII; the
Mantuan _Apollo_: _cf._ _50stes Berliner Winckelmannsprogr._, p. 139,
n. 61 (for replicas); etc.
[599] For Polykleitos’ canon, see Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 55; _S. Q._,
953 f.; Furtw., _Mp._, p. 249.
[600] So Pliny, _op. cit._, XXXV, 128; _cf._ J. Six, _Jb._, XXIV, 1909,
pp. 7 f.
[601] _H. N._, XXXIV, 61; see Jex-Blake, p. XLVIII.
[602] _H. N._, XXXIV, 65.
[603] However, other fourth-century artists, notably Praxiteles, used
impressionism in the treatment of the hair: see Bulle, pp. 444 f.
[604] In XXXIV, 80, he mentions Menaichmos, who wrote on the toreutic
art probably in the fourth century B. C.; in XXXIV, 83 (_cf._ XXXV,
68), he mentions Xenokrates, of the school of Lysippos, who wrote books
on art; he is probably identical with an artist of the same name known
to us from inscriptions from Oropos and Elateia: _I. G. B._, 135, a, b
(Oropos), c (Elateia); _Arch. Eph._, 1892, 52 (Oropos); the identity
is doubted by Jex-Blake, p. xx, n. 2. In XXXIV, 84 (_cf._ XXXV, 68)
he speaks of Antigonos, who wrote on painting and who was employed
by Attalos I of Pergamon to work on the trophies of his victory
over the Gauls. For Antigonos as a writer on the criticism of art,
see Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, _Antigonos von Karystos_ (Kiessling and
Wilamowitz, _Philolog. Untersuchungen_, IV, 1881), Ch. I, pp. 7 f.
[605] _H. N._, XXXIV, 55. According to the exact words of Pliny, the
_Canon_ and the _Doryphoros_ were distinct works. It is probable,
however, that Pliny’s words conceal the same statue under two names,
his commentary on each coming from a different source: see Furtw.,
_Mp._, p. 229 and n. 4; _Mw._, p. 422 and n. 2; _cf._ Muenzer,
_Hermes_, XXX, 1895, p. 530, n. 1.
[606] Cicero, _Brut._, 86, 296. On the fame of the _Doryphoros_, see
_id._, _Orator_, 2.
[607] _Instit. Orat._, V, 12.21. In Philon’s treatise περὶ βελοποιϊκῶν,
IV, 2, we read: τὸ γὰρ εὖ παρὰ μικρὸν διὰ πολλῶν ἀριθμῶν ἔφη γίνεσθαι,
sc. Πολύκλειτος, (“Beauty,” he said, “was produced from a small
unit through a long chain of numbers”), a description which rightly
characterizes the _Doryphoros_. The system given by Vitruv., III, 1,
hardly agrees with Polykleitan statues and so has been connected by
Kalkmann, though on insufficient grounds, with the canon of Euphranor:
see _50stes Berlin Winckelmannsprogr._, 1890 (Proport. des Gesichts),
pp. 43 f.; _cf._ H. Stuart Jones, _op. cit._, p. 129.
[608] _Guida Museo Napoli_, no. 146; Collignon, I, Pl. XII, opp. p.
488; Bulle, 47 and analysis on pp. 97-102.
[609] Kalkmann, _op. cit._, p. 53, gives the height as 1.98-1.99 m.;
Bulle, p. 97 to no. 47, as 1.99 m.
[610] In Rayet, I, Text to Pl. 29; reproduced in _Études d’art antique
et moderne_, 1888, pp. 399 f.; _cf._ also Collignon, I, pp. 492 f. and
P. Gardner, _Principles of Greek Art_, pp. 21 f.
[611] _De plac. Hipp. et Plat._, 5.
[612] B. B., 321; Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, 956; _Guide_, 617; F. W., 215;
to be discussed _infra_, pp. 201-2.
[613] _Orat._, XXXI, 89 f. (614 R).
[614] In the present discussion we shall confine ourselves to the
assimilation of mortal types to those of athletic gods and heroes,
omitting the larger question of assimilation to divine types in
general. A good example of the latter is afforded by P. VIII, 9.7-8.
Here, in noting that the Mantineans worshipped Antinoos as a god by the
erection of a temple and the celebration of mysteries and games, he
says that images and paintings of the hero were in the Gymnasion there,
the latter Διονύσῳ μάλιστα εἰκασμέναι.
[615] Kabbadias, no. 218; _Rev. Arch._, III (1er Sér.), 1846, Pl. 53,
fig. 2; Ph. Le Bas, _Voyage archéologique_ (ed. Reinach), Pl. CXVIII,
p. 107; B. B., 18; von Mach, 191; F. W., 1220; Reinach., _Rép._, II, i,
149, 10.
[616] _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 49.
[617] Kabbadias, no. 219.
[618] Formerly known as the _Antinous_: M. W., II, Pl. 28, 307; Clarac,
IV, Pl. 665, 1514; Reinach, _Rép._, I, 367,2 (with restored arms); von
Mach, no. 192; Amelung, _Vat._, II, no. 53 (pp. 132 f.) and Pl. 12; F.
W., no. 1218; Baum., I, pp. 675 f. and fig. 737.
[619] _B. M. Sculpt._, III, no. 1599 and Pl. IV; Clarac, IV, Pl. 664,
1539; Reinach, _Rép._, II, i, 149, 1; Springer-Michaelis, p. 317, fig.
567. A corresponding replica from Melos is described by F. W., 1219;
for a replica of the head (on a torso which does not belong to it) in
the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican, see Amelung, _Vat._, I, no. 132 (p.
155) and Pl. 21; for others, see Koerte, _A. M._, III, 1878, pp. 98 f.
The height is given in _B. M. Sculpt._ as 6 ft. 7-1/2 in. (without the
plinth).
[620] Amelung, _Vat._, II, p. 656 and Pl. 61; Furtw., _Mw._, p. 361,
fig. 48. It is a marble copy of an original bronze of Myronian origin.
Its height is 1.98 meters (Amelung).
[621] Duetschke, IV, no. 416; M. W., II, Pl. 30, 329.
[622] _Ibid._, no. 416; Koerte, _A. M._, III, 1878, p. 350, no. 72.
[623] Duetschke, IV, no. 876; Clarac, 958, 2473; Conze, in _A. A._,
1867, pp. 105-6. Here Conze gives a list of which three reliefs and one
statue represent dead men as Hermes.
[624] Duetschke, IV, no. 46; Conze, _l. c._, p. 106 (mentioned in
preceding note).
[625] _E. g._, the well-known bust of the emperor Commodus with the
attributes of Hercules in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome: Helbig,
_Fuehrer_, I, 930; Baum., I, p. 398, fig. 432; Arndt-Bruckmann,
_Griech. u. roem. Portraets_, 230; Hekler, _Greek and Roman Portraits_,
1912, Pl. 270 a; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 2, 583, 7.
[626] _Not. Scav._, 1885, p. 42; _Ant. Denkm._, I, I, 1886, Pl. V;
Bulle, 75 and fig. 27, p. 141; B. B., 246; Helbig, _Fuehrer_, II.,
1347, and references; Arndt-Bruckmann, _Griech. u. roem. Portraets_,
Pls. 358-360; Hekler, _Greek and Roman Portraits_, Pls. 82-4;
Collignon, II, p. 493, fig. 257; Murray, _Hbk._ Gr. _Archæol._, 1892,
pp. 305 f., fig. 100; Lanciani, _Ruins and Excavations of Anc. Rome_,
1897, Pl. on p. 303; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 2, 548, 7; _cf._ Furtw.,
_Mp._, p. 364, n. 2, and _Mw._, p. 597, n. 3. The height of the statue
is 2.08 meters, or 2.37 meters to the hand (Bulle).
[627] _E. g._, Philip V, Perseus, Alexander Balas (who usurped the
Seleucid throne in 149 B. C.), Demetrios I (Soter), of Syria (who
reigned 162-150 B. C.), and Antiochos II, (Theos, who reigned 261-246
B. C.), have been suggested.
[628] See Imhoof-Blumer, _Portraetkoepfe auf ant. Muenzen hellenischer
und hellenisierter Voelker_, 1885, Pls. I, 6; III, 24; V, 21; VI, 29
and 31.
[629] A small replica of this famous statue may probably be seen in
the bronze statuette in the Nelidoff collection: Wulff, _Alexander mit
der Lanze_, 1898, Pls. I, II; Helbig, _Fuehrer_, II, p. 134, fig. 35.
On supposed replicas, see Bernouilli, _Das Bildniss Alex. d. Gr._, p.
107; and Th. Schreiber, Studien ueber das Bildniss Alex. d. Gr., _Abh.
d. philolog.-histor. Cl. d. k. saechs. Gesellsch. d. Wissensch._, XXI,
1903, no. III, pp. 100 f.
[630] Kabbadias, 235; Collignon, in _B. C. H._, XIII, 1889, p. 498 and
Pl. III; Bulle, 74.
[631] _Cf._ the _Farnese Herakles_, Bulle, 72; etc.
[632] Collignon, I, p. 253, fig. 122; see below, p. 119 and note 5.
[633] _E. g._, in the _Payne Knight_ bronze of the British Museum (_B.
M. Bronz._, no. 209 and Pl. 1) and the _Sciarra_ bronze (Collignon, I,
p. 321, fig. 161; _R. M._, II, 1887, Pls. IV, IVa, V), which will be
discussed in Ch. III, pp. 108, 119.
[634] He won Ol. (?) 80 (= 460 B. C.): P., VI, 4.11; Hyde, 45;
Foerster, 255; _Inschr. v. Ol._ 149. _Cf._ Furtw., _Mp._, pp. 249 f.;
_Mw._, pp. 452 f.
[635] _Mp._, p. 255; an almost exact copy of the Eleusis statue is in
the Museo Torlonia, no. 37.
[636] Froehner, _Les medaillons de l’Empire romain_, 1878, p. 123;
Furtw., _Mp._, _l. c._
[637] _Mp._, pp. 229 f., especially pp. 233 f.; _Mw._, pp. 422 f.,
especially pp. 426 f.
[638] On an Argive funerary relief: see _A. M._, III, 1878, pp. 287 f.
and Pl. XIII: this free adaptation of the _Doryphoros_ dates from the
middle of the fourth century B. C.; it will be treated later on in our
discussion of the _Doryphoros_.
[639] _Cf._ Ph., 16, (the palæstra of Hermes, the first known); Babr.,
48,5 (παλαιστρίτης θεός). A trainer of professional athletes was called
a γυμνάστης (a term sometimes applied to athletic gods): Xen., _Mem._,
II, 1.20; Plato, _de Leg._, 720 E; etc.
[640] _E. g._, _Suppl._, 189, 333; _Agam._, 513.
[641] As in Iliad, XV, 428; XVI, 500; XXIV, 1. Eustathius in a scholion
on the latter passage wrongly says that Aischylos called the ἀγοραῖοι
θεοί “ἀγώνιοι θεοί.”
[642] As in Hesychios, who says ἀγώνιοι θεοὶ = οἱ τῶν ἀγώνων προεστῶτες.
[643] 509, ὕπατος χώρας, “lord of Nemea.”
[644] _Ibid._, ὁ Πύθιος ἄναξ.
[645] 515.
[646] _E. g._ Plato, _de Leg._, 783 A; Pindar, _Isthm._, I, 60, _Ol._,
VI, 79, and _Pyth._, II, 10 (of Hermes); Soph., _Trach._, 26 (of Zeus,
the decider of contests); _C. I. G._, II, 1421 (of Hermes); _cf._ also
Simonides, quoted by Athenæus, XI, 90 (p. 490); Aischyl., _fragm._ 384
(of Hermes); Aristoph., _Plut._, 1161 (of Hermes); _C. I. G._, I, 251;
etc.
[647] See Preller-Robert, _Griech. Mythol._^4, 1894, p. 415, n. 3.
[648] _Cf._ Krause, pp. 169 f.; Preller-Robert, _op. cit._, pp. 415 f.;
Urlichs, _Skopas_, p. 42; Nissen, _Pompej. Stud._, p. 168; Roscher,
_Lex._, I, 2, p. 2369; S. Eitrem, in Pauly-Wissowa, VIII, pp. 786-7.
[649] Pindar, _Nem._, X, 52-3; _Oxy. Pap._, VII, 1015, 8.
[650] _E. g._, at Messene, P., IV, 32.1 (along with that of Theseus).
[651] _B. M. Sculpt._, III, 2156; _C. I. G._, I, 250, and Neubauer,
_Hermes_, XI, 1876, p. 146, no. 12; for the dedication of a torch to
Hermes, see _A. G._, VI, 100.
[652] _C. I. A._, II, 3, 1225-6; IV, 2, 1225b; 1226, b, c, d.
[653] _Inschr. Gr. Insul._, III (Thera), 390; _cf._ Cougny, _Epigr.
Anth. Pal._, III, 1890 (_Appendix nova_), p. 26, no. 168.
[654] Schol. on Pindar, _Ol._, VI, 134, Boeckh, p. 148. He is
represented as a wrestler in a bronze group from Antioch, with wings in
his hair: R. Foerster, _Jb._, XIII, 1898, pp. 177 f., and Pl. XI (to be
discussed _infra._, p. 233 and note 2).
[655] Servius on Virgil’s _Aen._, VIII, 138.
[656] I, 2.5.
[657] V, 14.9 (Ἑρμοῦ ... Ἐναγωνίου).
[658] VIII, 14.10. An inscription (_Inschr. v. Ol._, 184) records that
a certain Akestorides of Alexandria Troas (whose name is left out of
the text of Pausanias, VI, 13.7) won a victory at Pheneus, and this was
probably at these games; on this victor, see Hyde, 119, and pp. 49-50.
[659] V, 7.10.
[660] Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, no. 324; _Guide_, 331; B. B., 131; Bulle,
54; von Mach, 126 b; Baum., I, p. 458, fig. 503; Reinach, _Rép._, I,
526,8; Collignon, II. p. 124, fig. 60; Overbeck, I, pp. 380 f. and
fig. 102; F. W., no. 465; _A. Z._, XXIV, 1866, Pl. CCIX, 1-2, pp. 169
f. (Kekulé) and Pl. 209, 1, 2; _Annali_, LI, 1879, pp. 207 f. (Brunn);
_Jb._, XIII, 1898, pp. 57 f. and fig. 1 (Habich); _J. H. S._, XXVIII,
1907, p. 25, fig. 13; _A. J. A._, VII, 1903, pp. 445 f. (von Mach);
Springer-Michaelis, p. 268, fig. 482; replicas in the Louvre (photo
Giraudon, no. 1209), London (_B. M. Sculpt._ III, no. 1753), Duncombe
Park, England (Michaelis, p. 295, no. 2), and elsewhere; for series,
see J. Six, _Gaz. arch._, 1888, pp. 291 and Pl. 29, fig. 10 A.
[661] _Mw._, p. 122; also Smith, _B. M. Sculpt._, III, no. 1753.
[662] First by Visconti, _Mus. Pio Clem._, III, p. 130; lately by G.
Habich, _l. c._, and others.
[663] _H. N._, XXXIV, 72; _S. Q._, 826. It was the only bronze work
which the sculptor is known to have made, all his other works being in
marble.
[664] Kekulé (_l. c._), Furtwaengler (_l. c._), and others make the
identification.
[665] Long ago Turnebus (_Advers._, 1580, p. 486) explained the word
in the sense of ἔγκρισις ἀθλητῶν, as used by Lucian, _pro Imag._, 11;
_cf._, Cicero’s _probatio_, in his _de Off._, I, 144. Most modern
commentators, however, refer the word to the statue, translating it
“classical” or “chosen”: thus Urlichs, _Chrest. Pl._, 1857, p. 325; O.
Jahn, Ueber die Kunsturteile des Plinius (_Ber. saechs. Ges. d. Wiss._,
1850), p. 125; H. L. von Urlichs, _Blaetter f. d. bayr. Gymnasialsch._,
1894, pp. 609 f., translates it “klassisch” or “mustergueltig,” _i.
e._, serving as a pattern or standard. But the term was too well known
as an athletic one for it ever to have been applied to a statue. The
present participle, instead of the usual aorist (ἐγκριθείς), shows
that Alkamenes’ statue represented an athlete in the act of undergoing
selection. The old emendation into ἐγχριόμενος has been recently
defended by Klein, _Praxiteles_, p. 50, who identifies Pliny’s statue
with the Glyptothek _Oil-pourer_ (Pl. 11); it is discredited by the
occurrence of the epithet _Encrinomenos_ as a Roman proper name, _C. I.
L._, V, 1, 4429, which shows how familiar it was. See Jex-Blake, on the
passage of Pliny.
[666] _Cf._ Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 345; Helbig, _l. c._
[667] It seems to be a Hadrianic copy of an original which stood on the
Athenian Akropolis.
[668] Now in the Antiquarium, Rome: Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, no. 1030;
noted in _B. Com. Rom._, XXXVIII, 1910, p. 249, and fully discussed,
_ibid._, XXXIX, 1911, pp. 97 f. (L. Mariani), and Pls. VI, VII (three
views), and VIII (head, two views).
[669] _H. N._, XXXIV, 80: _Naucydes Mercurio et discobolo et immolante
arietem censetur_, etc.
[670] _Ueber den Diskoswurf bei den Griechen_, 1892, p. 55. However,
von Mach discusses a r.-f. deinos in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston,
which resembles the pose of the statue: _A. J. A._, VII, 1903, p. 447,
fig. 1.
[671] As in a vase by Douris: _A. Z._, 1883, Pl. II; Furtw., _Berliner
Vasen_, no. 2283 A; also on a Hellenistic gem in Berlin: Furtw.,
_Gemmen Katalog_, no. 6911. Philostr., _Imag._, I, 24, says that the
left foot was advanced.
[672] Coin of Amastris: Schlosser, _Numism. Zeitschr._ (Vienna), XXIII,
1891, p. 19, Pl. 2, no. 35; a better reproduction by Imhoof-Blumer,
in Sallet’s _Zeitschr. f. Numism._, XX, 1897, p. 269, Pl. 10, n. 2 (=
Habich, p. 58, fig. 2); another in _B. M. Coins_ (Pontus), Pl. XX, 7,
pp. 87 and 21. On this and the Thracian coin, see also Habich, Hermes
Diskobolos auf Muenzen, in _Journ. internat. d’arch, num._, II, 1898,
pp. 137 f. Habich gives a gem showing the god with a kerykeion in the
left hand, and a diskos in the right and with the right foot advanced:
p. 61, fig. 3.
[673] _E. g._, Michaelis, _Jb._, XIII, 1898, pp. 175-6. He looks upon
the statue simply as that of a diskobolos.
[674] In the National Museum, Athens, no. 13399: Staïs, _Marb. et
Bronz._, pp. 353-354 and fig.; _Arch. Eph._, 1902, Pl. 17; Svoronos,
Textbd., I, pp. 42-3; Tafelbd., I, Pl. VIII, no. 1; _J. H. S._, XXI,
1901, p. 351 (Bosanquet). This statuette is 0.25 meter in height and
the base 0.09 meter (Svoronos).
[675] Svoronos, p. 43, reproduces the coins of Amastris and
Philippopolis.
[676] Stuart Jones, _Cat. Mus. Capitol._, p. 288, no. 21 and Pl. 71;
Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, no. 858; _Guide_, 509; B. B., 387; Furtw.,
_Mp._, p. 303 and n. 7; _Mw._, p. 525 and n. 1; Clarac, II, 859, 2170;
Reinach, _Rép._, I, 525, 1; Lange, _Motiv des aufgestuetzten Fusses_,
1879, pp. 13 f. Helbig speaks of a replica in Paris, but confounds it
with the type of the so-called _Sandal-binder_ of the Louvre (Fig. 8).
The Capitoline statue is 1.845 meters in height (Stuart Jones).
[677] The motive of the “aufgestuetztes Bein” is more likely Lysippan
than Skopaic, as Furtwaengler wrongly assumed.
[678] Svoronos, Textbd., I, pp. 18 f. (with bibliography of all the
objects down to 1903, on p. 15, n. 1.); Tafelbd., I, Pls. I and II
(front and back); Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, pp. 302-304 and fig.;
Bulle, 61; von Mach, 290; _J. H. S._, XXIII, 1903, Pls. VIII (head),
IX (body, three views); H. B. Walters, _Art of the Greeks_, Pl. XVI;
Gardner, _Sculpt._, Pl. LXXVIII; for bibliographical notice and
discussion, see _A. J. A._, V, 1901, p. 465, and VII, 1903, pp. 464-5;
Springer-Michaelis, p. 297, fig. 531; the best account of the statue in
English is by Dr. A. S. Cooley, in _Record of the Past_, II, 1903, pp.
207-13 (with two illustrations). It is 1.94 meters in height, _i. e._,
slightly over life-size (Svoronos).
[679] _J. H. S._, XXI, 1901, pp. 205 f; he also briefly described all
the bronzes found in _A. A._, 1901, pp. 17-19, (4 figs.), in _Rev. des
Ét. gr._, XIV, 1901, pp. 122-6 (5 figs.), and in _C. R. Acad. Inscr._,
1901, pp. 58-63 (3 figs.) and 158-9 (3 Pls.). All the bronzes were
published after cleansing in _Arch. Eph._, 1902, pp. 145 f., with Pls.
7-17 and figs. 1-18 in the text; see also Staïs, _Les trouvailles dans
la mer de Cythère_, 1905; the last publication of all the pieces is by
Svoronos, Textbd., I, pp. 1-86; Tafelbd., I, Pls. I-XX.
[680] In his popular discussion of the bronzes in _Monthly Review_,
June, 1901, pp. 110-127 (with 5 Pls., and 5 figs.). Similar praise is
that of W. Klein, II, p. 403; he calls it _die wundervollste aller uns
erhaltenen Bronzestatuen des Altertums_.
[681] _London Illustrated News_, June 6, 1903 (with double-page plate).
[682] _Gaz. d. B.-A._, XXV, Pér. III, 1901, pp. 295-301 (with 3
figures).
[683] In a monograph entitled Ὁ Ἔφηβος τῶν Ἀντικυθήρων (pp. 1-42, and
6 figs.), Athens, 1903.
[684] It was restored by the French sculptor André, who covered it
with putty to conceal the jointures and the rivets which were used in
welding the fragments together. He also colored it to resemble bronze.
The method used in the restoration is certainly open to objection, but
not to the extent asserted by certain scholars, _e. g._, by von Mach,
who asserts that no Greek statue has received such unworthy treatment,
and that the restoration makes it possible to refer the statue to
almost any age or admixture of influences: _Greek Sculpture, Its
Spirit and Principles_, p. 326. Much of the beauty of the statue, to
be sure, is gone, but the style is not obscured. It has been restored
too full, which gives it a sensuous appearance. For the statue, before
restoration, see Svoronos, Textbd., p. 18, fig. 2; Staïs, _Marbres et
Bronzes_, fig. on p. 304.
[685] _J. H. S._, XXIII, 1903, pp. 152 f.; _cf._ _Sculpt._, pp. 244 f.;
_Hbk._, pp. 532 f. In Chap. VI of the present work we shall follow the
view which ascribes the _Herakles_ to Lysippos: _infra_, pp. 298, 311.
The Praxitelean and Lysippan influences in the bronze under discussion
are noted by Richardson, p. 276.
[686] _Ibid._, pp. 217 f.
[687] For the former, see Amelung, _Fuehrer_, 249; von Mach, 327;
Reinach, I, 452, 2. On the hem of the cloak is an Etruscan dedicatory
inscription to one Metilius by his wife, containing the name of Tenine
Tuthines as the bronze-caster: see Corssen, _Sprache d. Etrusker_, I,
pp. 712 f. (quoted by von Mach). For the latter, see Helbig, _Fuehrer_,
I, no. 5; _Guide_, 5; _Mon. d. I._, VI and VII, 1857-63, Pl. 84, 1;
_Annali_, XXXV, 1863, pp. 432 f. (Koehler); Rayet, II, Pl. 71; B. B.,
225; Bernouilli, _Roem. Ikonogr._, II, i, pp. 24 f., fig. 2; etc.
[688] Text on pp. 115 f.; Klein, _op. cit._, pp. 403 f., believes that
the enigma of its interpretation remains unsolved. He looks upon it as,
perhaps, a pre-Lysippan work, a sort of _Vorstufe_ to the _Apoxyomenos_.
[689] _Cf._ Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 534.
[690] On this gesture, see von Mach, _op. cit._, pp. 325-6.
[691] Textbd., I, figs. 13-14, pp. 26-7. For the gem, see _ibid._, fig.
3, p. 22; Reinach, _Pierres gravées_, Pl. 56, 34.
[692] _H. N._, XXXIV, 77. So Miss Bieber, _Jb._, XXV, 1910, pp. 159 f.,
following the suggestion of Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, ed. I, 1907,
pp. 254 f. (view reiterated in ed. 2, 1910, p. 304), and Loeschke.
Pliny says that the statue of Euphranor displayed every phase of Paris’
character, in the triple aspect of judge of the goddesses, lover of
Helen, and slayer of Achilles. On this statue, of which we know so
little, _cf._ the very different results reached by Furtwaengler
(_Mp._, pp. 357 f.; _Mw._, pp. 591-2) and Robert (_Hallisches
Winckelmannsprogr._, XIX, 1895, pp. 20 f.). Edw. Vicars, in the _Pall
Mall Magazine_, XIX, 1903, pp. 551 f., followed by Dr. Cooley, believes
that the bronze should be restored as Paris holding the apple of
discord in the right hand.
[693] _Suppl. de la Gaz. d. B.-A._, 1901, pp. 68 f., and 76 f.
[694] VI, 100 f.; VIII, 372 f.; in the latter connection it is an
adjunct to the dance.
[695] Athenæus, I, 44 (p. 24 b), quotes the Pergamene Karystios
(= _F. H. G._, IV, p. 359, fragm. 14) as saying that the women of
Kerkyra played ball in his time. For Rome, _cf._ Hor., _Sat._, II,
2.11; Suetonius, _Octav._, 83; Pliny, _Ep._, III, 1.8; Seneca, _de
Brev. vit._, 13; etc. On ball-playing, see Grasberger, _Erziehung und
Unterricht_, I, 1864, pp. 84 f.; L. Becq de Fouquières, _Les Jeux des
Anciens_,^2 1873, Ch. IX, pp. 176-199.
[696] Athen., I, 25 (p. 14 d, e).
[697] Athen., I, 25-26 (pp. 14 f, 15 a).
[698] In his περὶ τοῦ διὰ σμικρᾶς σφαίρας γυμνασίου. _Cf._ Sidon.
Apoll., V, 17; Martial, IV, 19; etc.
[699] Athen., I, 34 (p. 19 a).
[700] Athen., I, 26 (p. 15); _cf._, Eustath., on Od., VI, 115, p. 1553;
only the Milesians were opposed to it: _id._, on Od., VIII, 372, p.
1601.
[701] Theophr., _Char._, V, 9; Pliny, _Ep._, II, 17.12 and V, 6.27;
Suetonius, _Vit. Vespas._, 20; etc.
[702] _B. S. A._, X, 1903-4, pp. 63 f; _cf._, XII, 1905-6, p. 387.
[703] The σφαιρεῖς are mentioned in _C. I. G._, I, 4, 1386, 1432;
P., III, 14.6, mentions a statue of Herakles there, to which these
youths sacrificed. Mueller, _Die Dorier_, 4, 5, §2, classed these
competitions as a sort of football.
[704] _Rev. des Ét. gr._, XIV, 1901, pp. 445-8.
[705] Helbig, _Fuehrer_, II, no. 1299; B. B., 413; Bulle, 44;
Arndt-Amelung, _Einzelaufnahmen_, III, text to no. 1127; F. W., text
to 1630; Rayet, II, text to Pl. 70, fig. on p. 5; Kekulé, _Die griech.
Skulpt._,^2 fig. on p. 349 (the _Germanicus_ on p. 348; _cf._ Bulle,
p. 94, fig. 17); Loewy, _Griech. Plastik_, Pl. 94, fig. 176 a, p.
80. The statue is 1.83 meters high (Bulle). Head alone in Overbeck,
II, p. 446, and _cf._ 456, n. 4; Arndt-Amelung, nos. 270-271. A fine
herma-replica of the head is at Broadlands, England: Michaelis, p. 219,
no. 9; Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p. 58, fig. 13 (three views). A poorer copy
is in the Uffizi, Florence: Duetschke, III, no. 13; Arndt-Amelung,
_Einzelaufnahmen_, 83-84.
[706] Graef, _Aus der Anomia_, 1890, p. 69. Bulle finds the head
similar to that of the _Lemnian Athena_ and the body to that of
the _Farnese Anadoumenos_ of the British Museum (= Bulle, no. 49).
Furtwaengler thinks that its relation to the _Lemnia_ is not close
enough to warrant us in assigning it to Pheidias: _Mp._, p. 57; _Mw._,
pp. 86 and 742. On the basis of a Phokaian coin (Berlin example, _Mp._,
Pl. VI, 19; copy in British Museum, _B. M. Coins_, Ionia, IV, 23),
which represents a similar Hermes, he ascribes the statue to an Ionian
artist and conjectures Telephanes mentioned by Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV,
68.
[707] Helbig finds the head Myronian, but the body unconnected with any
of the well-known artistic tendencies of his day.
[708] As shown in the _Germanicus_ copy; the right arm is wrongly
restored in the Ludovisi statue. In the _Germanicus_ the arm is bowed
more at the elbow, the hand reaching the level of the temples.
[709] Froehner, pp. 213 f., no. 184 (and bibliography); F. W., 1630;
Rayet, II, Pls. 69 (statue), 70 (head); etc.
[710] _A. J. A._, XV, 1911, Pl. VI and pp. 215-16 (Caskey); _Jb._,
XXIV, 1909, Pls. I and II (from Munich cast), pp. 1 f. (Sieveking).
For the _Hermes_ of the Boboli gardens, see _ibid._, figs. 1 and 3,
pp. 2 and 4; Arndt-Amelung., _Einzelauf._, 103-105; Duetschke, II, no.
84; Furtw., _Mp._, p. 230, _Mw._, p. 424. Another replica is in the
Hermitage: Kieseritzky, _Kat._, no. 179; Sieveking, figs. 4-5, p. 5;
_Mp._, p. 290, _Mw._, 506; another in the Torlonia Museum in Rome, no.
[475] Sieveking, fig. 6, p. 5.
[711] _Gaz. d. B.-A._, 1911, p. 251.
[712] Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p. 230 and _cf._ p. 290; _Mw._, p. 424 and
_cf._ p. 506.
[713] See the _Annual Report of the Museum of Fine Arts_, 1898, p. 20.
Mahler, _Polyklet u. seine Schule_, p. 27, no. 34, wrongly thought that
it was a replica of the _Doryphoros_.
[714] Froehner, no. 183, pp. 210 f. (bibliography on pp. 212-13; later
bibliogr. in Klein, _Praxitel. Stud._, 1899, p. 4, n. 2); B. B., no.
67; von Mach, 238 b; Clarac, Pl. 309, no. 2046. Replica in Munich (with
a head of Apollo not belonging to the torso): Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschr.
d. Glypt._^2, 1910, 287 (with list of replicas); von Mach, 238a;
Clarac, V, 814, 2048; Reinach, _Rép._, I, 487, 7; Klein, pp. 4 f.; one
in London, in Lansdowne House: Michaelis, pp. 464f., no. 85 and Pl.
opp. p. 464; Clarac, V, 814, 2048 A; Reinach, _Rép._, I, 487, 6; one
in the Vatican: Reinach, _Rép._, I, 487, 5; head and torso in Athens:
_ibid._, II, i, 153, 10; _A. M._, XI, 1886, Pl. IX (middle), pp. 362 f.
(Studniczka); head in Copenhagen, formerly in the Borghese Coll., Rome:
P. Arndt, _Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg_, 1912, Pls. 128, 129, and text pp. 177
f., (fig. 95 = bronze restoration for the municipal Museum in Stettin,
combining the Lansdowne body and the Fagan head in the British Museum;
for the Fagan head see _B. M. Sculpt._, III, 1785).
[715] See von Mach, 170; R. Kekulé, _Die Reliefs an der Balustrade der
Athena Nike_, with Pls. 1-6.
[716] From the _Ekphrasis_ of Christodoros, _A. G._, II, _vv._ 297-302.
It was first shown to be a statue of Hermes by Lambeck, _de Mercurii
statua_, Thorn, 1860.
[717] Pick, _Die antiken Muenzen Nordgriechenlands_, I, Pl. XVI, 25;
_cf._ Froehner, p. 211.
[718] Duetschke, IV, no. 151; _J. H. S._, XXVI, 1906, Pl. XVI, pp. 239
f. (Wace).
[719] _E. g._, _B. M. Bronzes_, nos. 1200, 1202, 1207; for a herm in
the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican, after a fourth-century B. C. type,
see Amelung, _Vat._, I, p. 84, no. 65 and Pl. X.
[720] _B. M. Sculpt._, III, no. 1600 and Pi. III; _Jb._, I, 1886, p.
54, and Pl. 5, and fig. 1 (Wolters); Kalkmann, Proport. d. Gesichts,
pp. 41 and 98; Furtw., _Mp._, Pl. XVIII. opp. p. 346; for a full
discussion of this head, see the note by translator in _Mp._, pp.
346-7. The head is 11-1/2 inches high (_B. M. Sculpt._).
[721] Nissen, _Pompej. Stud._, p. 166.
[722] _H. N._, XXXIV, 18.
[723] _E. g._, one in Paris, in the Cab. des Médailles, no. 3350;
Clarac, 666 D, 1512 F.
[724] _E. g._, E. von Sacken, _Die ant. Bronzen des k. k. Muenz-und
Antiken-Cabinetes in Wien_, 1871, Pl. 10, 4; a bronze _Mercury_ in
Paris, in the Cab. des Méd., Coll. Oppermann (0.20 m. tall): Furtw.,
_Mp._, p. 233, fig. 94, and _Mw._, p. 428, fig. 64; bronze statuette
of Mercury in the British Museum with chlamys over the left shoulder:
_Mp._, p. 232, fig. 93; _Mw._, p. 427, fig. 63.
[725] _Mp._, p. 231, n. 3.
[726] _B. M. Bronzes_, no. 1217.
[727] _Mp._, pp. 288 f.; _Mw._, pp. 502 f.
[728] _Inschr. v. Ol._, no. 165 (renewed); base pictured, _Mp._, p.
288, fig. 123; _Mw._, p. 503; fig. 90. Furtwaengler had ascribed the
statue of Aristion to the younger Polykleitos; this was disproved by
the date of Aristion’s victory, Ol. 82 (= 452 B. C.), given by the
_Oxy. Pap._
[729] Michaelis, p. 446, no. 35; Clarac, V, 946, 2436 A; Furtw., _Mp._,
p. 289, fig. 124; _Mw._, p. 504, fig. 91.
[730] XXIII, 660; _cf._ Od., XIX, 86: “By Apollo’s grace he hath so
goodly a son”—meaning that Apollo gave increase of physical strength to
men, just as Artemis did to women. _Cf._ Hesiod, _Theog._, 346-7.
[731] V, 7.10.
[732] _Quaest. conviv._, VIII, 4 (= p. 724 C, D.); here he also
mentions a Gymnasion of Apollo at Athens.
[733] Told by many writers: _e. g._, Apollod., II, 6.2.
[734] P., X, 13.7, describes a group at Delphi representing Apollo and
Hermes grasping the tripod before the fight; in VIII, 37.1 he mentions
the same subject on a marble relief at Lykosoura, and in III, 21.8
says that Gythion was founded by the two after the contest, and that
their images stood in the agora there. The subject was represented in
the gable of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi: Frazer, V, p. 274 (in
connection with P., X, 11.2). Stephani enumerated 89 existing works of
art which represent this subject, of which 58 appear on black-figured,
18 on red-figured vases, 8 on marble reliefs, 3 on terra-cottas, and 2
on gems: _Comptes rendus de la comm. impér. archéol._, St. Petersburg,
1868, pp. 31 f.; Overbeck has added to the list: _Griech. Mythol._,
III, Apollon, 1889, pp. 391-415.
[735] The _Choiseul-Gouffier_ statue: _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 209;
_Marbles and Bronzes_, Pl. III; _Specimens_, II, Pl. V; _Museum
Marbles_, XI, Pl. 32; F. W., no. 221; _J. H. S._, I, 1881, Pl. IV, and
pp. 178 f., and _cf._, II, 1882, pp. 332 f. (Waldstein); von Mach,
Pl. 67; Collignon, I, p. 403, fig. 208; Clarac, III, 482, 931 H, and
p. 213: Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 85, 10; Conze, _Beitr. zur Gesch. d.
gr. Pl._^2, 1869, Pl. VI; Springer-Michaelis, p. 234, fig. 429. The
height of the statue is 5 feet, 10.5 inches (_B. M. Sculpt._). The
_Apollo-on-the-Omphalos_: Kabbadias, 45; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_,
pp. 23-24 and fig.; _J. H. S._, I, Pl. V, fig. 3; Collignon, I, p. 405,
fig. 209; B. B., 42; von Mach, 66; F. W., 219; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1,
85, 7; Conze, _op. cit._, Pls. III-V, and text, pp. 13 f.; Murray, I,
Pl. VIII, opp. p. 234 (both statues); torso in Munich, Arndt-Amelung,
_Einzelauf._, nos. 849-50; for list of other copies, see _A. M._, IX,
1884, pp. 239-40.
[736] _Cf._ _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 209 (A. H. Smith).
[737] See Waldstein, p. 180; F. W., no. 219; _A. M._, IX, 1884, p. 248.
[738] Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 85, 9; M. D., I, p. 47, no. 179; _cf._ F.
W., 219. Overbeck, _Griech. Kunstmythol._, III. _Apollon_, p. 162, fig.
9.
[739] _A. M._, I, 1876, Pl. X, and pp. 178 f. (Kekulé); Bulle, 105
(Left) and p. 208, fig. 47.
[740] Published in _J. H. S._, XXVI, 1906, pp. 278-80 (Dickins); here,
on p. 279, we have the fragment photographed with the lower parts
of the _Choiseul-Gouffier_ and _Omphalos_ copies on either side;
Dickins says that with the possible exception of the Athens statue
this fragment shows the best workmanship of all the copies. Helbig,
_Fuehrer_, no. 1268.
[741] _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 211; it shows the _krobylos_ best.
[742] _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 210.
[743] Braun, _Vorschule d. Kunstmythol._, Pl. V, (quoted by A. H.
Smith).
[744] _Mon. d. I._, X, 1874-78, Pl. 54; discussed in _Annali_, L, 1878,
pp. 61 f. (Brizio).
[745] _Cf._ Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, no. 859; Beulé, _Monnaies d’Athênes_,
p. 271, quoted in _Jb._, II, 1887, p. 235, n. 54.
[746] _Jb._, II, pp. 234 f.; on p. 234, the Athens statue and the
figure from the Bologna krater are shown side by side.
[747] _Fuehrer_, under no. 859 (the Capitoline replica), and especially
under no. 1268.
[748] _Beitraege zur Gesch. d. gr. Pl._^2, p. 19.
[749] Roscher, _Lex._, I, p. 456.
[750] _A. M._, IX, 1884, p. 244.
[751] Mentioned by P., I, 3.4; this view has been upheld by Conze,
_l.c._; Murray, I, p. 235; _cf._ Furtw., _l. c._, and on the artist,
see his article in _Sitzb. Muen. Akad._, 1907, pp. 160 f.
[752] _S. Q._, nos. 508-526.
[753] Furtw., _l. c._; the coin in the British Museum is pictured in
_J. H. S._, XXIV, 1904, p. 205, fig. 2. Conze’s theory of identifying
the type with the _Alexikakos_ has been questioned among others also by
Overbeck: I, n. 226, to pp. 280 (on p. 301).
[754] Dionys. Halic., _de Isocrate Judicium_, III, p. 542 (ed. Reiske);
_S. Q._, 531.
[755] _Op. cit._, especially p. 182.
[756] P., VI, 6.6. He won in the early fifth century, in Ols. 74, 76,
77 (= 484, 476, 472 B. C.): _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195,
207.
[757] F. W., nos. 219 and 221. Clarac, Text, Vol. III, p. 213, leaves
it in doubt whether it be Apollo or an athlete; however, he calls the
Capitoline copy an athlete.
[758] Published by Miss K. A. McDowall, _J. H. S._, XXIV, 1904, pp.
203-7 and fig. 1.
[759] The untrustworthy character of the Torlonia copy has been shown
by Overbeck, _Kunstmythologie_, III, _Apollon_, pp. 109 and 162.
The Roman copy in the Capitoline is also inferior, and the legs are
wrongly restored—for at that period in art there was little difference
between the free and the rest leg; see Helbig, _Fuehrer_, no. 859;
Stuart Jones, _Cat. Mus. Capit._, p. 287, no. 20 and Pl. 69; Conze,
_Beitraege zur Gesch. d. gr. Pl._^2, Pl. VII; Clarac, 862, 2189; head
in Arndt-Amelung, _Einzelaufnahmen_, Serie II, 452-4, p. 35.
[760] Waldstein ascribed the original to Pythagoras, partly because
this artist was famed for the detail of veins, sinews, and hair: see
Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 59.
[761] _Bildw. v. Ol._, Textbd., pp. 223 f.; Tafelbd., Pl. LVII, 3-5.
The original height was 2.60 meters.
[762] _Strena Helbigiana_, 1900, p. 293; discussed also by Miss
McDowall (_l. c._ and fig. 3, p. 206); a poor replica is in Munich:
Furtw., _Mw._, p. 115, and fig. 21.
[763] _B. M. Coins, Troas_, etc., Pl. XXXII, 1; McDowall, _l. c._, fig.
4, p. 207.
[764] Bulle, 50, who gives the height 1.86 meters; von Mach, 115;
Reinach, _Rép._, II, 2, 547, 9; other references _infra_, on p. 152, n.
5.
[765] _Jh. oest. arch. Inst._, VIII, 1905, pp. 42 f.; IX, 1906, pp. 279
f.; _cf._, Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkm._, pp. 105-6, n. 1 (Engl. ed., p.
120).
[766] _Jh. oest. arch. Inst._, XII, 1909, pp. 100 f. He thinks that the
original may have been identical with the statue of Ἀπόλλων ἀναδούμενος
standing before the temple of Ares at Athens, P., I, 8.4, and that the
παῖς ἀναδούμενος of Pheidias at Olympia, P. VI, 4.5, also may have
been an Apollo. He also interprets the figure of a charioteer entering
a chariot on an Attic relief (Fig. 63), to be discussed later, as an
Apollo: _Jb._, VII, 1892, pp. 54 f. For the relief, see B. B., 21; von
Mach, 56; F. W., no. 97; _infra_, pp. 269 f.
[767] _Cf._, Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 18 (_Achilleae_). On these
“Achillean” statues (a generic name for statues of athletes leaning
on their spears, from Achilles, the typical hero of ephebes), see
Furtwaengler, _Jahrbuecher f. cl. Philol._, Supplbd., IX, 1877, p. 47,
n. 11.
[768] _Jh. oest. arch. Inst._, VIII, 1905, pp. 269 f. Miss McDowall,
in the article already cited, p. 204, has also argued that there is no
necessary connection between the quiver slung over the tree-support and
Apollo.
[769] _Inschr. v. Ol._, 162-3; Loewy, _op. cit._, X, 1907, pp. 326
f. Studniczka, _ibid._, IX, 1906, pp. 311 f., discusses the base and
believes that the pose of the statue of Pythokles was the same as that
of the _Borghese Ares_ of the Louvre (von Mach, 125; F. W., 1298;
Reinach, _Rép._ I, 133, 1-3; etc.), the weight on the left foot, _i.
e._, essentially different from the Polykleitan pose.
[770] _R. M._, XXVII, 1912, p. 37.
[771] Duetschke, IV, no. 52 (= wrongly female); _J. H. S._, XXVI, 1906,
Pl. XV (three views), and pp. 235 f. (Wace).
[772] _Mp._, p. 247; _Mw._, pp. 448-449; he assigns it to the third
quarter of the fifth century B. C.
[773] Amelung, _Rev. arch._, II, 1904, p. 344.1; Wace, _l. c._, p. 237.
[774] Both Schreiber, _A. M._, VIII, 1883, pp. 246 f., and Studniczka,
_Jb._, XI, 1896, pp. 255 f., have shown that the hair arranged in the
double plait, whether the κρωβύλος or not, is Attic, and that similarly
the mass of locks over the ears is common in Attic works.
[775] P., V, 7.9. In V, 7.7, the Idæan Herakles is said to have first
crowned his brother as victor there; _cf._ V, 8.3-4. We have already
(p. 10) spoken of the difference of opinion as to whether it was the
Cretan (Idæan) Herakles, or the more famous son of Zeus and Alkmena,
who founded the games. On the traditional connection of the hero with
Olympia, see E. Curtius, _Sitzb. d. k. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu
Berlin_, 1894, pp. 1098 f.; Busolt, _Gr. Gesch._,^2 I, pp. 240 f.;
Krause, _Olympia_, pp. 26 f.
[776] With the river-god Acheloos, III, 18.16 (the contest pictured
in relief on the throne of Apollo at Amyklai; _cf._ the same scene
represented by the cedar-wood figures inlaid with gold on the treasury
of the Megarians at Olympia, VI, 19, 12); with Antaios, IX, 11.6
(pictured in the sculptures of the gable of the Herakleion at Thebes);
with Eryx, III, 16.4 and IV, 36.4.
[777] P., V, 8.4.
[778] P., V, 21.9; he won in Ol. 178 (= 68 B. C.): Foerster, 570-1.
[779] V, 21.10.
[780] These victors were Kapros of Elis, who won in Ol. 124 (= 212 B.
C.): Hyde, 150; Foerster, 474, 475; he had two statues, the remains of
which may have been recovered: see _Bronzen v. Ol._, Tafelbd., Pls. II,
III; Aristomenes of Rhodes, who won in Ol. 156 (= 156 B. C.): Foerster,
505-6; Protophanes of Magnesia ad Maiandrum (ad Lethaeum in P., _l.
c._), who won in Ol. 172 (= 92 B. C.): Foerster, 538-9; Marion of
Alexandria, who won in Ol. 182 (= 52 B. C.): Foerster, 579-80; Aristeas
of Stratonikeia, who won in Ol. 198 (= 13 A. D.): Foerster, 609-10;
Nikostratos of Aigeai in Kilikia, who won in Ol. 204 (= 37 A. D.):
Foerster, 621-2.
[781] Two men entered later, but were disqualified: Sokrates, who won
in wrestling (?) in Ol. 232 (= 149 A. D.): Foerster, 704; and Aurelios
Ailix, or Helix, of Phœnicia, who won the pankration in Ol. 250 (=
221 A. D.): Foerster, 734. See Dio Cassius, LXXIX, 10; Philostr.,
_Heroicus_, III, 13 (p. 147, ed. Kayser); _cf._ Ph., 46 and note by
Juethner, _ad loc._ Ailix won in both events on the same day at the
Capitoline games in Rome, which no one had done before: Foerster, _l.
c._ Frazer, III, p. 625.
[782] Such victors were numbered in two ways; some authorities in the
way mentioned above, _e. g._, Dio Cassius, _l. c._; others numbered
them δεύτερος, τρίτος, κ. τ. λ., _e. g._, Africanus; _cf._ Rutgers, pp.
73 f. and n. 1, and p. 97 and n. 2.
[783] See F. Kindscher, Die herakleischen Doppelsieger zu Olympia,
_Jahn’s Archiv f. Phil. u. Paedag._, II, 1845, pp. 392-411.
[784] P., IV, 32.1 (statues of the three in the Gymnasion at Messene).
He mentions, IX, 11.7, a Gymnasion and Stadion of the hero near the
Herakleion in Thebes.
[785] _B. C. H._, XXIII, 1899, pp. 455-6.
[786] On the difficulty of distinguishing statues of victors from those
of Herakles, see also Arndt, _La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg_, Text, p. 138, to
Pl. 94.
[787] P., VI, 2.1.
[788] Ch. VI, pp. 293 f., especially pp. 298-299.
[789] _La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg_, Pl. 117 (three views). It was formerly
in the Tyszkiewicz collection.
[790] See Arndt, _l. c._ Furtwaengler believed the head Praxitelean:
see Roscher, _Lex._, I, 2, p. 2166 ll. 61 f. S. Reinach saw in it a
_mélange_ of Skopaic and Praxitelean elements: _Gaz. d. B.-A._, 3,
Pér., XVI, 1896, II, p. 332 and fig. on p. 328; _Têtes_, Pl. 176, p.
139; he is followed by Arndt.
[791] _Antichita di Ercolano, Bronzi_, I, Pls. 49 and 50; D. Comparetti
e G. de Petra, _La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni_, 1883, Pl. VII, 3, p.
261, 4; Rayet, II, Pl. 66; B. B., no. 364; F. W., 1302. Similarly, the
bronze head of a youth in Naples, with a rolled fillet, may be from the
statue of a victor or of the hero: Invent., 5594; B. B., 365.
[792] For the Naples replica, see Comparetti e de Petra, _Villa
Ercolan._, Pl. XXI, 3; Furtw., _Mp._ p. 234, fig. 95; _Mw._, p. 430,
fig. 65; poorer copy in the Museo Chiaramonti of the Vatican (no.
139): Helbig, _Guide_, 69; B. B., 338; another in Broadlands, England:
Michaelis, p. 220, no. 10; _Mp._, p. 235, fig. 96; _Mw._, p. 431, fig.
66. Graef had already conjectured the type to be that of a Polykleitan
_Herakles: R. M._, IV, 1889, p. 215. He is followed by Furtwaengler,
_Mp._, p. 23.
[793] Amelung., _Vat._, I, p. 738, no. 636 and Pl. 79; Helbig,
_Fuehrer_, I, no. 108; _Guide_, 113; B. B., no. 609; Furtw., _Mp._,
p. 341, fig. 146 (head, on p. 342, fig. 147); _Mw._, p. 575, fig. 109
(head, on p. 577, fig. 110). The group is 2.12 meters high (Amelung.).
[794] Helbig, _Guide_, no. 242.
[795] Helbig, _ibid._, no. 470; _R. M._, IV, 1889, p. 197, no. 12
(Skopaic).
[796] It was found in Genzano: _B. M. Sculpt._, III, no. 1731 and Pl.
V, fig. 2; height, 1 foot, 4-7/8 inches; for references, see _infra_,
p. 169, n. 8.
[797] _B. M. Sculpt._, III, no. 1732; _Specimens_, I, Pl. 57; _Museum
Marbles_, III, Pl. 12. A similar head, half portrait and half ideal,
appears on coins of Macedonia. Such filleted heads as nos. 1733 and
1740 of _B. M. Sculpt._ are probably from statues of Herakles. The
statuette of a seated Herakles, _ibid._, no. 1726, with the lion-skin
and wearing a laurel wreath tied on with a fillet (= Reinach, _Rép._,
II, 1, p. 227, no. 3; _J. H. S._, III, 1882, Pl. XXV.) and inscribed
as the work of Diogenes (_I. G. B._, 361), recalls the description of
the pose of the _Hermes Epitrapezios_ made by Lysippos for Alexander:
Statius, _Silv._, IV, 6; _cf._ Martial, IX, 44.
[798] _B. M. Bronz._, nos. 1254, 1276, 1292, etc.
[799] _B. M. Bronz._, Pl. II (upper right-hand); text, no. 212.
[800] Friedrichs, _Kleinere Kunst_, 1850; mentioned by Furtw., _Mw._,
p. 525, n. 2.
[801] III, nos. 9 and 19; no. 19 has swollen ears.
[802] See Furtw., _Mp._, pp. 234 and 236; _Mw._, pp. 429 and 433. He
gives as an example the Polykleitan ephebe head-type discussed _supra_,
p. 95.
[803] P., V, 8.4.
[804] P., V, 15.5.
[805] P., III, 14.7 (ἀφετήριοι).
[806] P., II, 34.10.
[807] Iliad, III, 237 (= Od., XI, 300); Homeric Hymn to the Dioskouroi,
XXXIII, 3; Pindar, _Isthm._, I, 16 f.; _Pyth._, V. 9; etc. Kastor was
famed also for throwing the quoit: Pindar, _Isthm._, I, 25.
[808] Iliad and Od., _ll. cc._; Simonides, frag. 8 (_P. l. G._, III, p.
390); Apoll. Rhod., _Argon._, II, 1 f.
[809] Apoll. Rhod., _op. cit._, I, 146; Theokr., XXII, 2-3 and 34;
Pindar, _Pyth._, XI, 61-2; _Nem._, X, 49-50; _Isthm._, V, 32-3; etc.;
various Roman poets: see Bethe, in Pauly-Wissowa, V, I, pp. 1092-4.
[810] _R. M._, XV, 1900, 1 f. (with illustrations).
[811] _I. G. A._, 37.
[812] _B. M. Bronz._, no. 3207; _C. I. G. G. S._, III, 1, 649; _Rev.
arch._, Sér. 3, XVIII, 1891, Pl. 18, and pp. 45 f. (Froehner);
_Wochenschr. f. kl. Phil._, VIII, 1891, p. 859; Gardiner, p. 317, fig.
73. Froehner reads the name “Exotra,” that of a woman victor.
[813] _I. G. A._, 43 a (p. 173).
[814] Duetschke, IV, no. 534. Another relief fragment in the Uffizi
shows the upper part of the two with horses, each wearing the chlamys
and pilleus and carrying spears: Duetschke, III, 446.
[815] _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 780; _Museum Marbles_, II, Pl. 11;
_cf._ a similar relief, no. 781. The relief _ibid._, III, no. 2206,
supposedly representing Kastor, has been pronounced a modern forgery by
Treu: see F. W., 1006.
[816] Ch. I, pp. 27 f. and 37 f.
[817] This is the usual division of victor monuments: Scherer, pp. 21
f.; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 530; Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkmaeler griech.
und roem. Skulptur_, Handausgabe^3, 1911, pp. 104 f. (translation by
H. Taylor, 1914, pp. 120 f.) Reisch, p. 40, divides _Siegerbilder
in Motiven von allgemeiner Geltung und Bilder in Motiven, die der
speciellen Veranlassung der Weihung entlehnt sind_—a division
practically amounting to that of rest and motion statues, as we shall
see.
[818] Discussed _infra_ in Ch. VII, pp. 334 f.
[819] VIII, 40.1.
[820] See _infra_, Ch. VII, pp. 327-8.
[821] We know of one case, at least, where an “Apollo” (draped) was
transferred to a relief—on a column drum of the old Artemision in
Ephesos, now in the British Museum: _J. H. S._, X, 1889, Pl. III, pp. 4
f., and figs. 4a, 5 (Murray); Overbeck, I, p. 106, fig. 9; Richardson,
p. 53, fig. 16. According to Herodotos, I, 92, most of these columns
were the gifts of Crœsus, who reigned 560-546 B. C. On the whole series
of “Apollos,” see W. Deonna, _Les Apollons archaïques_, 1909; _cf._
F. W., text to no. 14, pp. 9 f; _B. M. Sculpt._, I, pp. 82-3, with
references; etc.
[822] See Richardson, pp. 39 f.
[823] Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, pp. 11-12 and fig.; _B. C. H._, X,
1886, Pl. V (two views) and pp. 98 f. (Holleaux); Collignon, I, p. 117,
fig. 58; Deonna, _op. cit._, p. 161, no. 35; Richardson, p. 44, fig.
12. It is in the National Museum at Athens, where most of the “Apollos”
are to be found. The sanctuary of Apollo Ptoios on Mount Ptoion,
Bœotia, is mentioned by P., IX, 23.6, Hdt., VIII, 135, and other
writers.
[824] In Athens: Kabbadias, no. 8; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 10;
Deonna, p. 227, no. 129; _A. M._, III, 1878, Pl. VIII; Collignon, I, p.
132, fig. 66; Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 131, fig. 16; Richardson, p. 39, fig.
5; B. B., no. 77C; von Mach, 12; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 76, 10; F. W.,
14; Springer-Michaelis, p. 172, fig. 336; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 319,
fig. 133.
[825] Kabbadias, no. 9; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, pp. 9-10 (1.27
m. high); _Annali_, XXXIII, 1861, pp. 79 f. and Pl. E; Deonna, _op.
cit._, p. 148, no. 26; _B. C. H._, V, 1881, Pl. IV, and pp. 319 f.;
Collignon, I, p. 114, fig. 56; Overbeck, I, fig. 14; Gardner, _Hbk._,
p. 166, fig. 29; Richardson, p. 40, fig. 8; B. B., 77A; von Mach, 11 b;
Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 509, fig. 260; F. W., 43; Reinach, _Rép._, II,
1, 76, 11.
[826] Kabbadias, no. 10; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 8 (1.30 meters
high); Deonna, p. 153, no. 28; _B. C. H._, X, 1886, Pl. IV, and p.
66 (Holleaux); Collignon, I, p. 196, fig. 92; von Mach, 15a (left);
Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 168, fig. 30; B. B., 12 (left); Reinach, _Rép._,
II, 1, 76, 7. In another found at Mount Ptoion in 1903, the left arm is
almost entirely broken away: _B. C. H._, XXXI, 1907, Pl. XX.
[827] Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 10, no. 1558; Deonna, p. 217,
no. 114, _B. C. H._, XVI, 1892, Pl. XVI (two views) and pp. 560 f.
(Holleaux); von Mach, no. 13; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 321, fig. 134;
Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 132, fig. 17; Richardson, p. 39, fig. 6; Reinach,
_Rép._, II, 1, 76, 1.
[828] Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschreib. d. Glypt._,^2 pp. 49 f., no.
47; Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 158, fig. 26; Gardiner, p. 87, fig. 7;
Richardson, p. 40, fig. 7; B. B., no. I; Bulle, 37 (right); von Mach,
14; Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkm._, Pl. I, pp. 3 f; _Mon. d. I._, IV,
1847, Pl. XLIV; Baum., I, fig. 340; Collignon, I, p. 202, fig. 96;
Springer-Michaelis, p. 174, fig. 338; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 401,
figs. 187, 188; F. W., 49; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 76, 2. It is 1.53
meters high (Bulle).
[829] Left: torso found in 1885: _B. C. H._, XI, 1887, Pl. VIII, and
pp. 185 f. (Holleaux); Collignon, I, p. 198, fig. 49; Richardson, p.
41, fig. 9 (without the head); head found in 1903: _B. C. H._, XXXI,
1907, Pls. XVII-XVIII; entire figure, _ibid._, Pl. XIX; text, pp. 187
f. (Mendel); Kabbadias, 12; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 9 and fig.;
Deonna, p. 156, no. 30. Right: Staïs, pp. 12-13, no. 20; Deonna, no.
35; Collignon, I, p. 315 and fig. 157 (two views); _B. C. H._, XI,
1887, Pls. XIII and XIV, and pp. 275 f., and X, 1886, fig. VI (without
head) and pp. 269 f.; von Mach, 15b (right); Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 169,
fig. 31; Richardson, p. 42, fig. 10 (two views); Reinach, _Rép._, II,
1, 77, 4 (without head); _cf._ II, 1, 18, 4 and 5.
[830] See Holleaux, _B. C. H._, XI, p. 186, n. 1. Richardson, p. 41,
wrongly thought that they were of marble, explaining the preservation
of the arms by their presence; the arms, however, were formerly broken
off and have since been readjusted to the statue.
[831] _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 206; _Mon. d. I._, IX, 1869-73, Pl. XLI;
_Annali_, XLIV, 1872, pp. 181 f.; B. B., 51; von Mach, 16; Overbeck, I,
p. 237, fig. 61; F. W., 89; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 81, 6. It is 3 feet
4 inches in height.
[832] See Holleaux, _B. C. H._, X, 1886, p. 271; XI, p. 186; and _cf._
Vischer, _Kleine Schriften_, II. pp. 302 f.
[833] B. B., no. 76.
[834] See Holleaux, in _B. C. H._, XI, 1887, p. 178.
[835] From the inscription on its thigh.
[836] In the Athens Museum; it dates from the middle of the sixth
century B. C.: Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 11, no. 1906 and fig.
(1.78 m. high); Deonna, p. 133, no. 5; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, figs.
189-190; Kabbadias, _Arch. Eph._, 1902, pp. 43 f. and Pls. 3 and 4;
Bulle, no. 37 (left), who gives its height as 1.79 meters.
[837] See Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkm._, text to Pl. I, p. 4.
[838] Furtw.-Urlichs, _Denkm._, p. 4, ascribe it to the Cretan
sculptors Skyllis and Dipoinos, who worked in Argos, Sikyon, and
Corinth, or to their school.
[839] Statue A: _Fouilles de Delphes_, IV, Pl. I; _B. C. H._,
XXIV, 1900, Pls. XIX-XXI (front, side, and rear) and pp. 445 f.
(Homolle); Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 155, fig. 25; Gardiner, p. 89, fig. 8;
Springer-Michaelis, p. 174, fig. 337; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pls. IX, X.
Statue B (fragmentary): _Fouilles de Delphes_, IV, p. 7, fig. 7; _B.
C. H._, XXIV, 1900, Pl. XVIII. See also the following: _Gaz. B.-A._,
III Pér., XII, 1894, pp. 444-6; XIII, pp. 32 f.; _C. R. Acad. Inscr._,
1894, p. 585; especially Homolle, _l. c._, pp. 445 f. (he exchanges B
for A); _cf._ _A. J. A._, 1895, p. 115; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 2, 77, 6
and 7.
[840] VI, 10.5; the epigram reads:
Εὐτελίδας καὶ Χρυσόθεμις τάδε ἔργα τέλεσσαν
Ἀργεῖοι, τέχναν εἰδότες ἐκ προτέρων.
Damaretos of Heraia won two victories in the heavy-armed race in Ols.
65, 66 (= 520, 516 B. C.); Theopompos two in the pentathlon in Ols. (?)
69, 70 (= 504, 500 B. C.). Their monument was one in common: Hyde, nos.
94, 95 and pp. 42 f.; Foerster, 135, 140 and 168, 169.
[841] P., VI, 15.8; he won in the boys’ wrestling match and in the
pentathlon in Ol. 38 (= 628 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 148; Foerster, 61, 62.
[842] Hoplite victor in Ol. 68 (= 508 B. C.): Foerster, 151.
[843] Victor in three running races on the same day (τριαστής) in Ol.
67 (= 512 B. C.): Afr.; Foerster, 144-6.
[844] They won in boxing in Ol. 59 (= 544 B. C.) and the pankration in
Ol. 61 (= 536 B. C.) respectively: P., VI, 18.7; Hyde, 187, 188, and p.
56; Foerster, 113 and 120. Pausanias, _l. c._, wrongly says that they
were the oldest statues at Olympia.
[845] He won the double foot-race in Ol. 35 (= 640 B. C.): Afr.; P., I,
28.1; Foerster, 55.
[846] He won five victories in wrestling at the beginning of the sixth
century B. C.: P., III, 13.9; Foerster, 86-90. The statue of Oibotas
of Dyme, who won the stade-race in Ol. 6 (= 756 B. C.), was set up in
Ol. 80 (= 460 B. C.): Afr.; P., VI, 3.8; Hyde, 29; Foerster, 6; that of
Chionis of Sparta, who won seven running races in Ols. 28-31 (= 668-656
B. C.), was made by Myron, and consequently was erected in the fifth
century B. C.: P., VI, 13.2; Afr.; Hyde, 111, and p. 48; Foerster,
39, 41-6: these two, therefore, did not necessarily conform with the
“Apollo” type.
[847] VI, 14.5 f; he won in Ol. (?) 61, and in Ols. 62, 63, 64, 65, 66
(= 536-516 B. C.): Hyde, 128; Foerster, 116, 122, 126, 131, 136, and
141; Afr. gives the second victory as Ol. 62; see Foerster, 122.
[848] _Vit. Apoll. Tyan._, IV, 28.
[849] VI, 14.6-7.
[850] Frazer, IV, p. 44, believes that this description may be
imaginary, concocted from stories of Milo’s feats of strength; but
Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 601, cite Guttman, _de olympionicis apud
Philostratum_, p. 7, Matz, _de Philostr. in describ. imag. Fide_, p.
33, and Gurlitt, _Ueber Pausanias_, 1890, p. 413, as believing that it
was based on the appearance of the statue. Scherer, pp. 23 f., thought
that Philostratos followed Pausanias in interpreting the attributes of
the statue, and that the latter got his idea of the strength of the
victor from the statue or from a cicerone. Pliny, _H. N._, VII, 19,
says of Milo: _Malum tenenti nemo digitum corrigebat_. Aelian mentions
Milo’s feat with the pomegranate in _Var. Hist._, II, 24 and _de Nat.
anim._, VI, 55.
[851] _Cf._ Philostr., _l. c._, ll. 27, 28: καὶ τὸ μήπω διεστὼς τῇ
ἀρχαίᾳ ἀγαλματοποιίᾳ προσκείσθω.
[852] _Op. cit._, p. 31.
[853] _Cf._ P., VIII, 46.3.
[854] Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 75.
[855] For the type, see the Payne Knight bronze statuette in the
British Museum: _B. M. Bronz._, no. 209 and Pl. I; Frazer, IV, p. 430,
fig. 45; the same type appears on Milesian coins. _Cf._ Brunn, I, 77.
Frazer is against Scherer’s contention.
[856] II, 2, pp. 601-2. See P., VI, 9.1 (statue of Theognetos).
[857] _H. N._, XXXIV, 59.
[858] _Anachar._, 9; _cf._ _A. G._, IX, 357.
[859] No. 38; _cf._ for the left-hand figure, p. 83, fig. 11 (side
view).
[860] _B. C. H._, XVIII, 1894, pp. 44 f., Pls. V, VI (de Ridder);
Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 547, fig. 332; A. de Ridder, no. 740, pp.
268-9, and Pls. III, IV. It is similar in pose to bronzes in the same
museum, nos. 736 (= de Ridder, Pl. II, 1), 737 (= Pl. II, 3), and 738
(= Pl. II, 2). It is 0.27 meter high (Bulle).
[861] It will be considered later on in this chapter: p. 119 and n. 3.
It is 0.185 meter high (Bulle).
[862] This statuette, showing Peloponnesian tendencies, is in the
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; it is 0.25 meter high (Bulle).
[863] In the same way the pediment statues from Aegina differ from
Attic works by straighter lines and more compact forms.
[864] He won a chariot victory some time between Ols. (?) 98 and 101
(= 388 and 376 B. C.): P., VI, 2.8; Hyde, 17 (= 105 d; P., VI, 1.26);
Foerster, 310.
[865] He won in chariot-racing some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 130
(= 320 and 260 B. C.): P., VI, 13.11; Hyde, 122; Foerster, 513. The
date is from the lettering on the recovered base: _Inschr. v. Ol._,
177; _cf._ Hyde, p. 51. On such statues, _cf._ Reisch, p. 41.
[866] The spelling Ηαγελαιδας occurs on two blocks, d, e, from the
Praxiteles bathron at Olympia: _Inschr. v. Ol._, 631 = _I. G. B._,
30; for the whole Praxiteles bathron see _Inschr. v. Ol._, 266.
Dittenberger and Purgold keep the reading Hagelaïdas. Possibly the
spelling Ἁγελαίδα stands for ὁ Ἀγελαίδα; the MSS. of Pliny read
Hagelades; see _I. G. B._, p. xviii, Add. to no. 30; Gardner, _Hbk._,
p. 217, n. 1. On the sculptor, see Lechat, p. 380 and n. 4, and pp. 454
f.; Collignon, I, pp. 316 f.; Joubin, pp. 14 f., 83 f., 92 f., etc.;
Brunn, pp. 63 f.; Gardner, _Hbk._, pp. 216 f.; and especially Pfuhl, in
Pauly-Wissowa, VII, pp. 2189 f.
[867] For Myron, see Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 57. Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p.
196, _Mw._, 379-80, thinks that the connection is not literally true,
even if considerations of chronology are not against it, and derives
the story of Hagelaïdas teaching Myron from the similarity between
the work of the two. For Polykleitos, see Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 55.
The tradition that Hagelaïdas was the master of Polykleitos has been
unreasonably assailed by many scholars: _e. g._, by Robert, _Arch.
Maerchen_, 1886, p. 97; Mahler, _Polyklet u. s. Sch._, 3912, pp. 6 f.;
Klein, I, p. 340; _cf._ II, p. 143; _cf._ Springer-Michaelis, I, p.
210. Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p. 196, _Mw._, p. 380, believes it impossible
because of chronological difficulties, and assumes a sculptor of an
intermediate generation as the teacher of Polykleitos; he, followed
by Mahler, _l. c._, and Klein, I, 340, names Argeiadas (mentioned in
_I. G. B._, no. 30) as this intermediate artist. However, he admits
that the statement is true in a general sense, since Polykleitos
developed his canon from that of Hagelaïdas: _cf._ _50stes Berl.
Winckelmannsprogr._, p. 149; Pfuhl, however, p. 2192, has shown that
the relationship is perfectly possible.
[868] To be mentioned _infra_, p. III and note 2.
[869] Dio Chrysost., _de Hom. et Socr._, 1; here Mueller amends the
MSS. reading ΗΠΟΥ to ΗΓΙΟΥ; E. A. Gardner, _Class. Rev._, 1894, p. 70,
wrongly reads Ἡγελάδου.
[870] _Mp._, pp. 53 and 196; _Mw._, pp. 80-81, and 380.
[871] Wilamowitz has shown that it comes from Apollonios, son of
Chairis, who lived _circa_ 100 B. C., and that it goes back probably
to the _Chronica_ of Apollodoros of Athens, who lived in the middle of
the second century B. C.: _Aus Kydathen_ (Kiessling and Wilamowitz,
_Philolog. Untersuchungen_, I, 1880), pp. 154 f. Kalkmann, in his
_Quellen der Kunstgesch. d. Plinius_, p. 41, believes that the date
which is given by Pliny (XXXIV, 49) for the _floruit_ of Hagelaïdas,
Ol. 87 (= 423-429 B. C.), comes from the same Apollodoros.
[872] _Op. cit._, pp. 41 and 65 f.; Pfuhl, p. 2194. Brunn, _l. c._,
Overbeck, I, p. 140, and Robert, _l. c._, had assumed an earlier plague
at the beginning of the fifth century B. C.; but the real occasion for
the dedication of the _Herakles_ remains obscure.
[873] P., IV, 33.2.
[874] P., VI, 8.6; Hyde, 82; Foerster, 142, 148.
[875] P., VI, 14.11; Hyde, 132; Foerster, 133, 134.
[876] P., VI, 10.6 f.; Hyde, 99; Foerster, 143. There is no reason for
following Brunn in his contention that these statues were set up some
time after the victories, as these dates fit the chronology of the
artist outlined above.
[877] A fifth-century type of statue occurs on these coins,
representing the god standing with the left foot forward, the knee
slightly bent, a thunderbolt held in the extended right hand and an
eagle in the extended left: _B. M. Coins_, Pelop., Pl. XXII, nos. 1 and
6; Hitz.-Bluemn., I, 2, Muenztafel, III, 20 and 12; Springer-Michaelis,
I, p. 211, fig. 393; Collignon, I, p. 318, figs. 158-159. Frickenhaus,
quoted by Pfuhl, p. 2194, believes that the pose is seen also in the
small bronze pictured in _B. S. A._, III, 1896-7, Pl. X, 1.
[878] P., VII, 24.4. See _B. M. Coins, Pelop._, Pl. IV, nos. 12 and 17,
and _cf._ 14; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 1, Muenztafel, IV, 16-17; Svoronos,
_Journ. int. d’arch. num._, II, 1898, 302, Pl. 14, 11.
[879] Furtwaengler, _50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr._, 1890 (Eine
argivische Bronze), pp. 152-153 and Pl. I (3 views); from which plate
Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 221, fig. 49; Waldstein, _J. H. S._, XXIV, 1904, p.
131, fig. 1; Gardiner, p. 93, fig. 11; von Mach, 17 b; Reinach, _Rép._,
II, 1, 85, 1; _cf._ Frost, _J. H. S._, XXIII, 1903, pp. 223 f., and
fig. 1, who compares its style and pose with a later bronze statuette
found off Cerigotto (_Arch. Eph._, 1902, Pl. 14). Ligourió is on the
site of the ancient Lessa: Curtius, _Peloponnesos_, II, 1852, p. 418.
The bronze without the base is 135 millimeters high (Furtwaengler).
[880] B. B., 302; Bulle, 43; Springer-Michaelis, p. 234, fig. 428;
Furtw., _Mp._, p. 52, fig. 10 (upper part); _Mw._, p. 79, fig. 3;
Overbeck, II, p. 473, fig. 228 b. It is 1.60 meters high (Bulle).
[881] Listed by Furtwaengler, _50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr._, p.
139, n. 61. For the relation of these copies to each other, _id._,
_Berl. Philol. Wochenschr._, XIV, 1894, pp. 81 f.; he ascribes them to
Hegias.
[882] B. B., no. 301; Bulle, 41; von Mach, 321; Helbig, _Fuehrer_,
II, 1846; _Guide_, 744; Baum., II, p. 1191, fig. 1391; Collignon, II,
p. 661, fig. 346; Overbeck, II, p. 473, fig. 228, a; Reinach, _Rép._,
II, 2, 588, 9; F. W., 225; _A. Z._, XXXVI, 1878, Pl. XV, and pp. 123
f.; _Annali_, XXXVIII, 1865, Pl. D and pp. 58 f.; Kekulé, _Gruppe des
Kuenstlers Menelaos in Villa Ludovisi_, 1870, Pl. II, 2, pp. 20 f.;
Joubin, p. 87, fig. 15; Springer-Michaelis, p. 211, fig. 398. The best
copy of the head of the statue by Stephanos is in the Lateran Museum,
Rome: see Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p. 217, fig. 92; _Mw._, p. 405, fig.
62. The statue is 1.44 meters high (Bulle). For the inscription on the
tree-trunk, see _I. G. B._, no. 374.
[883] The best example is in Naples, the group being known, and
probably correctly, since Winckelmann’s day, as _Orestes_ and
_Elektra_: B. B., no. 306; Kekulé, _Gruppe d. Menelaos_, Pl. II, 1;
Bulle, 141 (height 1.44 meters); Collignon, II, pp. 662, fig. 347;
Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 557, fig. 151; Clarac, V, 836, 2093; Reinach,
_Rép._, I, 506.4. A sketch of the Naples _Orestes_ and the Ligourió
bronze, showing their great resemblance, is given by Furtwaengler,
_50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr._, p. 137. A replica of the female
figure is cited by Michaelis as in Marbury Hall, England: p. 503, no.
6; _cf._ Conze, _Beitraege zur Gesch. d. gr._ Pl.^2, p. 25, n. 3.
[884] _E. g._, the so-called group of _Orestes_ and _Pylades_ in the
Louvre: von Mach, 323; Collignon, II, p. 663, fig. 348; Reinach,
_Rép._, I, 161, 2 (= _Mercury_ and _Vulcan_).
[885] Kalkmann, _53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr._, 1893, pp. 77
f., thought that the Stephanos figure went back to an original by
Pythagoras, the rival of Myron, which Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p. 49,
rightly characterizes as “wide of the mark”; Pfuhl, p. 2197, Bulle,
and others regard its ascription to the school of Hagelaïdas as
probable, even if not capable of proof. Furtwaengler, _50stes Berl.
Winckelmannsprogr._, p. 152, believes it was _vermutlich ein Werk des
Meisters_ (_i. e._, _Hagelaïdas_) _selbst_: on pp. 146-7 he pronounces
the life-size marble torso of a statue of a nude man found in a wall
over the ruins of the Palaistra at Olympia (Treu, _A. Z._, XXXVIII,
1880, p. 45)—because of its resemblance in pose to that of the Ligourió
statuette—a Roman school copy of an original bronze victor statue going
back to Hagelaïdas.
[886] _E. g._, the marble group formerly in the Boncompagni-Ludovisi
collection, now in the Museo delle Terme, Rome: Helbig, _Fuehrer_, II,
1314; _Guide_, 887; B. B., no. 309; von Mach, 322; Baum., II, p. 1193,
fig. 1393; Springer-Michaelis, p. 454, fig. 834; Kekulé, _Die Gruppe d.
Menelaos_, Pl. I; Schreiber, _Bildw. d. Villa Ludovisi_, p. 89, no. 69;
Collignon, II, p. 665, fig. 349; F. W., 1560; Reinach, _Rép._, I, 506,
6.
[887] V, 10.8.
[888] Pliny, _H. N._, XXXIV, 72, and XXXVI, 16.
[889] See Brunn, pp. 236-7 and 244-5.
[890] Loeschke (_Dorpaterprogr._, 1887, p. 7, on the basis of an early
suggestion of Furtwaengler in _A. M._, III, 1878, p. 194) and J.
Six (_J. H. S._, X, 1889, pp. 109 f.), assumed two sculptors of the
name of Alkamenes, ascribing the gable statues and that of _Hera_ at
Phaleron (mentioned by P., I, 1.5) to the elder one. Furtwaengler later
retracted the theory of two artists and assumed but one (_Mp._, p. 90,
n. 3; _Mw._, p. 122 and n. 6). Koepp has shown that the _Hera_ is of no
use in dating, since the story of Pausanias that the temple of Hera was
destroyed by the Persians is an invention (_Jb._, V, 1890, p. 277). The
idea of an elder Alkamenes based on the inscription on a herm recently
found in Pergamon (_A. A._, 1904, fig. on p. 76) has also been refuted
by Winter (_A. M._, XXIX, 1904, pp. 208-211, and Pls. XVIII-XXI), who
has shown that the inscription and statue do not go so far back.
[891] See Baum., pp. 1104 KK.
[892] P. 243.
[893] _A. Z._, XLI, 1883, pp. 141 f.
[894] No. 135.
[895] _Arch. Stud. H. Brunn dargebr._, pp. 67 f.
[896] _A. M._, VII, 1882, pp. 206 f. He also found the style of the two
pediments unlike.
[897] _A. Z._, XXXIX, 1881, p. 78, n. (= Argive-Sikyonian); _cf._
_Bildw. v. Ol._, Textbd., pp. 44-95; Tafelbd., Pls. IX-XVII (East
Gable), XXII-XXXI (West Gable).
[898] _A. M._, XII, 1887, pp. 374-5 (= Argive-Sikyonian); _cf._ _R.
M._, II, 1887, pp. 53 f., where he excepts the four corner figures of
the West Gable as Attic, because they are of Pentelic marble, and not
Parian, like the others.
[899] I, pp. 460-1.
[900] I, p. 330 (= Elean).
[901] For a discussion of the whole question of the artists, see
Hitz.-Bluemn., II, i, pp. 329 f.; Frazer, III, pp. 512 f. For a
restoration of the two groups, see Treu, _Jb._, III, 1888, Pls. 5,
6 (West), and _ibid._, IV, 1889, Pls. 8, 9 (East); whence Gardner,
_Hbk._, p. 246, figs, 57 and 56 respectively; see also _Bildw. v. Ol._,
Tafelbd., Pls. XVIII-XXI; Textbd., pp. 114-137; Overbeck, I, Pl. opp.
p. 309; etc.
[902] Richardson, p. 101, fig. 49 (side), and p. 154 for the statement;
Lechat, _Au Musée_, Pl. XVI; Bulle, pp. 462-3, figs. 135, 136; B.
B., no. 461 (middle row, bottom); _A. M._, XII, 1887, pp. 372 f.
(Studniczka); de Ridder, no. 467; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 679, fig.
347; it is 0.10 meter high (Graef., _A. M._, XV, 1890, p. 16, n. 1).
For the figure of Apollo, see Bulle, no. 42; _Bildw. v. Ol._, Tafelbd.,
Pl. XXII, and Textbd., p. 69; von Mach, 86 (statue), 446 (head). The
original height was 3.10 meters (Bulle).
[903] _Mp._, p. 53; _Mw._, p. 80; _50stes Bert. Winckelmannsprogr._,
pp. 140-1 and 148.
[904] The torso was found in 1865, the head in 1888: torso, _A. M._,
V, 1880, p. 20 and Pl. I, with wrong head (Furtwaengler); head, _Arch.
Eph._, 1888, p. 81 and Pl. III; figure in outline, Collignon, I, pp.
374-5, figs. 191-2; Dickins, no. 698, pp. 264 f.; B. B., 461 b; Bulle,
40 and figs. 15, 14 on pp. 87-8 (from a cast); von Mach, 57; Overbeck,
I, p. 205, fig. 48; Lechat, p. 452, fig. 38; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 2,
588, 1; Springer-Michaelis, p. 217, fig. 403; Furtwaengler, _A. A._,
1889, p. 147, _Mw._, pp. 76, n. 2, and 81; Wolters, _A. M._, XIII,
1888, p. 226. Bulle dates it toward 480 B. C.
[905] The same turn appears in the sixth-century Rampin head:
Collignon, I, p. 360, fig. 182. It will be discussed later on, pp.
126-127.
[906] Furtwaengler, _50stes Bert. Winckelmannsprogr._, pp. 132 and 150;
_Mp._, p. 19; Dickins, p. 265.
[907] It is a dedication by Euthydikos: Collignon, I, Pl. VI (right),
opp. p. 356; von Mach, no. 26 (right); Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 212, fig.
47; Bulle, 240; Lechat, _Au Musée_, p. 367, fig. 37; Perrot-Chipiez,
VIII, p. 595, fig. 299; Richardson, p. 78, fig. 33; Springer-Michaelis,
p. 207, fig. 390. Bulle gives it as half life-size.
[908] Dickins, pp. 248 f., no. 689; Bulle, no. 198; B. B., 460; von
Mach, 440 and 443 (left); Collignon, I, p. 362, fig. 184, and bibliog.,
note 3, p. 363; Overbeck, I, p. 206, fig. 49; Gardner, _Hbk._, p.
213, fig. 48; Lechat, p. 362 and _Au Musée_, p. 374, fig. 39; Furtw.,
_50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr._, p. 151; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pl.
XIV; _Arch. Eph._, III, 1888, Pl. II. It is slightly under life-size.
[909] Here again Furtwaengler ascribes it to Hegias, whose art he
derives from Hagelaïdas.
[910] Richter, _Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes in the Metropolitan
Museum_, p. 49, fig. 78; it will be discussed _infra_ in Ch. IV, pp.
220-1.
[911] See _supra_, p. 105 and n. 3.
[912] On Chrysothemis, see Robert in Pauly-Wissowa, III, 2, p.
2521; Brunn, pp. 61-2; Overbeck, I, p. 140; Collignon, I, pp. 225
(= forerunners of Hagelaïdas and Polykleitos), and _cf._ p. 320. On
Eutelidas, see Pauly-Wissowa, VI, 1, p. 1493.
[913] Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 55; others, _e. g._, P., VI, 6.2, call him
an Argive. He belonged to a family of sculptors, some of whom worked in
Sikyon and others in Argos.
[914] Kyniskos: P., VI, 4.11; Hyde, 45; Foerster, 255; _Inschr. v.
Ol._, 149; Pythokles: P., VI, 7.10; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 70; Foerster,
295; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 162-3; Aristion: P., VI, 13.6; _Oxy. Pap._;
Hyde, 115; Foerster, 376; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 165 (renewed); _I. G. B._,
92; Thersilochos: P., VI, 13.6; Hyde, 114; Foerster, 369.
[915] _H. N._, XXXIV, 91. In the same book, § 72, Pliny mentions
another pupil of Polykleitos, Aristeides, as the fashioner of
chariot-groups. Pausanias merely mentions him in connection with
improvements in the hippodrome at Olympia made by Kleoitas: VI, 20.14;
see Pauly-Wissowa, II, pp. 896-7.
[916] Furtwaengler, _Mp._, p. 226, makes Naukydes, Daidalos, and
the younger Polykleitos sons of Patrokles, the brother of the great
Polykleitos. Naukydes and Daidalos describe themselves as sons of
Patrokles in two inscriptions: _I. G. B._, 86 and 88. Pausanias,
however, calls Naukydes a brother of Polykleitos and son of Mothon: II,
22.7.
[917] Cheimon: P., VI, 9.3; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 88; Foerster, 285;
Baukis: P., VI, 8.4; Hyde, 77; Foerster, 318; Eukles: P., VI, 6.2;
Hyde, 52; Foerster, 297; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 159 (renewed). Naukydes’
activity extended from Ol. 83 to Ol. 95 (= 448-400 B. C.): Hyde, p. 39.
[918] _H. N._, XXXIV, 49.
[919] P., VI, 8.1; Hyde, 72; Foerster, 268.
[920] P., VI, 6.2, expressly distinguishes between the elder and
younger Polykleitos; in speaking of the statue of the boy wrestler
Agenor, he says that Polykleitos, the pupil of Naukydes, “not the one
who made the statue of Hera,” fashioned it. Robert, _O. S._, pp. 186
f., gives his activity as Ols. 98 to 103 (= 388-368 B. C.).
[921] Antipatros: P., VI, 2.6; Hyde, 16; Foerster, 309; Agenor: P.,
VI, 6.2; Hyde, 53; Foerster, 355; Xenokles: P., VI, 9.2; Hyde, 85;
Foerster, 308; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 164; _I. G. B._, 90; Furtwaengler
wrongly ascribed the statue of Xenokles to the elder Polykleitos and
that of Aristion to the younger: _Mp._, pp. 224-5. Loewy had already
assumed the eider for Aristion, _Strena Helbigiana_, p. 180, n. 4, and
this was confirmed by the early dating of his victory in the _Oxy. Pap._
[922] P., VI, 16.7; Hyde, 162; Foerster, 515. On this sculptor, see
Pauly-Wissowa, I, p. 2137; _I. G. B._, 475; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 318; etc.
[923] Before 600 B. C.; Robert, in Pauly-Wissowa, V, pp. 1159 f.; _cf._
Collignon, I, pp. 131 and 222 f.; Overbeck, I, pp. 84 f.
[924] P., VI, 9.1, f.
[925] Antipatros of Sidon, in _A. Pl._ (XVI), no. 220; on Aristokles,
see Pauly-Wissowa, II, p. 937; Robert, _Arch. Maerch._, pp. 95 ff.
[926] Longpérier, _Notice des bronzes antiques du Louvre_, I, 1868,
no. 69; de Ridder, _Les bronzes antiques du Louvre_, I, 1913, Pl.
2, 2, and p. 7; B. B., no. 78; Collignon, I, Pl. V, opp. p. 312;
von Mach, 18 (two views); Overbeck, I, p. 235, fig. 60 (two views);
Springer-Michaelis, p. 211, fig. 397; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pl. XI;
Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 84, 9. For bibliography, see Deonna, _Les
Apollons archaïques_, p. 274. It is only 3 feet 4 inches tall. The
_Apollo Philesios_, stolen from Miletos at the destruction of the city
by Darius in 493 B. C. (Hdt., VI, 19; but P., VIII, 46.3, and later
writers wrongly say by Xerxes; see E. Meyer, _Gesch. d. Altertums_,^2
1912, III, p. 309), was restored from Ekbatana in Media in 306 B. C. by
Seleukos Nikator (P., _l. c._, and _cf._ I, 16.3). It is also mentioned
by P., II, 10.5. The genuineness of the Piombino statuette has been
assailed, but Overbeck has proved it genuinely archaic: _Griech.
Kunstmyth._, III, _Apollon_, 1889, pp. 22 f.; _cf._ _Gesch. d. gr.
Pl._, I, pp. 234 f.
[927] _H. N._, XXXIV, 75; _cf._ Jex-Blake _ad loc._, p. 60. Pausanias
mentions a cedar replica of the _Apollo_ at Thebes: II, 10.5 and IX,
10.2. See p. 336, n. 1.
[928] P. Gardner, _The Types of Greek Coins_, 1883, Pl. XV, nos.
15-16; Collignon, I, p. 312, figs. 153-155; _cf._ B. Head, _Historia
Nummorum_^2, 1911, p. 586; Overbeck, _Apollon_, pp. 23 f., and
Muenztafel I, nos. 22 f. Also on gems: see M. W., I, Pl. XV, no. 61;
_B. M. Gems_, no. 720; etc.
[929] _L. c._
[930] _B. M. Bronzes_, no. 209 and Pl. I (middle); _Specimens_, Pl.
12; _Annali_, VI, 1834, Pl. D, fig. 4; Overbeck, I, p. 144, fig.
24, and _Apollon_, p. 24, fig. 5; Murray, I, p. 193, fig. 49; Rayet
et Thomas, _Milet et le golfe Latmique_, Pl. 28, 2; Collignon, I,
p. 313, fig. 156; Dar.-Sagl., I, p. 318, fig. 375; von Mach, 17 a;
Springer-Michaelis, p. 183, fig. 350; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 475,
fig. 242; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 1, 80, 9; Fowler and Wheeler, _Hbk. of
Greek Archæology_, 1909, p. 331, fig. 251; Furtwaengler, in Roscher,
_Lex._, I, 1, p. 451; Frazer, IV, p. 430, fig. 45, Bulle, 28 (middle).
A modern copy is in the Antiquarium, Munich: F. W., 51. It is 0.185
meter high (Bulle).
[931] _R. M._, II, 1887, pp. 90 f. (Studniczka) and Pls. IV, IV a, V;
Collignon, I, p. 321, fig. 161; Overbeck, I, p. 239, fig. 62; Michaelis
in _A. Z._, XXI, 1863, pp. 122 f. (Anzeiger). It is 1.11 meters in
height.
[932] Collignon, I, p. 253, fig. 122; Overbeck, _Griech. Kunstmythol._,
III, _Apollon_, p. 36, fig. 8; Fraenkel, in _A. Z._, XXXVII, 1879, pp.
84-91, and Pl. 7.
[933] The small bronze also found there, 0.155 meter high, belongs
to the same series: _B. C. H._, X, 1886, pp. 190 f., and Pl. IX. It
greatly resembles the statuette from Naxos. For a list of replicas of
the statue of Kanachos, see Rayet, _Études d’archéologie et d’art_, p.
164; etc.
[934] On the style of Kanachos and the _Apollo_, see also Kekulé,
_Sitzb. d. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin_, 1904, I, pp. 786-801; O.
Mueller, _Kleine Schriften_, II, p. 537; F. W., to no. 51; Brunn, pp.
74 f.; Collignon, I, pp. 310 f.; etc.
[935] P., VI, 1.3 and 8.5; Hyde, 1, 2, 3, and 78; Foerster, 296, 300,
299, 290 and 305; on Alypos, see Pauly-Wissowa, I, p. 1711; Brunn, p.
280; _B. C. H._, XXI, 1897, pp. 287 f.; and _cf._ P., X, 9.10.
[936] P., VI, 13.7; Hyde, 116; Foerster, 291; on the sculptor, see
Brunn, p. 277.
[937] P., VI, 3.13; Hyde, 34; Foerster, 575; on the sculptor, see
Brunn, pp. 292 and 419; _cf._ Hyde, p. 34.
[938] Timon and Aigyptos, who won some time between Ols. (?) 98 and
[101] P., VI, 2.8; Hyde, 17, 18; Foerster, 310, 301; Aristodemos, Ol.
[98] P., VI, 3.4; Hyde, 25; Foerster, 312; Eupolemos, Ol. 96: Afr.; P.,
VI, 3.7; Hyde, 28; Foerster, 294. On Daidalos, see Pauly-Wissowa, IV,
pp. 2006 f.; Robert, _O. S._, pp. 191 f.; Brunn, pp. 14 f.
[939] P., VI, 3.5; Hyde, 26; Foerster, 325. On Damokritos, see
Pauly-Wissowa, IV, p. 2070; Brunn, p. 105.
[940] Deinolochos: P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 5; Foerster, 330; Hysmon: P.,
VI, 3.9; Hyde, 31; Foerster, 347; Kritodamos: P., VI, 8.5; Hyde, 80;
Foerster, 337; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 167; _I. G. B._, no. 96; Alketos: P.,
VI, 9.2; Hyde, 86; Foerster, 320; Lykinos: P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 100;
Foerster, 336. On Kleon, see Brunn, pp. 285; _I. G. B._, to no. 95.
[941] Troilos: P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 6; Foerster, 338 and 345; _Inschr.
v. Ol._, 166; the dates of his two victories, Ols. 102, 103, are
known; Philandridas: P., VI, 2.1; Hyde, 10; Foerster, 393; his victory
fell either in Ol. 102 or Ol. 103; Cheilon: P., VI, 4.6-7; Hyde, 41;
Foerster, 384 and 392; P., because of the dating of Lysippos, inferred
that this victor fell either at Chæroneia (338 B. C.) or Lamia (322
B. C.), both of which dates fall within the working years of the
sculptor; see P. Gardner, _J. H. S._, XXV, 1905, p. 246; Polydamas:
P., VI, 5.1; Hyde, 47; Foerster, 279; Africanus gives us the date of
his victory as Ol. 93, though the statue was set up after the victor’s
death; Kallikrates, of Magnesia on the Mæander: P., VI, 17.3; Hyde,
175; Foerster, 390 and 397 (for two victories). Lysippos made two honor
statues for Pythes of Abdera: P., VI, 14.12; Hyde, 134 a.
[942] Kallon: P., VI, 12.6; Hyde, 106; Foerster, 410; Nikandros: P.,
VI, 16.5; Hyde, 157; Foerster, 408 and 413 (two victories). On the
sculptor, see Pauly-Wissowa, IV, p. 2013; Brunn, p. 407.
[943] P., VI, 17.5; Hyde, 181; Foerster, 401. On Daitondas, see Robert
in Pauly-Wissowa, IV, p. 2015 (who dates the sculptor at the beginning
of the third century B. C., because of an inscribed base found at
Delphi: _I. G. B._, 97; _C. I. G. G. S._, I, 2472); _cf._ Schmidt, _A.
M._, V, 1880, pp. 197-8, no. 58; _cf._ Brunn, p. 418.
[944] P., VI, 2.6 f.; Hyde, 15; Foerster, 424.
[945] _H. N._, XXXIV, 51; _cf._ XXXIV, 78 (for his image of the Eurotas
river); XXXV, 141 (as painter). The _Tyche_ is mentioned by P., VI,
2.7. Many copies of this work in marble, bronze, and silver have been
identified, especially a marble statuette in the Vatican: B. B., no.
154; Helbig, _Fuehrer_, I, 362; F. W., 1396; von Mach, 256; etc. For a
list of copies, see R. Foerster, _Jb._, XII, 1897, pp. 145 f.; _cf._
Amelung, _Fuehrer d. Florenz_, nos. 261-2; and P. Gardner, _J. H. S._,
IX, 1888, pp. 75 f. and Pl. V (silver statuette). On the sculptor, see
Robert in Pauly-Wissowa, VI, pp. 1532-3; Brunn, I, pp. 411 f.; II, p.
157 (painter); Overbeck, II, pp. 172 f.; Collignon II, pp. 485 f.;
Murray^2, II, pp. 354 f. Robert, _l. c._, gives three other sculptors
of the same name; _cf._ _I. G. B._, nos. 143 and 244-9; Homolle, _B. C.
H._, XVIII, 1894, pp. 336 f.
[946] Kratinos: P., VI, 3.6; Hyde, 27; Foerster, 433; Alexinikos: P.,
VI, 17.7; Hyde, 184; Foerster, 438. On the sculptor, see Pliny, XXXIV,
85; Brunn, p. 415.
[947] P., V, 25.12-13.
[948] P., V, 27.8 (= joint work of Onatas and Kalliteles).
[949] P., V, 25.8 f. The base has been found _in situ_ east of the
temple of Zeus: _Ergebn. v. Ol._, Tafelbd., II, Pl. XVII, 12; Textbd.,
pp. 145 f. See Plans A and B.
[950] P., VI, 12.1. Hiero won three victories in Ols. 76, 77, 78 (=
476-468 B. C.): _Oxy. Pap._, Hyde, 105; Foerster, 199, 209, 215. The
monument was dedicated in 467 B. C. after the death of the king. For
the sculptor, see Brunn, p. 88.
[951] P., VI, 9.4-5; Hyde, 90; Foerster, 180; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 143.
[952] Philon: P., VI, 9.9; Hyde, 91; Foerster, 167 and 179; he won in
Ols. (?) 72 and 73 (= 492 and 488 B. C.); Glaukos (boy boxer): P., VI,
10.1-3; Hyde, 93; Foerster, 137; he won in Ol. 65 (= 520 B. C.), but
his statue was set up by his son at the beginning of the fifth century
B. C.: Hyde, p. 42; Theagenes: P., VI, 11.2 f.; he won in Ols. 75 and
76 (= 480 and 476 B. C.): _Oxy. Pap._, Hyde, 104; Foerster, 191, 196.
[953] For the meaning of the word σκιαμαχεῖν, see _infra_, Ch. IV, p.
243 and n. 4.
[954] Theognetos: P., VI, 9.1; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 83; Foerster, 193,
193 N; Epikradios: P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 101; Foerster, 228.
[955] P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 103 and p. 44; Foerster, 519. On the
sculptor, see Brunn, p. 96.
[956] P., VI, 14.2; Hyde, 133; Foerster, 327. For the sculptor, see
Brunn, p. 96.
[957] Lechat, _Au Musée_, Pl. XV; _Arch. Eph._, 1887, Pl. III and pp.
43 f.; Bulle, 226 (two views); von Mach, 442, 443 (right); S. Reinach,
_Têtes_, nos. 5 and 6; Overbeck, I, p. 198, fig. 44 (two views);
Collignon, I, p. 304, fig. 151; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, pp. 526-7, figs.
271-2; E. A. Gardner, _J. H. S._, VIII, 1887, p. 191. While Overbeck
and Lechat regard it as Attic, most scholars call it Aeginetan. The
helmet is separately made and fastened on. Bulle dates it in the first
decade of the fifth century B. C. It is 0.27 meter high (Bulle).
[958] Comparetti e de Petra, _La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni_, 1883,
Pl. VII, 1, p. 260; Collignon, I, p. 303, fig. 150; _Mon. d. I._, IX,
1869-73, Pl. XVIII; Kekulé, _Annali_, XLII, 1870, pp. 263 f.; von
Mach, 441; F. W., 229; for its style, see Rayet, I, text to Pl. 26.
Studniczka, _R. M._, II, 1887, p. 105, n. 47, believes that the closely
allied colossal marble head in the Museo Torlonia (no. 501) in Rome is
a copy of the colossal _Apollo_ of Onatas at Pergamon, mentioned by P.,
VIII, 42.7. The head of the _Zeus_ found at Olympia (_Bronz. v. Ol._,
Pl. I, 1, 1 a) has been regarded as Aeginetan.
[959] Collignon, I, p. 306; fig. 152 on p. 305.
[960] _B. M. Sculpt._, I, no. 206; etc. Brunn, _Sitzb. Muen. Akad._,
1872, pp. 529 f., referred it to the school of Kallon; _cf._ also
Collignon, I, p. 302.
[961] Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 169, fig. 31; von Mach, no. 15 (right); etc.
[962] _Aegina, das Heiligtum der Aphaia_, 1906; see Tafelbd., II,
Pls. 104 (West Gable), 105 (East Gable), (the pediment groups in
colors); whence Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 226, Pls. 50-51; _cf._ also
Springer-Michaelis, pp. 214-15, figs. 400 (West Gable), 401 (East
Gable); fig. 399 gives an older arrangement of the West Gable statues,
as set up in plaster in the Strasbourg Museum. Since Furtwaengler’s
death new attempts at reconstruction have been made, notably by P.
Wolters, _Aeginetische Beitraege_, and D. Mackenzie, in _B. S. A._, XV,
1908-09, pp. 274 f. and PI. XIX (East Gable). For various figures, see
von Mach, nos. 78-83. See Furtwaengler-Wolters, _Beschr. d. Glypt._^2,
pp. 95 f. and figs. 74 f.
[963] While Overbeck dates them about 500 B. C., Furtwaengler, Bulle,
Gardner, and others date them about 480 B. C.
[964] Hdt., VIII, 93.
[965] P., X, 13. 10.
[966] Furtw., _op. cit._, Tafelbd., Pl. 95, no. 82, and Textbd., pp.
248-9, and fig. 178 on p. 23; B. B., no 26; Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 229,
fig. 52; it is from the north half of the gable.
[967] Furtw., fig. 204, p. 248.
[968] Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschr. d. Glyptothek_,^2 no. 78; Furtw., _op.
cit._, Tafelbd., Pl. 96, no. 32, and Textbd., pp. 223-4; the figure
on our plate to the right = Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschr._, no. 77 and
Furtw., _op. cit._, Pl. 96, no. 29, Textbd., p. 221. No. 78 should
stand, however, in front of 77 as arranged by Furtwaengler, _op. cit._,
Tafelbd., Pl. 104, and both should be placed in the south half of the
West Pediment and not in the north. For the two figures in Fig. 21,
see also von Mach, 78 (middle and right). For another figure (armed
with helmet, shield, and spear) from the East Gable, see Bulle, 86 =
Furtw.-Wolters, no. 86 (formerly no. 56).
[969] Recently these sculptures, and especially the limestone (λίθος
πώρινος) fragments, have been dated from 490 B. C., rather than from
[480] see Svoronos, I, p. 92. The Akropolis was destroyed by Xerxes in
480 B. C., but it is problematical if with the completeness recorded
by Hdt., VIII, 53; see Doerpfeld in _A. M._, XXVII, 1902, pp. 379 f.;
Dickins, pp. 5 f. The next year Mardonios destroyed the city by fire:
Hdt., IX, 13.
[970] See von Mach, 25 f.; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 2, pp. 635 f.;
for details, Lechat, _Au Musée_, and Schrader, _Die archaischen
Marmorskulpturen im Akropolis-Museum zu Athen_, 1909. See also Dickins,
_op. cit._; Perrot-Chipiez, pp. 574 f. and p. 577, fig. 289 (= _Au
Musée_, fig. 26), and p. 578, fig. 290 (= _Au Musée_, fig. 8); etc.
[971] _Mon. gr._, VII, 1878 (publ. in vol. I, 1882), Pl. I and pp. 1-14
(A. Dumont); _Mon. Piot_, VII, Pl. XIV, and pp. 146-7 (Lechat); Rayet,
I, Pl. 18; Collignon, I, p. 360, fig. 182; Reinach, _Têtes_, 3, 4;
Bulle, 225; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 641, fig. 328.
[972] So Richardson, p. 83, and others.
[973] So Bulle; he dates it in the first half of the sixth century B.
C., doubtless a little too early.
[974] It is now in the National Museum at Athens: Kabbadias, no. 38;
Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 17; _Arch. Eph._, 1874, p. 484 and Pl.
71, Γ, a (Koumanoudis); Sybel, _Kat. d. Skulpt. zu Athen_, 1881, no.
2904; von Mach, 351; Overbeck, I, p. 202, fig. 46; Collignon, I, p.
385, fig. 200; F. W., 99; Conze, _Die attischen Grabreliefs_, I, 1890,
Pl. IV, pp. 5-6; Kirchhoff and Curtius, _Philolog. u. histor. Abh. d.
k. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin_, 1873, pp. 156 f. (and two illustrations,
one of a second fragment); Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 664, fig. 342.
[975] The breadth of 14 inches at top would become 30 inches at bottom.
A second fragment, apparently belonging to the first, contains a part
of the leg: _Arch. Eph._, 1874, Pl. 71, Γ, b.
[976] The same motive occurs on vases: _e. g._, Gerhard, I, Pl. XXII,
and IV, Pl. CCLXXII.
[977] This very low relief is the most perfect of the older Attic
grave-stelæ, and dates from the second half of the sixth century B. C.:
Kabbadias, no. 29; Staïs, _Marbres et Bronzes_, p. 15 and fig. (2.40
m. high); Sybel, _op. cit._, no. 3361; Overbeck, I, p. 200, fig. 45;
Conze, _Die attischen Grabreliefs_, I, Pl. II, 1, p. 4; B. B., no. 41
A; Baum., I, p. 341, fig. 358; Kekulé, _Die ant. Bildw. im Theseion_,
no. 363; Springer-Michaelis, p. 195, fig. 371; F. W., no. 101. Overbeck
dates it at the beginning of the fifth century B. C.; Richardson, p. 91
and fig. 43, about 525 B. C. For a duplicate stele from Ikaria, see _A.
J. A._, V, 1889, Pl. I and pp. 9 f. (Buck); Conze, _op. cit._, I, Pl.
II, 2.
[978] Dickins, no. 692 and fig.; mentioned by Furtwaengler, _A. M._, V,
1880, pp. 25 and 32; discussed by R. Delbrueck, _ibid._, XXV, 1900, pp.
373 f., Pls. XV, XVI (bottom).
[979] _La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg_, 1896, Pls. 1, 2 (and text by Arndt);
Reinach, _Têtes_, Pls. 1, 2; Rayet, _Mon. gr._, VI, 1877 (publ. in
vol. I, 1882), Pl. I; _id._, _Ét. d’archéol. et d’art_, pp. 1-8 and
Pl. I; Collignon, I, pp. 361, fig. 183; B. B., no. 116; Bulle, 197;
Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 643, fig. 329.
[980] Collignon, I, p. 376, fig. 193; Bulle, fig. 128 on p. 440.
[981] Brunn-Arndt, _Gr. und roem. Portraets_, Pls. XXIII-XXIV.
[982] _Gaz. arch._, 1887, Pl. XI.
[983] _Cf._ Arndt, _La Glyptothèque Ny-Carlsberg_, text to nos. 1 and 2.
[984] _Sammlung Sabouroff_, 1883, I, Einleitung, p. 5.
[985] Found in two fragments in 1822 and 1859-60: Dickins, no. 1342,
pp. 275 ff., and fig.; B. B., 21; von Mach, 56; Overbeck, I, p. 203 and
fig. 47; H. Schrader, _A. M._, XXX, 1905, pp. 305 f., and Pl. XI. Other
references are given _infra_, p. 269, n. 9.
[986] See Hauser, _Jb._, VII, 1892, pp. 54 f., who discusses the
question of the sex of the figure at length.
[987] So Hauser, _l. c._; followed by Robinson, _Cat. Museum of Fine
Arts in Boston_, no. 33.
[988] _E. g._, Gerhard, I, Pls. XX and XXI.
[989] See _infra_, Ch. V, pp. 269 f.
[990] While Schrader (_op. cit._, p. 313) dates it in the last quarter
of the sixth century B. C., Dickins finds it earlier than the remnants
of the sculptures of the Hekatompedon and, because of the delicate
carving of the drapery and hair, despite its Attic features, calls it
“typically Ionian in its elaboration of detail.” However, I follow
Overbeck’s date at the beginning of the fifth century B. C. (_op. cit._
p. 204), and believe that it represents a time near the close of Ionic
influence on Attic art.
[991] P., VI, 6.1; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208; _Inschr. v.
Ol._, 146.
[992] Of the Spartan hoplite and chariot victor Lykinos, who won two
victories in Ols. (?) 83 and 84 (= 448 and 444 B. C.): P., VI, 2.1;
Hyde, 12; Foerster, 211 N; of the pancratiast Timanthes of Kleonai,
who won in Ol. 81 (= 456 B. C.): P., VI, 8.4; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 76;
Foerster, 232; of the unknown Arkadian boxer, mentioned by P., VI, 8.5,
who won in Ol. 80 or Ol. 84 (= 460 or 444 B. C.): Hyde, 79, and pp.
39-41; _cf._ Foerster, 222 a, Hyde, 79 a; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 174; of the
Spartan runner Chionis, who won in Ols. 28, 29, 30, 31 (= 668-656 B.
C.), but his statue was erected in Ol. 77 or 78 (= 472 or 468 B. C.):
P., VI, 13.2; Afr.; Hyde, 111 and p. 48; Foerster, 39, 41-6. On two
statues of Lykinos, see _infra_, p. 187, n. 6.
[993] Of the Elean boxer Satyros, who won two victories in Ols. (?)
102, 103 (= 372, 368 B. C.): P., VI, 4.5; Hyde, 39; Foerster, 342, 348;
of the boy boxers Telestas and Damaretos of Messene, who won some time
between Ols. 102 and 114 (= 372 and 324 B. C.): P., VI, 14.4; Hyde,
127; Foerster, 378; and P., VI, 14.11; Hyde, 130; Foerster, 373. On the
sculptor, see Hyde, p. 35.
[994] P., VI, 4.5; Hyde, 40; Foerster, 494.
[995] P., VI, 12.8 f.; Hyde, 109; Foerster, 529; _cf._ Robert,
_Hermes_, XIX, 1884, pp. 306 f. On the artist family of Polykles, his
sons Timokles and Timarchides, Polykles Minor and Timarchides Minor,
see Robert, _l. c._, pp. 300 f.; Hyde, pp. 45-47 and table on p. 46.
[996] _E. g._, _H. N._, XXXIV, 73 (Boëdas); XXXIV, 78 (Euphranor);
XXXIV, 90 (Sthennis). In XXXIV, 91, he gives a list of artists who made
statues of _sacrificantes_.
[997] In the Iliad, I, 450; VIII, 347; XV, 371; Aischylos, _Prom._,
1005 (ὑπτιάσμασι χερῶν); etc. On the attitude of prayer in Greek art,
see L. Gurlitt, _A. M._, VI, 1881, pp. 158 f. (who tries to show that
the gestures of prayer and adoration were distinct); Sittl, _Die
Gebaerden der Gr. und Roem._, pp. 305 f.; _cf._ Conze, _Jb._, I, 1886,
pp. 1-13 (on the _Praying Boy_ of Berlin, Pl. 10.) See also Dar.-Sagl.,
I, pp. 80 f., _s. v._ _adoratio_.
[998] V, 25. 5.
[999] See article by P. Girard and J. Martha in _B. C. H._, II, 1878,
pp. 421 f. (lists of inventories of objects consecrated there).
[1000] Scherer, p. 33, shows that the gesture in such statues was meant
to invoke victory rather than to pay thanks for one that had been
gained.
[1001] Scherer agrees with Philostratos, _Vit. Apoll. Tyan._, IV, 28,
that the gesture of the right hand of the statue was one of prayer, and
argues from it that many similar statues existed there: p. 31. Rouse
wrongly assumes that all such statues were votive: p. 170.
[1002] P., VI, 1.7; he won in Ol. (?) 79 (= 464 B. C.): Hyde, 8;
Foerster, 233.
[1003] Ol. VII, Argum., Boeckh, p. 158.
[1004] Fragm. no. 264 (= _F. H. G._, II, p. 183).
[1005] Fragm. no. 7 (= _F. H. G._, IV, p. 307).
[1006] Diagoras won in Ol. 79 (= 464 B. C.): P., VI, 7.1 f.; Hyde, 59;
Foerster, 220; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 151 (renewed). For the sculptor of the
statue, Kallikles, see Robert, _O. S._, pp. 194 f. On Diagoras, see van
Gelder, _Gesch. d. alt. Rhodier_, p. 435. Akousilaos won in Ol. 83 (=
448 B. C.): P., _l. c._; _Oxy. Pap._; Hyde, 60; Foerster, 252.
[1007] _Beschr. d. Skulpt._, Inv. 6306; _A. M._, VI, 1881, p. 158.
Rouse, p. 171, following Scherer, pp. 31 f., doubts if this statue
represents the attitude of any of the Olympic victor statues.
[1008] She won two victories in Ols. (?) 96, 97 (= 396, 392 B. C.): P.,
VI, 1.6 f.; Hyde, 7; Foerster, 326, 333; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 160 (here
the name appears in the uncontracted form Ἀπελλέας).
[1009] _A. Z._, XXXVII, 1879, pp. 151-2 (on no. 301 = _Inschr. v. Ol._,
160); he is followed by Foerster, _l. c._
[1010] _H. N._, XXXIV, 86.
[1011] XXXIV, 70. For the motive, see the small bronze in Kassel,
representing Aphrodite: _Jb._, IX, 1894, Pl. IX (two views), and pp.
248-50 (W. Klein), though its connection with Praxiteles must not be
pressed; also bronze statuette in British Museum: Bulle, 1, pp. 332 f.,
and fig. 81.
[1012] Described by R. von Schneider, Die Erzstatue vom Helenenberge,
in _Jahrb. d. Samml. d. oesterr. Kaiserhauses_, XV, 1893;
illustrated by E. von Sacken, _Die ant. Bronz. d. k. k. Muenz.- und
Antiken-Cabinetes in Wien_, 1871, I, Pls. XXI-XXII, pp. 52 f., and
_cf._ _A. M._, VI, 1881 p. 155 (Gurlitt).
[1013] _Cf._ F. W., 1562.
[1014] _C. I. L._, III, 2, 4815.
[1015] _Mp._, p. 290; _Mw._, pp. 506-7.
[1016] _Beschr. d. ant. Skulpt._, no. 2 (for history and bibliography);
B. B., 283; von Mach, 273; Bulle, 64; Reinach, _Rép._, I, 459, 4; _cf._
Conze, _Jb._, I, 1886, pp. 1 f.; _ibid._, pp. 217 (Furtwaengler);
_ibid._, pp. 219 f. (Puchstein); Springer-Michaelis, p. 341, fig. 614.
A similar attitude of prayer appears on the figure of Phineus on a
r.-f. Attic amphora in the British Museum: _A. Z._, XXXVIII, 1880, pp.
143 f. and Pl. XII, 1 (Flasch). The statue is 1.28 meters high (Bulle).
[1017] Loewy, _R. M._, XVI, 1901, pp. 391 f. and Pls. XVI-XVII, by a
comparison with the Vatican _Apoxyomenos_ (Pl. 29), and the Naples
resting _Hermes_ (von Mach, 237; Reinach, _Rép._, I, 367, 1), has shown
its Lysippan character; _cf._ also Mau, _l. c._ in next note, Bulle,
and others, who refer it to the same school; Bulle assigns it possibly
to Boëdas, the pupil of Lysippos, who made a praying figure: Pliny, _H.
N._, XXXIV, 73; similarly Amelung, in Thieme-Becker, _Lex. d. bild.
Kuenstler_, IV, p. 187, Gardner, _Hbk._, p. 452, and others.
[1018] _R. M._, XVII, 1902, pp. 101 f.
[1019] _Muenchner Allg. Ztg._, 1902, Nov. 29, Beilage, no. 297; _cf._,
for his restoration of the arms, _ibid._, 1903, Beilage, no. 277, p.
445 (quoted by von Mach and Bulle, respectively).
[1020] _Jb._, I, 1886, fig. on p. 217; reproduced in _A. A._, 1904,
p. 75 (Conze); also on coins, _Jb._, III, 1888, pp. 286 f. and Pl. IX
(Imhoof-Blumer).
[1021] _Rev. arch._, Sér. IV, II, 1903, pp. 205-10, 411-12 (Lechat),
and Pl. XV; reproduced in _A. A._, _l. c._ Babelon, _C. R. Acad.
Inscr._, 1904, p. 203, thought that the stele represented a seer in
liturgic attitude as on certain coins of Sikyon; he argued, therefore,
that the Berlin statue did not represent an athlete.
[1022] _E. g._, Levezow, _de juvenis adorantis Signo_, Berlin, 1808, p.
12; and Welcker, _Das akad. Mus. zu Bonn_, p. 42 (quoted by Gurlitt,
_op. cit._ in the next note, p. 157); _cf._ Scherer, pp. 32-3.
[1023] _A. M._, VI, 1881, pp. 154 f. (Gurlitt), and Pl. V (from cast in
Berlin): it is 2.18 meters high and 1.11 meters broad.
[1024] In the National Museum, Athens; discussed by Kekulé, _Die
antiken Bildwerke im Theseion zu Athen_, 1869, no. 151; illustrated in
_Exped. scientifique de Morée_, III, 1838, Pl. XLI (= from Aegina).
[1025] See O. Jahn in _Annali_, XX, 1848, pp. 213 f. and Pl. K a (=
Orestes); _A. Z._, XXX, 1872, p. 60, Pl. 46 (Heydemann); Gurlitt, _op.
cit._, p. 156; _cf._ Sophokles, _Aias_, 815 f., to explain the scene.
[1026] See Richter, _Gk., Etrusc., and Rom. Bronz. in the Metropolitan
Museum_, 1918, no. 89 (7 inches high) and fig. on p. 59; _Cat. Class.
Coll._, p. 115, fig. 73; published by Furtwaengler, _Sitzb. Muen.
Akad._, 1905, II, p. 264, fig. 1 and Pl. IV (who considered it Etruscan
and not Greek); Reinach, _Rép._, III, 24, 3. Richter, _op. cit._, no.
79 (11-3/4 inches high), and figs. on p. 53 (two views); _Cat. Class.
Coll._, p. 91, fig. 54; _Burlington Fine Arts Club, Cat. Anc. Gk. Art_,
1904, p. 46, no. 36, and Pl. LIII; Reinach, _Rép._, IV, 370, 6.
[1027] On the custom of athletes smearing themselves with oil and
dust in the palæstra before entering the wrestling match, see Lucian,
_Anacharsis, sive de exercitationibus_, 28.
[1028] _H. N._, XXXV, 144.
[1029] Several cited by L. Bloch, _R. M._, VII, 1892, pp. 88 f.; and
especially one in _A. Z._, XXXVII, 1879, Pl. IV (red-figured krater
by Euthymides from Capua, now in Berlin); Hartwig, _Die griech.
Meisterschalen_, 1893, p. 570. _Cf._ Furtw., _Mp._, p. 259, _Mw._, p.
466.
[1030] _Cf._ Brunn, _Annali_, LI, 1879, pp. 201 f.
[1031] Michaelis, pp. 601-2, no. 9; Bulle, p. 109, fig. 19; Furtw.,
_Mp._, p. 257, fig. 107, _Mw._, p. 465, fig. 77. It is 1.68 meters high
(Michaelis).
[1032] It has the same foot position as that on the base of the statue
of the boxer Kyniskos, by Polykleitos: _Inschr. v. Ol._, 149.
[1033] _E. g._, by F. W., 462-4.
[1034] Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschr. d. Glypt._,^2 no. 302; B. B., 132 (=
front view, from cast), 134 (left = back view), 135 (= head, from cast,
two views); Bulle, 55; _Mon. d. I._, XI, 1879-83, Pl. VII; Brunn,
_Annali_, LI, 1879, pp. 201 f. and Pl. ST, 1, 2; F. W., 462; Reinach,
_Rép._, I, 522, 2; Clarac, V, 857, 2174; for replicas, Furtw., _Mw._,
p. 466, n. 4 and _Mp._, p. 259, n. 4; Duetschke, IV, pp. 53 f. on no.
82; etc. It is 1.93 meters high with the plinth, 1.80 meters without
(Furtw.-Wolters).
[1035] The right arm is wrongly restored in the Munich statue; its
proper restoration is given in a cast in Brunswick: Bulle, p. 112, fig.
20. Bulle, however, says that the Munich statue may be that of a boxer
and not of an oil-pourer (wrestler).
[1036] Pointed out by Kekulé, _Ueber den Kopf des Praxitelischen
Hermes_, 1881, p. 8.
[1037] _H. N._, XXXIV, 72; Klein, _Praxiteles_, 1898, p. 50; _id._,
_Arch.-epigr. Mitt. aus Oest._, XIV, 1891, pp. 6-9. We have discussed
it _supra_, p. 77.
[1038] For the _Marsyas_ in the Lateran Museum in Rome, see Bulle, no.
95, and text, pp. 183 f., and Helbig, _Fuehrer_, II, no. 1179. See
Brunn, _op. cit._, p. 204.
[1039] B. B., 557, text by Sieveking; described also by Furtwaengler,
_Beschr. d. Glypt._,^2 p. 313.
[1040] F. W., no. 463; _Annali_, LI, 1879, Pl. ST, 3; B. B., 133 (=
front view), 134 (right = back view); Furtw., _Mp._, pp. 259-60, _Mw._,
pp. 467-8; for list of replicas of this torso, see _Mp._, p. 259, n. 9,
_Mw._, p. 467, n. 4. Brunn, _op. cit._, p. 217, thought it a copy of
the Munich statue.
[1041] One in Turin, F. W., 464; Duetschke, IV, no. 82; two statuettes
in the Vatican (Braccio Nuovo), discussed by Bloch in _R. M._, VII,
1892, pp. 93 f.; Helbig, _Guide_, nos. 42 and 44.
[1042] Furtw.-Wolters, _Beschr. d. Glypt._,^2 no. 458; Clarac, Pl. 858,
2175; Furtw., _Mp._, pp. 263 f.; _Mw._, pp. 473 f. It is 1.54 meters
high. A replica is in the Vatican: see Furtwaengler, _l. c._; we shall
treat it later in reference to the statue of the pentathlete Pythokles;
Hyde, 70; Foerster, 295; _Inschr. v. Ol._, 162-3; see _infra_, p. 144
and n. 4.
[1043] _B. M. Bronzes_, no. 514, on p. 71, and Pl. XVI; _Specimens_,
I, Pl. 15; Reinach, _Rép._, II, 91, 7; _Mon. gr._, II, no. 23, Pl. XV
and p. 1 (ascribing it to the Argive school). It forms the basis for a
mirror.
[1044] Furtwaengler, _Sitzb. Muen. Akad._, 1897, II, pp. 129 f. and Pl.
6 (influence of Kalamïs).
[1045] _B. C. H._, X, 1886, pp. 393 f. (S. Reinach) and Pl. XII,
3 (this should be numbered XIV, 4; see text); Pottier et Reinach,
_Nécrop. de Myrina_, Pl. XLI, 3, pp. 450 f. It is 0.205 meter high.
[1046] _E. g._, F. W., 1798; relief found in 1830 in Hermione, now in
Athens; it is of the second or third century B. C.