feck GREEK SCULPTURE LATER GREEK SCULPTURE Pye lbs INFLUENCE ON EAST AND WEST By A. W. LAWRENCE Sometime Craven Fellow in the University of Oxford, Student of the British School of Archaeology at Athens and of the British School at Rome als} NEW YORK Pawo OURT, BRACK AND COMPANY ee a) “Lonpon a Sune OO UNG TEE NEES CHAPTER LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PREFACE I. INTRODUCTORY 2. THE FIRST HUNDRED YEARS, 334-240 B.C. 3. THE ASCENDENCY OF PERGAMON, 240-140 B.C. 4. THE LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD, 140-27 B.C. 5 - ADAPTATIONS OF OLDER WORK AND OTHER DECORATIVE SCULPTURES 6. THE WEST IN THE HELLENISTIC AGE 7. THE HELLENISTIC EAST 8. THE HELLENISTIC TRADITION IN INDIA AND THE FAR EAST BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDIX THE BEGINNING OF THE HELLENISTIC AGE LAST QUARTER OF THE FOURTH CENTURY Circa 300 FIRST HALF OF THE THIRD CENTURY MIDDLE OF THE THIRD CENTURY LATER THIRD CENTURY Circa 200 PAGE PAGE EARLY SECOND CENTURY is MIDDLE OF THE SECOND CENTURY 118 LATE SECOND AND EARLY FIRST CENTURIES 121 EARLY NEO-ATTIC 127 LATER FIRST CENTURY 128 AUGUSTAN 130 CARTHAGE 131 THE ALPS 19g MAGNA GRACIA 131 CENTRAL ITALY 133 ADDENDA—RECENTLY PUBLISHED SCULPTURES 134 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES 134 PLATES INDEX OF SUBJECTS hoe INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS 145 vi eee OF Telus reRA LLONS Plate 1 ‘Terracotta statuettes of Eros (Boston). Plate 2 ‘Terracottas of comic actors (Metropolitan Museum). Plate 3a ‘Terracotta negro-boy (Oxford). Plate 3b ‘Terracotta of old woman and child (Dresden). Plate 3c ‘Terracotta of idiot (Boston). Plate 4a Head of Meleager (Rome-Villa Medici). Plate 4b Female head from Cyzicus (Dresden). Plate 5 Statuette of boxer (Metropolitan Museum). Plate 6 Female head from Chios (Boston). Plate 7a Aphrodite (Capitoline Museum). Plate 7b Head of Aphrodite (Dresden). Plate 8 Female head (Cambridge, Mass.—Fogg Museum). Plate ga Female statue (Metropolitan Museum). Plate 9b Maenad (Dresden). Plate 10a Head of boy (Metropolitan Museum). Plate 1ob Head of Alexander (Acropolis Museum). Plate roc Head of Ariadne (Athens). Plate 11a So-called Jason (Louvre). Plate 11b Male statuette (Providence). Plate 12 Daughter of Niobe (Vatican). Plate 13 Son of Niobe (Uffizi). Plate 14 Youth from Subiaco (Rome-National Museum). Plate 15 Youth from Cythera wreck (Athens). Plate 16a Gold comb from Solokha (Hermitage). Plate 16b Bronze head of boxer (Athens). Plate 17a Bearded head of god (Alexandria). Plate 17b Head of goddess (Alexandria). Plate 18a Small head of philosopher (Metropolitan Museum). Plate 18b Head of Menander (Philadelphia). Plate 19 Silenus carrying infant Dionysus (Munich). Plate 20a Pan (Dresden). Plate 20b Head of Demosthenes (Oxford). Plate 21 Girl with dove (Munich). Plate 22a Head of boy (Alexandria). Vil Plate 22b Plate 23a Plate 23b Plate 24a Plate 24b Plate 25a Plate 25b Plate 26 Plate 27 Plate 28a Plate 28b Plate 29 Plate 30a Plate 30b Plate 31a Plate 31b Plate 32 Plate 33 Plate 34a Plate 34b Plate 35 Plate 36 Plate 37a Plate 37b Plate 38 Plate 39 Plate 40 Plate 41a Plate 41b Plate 42 Plate 43 Plate 44 Plate 45 Plate 46a Plate 46b Plate 47 LATE RGR E ER Ss.CaU Loe al- Uren Bronze head of satyr-boy (Munich). Seated girl (Rome-Conservator1). Melpomene (Vatican). Head of Muse (Dresden). Head of prince (Leyden). Bronze statuette of crouching Aphrodite (Louvre). Back view of seated Heracles (Metropolitan Museum). Front view of above. Bronze head of Berber (British Museum). Bronze boxer (Rome-National Museum). Head of above. Marsyas (Constantinople). Slave grinding knife (Uffizi). Satyr inviting nymph to dance (reconstruction). Head of above Satyr (Louvre). Head of above nymph (Dresden). Dying Gaul (Capitoline). Head of dying Asiatic (Rome-National Museum). Head of Silenus (Naples). Barberini satyr (Munich). Head of Sleeping Fury (Rome-National Museum). Head of Queen Arsinoe of Egypt (Boston). Head of Euthydemus of Bactria (Rome-Torlonia). Wounded Greek (Venice). Fragment of fighting Gaul (Metropolitan Museum). Marsyas (Rome-Conservator1). Sleeping Hermaphrodite (Rome-National Museum). Relief of family sacrifice (Munich). Sleeping Eros (Rome-Conservator1). Gravestone of Metrodorus (Berlin). Battle of gods and giants (Berlin). Female head from Pergamon (Berlin). Relief of dancing girl (Constantinople). Head of Alexander from Pergamon (Constantinople). Head of centaur (Rome-Conservatori). Torso of satyr (Naples). vill Plate 48a Plate 48b Plate 48c Plate 49 Plate 50 Plate 51a Plate 51b Plate 52 Plate 53 Plate 54 Plate 55 Plate 56a Plate 56b Plate 57 Plate 58a Plate 58b Plate 59a Plate 59b Plate 60 Plate 61 Plate 62a Plate 62b Plate 63 Plate 64 Plate 65a Plate 65b Plate 66 Plate 67 Plate 68a Plate 68b Plate 68c Plate 69 Plate 70 Plate 71 Plate 72 Plate 73 A Sete Oo Fer lelel Uys) ly ROAR SL OUNSS Head of so-called Seneca (Rome-National Museum). Head of so-called Seneca (Naples). Fragment of female statue (Tegea). ‘Telephus frieze (Berlin). Female statue from Magnesia (Constantinople). Bronze statue of Demetrius I (Rome-National Museum). Head of above. Zeus from Pergamon (Constantinople). Head of Athena (Constantinople). Fragments by Damophon (Athens and Lycosura). Drapery by Damophon (Athens). Head of Persephone (Metropolitan Museum). Bronze portrait head from Delos (Athens). Portrait statue from Delos (Athens). Head of above. Gravestone from Smyrna (Berlin). Head of young man (Athens). Head of old man (Athens). Relief of family (Berlin). So-called Menander (Vatican). Head of Pompey (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek). Head of Cotys of Thrace (Athens). Erotic group from Delos (Athens). ‘Turbaned head of youth (Athens). Silenus (Athens-Theatre). Caryatid (Eleusis). Sea-monsters from Basis of Ahenobarbus (Munich). Laocoon (Vatican). Head of old woman (Dresden). Head of old peasant (Dresden). Old woman (Metropolitan Museum). Archaistic relief of Seasons (Louvre). Caryatid from Tralles (Constantinople). Dancer from Pergamon (Berlin). Lady from Delos (Athens). Head of above. 1X Plate 74 Plate 75 Plate 76 Plate 77 Plate 78 Plate 79 Plate 80 Plate 81a Plate 81b Plate 82 Plate 83 Plate 84 Plate 85 Plate 86a Plate 86b Plate 87a Plate 87b Plate 88 Plate 89 Plate goa Plate gob Plate 91 Plate 92a Plate g2b Plate 93 Plate 94a Plate 94b Plate 95 Plate 96 Plate 97a Plate 97b Plate 98 Plate 99 LAT ER GERor Ee Ks .O Ueler Tu eRe rh Boy boxer (Constantinople). Head of above. Aphrodite from Cyrene (Rome-National Museum). Head of Aphrodite (Boston). Fragment of Ariadne ? (Prado). Eleusinian deities, relief of Lacrateides (Eleusis). Relief of Euripides (Constantinople). Archaistic female head (Metropolitan Museum). Head of Sleeping Ariadne (Rome-National Museum). Imperial family, from Ara Pacis (Uffizi). Neo-Attic vase (Metropolitan Museum). Relief of Maenad (Rome-A bani). Relief of Maenad (Rome-Albani). Relief of Bacchic revel (Naples). Stucco panel of landscape (Rome-National Museum). Relief of dancer (Athens). Stucco Victory (Rome-National Museum). Statuette of Demeter ? (Vatican). Neo-Attic gravestone (Cagliari). Sarcophagus of priestess (Carthage). Apulian relief (Boston). Stone throne (Rome-Corsini). Relief of soldier from Taranto (Hague). Cast from terracotta mould (Hague). Man’s sarcophagus (Toscanella). Woman’s sarcophagus (‘Toscanella). Terracotta frieze, repulse of Gauls (Bologna). Man’s sarcophagus (‘Toscanella). Marble urn (Florence). Terracotta head from Falerii (Rome-Villa Giulia). Bronze orator (Florence). Urn (Tomb of Volumnii). Alabaster urn (Volterra). Plate 100a Terracotta urn (Rome-Villa Giulia). Plate 100b Bone carving (Chicago). Plate 101 Procession on urn (British Museum). Xx ie Ol) lel US i ReAgT LON Ss Plate 102a Fragments from Fluteplayer’ss Monument (Rome- Antiquarium). Plate 102b Orpheus from the same. Plate 103 Portrait head from Palestrina (Berlin). Plate 104a Relief with family group (Palmyra). Plate 104b Gravestone of Baalyaton (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek). Plate 104c Egyptian portrait (Munich). Plate 105a Terracotta musicians from Babylonia (British Museum). Plate 105b Statuettes from Babylonia (British Museum). Plate 106a Parthian coins (British Museum). Plate 106b Relief on Nimrud Dagh. Plate 107a Palmyrene gravestone of lady (Louvre). Plate 107b Himyarite head (Brussels). Plate 108a Lion capital (Sarnath). Plate r08b Capital with rider (Sarnath). Plate 108c Railing from Buddh Gaya (Calcutta). Plate roga Pillar from Bharhut (Calcutta). Plate rogb Buddhist Saint (Berlin). Plate 110 Panel of woman and tree (Berlin). Plate 111a Chinese stela (Chicago). Plate 111b Chinese statue of Goddess of Mercy (Metropolitan Museum). Plate 112a Chinese head of Saint (Chicago). Plate 112b Japanese bronze of Goddess of Mercy (Horyuji). XJ PR PACE over sculpture of the transition from Greek to Roman times reached a high level (of which such relics as the Dying Gaul and the Venus of Milo have long testified), although too it possesses unusual historical value from its influence in subsequent centuries through- out Asia as well as within the Roman Empire, yet few scholars could trace the lines of its development, some of their essays on the period are noticeably out of date, while the others are concerned with problems rather than established facts, being addressed to archeologists only. Classical students have, in fact, worked more upon earlier sculpture, with the result that no attempt has been made to index the vast literature on later objects that lies scattered among learned publications. In the hope that the present book may serve both ordinary readers and specialists, | have cleared the text of controversy and provided an Appendix to absorb dull matter ; the text mentions few works that are not illustrated in the Plates, but the Appendix gives a list of the important sculptures of the period arranged according to their probable dates. In most cases reasons for so dating them have already been stated in articles to which reference is made, and to avoid unduly Xill LAVIGE RR) GeR EE KS si CU Pats U ROE lengthening the book I have been compelled to rely upon the context to indicate the works with which each should be compared. I shall expect the forgiveness of my colleagues for omitting detailed reasoning, as such a list allows them to test the accuracy of my classification as a whole ; bad as it is, I fail to see that this method is more unsatisfactory than the orthodox one, of lengthy arguments on scanty material, adopted in previous assaults on a subject which, however complex, must form and be presented as a coherent whole. The main thesis, continuity in ancient European sculpture, has been treated within the time-limits offered by the commencement of Alexander’s conquests and the foundation of the Roman Empire; the story of the eastward spread of Greek art cannot be so com- pressed, for a sketch of sculpture in the Oriental provinces of Alexander’s successors must be written with a glance forward at monuments of the Roman period, while it would be absurd to break off an account of Indian Hellenism at Augustus’ time, when the move- ment had not attained full growth and had not begun to supply the Far East with its hybrid style of Greek inspiration. I should have preferred to omit the chapter on the Near East because the evidence so far accumulated is too disjointed to be adequately sum- marised, but some mention of Alexandria and Antioch was obviously required and these cities ought to be seen X1V PERGE REA Cer in their environment ; the widespread impression that Gandharan art is a legacy of Alexander rendered a passage on India imperative. I was enabled to travel to all essential museums by the aid of the Craven Fund of Oxford University, and I must express my gratitude to the Committee for the freedom allowed me. I have too, received much kind assistance from scholars in various parts of the world whom I cannot thank individually ; I must, however, acknowledge my special indebtedness to Mr. Sidney Smith for advice on Oriental matters and for reading the manuscript of Chapter VII (he is not, of course, to be held responsible for its contents), and to my wife, B. I. Lawrence, for constant help throughout. The illustrations have been drawn largely from American museums and have in general been selected to include as many unpublished or unfamiliar objects as possible ; negatives are the property of the museums concerned except in the case of Athens or when a note to the contrary is inserted. For permission to reproduce photographs I have to thank Dr. E. Breccia of the Alexandria Museum; Dr. Buschor of the German Institute at Athens ; the Director of the Indian Section and Dr. K. A. Neugebauer of the Berlin Museums ; Dr. P. Ducati of the Civic Museum, Bologna; Dr. L. D. Caskey of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston ; M. L. Speleers of the Brussels Museum; Dr. E. W. XV LAW ERG ROEDER Ss CU be Per URE Forbes of the Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, Mass. ; Rev. Fr. Delattre of the Lavigerie Museum, Carthage ; Dr. C. F. Kelly of the Art Institute, Chicasomeain D. C. Davies of the Field Museum, Chicago ; Macridy Bey of the Constantinople Museum; Mr. H. Ingholt of the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen; the Director and Dr. W. Miller of the Albertinum, Dresden; Dr. C, W. Lunsingh Scheurleer of the Hague; Miss J. P. J. Brants of the Museum of Antiquities, Leyden ; in London, Messrs. H. B. Walters, E. J. Forsdyke, H. R. Hall, Sidney Smith and E. S. G. Robinson of the British Museum, Mr. W. T. Ottewill of the India Office, Mr. E. Maclagan of the Victoria and Albert Museum, Mr. J. Penoyre and Mr. F. N. Pryce for the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies; Dr. Paul Wolters of the Glyptothek, Munich ; Mr. H. W. Kent, Miss G. M. A. Richter, and Miss C. Alexander of the Metropolitan Museum, New York; Dr. D. G. Hogarth of the Ashmolean Museum and Mr. S. Casson, Oxford ; M. E. Michon of the Louvre, M. J. B. Chabot, and the Director of the Imprimerie Nationale, Paris ; Dr. G. B. Gordon of the University Museum, Philadel- phia; Mr. L. Earle Rowe of the Rhode Island School of Design, Providence ; Dr. R. Paribeni of the National Museum, and Dr. W. Amelung of the German Institute, Rome. The firms of F. Bruckmann (Munich), Paul Geuthner (Paris) and Walter de Gruyter & Co. (Berlin) XV1 PERSE REAL Cre have generously allowed the use of copyright photo- graphs. The type was already set up before I had access to Goblet d’Alviella, Ce gue Inde doit a la Grece, or to Kammerer, Essai sur [histoire antique a’ Abyssinie (both by Geuthner, Paris, 1926); a few references will be found to the British School of Rome Catalogue of the Palazzo dei Conservatori, the proofs of which were not long available to me. Ai list of Addenda includes minor publications up to January, 1927. XVil Cee AT Pale bites TSNeTeR OD. Cale O Ray Re NDER’s eastern conquests reduced Greece itself into a politically and economically unimportant section of his empire, but its cultural superiority to the greater part of his new realms remained unimpaired. ‘The sole exception was the A‘gean coast of Asia Minor ; in the sixth century the Ionian cities here were the most ad- vanced and wealthiest of the Greek world, under the light control of Lydia, and later of Persia; they were eclipsed by Athens only as a result of harsh treatment received from the Persians after an abortive revolt in 499, and on Alexander’s removal of artificial barriers, the natural fertility of the country and its central position on land and sea traffic-routes brought it again into a dominant position. The three hundred years during which Alexander and his successors ruled the East is usually known as the Hellenistic Age, since newly Hellenised regions count more politically than the genuinely Hellenic. In art the situation is reversed. It must be constantly borne in mind that the typical cosmopolitan art of this period is purely Hellenic and that the chief art-centres lie around the AZgean ; it is true that it is the eastern shore which I LATER GREEK SCULPT URE now takes the lead but the character of the population is’ identical. Athens and the rest of Greece produced no first-class sculpture, expensive gravestones were pro- hibited by an Athenian sumptuary law of 321, and the terracotta industry at ‘Tanagra did not outlast the third century ; Alexandria was the favourite home of science, literature and luxury, but art soon ceased to flourish there ; Syracuse was never productive ; ‘Tarentum was fast declining and the other South Italian cities had al- ready decayed ; we know nothing of any art at Antioch. The wealthy Pergamon produced no literature but had no peer in architecture, sculpture or painting, and the other business cities of the eastern A®gean (Rhodes, Tralles, Delos, Magnesia), yield the rest of the notable sculptures of these centuries, while most of the terracottas came from Smyrna or Myrina, a small place that be- longed to Pergamon. One style prevails everywhere (apart, of course, from the poorer work of backward regions like Cyprus, Egypt or Apulia) and this cosmo- politanism is explained by the fact that artists travelled constantly ; signatures from the Altar of Pergamon include Athenians, Trallians, Rhodians, as well as Pergamenes, and we know that this is a typical case. Yet the obvious differences between later and earlier Greek sculpture are largely due to the Hellenistic system of absolute monarchy and extensive kingdoms. The history of Alexander’s earliest successors is chiefly 2 IpNeie Re OF DSUs Cele ORRsy occupied with the almost constant warfare that divided and re-divided the passive, half-desert empire which he had left them. In general, the Ptolemies were only secure in Egypt ; the Seleucids held Syria and varying amounts of country further east and in Asia Minor ; the kings of Pergamon owned the west of Asia Minor, while Greece and the islands passed in turn under the protection of a Ptolemy, a Seleucid, or anybody else. Other kingdoms have no significance for art, but the growth of Rome is of vital importance; Greece was annexed in 146, Pergamon in 133, Cyrene in 96, Syria in 65, Egypt in 30. The early extinction of the Per- gamon dynasty is most regrettable as no other royal house patronised art on the grand scale; Ptolemaic buildings, it is true, were not uncommon, but in Egypt they followed the style of the Pharaohs. Before studying the effect of Macedonian and Roman autocratic rule, it is essential to examine the psycho- logical basis of Greek art. A fundamental difference between the Greek temple and the Assyrian or Persian palace or the Egyptian temple, results from the right of every citizen, according to the average Greek con- stitution, to a direct share in the governing of his state ; thus the self-respect of the individual asserts itself in each figure, whilst to the Oriental the king is the nation, all others are the king’s servants, and such dignity as their figures possess is due to their service. In the Greek 3 LAT E RGG RiECEVRY Ss (CoU- CrP eD UsRe RP state (usually consisting only of one or two towns), a small electorate and the absence of a professional civil service (a feature imitated in the United States con- stitution, designed of course for a small electorate), gave rise in the city-population to a quality of patriotism now only faintly echoed in rising American towns. ‘This in- tense pride in the city-state developed into wider racial pride from contact with less civilised foreigners and from a somewhat untruthful version of the defeat of Xerxes’ invasion of Greece. The Greeks’ remarkable interest in the human body was inspired partly by the citizens’ pride in what he could offer to the State in time of need (war was the normal relation between states unless they es- pecially declared to the contrary), partly by his homo- sexual conception of love. Women played no important part in Greek life, except that of raising new citizens, and Pericles’ remark that the best woman is not spoken of for good or evil, represents the ordinary view; it sounds strange from the mouth of Aspasia’s lover, but she was merely a courtesan who owed her education to the facilities of social intercourse she gained by her profes- sion. For a love, then, which should include com- panionship besides physical passion, an educated Greek could only go to unmarriageable women like Aspasia or to young men of his own sex. It is easy to under- stand that a cultivated taste in male beauty would be formed in a nation given to such love attachments and 4 TaNG eR OD. UECe ORY, to the passionate friendships which take their place in less strongly-sexed and less complicated natures (that of Achilles and Patroclus is an early literary example), especially when the nation was gifted with a high stan- dard of physical development due to the prevalence of amateur athletics. ‘That the artistic impulse turned so largely towards statues may be attributed to the Greek landscape of strong nude hills ; similarly a country like Holland or Flanders, flat and inviting a rectangular lay- out, calls forth paintings characterised by precise draughtsmanship. The peculiarities of Greek art, then, arise from patriot- ism, from individual self-respect, fostered by the import- ance of the citizen in Hellenic democratic systems, and from an abnormal interest in the male body. In the Hellenistic period, athletics became professional, and war, except in small states of Greece proper, the business of mercenaries. [he average man accordingly lost his interest and taste in male beauty, as did many of the artists. In statues of public persons “‘heroic nudity” is still essential to indicate a super-human nature, but they have heavy, powerful bodies, extremely conventional- ised and unconvincing to the trained eye of an amateur athlete, bodies like cart horses (pl. 51a). In statues of athletes the weak man’s tendency to exaggerate strength is revealed in huge limbs, bulging muscles and brutal faces, like those of the bronze Boxer in Rome (pl. 28) : * LAT ER (GoRSEsE KS CC, Us PiU, RE admiration of the Magnificent Beast is bred in the artificial life of great cities, so that the vigorous characters Theo- critus described for the Alexandrians are Hellenistic prototypes of the cow-boys of modern fiction and of the ape-man, Tarzan, an American conception which has appeared in almost all European languages. ‘The Gaul- ish invasions of Greece, Asia Minor and Italy, gave a new subject to art, the incredible courage of these Zulus of the ancient world, otherwise the cult of the noble savage did not flourish, for savages were too accessible to in- spire romantic feelings. Substitutes were found in the satyrs (frankly comic in archaic art, charming animals in the fourth century) who become expressions of the desire for physical fitness that comes upon the brain- worker—they are healthy, active beings, remote from the commonplace sanity of the streets and from an endless pursuit of what is Vanity. Homosexual love was now declining; the interest in women’s bodies noticeable in the time of Praxiteles was soon widespread, especially in the East; Phcenicia is reported to have been full of songs of adultery, one of which has survived on the wall of a Palestinian tomb, and the great poet of intersexual love, Meleager of Gadara, was a Palestinian and possibly a contemporary of the Jew who composed the “Song of Solomon” from a collection of village marriage-songs. ‘The inferiority of the pioneer female statues may be attributed in part to 6 IS Nicte RO; DEUS Ces OERaY, the fact that failure is more conspicuous in an experi- mental female nude than in a male statue constructed according to a conventional scheme of proportions, in part to a lack of criteria which may have caused the choice of unfortunate models: the inactive life of most Greek women must have encouraged the soft, plump type favoured by sculptors and treated as typical in the erotic literature’s debates on the comparative merits of male and female, the sole alternative to this ideal lying in the muscular Amazon who corresponds to the peasant- woman of the hills. ‘The tendency of female figures is to become steadily slimmer, and improvements were still being made in the time of the Antonines when an apple- breasted type was evolved. But another difference must be noted between the statues of women and their predecessors, the young athletes ; the intention is not so much to be beautiful as to be seductive, and in nearly every case the subject is not a mortal but Aphrodite. Herein lies the clue to a practice that was now formed and has been followed ever since in most countries, of not representing a woman’s body in its entirety ; the idea was foreign to archaic Greek and to Etruscan art and was born, together with the idea of the seductive- ness of woman, in the large Hellenistic cities. The autocratic system of Hellenistic monarchies brought about a decrease in the opportunities and duties of the individual, so there are few citizen statesmen and 7 LAT E Re G REE Kees GrUsLoP Tt UL RE soldiers, types so frequent in early sculpture. Portraits of these monarchs are idealised to express their heroic strength of character in the same way as athletes’ muscles are exaggerated (pl. §1). Portraits of philosophers are also idealised to express their wise and unworldly character, for they were, of course, equivalent to leaders of religious sects; in this capacity their images were set up and venerated everywhere. The commonest variety of portrait is the sepulchral statue of any ordinary man or woman sufficiently wealthy to afford such a monument ; in these the heads were realistic and they alone were important, the bodies were of stock types and only present because busts had not yet come into fashion. Honorary statues which were frequently granted by grateful public organisa- tions, fall in the same class ; as a matter of fact they were usually paid for by the recipient of the dignity, and are indistinguishable from the sepulchral statues of such per- sons. The rich did not, as a rule, patronise sculpture for other reasons ; the falling-off of their political import- ance lessened their desire for public service and increased their inclinations towards luxury; they no longer lavished their fortunes on embellishing the city but built large, comfortable houses, decorated with paintings and mosaics, with perhaps a statue copied from the Old Masters they were taught to admire at school, and some- times with a statue or two of members of the family. 8 IN TRO DIU Crh OTR Y Houses were spacious but, since most people did not want to live with statues, the majority of decorative sculpture was neither large nor in the grand style; faith in the gods was not so intense in these enlightened days, they were therefore represented merely by herms and by statuettes of the more attractive deities such as Aphrodite (female nudes often appeal to a male mind in which esthetic feeling is otherwise dormant) or Eros (no longer the serious grown boy of the fifth and fourth centuries, but the sportive Cupid of all subsequent times, e.g.. a group of third century terracottas from a tomb at Eretria, pl. 1). Cheap statuettes of genre subjects were successful—children or comic actors (among a set found in a fourth century tomb at Athens were the three illustrated on pl. 2, one of which is disguised as a woman); caricatures were innumerable—burlesques of famous statues, old women (pl. 3), negroes (pl. 3), dwarfs, idiots (pl. 3) and all kinds of deformed creatures, rendered more humorous by abundant obscenity. Scenes of country life were not invented till the first century B.c., when they achieved great popularity. It will now be clear that the charge of decadence that was formerly brought against the sculpture of the Hellenistic Age rests on a misconception of its true character. ‘Those who would like this to be a continua- tion of the Age of Phidias will continue to condemn it ; those who appreciate progress and are content to take 9 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE it on its own merits will realise the intrinsic value of this vigorous attempt to express a more complex mentality, while an influence on art in many parts of the world will always evoke unusual interest. IO Cee Abeer shar ce feeb i RST HUNDRED YEARS 334-240 B.c. I HAVE chosen 334, the year in which Alexander began his conquest of Asia, as the upper limit of this book, not because the date marks a turning point in art, but because the ordinary text-books cease to be definite after this, the time of the Sophocles statue, of the temple of Artemis at Ephesus and the monument of Lysicrates at Athens. ‘The situation was this: expressionless render- ing of certain type-figures (the youth, the man, the girl, the woman), such as was perfected with the Parthenon, had given place to an emotional rendering, but the same type-figures continued and the expression alone differ- entiated the gods and satyrs of Praxiteles. A few illustrations will show how far sculptors had progressed. A typical male head (pl. 4a), from a statue of Meleager out hunting with his dog, is possibly an original work by Scopas, but no one can tell with certainty as it has weathered from standing in the open in the gardens of the Villa Medici on a body that does not belong to it. The young man (pl. 5) is wearing ear-guards and so is designated as a boxer ; there is nothing individual about him, body and face are both of the conventional “youth” II LA ER’ GoRrE, B2Kyes; CLUSLaPli Ue RAE type of which the Meleager is an outstanding example. The girl’s head (pl. 6) has been smoothed over till the surface is like wax, but a careful examination reveals delicate modelling which proves it to be structurally an imitation of the earlier style of Praxiteles and its date is not long after 350 B.c. ; the hair was supplied in stucco and painted, not to save marble (the head comes from Chios, which was within easy reach of the Parian quarries) but to avoid unnecessary labour. A head from Cyzicus (pl. 4b) seems to be contemporary. The Capitoline Aphrodite (pl. 7a) is a copy, of the first century A.D., from a statue of which the Dresden head (pl. 7b) gives a truer representation. The woman’s head (pl. 8) probably formed part of a mourning figure placed on a tomb, such as the conventional statue (pl. ga), which, with a copy of Scopas’ figure of a Maenad dancing in Dionysiac ecstasy (pl. gb) illustrates the treatment of drapery. A boy’s head (pl. 10a) is a good Roman copy of an interesting experiment in the manner of Lysippus’ early years. : Lysippus is known to have been Alexander’s favourite sculptor and a general resemblance to his Apoxyomenus and Agias (so far as the bad contemporary copy at Delphi is evidence for it) make it possible that the Athens head (pl. rob) was taken from one of his portraits of the king : he was the author, too, of the statue of a youth fastening his sandal, of which many copies survive (pl. 11a). A 12 etek bel RSet He NUDEIRGE DYE ARES statuette from Cnidus (pl. r1b) is an original by a member of his school. The magnificent Victory of Samothrace in the Louvre is most likely the memorial of a battle, fought in the Dardanelles just after Alexander’s death in 323, that resulted in the disappearance of Athens for ever as a naval power. It was formerly thought that a coin-type of Demetrius Poliorcetes—a Victory blowing a trumpet —was taken from this statue, which would therefore have commemorated his battle of 307, but if correctly restored, the right arm would be stretched upwards, possibly holding a wreath to crown the conqueror ; moreover, Samothrace belonged to a personal enemy who would not have allowed Demetrius to use his land for such a purpose. ‘The coin, therefore, is probably a slightly later imitation. ‘The Louvre figure is a supreme example of the fourth century style free from the characteristic tricks of later drapery ; the head may be reconstructed on the lines of a contemporary original, the Deserted Ariadne (pl. roc), discovered on the south slope of the Acropolis at Athens, although the expression would of course be different. A well-known group, the Massacre of the Niobids, belongs to the same period ; one of the original figures survives, Niobe’s eldest daughter running for her life (pl. 12), and there are copies of the rest ; the left arm of the son (pl. 13) has been wrongly restored, he is in reality supporting a ne LATER GREEK SCULPTURE younger sister, who is lying wounded at his feet, while with his right arm he holds out his drapery as a shield against the arrows of Apollo and Artemis. ‘The head of Niobe seems, to judge by the divergent copies extant, to have so closely resembled that of the Deserted Ariadne that they must surely have been by the same artist, whose name so far remains unknown. A statue of a kneeling youth from Nero’s villa at Subiaco (pl. 14) is allied to the Niobids, but the peculiarly smooth work- manship, probably of Nero’s own age, leaves few criteria for the style of the original ; the subject too is uncertain, but the position of the legs proves that the body is being pushed downwards, perhaps by the attack of a horseman or centaur. In the crouching youth (pl. 15) we have a copy of something similar, corroded by sea water as it comes from an Augustan ship wrecked off the south of Greece ; it has been interpreted as the shepherd boy stalking a nymph of some erotic group, which is borne out by the expression on his face. The well-known “ Sarcophagus of Alexander,” from the royal burial place at Sidon, most likely held the body of the last king, a Pheenician called Abdalonymus, whom Alexander set on the throne about 332; the style of the beautiful coloured reliefs frequently recalls the Niobid group and thus helps to fix its date. An analogous scene (pl. 16a) forms the handle of a gold comb buried with a Scythian prince in a tumulus in 14 feneton Fr leR Sot (HU N DIRSE D YEARS South Russia, an excellent specimen of the metal work executed for the nomads by Greeks of the Black Sea colonies and placed in great quantities in the graves of late fourth and third century chiefs; the designs are in some cases purely Greek and in others, such as this comb, related to the formalised groups of animals produced by the Sarmatian bronze-smiths in Siberia, whose art had an influence on primitive China. Fourth century men and women, under the influence of strong emotions, have an intense look for which the deepset eyes and heavy overhanging brows are largely responsible, and at the commencement of the next century portraits too are strained and lowering. Such an expression was, of course, highly approved by the military monarchs as it was designed to increase the impressiveness of their appearance, and it is present (by nature or design) on the faces of modern Latin autocrats. But the passionate style is not limited to kings: it is applied to gods and goddesses (e.g., the heads from Alexandria, pl. 17a, b), philosophers (pl. 18a), and even to the comic poet, Menander (342-291), whose statue by the sons of Praxiteles stood in the theatre at Athens (pl. 18b). _ This was not the only style employed at the beginning of the third century ; side by side with these super- human beings, whose faces are obscured by the great masses of flesh pressed out under their excessive burden Oh LACT E RUG IRE E RSC UeLaPai iO hoe of thought or emotion, there remained the precise, clear-cut portraits familiar in the fourth century, and of these the bronze boxer (pl. 16b) is a notable example. The Silenus carrying the infant Dionysus (pl. 19) is also from a bronze, of perhaps a few years earlier, but in the same manner ; the date of the original of a Pan (pl. 20a) is not easy to determine though it cannot be far from 300. Eventually the precise manner and the lumpy combined and produced the familiar statue of Demosthenes (the best copy of the head is one recently discovered, pl. 2ob) ; the bronze original by Polyeuctus dates from 280, more than fifty years after Demosthenes’ death, when any contemporary likeness would have appeared primitive and inadequate, hence no trace of an older style can be discerned and it must be considered a fanciful portrait, especially as it closely resembles the heads of Epicurus who died in 270. By this time the study of drapery had led to new developments. In the latter part of the fourth century a crinkly cloth was occasionally suggested, and by 300 its mode of representation had been perfected ; it is found in the copies of Eutychides’ statue of the Fortuna of Antioch, seated above the river Orontes, who is swimming past her feet; in the Girl from Anzio at Rome, a poor copy from a bronze ; also in a number of statues of infants or children holding sacrificial birds (thanksgivings for offspring) a fine example of 16 feniete rel RIS) HeUeN DeRe EDs Y EARS which is the girl with a dove (pl. 21). Young children had not previously been allowed more than a subsidiary place in art; except on a few Attic gravestones of the middle of the fourth century, they appear mere dolls. The Hellenistic types of face are well illustrated by a fragment from Alexandria (pl. 22a) and a bronze satyr- boy (pl. 22b), a fine head of the middle of the third century. The divergent lines of the drapery and the twisted pose which we find in the Fortuna of Antioch occur too in a statue of a girl (pl. 23a), the original of which has been plausibly attributed to Eutychides, and the well-known Sleeping Ariadne, a carefully- plotted drapery study, may be derived from a statue of the same period. The Vatican group of Muses, very popular in Roman days to judge by the number of copies remaining, especially of the Melpomene (pl. 23b), expresses the same aims, balance in pose and drapery without the symmetry of earlier times ; the best pre- served head is one recently identified at Dresden (pl. 24a). A similar facial type is met with in some copies of the “ Medici” Aphrodite, and in the Crouching Aphrodite, by a Bithynian sculptor, Doedalsas (pl. 25a); the goddess is pouring water over herself in what is no doubt a ritual bath, in some copies attended by an Eros standing against her knee. Here we see a reaction against the over-violent style of the Alexandrian goddess head (pl. 17b), and a similar moderating tendency is displayed B 17 LeAVTS ETRe GORGE CES a SiCaUieLere Li aRinkt in male portraits such as the head (pl. 24b) which belongs to the statue of a prince. The realism of Doedalsas’ Aphrodite, a woman in an attitude which emphasises her heavy build, is parallel in a remarkable statue of Heracles sitting on a rock with his club under his shoulder; the back is beautiful, the front, however, is almost repulsive from its extreme carefulness (pls. 25b, 26). A bronze head from Cyrene in the British Museum is a realistic portrait of an African, of Berber stock (pl. 27), and a more striking but less artistic example of realism is the bronze statue of a boxer in Rome (pl. 28). The limbs are grotesquely heavy and coarse, the bestial face appears almost a caricature, with its blood-soaked moustache, toothless mouth and battered ears ; the ideal is repeated in literature by Theocritus, in a description of a boxing match. A group of the skinning of Marsyas can be placed shortly before the Dying Gaul, and so belongs to the neighbourhood of 250; the satyr is tied to a tree, his animal face distorted with fright (pl. 29), while Apollo’s Scythian slave sharpens the knife, with a satisfied eye on his victim (pl. 30a). The grouping is loose, yet marks an advance on previous conceptions : the Niobids formed a series of separate statues or pairs of statues in no way dependent on the rest, whereas the slave is intimately connected with the Marsyas. In the same way another artist of the time linked together a dancing satyr and a 18 etieeeebeleRi oe SH UeNeDERS EDS Y EVAU Rss nymph putting on her sandals to join him ; a restora- tion (pl. 30b) has been carried out with the help of numerous copies, of which good heads are illustrated (pl. 31). The conjunction of the two statues rests on the authority of a coin of Cyzicus, a place in Doedalsas’ country ; it may be that the district is significant, for the nymph is certainly comparable to the Aphrodite at the Bath, though the resemblance is not sufficient to justify an unqualified attribution to the same hand. 19 CHAPTER 3 THE ASCENDENCY OF PER GAG 240-140 B.C. IR the troubled years during which Alexander’s generals were struggling over his empire, Pergamon, a town north of Smyrna, was selected by King Lysimachus for the store-house of his treasury. The officer in charge rebelled in 283 and established a small state which rose to importance when its third king, Attalus, succeeded in checking a tremendous horde of Gauls who had in- vaded Asia Minor and ravaged it for many years. They finally settled in a district named after them, Galatia, where a language intelligible to visitors from France was still spoken in the fourth century a.p. The greatness of Attalus’ achievement (and of Lysi- machus’ wealth) was worthily perpetuated in two dedications, a set of small statues, dating from 201, and an earlier set of colossal statues which may commemo- rate the decisive victory in 241, or the end of the war in 228. The Dying Gaul of the Capitol (pl. 32) is a marble copy (perhaps contemporary) from a member of this larger bronze group, which included too the marvel- lous Dying Asiatic (pl. 33). Wild hair “ like satyrs ” (cf. a contemporary type, pl. 34a) was as much a feature 20 ietieterors CLE N DoE NiCi\Ys O° (PER GAM O'N of the Gauls as their twisted collars and their trousers, but since the Asiatic’s hair is equally disordered where his cap reveals it, we are justified in taking this feature as a mark of the age rather than the race. The treatment of the nude is powerful but restrained and extremely careful, free from the clumsiness of the Boxer in Rome (pl. 28) ; an admirable statue in the same style is the Sleeping Faun (pl. 34b), who should be restored in a less upright posture ; the group of Menelaos carrying the dead Patroclus (familiar from a copy in the Loggia dei Lanzi at Florence) can scarcely belong to any other period ; a Sleeping Fury (pl. 35), itself of poor work- manship, suggests another amazing original, while among portraits there is a life-like and intelligent head of Queen Arsinoe of Egypt, wife of Ptolemy IV, 221-203 (pl. 36), and a startling head of one Euthy- demus (pl. 37a), who dislodged the rightful king of Bactria (North Afghanistan) about 230, and initiated the conquest of Kabul and the N.W. Frontier of India carried out by his son, the first Greek to hold this country since Alexander. Copies of the smaller statues of 201 (chiefly to be found in Venice and Naples) are in Pergamene marble, whereas the bronze originals were at Athens ; the dis- crepancy is best explained by assuming the existence of a duplicate set at Pergamon, from which our copies were taken, for their singular dimensions, two-thirds 21 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE life-size, correspond to the pedestals discovered at Athens, the subjects are known to be identical (fights with Gauls, Amazons, Persians, Giants), and the style displays a transition from the larger group of Attalus to the Altar of his successor. A typical figure (pl. 37) is usually described as a wounded Gaul, but the dress is that worn by Greek soldiers on the Alexander Sar- cophagus, and he has no Gallic characteristics ; the right arm has been restored holding up a sword in a futile way, and it is more likely that he is defending himself with a shield. The modelling of this group has a baroque character absent in the larger statues, the attitudes are theatrical, the surface markings exaggerated, and some of the faces so distorted as to lose all beauty. But there is much to be said for the fragment of a fighting Gaul (pl. 38), as well as for an up-to-date Marsyas (pl. 39), howling, the face working frantically, and the hairy body damp with sweat. ‘To the same period belongs the bronze group of an old and a young centaur, each ridden by an Eros, one of whom has tied the old fellow’s hands together ; the familiar copies in the Capitoline Museum were executed by two Hadrianic sculptors from Asia Minor, in a shiny, dark-grey marble, to reproduce the effect of bronze. The head and pose of the famous Dancing Faun from Pompeii refer it to this period but the body may have been smoothed down a trifle by the copyist; it is deservedly popular 2.2 ietdebeea oC. N DIE IN C Y SOF P E.R GA M:O Ni for its perfect physique, as an embodiment of health. Later Greek artists show a predilection for Herm- aphrodites ; the attempt to combine male and female excellencies usually resulted in a predominance of the female element in the details, though the body is slimmer than a Greek woman’s and the sexual organs are in- variably male. The finest of the existing herm- aphrodites (pl. 40) was much copied, and therefore very popular in antiquity ; the date is about 200 so far as can be ascertained. The still commoner Sleeping Eros (pl. 41b) has been attributed to the same artist, from similarity in points of detail as well as its general arrange- ment. No large architectural sculptures can be attributed to the early part of the third century, but the frieze of a great temple at Magnesia, begun in 221, appears to have been designed soon afterwards, and two or three similar friezes on a smaller scale are preserved in the adjacent islands of Cos and Teos. The style can, however, be better appreciated in a remarkable gravestone from Chios, of a type represented only by one other example from the same island ; the best preserved of the three carved sides (pl. 42) has at the top an ivy-pattern, then a line of sirens (death spirits), a fight between men and centaurs, and a pair of chariots racing past the turning- post ; on another side we see the heroised Metrodorus ad LATER GREEK SCULPTURE standing under a tree beside his tomb with a boy worshipping him. An interesting relief from Corinth (pl. 41a) shows a family sacrifice before the statues of two deities, which are protected by a curtain ; in the distance stands a pillar with two little archaic images upon it. Some of the figures resemble terracottas whereby the date is approximately determined and it is plain that the relief is a precursor of the sculptured landscapes. At the commencement of the second century Per- gamon was the scene of a previously unparalleled outbreak of dramatic town-planning with baroque sculpture worked into the composition ; this should be seen through an architect’s eyes, and I quote Sir Reginald Blomfield, who notes how “in Sicily the temples were ranged along the crests of hills without any apparent attempt being made to connect these in the consecutive design : how too, in the Acropolis at Athens, the placing of the temples was governed by political rather than architectural considerations. But the architects of Per- gamon felt that this was not enough. They felt the necessity of a comprehensive scheme dealing with the work and its building as a whole, so they used to the full the physical features of the site by grouping their build- ings along the crest of the hill. They covered the hollow of the hillside below with the seats of the theatre ; and then, as a firm foundation for the design, they cut 24 THE ASCENDENCY OF PERGAMON the terrace, forming as it were the base of a hollow fan radiating upwards to the sky. It was a great effort in civic architecture, memorable as it was something new in the world and because it was to lead on to the planning of Cesarian Rome. Of the buildings, or groups of buildings, the one which seems to me the most remark- able is that occupying the southern horn of the crescent, the great Altar of Zeus Soter, and I select this because it was to some extent peculiar even in antiquity ; the Pergamon Altar was peculiar not only for its size but its sculpture. Even the obscure Ampelius noted this Altar and its tremendous sculpture; the early Christians regarded it as the special throne of the Devil—these writhing figures of gods and giants in mortal conflict seemed to them the embodiment of all that was evil (pl. 43 )—I doubt if any more gigantic enterprise in sculp- ture has ever been undertaken, for this frieze was not broken by details, such as triglyphs, or returns round architectural members, but was one continuous band run- ning sheer round the building from the steps on one side till it ran out on the steps on the other side. ‘There is something Titanic in the audacity that could venture on such a work. The Pan-Athenaic procession that ran round the cella of the Parthenon was a far more beautiful work, in its exquisite refinement and in its profound instinct for the relation of sculpture to architecture. But that frieze was on an altogether smaller scale, and os LATER GREEK SCULPTURE although it is evident that the sculptors of Pergamon were men of coarser fibre than the sculptors of the Parthenon, yet the use they made of their astonishing technique very nearly replaced the genuine inspiration of the earlier school. I doubt if in the whole range of sculpture it is possible to find such a prodigious tour-de- force, for Hellenistic art had passed the stage of ideal- ism, it sought for realism passionately, for strong, even violent emotion. ‘The giants were shown as half-human, half-animal, the upper part of superb muscular develop- ment, with splendid wings that recall the Victory of Samothrace. The legs below the knee become serpents, which take part in the conflict on their own account. The taste of the latter is questionable, but of the decorative value of the wings there can be no doubt. The wings form a background to those magnificent torsos, and the serpents fill up the intervening spaces, and give the neces- sary recurring motive which binds the whole frieze together. As in the case of the Acropolis at Athens, political motive prompted the architectural treatment : where, however, the advance is made, is in the consecu- tive placing of these monuments: the very best is made of them, not only individually as in the temples of the Acropolis, but as units in one great composition. ‘The architecture is reduced to its simplest expression and it was left to the sculptors to tell the story in a way which. no one could mistake. It is to be recollected that, in 26 THE ASCEN DENCY OF PERGAMON architectural sculpture on a great scale, it is of the great- est importance to keep the masses broad and simple ; and design which results in uniform shadows scattered over the surface will defeat its purpose as architectural design and will contribute little more to the total effect than a vermiculated wall. The peculiar quality of the Gigantomachy is that, by means of the contrast of the torsos with the wings and flying draperies in the lower planes, an admirably varied surface was obtained with- out losing the rhythm of the composition. The speed with which Pergamene sculpture advanced was phenomenal. It was about 188, only forty or fifty years after the Dying Gaul, that the monstrous frieze of the battle of the Gods and Giants was created, a fantastic and unconvincing series of the ferocious struggles of impossible mythological creatures. The treatment of details was as extravagant as the whole, yet the novelty of the style is an illusion, for the baroque mannerisms in technique had been gradually developed from the Dying Gaul through the smaller Attalus group, and similarly the dignified poses of the first set of statues gave place to more striking and melodramatic attitudes in the second and to mere snapshots in the frieze ; some of the gods’ figures, moreover, follow types created by Old Masters, to which the Greeks always remained faithful. ‘The execution of the frieze is as a rule more effective than conscientious, in accordance 27 LAME RSG REE KS Chun PrIeuaR E with its dimensions, and other sculptures of the time are better ; among the finest work from Pergamon are the female head (pl. 44), the dancing girl (pl. 45), in whom a touch of the archaic manner is visible, and a “ pathetic” version of an old portrait of Alexander (pl. 46a) ; the head of an old centaur (pl. 46b) is very typical, though a later copy, so too is the torso of a satyr (pl. 47). It seems strange that one period should excel in both prettiness and virility, and it is worth noting that the phenomenon is repeated in the baroque period of Japanese sculpture (XIII-XIV centuries) and in the European baroque. ‘The portrait of Homer took its final shape at this time and is perhaps derived from a statue of him at Pergamon; the heads called Seneca (pl. 48a) are from another imaginary portrait of ap- proximately the same date, which an Augustan artist has rendered even more dramatic in the familiar bronze copy at Naples (pl. 48b). The smaller frieze of the Altar deals with the ad- ventures of Telephus, the legendary founder of Per- gamon, who was being suckled by a deer when Heracles came upon him (pl. 49, right) ; the next scenes illustrate women decorating a sanctuary of Athena and heroes hurrying ashore. It seems that a reaction against the clumsy pomposity of the Gigantomachy had already set in, some twenty years after, for details are toned down and the action nowhere becomes as hectic as the previous 28 fitters c EN DEN CY OF PER GAM ON generation would have liked. The great interest of the frieze lies in its relation to the landscape com- positions evolved in the following century, for their essential features first appear in it, though the germ of the idea may be traced back to 200, in the sacrifice relief (pl. 41a). The frieze is valuable, too, as it contains examples of a new drapery fashion by which the outer garment appears transparent and reveals the folds beneath. This was especially popular in Asia Minor, in terracottas as well as marbles, but a statue of the kind in Arcadia (pl. 48c) and others in the Islands proves that it was not confined to any one district. ‘The acme of transparency was reached in a statue from Magnesia on the Maeander (pl. 50), probably of the middle of the century, and it was already declining in a statue dated 138. This was the last of the Greek experiments in this line, and, as there was no fresh advance to be made, drapery had little interest for subsequent artists, and usually was frankly based on old models. Among the sculpture contemporary with the Telephus frieze should be mentioned a bronze statue of a ruler who resembles the coins of Demetrius I, King of Syria from 162 to 150 (pl. 51a, b), the body of which is conventionally sturdy and devoid of merit; and a figure from the Temple of Hera built at Pergamon, by Attalus II (159-138), which probably represents Zeus rather than the king (pl. 52). The Athena from 29 LATER (GREE Ke S'C UjLP TU ROE Tralles (pl. 53) is colder than the famous head from Pergamon (pl. 44) although otherwise closely akin. It is an Asiatic example of a style influenced by Phidias, which has been wrongly conjectured to have been restricted to Greece, chiefly from the fame of Damophon of Messene. This artist was the author of a colossal group at Lycosura, a sanctuary of Demeter in the Arcadian hills, the remains of which, in the tiny local museum, give perhaps the truest impression of how cult statues looked in the dim little room inside a Greek temple. The illustrations include the torso of Demeter (pl. 542), the heads of two subsidiary figures of Artemis (pl. 54b) and asatyr Anytos (pl. 54c), and a portion of Demeter’s drapery (pl. 55) carved to represent embroidery, with Nereids on sea-monsters, winged Victories, and a row of animal-headed creatures who occur in local terracottas and represent a very primitive stratum of deities ; Arcadia was noted in antiquity for its religious survivals, among them the worship of a black, horse-headed Demeter, and the persistence of human sacrifice until the second century a.p. Damophon treats his heads in a cursory manner, unlike the Pergamenes, and he was greatly influenced by the fifth century, especially in the Artemis, which is derived from Phidian heads. A return to the classic style of the Old Masters is customary from now on: thus an attractive head of Persephone 30 ieotieeros CEN DEN CY OF PER GAM ON (pl. 56a) in the style of Damophon has passed for a fourth century original, and there are instances of statues reproducing parts of one or more of the acknowledged masterpieces, this especially in Greece though examples from the Islands and Asia Minor are also known. ‘There was in fact a poverty of invention after the rapid progress made with the encouragement of Attalus and Eumenes and the only lines in which satisfactory ability had not yet been attained were realistic portraiture, composition of figures and groups, and landscape. ‘The programme for the next period was thus formulated. 31 CHAPTER 4 THE LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD 1.40 = 209 ABC, Au the Hellenistic kingdoms entered on a decline after 140, dominated by the new power of Rome which had long since conquered Macedonia, which annexed Greece in 146 and was soon to take over Asia Minor, for the last king of Pergamon died in 133, leaving his posses- sions by will to the Roman Republic. The removal of royal patronage meant that Pergamon lost its importance as an art-centre ; another artists’ colony was, however, springing up in the A‘gean. The barren little island Delos had once been distinguished merely by a wealthy Temple of Apollo which lent money at the unusually low rate of 10 per cent., but in 166 the Romans had declared the place a free port (designing it as a rival to Rhodes), after which it rapidly became the headquarters of AXgean trade and the residence of Italian, Syrian and other foreign merchants. This prosperity lasted till the Mithradatic war in which Delos naturally sided with the Romans, for which it was thoroughly sacked in 88 ; Rhodes too adopted a pro-Roman attitude, standing a siege, whereupon the Romans reversed their policy and restored Rhodes its commerce. Delos was feebly 32 Meee Anly be Her sil beNel oolel; Gee Pee Ral O.D trying to recover from this double disaster when a pirates’ raid in 69 devastated the city ; business was transferred to Rhodes or to Italian ports, and only an insignificant village was left on the site. The acres of ruins, now largely cleared by the French School at Athens, form a Hellenistic Pompeii. ‘There are fewer paintings than sculptures among the finds (most of which are housed in a museum on the island), the bulk of the material consists of statues of merchants or officials, both Greek and Italian, in a style scarcely to be dis- tinguished from that of Roman Republican portraits and of identical types ; the standing figures sometimes wear armour, though more appear in the nude, and armed men on horseback also occur; the women, too, are shown in conventional attitudes like those used at Rome. A survivor of many Delian statues in honour of Romans, a nude representation of the official Gaius Ofellius, is signed by two Athenians known to have worked at Rome soon after 150. No doubt the support of such Romans familiarised with sculpture during their residence in the AXgean was largely instrumental in bringing the flood of Greek artists to Italy : since there is no evidence that any Republican portraits are older than 88, the year of the sack of Delos, they must be regarded as late work of the same school and no national Roman influence on portraiture can be admitted. Delian portrait heads are not the products of a stagnant S mH LATE RG REE RUS Cively rata Rae period, but mark a distinct advance on the Pergamene ideals: they substitute line-drawing for chiaroscuro, a system of black cuts on a white face for the high- lights and shadows of lumpy modelling such as we see in the statue of Demetrius I (pl. 51). The transition can be watched in a bronze head with enamel eyes (pl. 56b), the features of which appear to have Italian characteristics, and in a statue (pls. 57, 58a) executed in a more realistic manner that dispenses with the set emotional expression. Unfortunately, the other Delian portraits are unpublished or only available in poor reproductions, and as the rights of publication are reserved to the excavators they cannot be illustrated here ; there are, of course, similar sculptures from other sites, but they can seldom be dated through external evidence like the Delian material, almost all of which must be previous to 69. A gravestone from Smyrna (pl. 58b) in which Pergamene traditions are prominent, represents the dead man heroised, in a pose used at Delos, while the slight indications of landscape and the bold attitude of the squire holding the horse’s bridle, suggest a date later than the Telephus frieze. A youth- ful head from Athens (pl. 59a), in which only faint traces of the Gigantomachy style persist, may be given as representative of idealistic work contemporary with the bronze head ; and the latest Delian style, the black- and-white, is admirably exemplified in another portrait 34 THE LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD from Athens (pl. 59b), in a family group from the neigh- bourhood of Athens (pl. 60), and in a statue of an un- known author (pl. 61), whose drapery closely resembles an Eleusis relief dated about 100-go B.c. (pl. 79). The black-and-white style presumably developed some time before 100, since it is so prominent at Delos, although its progress continued till the middle of the first century: it is employed for Pompey, 106-48 (pl. 62a), and with slight modifications for King Cotys of Thrace, who died shortly before 17 B.c. (pl. 62b). Sculptures other than portraits are rare at Delos, a few imitations of older types will be considered in the next chapter, and the rest have more historical than esthetic value ; yet good work was still being turned out by these artists, for inscriptions of c. 100 prove that among them was Agasias, whose signature is cut on the “ Borghese Warrior ”’ of the Louvre, a dry, anato- mical study of considerable merit based to some extent upon a fourth century original. . Another instance of a variant from a fourth century statue is the Venus of Milo. It might be classed among retrograde works since the cold serenity of the face, akin to a Delos statue’s (pl. 73), is derived from the fifth century (the age of Praxiteles, in which the statue’s prototype was formed, would have preferred a more human expression) : but the complicated pose is a decidedly late feature as is well emphasised in an analysis by Dr. Gerhard 452) LATER GREEK SiC ust Pl Usk E Krahmer. “The right arm pressed close to the breast acts as a frame to the trunk which is energetically raised to the left and turned in the same direction, to be sur- mounted by a strongly-raised head also turned to the left, but the direction of the body changes below the right arm, the movement runs the other way, pushing the region at the top of the supporting leg wantonly out to the right ; and the left thigh is bent forward in the same direction, thus intensifying the effect. Originally, when the statue was complete, the contrast to the move- ment of the trunk was still more striking as the right arm continued, in a way, the theme of the trunk by pointing down to the left. But even now, if we look at the unrestored original, we see at once the contrast between the trunk turned to the left and the middle part of the body bending out down to the right, for the direction of the trunk is repeated by the left shin as well as by the contiguous supporting leg and an end of the mantle which hangs down on the left. The figure there- fore passes through three alternate schemes of move- ment. Still another contrast is afforded by the soaring up of the top of the figure and the droop of the great folds which stretch from free leg to supporting leg. The whole achieves a rhythm that gives the statue a distinct character from all works of the fourth and third centuries. Let us compare for a moment the Cnidian Aphrodite of Praxiteles: the contours of the body run 36 pebiobeninwl bare by LiL BN LSehal COPE I O.D quietly downwards while the parallel forearms follow the turn of the head. The composition hinges on the direction of the glance, which is carried far away in aimless meditation ; to this the entire figure is sub- ordinated. But it is precisely this hingeing of the composition on one point that is absent in the Venus of Milo. On the contrary it looks as if the artist had, without hesitation, avoided the scheme of composition exemplified in the Cnidian, which may be called central, whilst by various conflicting movements he gave his statue an animation that recalls the rising of a flame, and his composition may be named centrifugal.” The Venus shares this complex rhythm of pose with a group of other statues from the A®gean islands and Asiatic coast, one of them inscribed with a date that corresponds to 128-127 B.c. ‘There is, accordingly, no stylistic obstacle to accepting an inscribed base found with the Venus as belonging to it, since 100 B.c. is the date roughly indicated by the lettering ; the beginning of the signature is missing but the sculptor’s name may be restored, as either Alexander or Hagesander and his place of origin is stated as Antioch on the Maeander, a small town in Asia Minor. On the other hand a drawing taken soon after the discovery attaches the base to a Herm. It seems a queer-shaped pedestal for a pillar to stand upon, and I have no faith in the truth- fulness of the sketch ; the absence of any other record 3 DATE RG REE hes CUS ae ha werer of the Herm is not a valid argument against its existence, for in a discovery made so long ago carefulness is not to be expected. The base, in fact, is lost too (this is the way of inscriptions), but a cast of it had been taken, on which the Venus fits no more loosely than is usual with antique statues, since a custom of fixing the feet in with lead made accurate joins unnecessary. An unusual group from Delos (pl. 63) was dedicated by a merchant of Beirut (Beyrouth), a still prosperous Syrian port, where tastes remain unaltered throughout the ages. The subject is erotic, in accordance with the character which an early Syrian Christian gives the place; Pan has been seized, literally and meta- phorically, by Eros (typifying the emotion inspired by his mother), but since Aphrodite threatens him with her slipper, he is obliged to try more persuasion than is his habit. It should be noted that his head is quite different from early types (e.g., pl. 20a), being apparently adapted from a Pergamene original; Aphrodite’s face is very rounded and smooth, somewhat in the manner of a portrait from Athens (pl. 64), a turbaned youth who may be one of the Oriental princes that attended the philosophers’ schools. But thin eyes and a polished surface were still fashionable under the first emperors (they occur in an Agrippina head at Thera), so there is no particular reason to claim as early a date for the turbaned youth as for the erotic group, 38 fee least beh ELL EN! Soil) G PoE RIO). D which can be placed about 100 from the character of the lettering. It may be, however, that a pair of Silenus statues at Delos are good evidence that the hairy figures sup- porting the stage of the Theatre at Athens (pl. 65a) antedate Nero’s reconstruction, to which the stage itself is due ; a theory that they once formed part of the Odeum, rebuilt in 86 by a philhellene King of Cappadocia, has become more plausible since the discovery on the site of fragments in similar technique, and although their suggested provenance must remain hypothetical, the dating at least is satisfactory. The colossal bust (pl. 65b) is one of a pair of supporting figures that stood up against an ornamental gateway at Eleusis, the gift of a Roman, Appius Claudius Pulcher, who died in 48 B.c.; the companion figure at Cam- bridge is too worn to be of interest. The architectural carvings are excellent, but the face and drapery and the little mask on the breast are purely decorative in char- acter ; the hair is of some importance as an older example of the technique used under Augustus. The provenance, as well as comparison with other Greek objects of the first century, testify to the local workmanship of the bust, which, with its contemporary, the portrait of Pompey, has considerable historical value, marking a step in the development of the so-called Roman style. Another monument illustrating the transfer of 39 LATER GREE KS C Url PiU RE Greek art to Italy dates between 35 and 32, when Augustus was still collaborating with Antony; Nero’s grandfather, Cneius Domitius Ahenobarbus, is known to have set up a group of sea-deities by Scopas, and its pedestal seems to have contained some reliefs of sea- monsters, now at Munich, and a relief of a Roman sacrifice in the Louvre. The episode of a Triton carrying off a Nereid in each of his tails (pl. 66), is of rare exuberance that might tempt us to see in it the in- fluence of Etruscan taste if it did not also remind us of the Laocoon, an original of the same period; the sculptor’s nationality must remain a mystery, for the other slabs are Italian in design, yet contain figures of common Greek types. Two of the three Rhodians who collaborated in the Laocoon are known from inscriptions to have held the important civic office of Priest of Athena in their city in 22 and 21; they were then of advanced age, the group may therefore be placed some ten or fifteen years before. Their knowledge of anatomy was not adequate (the lines of the ribs are impossible, and one of Laocoon’s sons has a three-jointed thumb), and their snakes are absurd, but their technique marks the highest point the Greeks had yet attained and it had full scope in such a subject (pl. 67). Studies of age and decrepitude were admirably adapted to these sculptors, and I believe that most of the 40 iene lea BME IL I LoESN ESiiel Cy PoE eR tO D extant types originated at the end of the first century B.c.; the Old Peasant (pl. 68b) is plainly of the school that produced the Laocoon; and the repulsive Old Fishermen (both draped and nude examples), cannot be earlier and are sufficiently like the Laocoon to be classed with it. A statue of an old woman carrying a fowl to market (pl. 68c) has most of the face restored, but another copy (pl. 68a) gives a correct impression of the original head. The well-known second century statue of a drunken old woman nursing a wine-pot (copies in the Capitoline Museum and at Munich), is frankly comic, whereas these later sculptures are serious essays in an esthetic problem treated in the spirit of a modern artist. Like the pastoral scenes which were evolved at the same time, they belong to the art of the Roman Empire rather than to the Hellenistic period. OH APO BE Rens ADAPTATIONS: OF OLDEROWORKR 3 OTHER DECORATIVE SCUDPit where conservatism of a nation is usually strongest in religious matters, and the most ancient images of the gods meet with the greatest veneration. ‘This instinct induced the Greeks not only to preserve crude old statues which had grown powerful through centuries of worship, but also to portray deities as their ancestors had done rather than in a new-fangled style unsanctified by traditions. ‘The movement started, so far as we can see, with those large painted vases that were given away as prizes for the Panathenaic Games. Athletics had a religious aspect (like the drama) and all the great festivals were held in honour of some deity ; this, in the case of Athens, was naturally Athena, and a figure of her occupies one side of the vase, the other bearing a scene of running, wrestling, or whatever the event might be for which the prize was awarded. All through the fifth and fourth centuries, the Athenas imitate the stiff- ness and incapability of primitive art and the painting is always in the awkward process, black on a red ground, that went out of date in the sixth century. Early in the fourth century, mannerisms appear—the swallow-tail 42 ADAPTATIONS OF OLDER WORK end to drapery is the most typical—and this marks the beginning of an archaistic school whose object was to convert the formal incompetence of archaic sculpture into pleasantly quaint decoration, especially in the shape of reliefs with figures almost exactly alike placed flatly in rows. ‘The idea was a great success, and held its ground for the next five hundred years without any fresh display of originality. In the frieze illustrated (pl. 69), a typically lifeless row of Seasons (one of the four is missing in this copy) follows the bearded Diony- sus, who holds his pine-branch ; a German scholar, Edouard Schmidt, whose knowledge of the subject entitles him to speak with authority, dates the original relief about 300, remarking that its figures are con- structed according to the scheme of proportions invented by Lysippus. In another class of retrograde statues, fifth century formalism was applied to the freer conceptions of later days, a convention which in capable hands could yield results of surprising beauty. An early example, ap- parently of the time of Alexander (compare the drapery of the sepulchral statue, pl. ga), is a supporting figure of which copies have been found at Tralles in Asia Minor (pl. 70), and in Algeria, among a collection formed in the Augustan age by the native king, Juba ; the original presumably stood at Athens, since two heads have been discovered there. The next batch of 43 LoAST ERG RoE EB, Bats CoUn is bb Uke statuettes and reliefs belongs to Pergamon, where some free copies of famous fifth-century sculptures were to be seen and artists obviously studied the work of their predecessors, thus of a row of girls dancing round the circular pedestal of some destroyed monument, one (pl. 45) is nearly in the style of the Gigantomachy, while another is extremely archaistic; a statuette (pl. 71) is inspired by primitive art though it is too sophisticated to be an exact reproduction. A generation later, the same tendency cropped up in literature, authors of the late second and first centuries reverting to the Attic dialect of two hundred years before. Sculptors like Damophon came to appreciate the simple lines of the Phidian school after the carnal extravagances of Pergamene royal monuments, with the result that henceforth it is more often the surface treat- ment than the form which identifies a retrograde sculp- ture, and the border-line between such and ordinary contemporary work is sometimes nebulous. ‘This arch- aistic neatness renders the statue of a lady (pls. 72, 73), found in a large house at Delos, one of the most beautiful of Hellenistic sculptures. The type originated in the fourth century and there are many copies extant, which vary in date by four centuries, but none equal this one in excellence ; it belongs to the later second century. The boy from Tralles (pls. 74, 75), whose bruised ears are a sign of the boxer, is a masterpiece of the same 44 Aer AS Pa teAy ll) OONESBOshs OLE DEEeR ss WlO RvK kind, the head being imitated from the fifth century although the crossed-legged pose began with Praxiteles and the cloak could not be older than the Pergamene kingdom. The Aphrodite found at Cyrene a few years ago (pl. 76), is almost a copy of an early fourth century type of the foam goddess rising from the sea and wring- ing out her hair, a lock of which fell against her arm and so accounts for a lump on the marble (the presence of a dolphin was a long-established means of indicating that the scene was laid in the sea, but the symbol’s tail also serves as a stand for the crumpled drapery that sets off the smoothness of the figure). The smoothness is perhaps overdone and the structure of the body has not received enough attention: the fatty surface of the legs and the singular length of the abdomen are not the only features at which offence has been taken. Another statue from Cyrene, in the British Museum, appears to be by the same hand, an Apollo playing the lyre, a free copy from a well-known original of Praxitelean age: it enables us to visualise the missing head of the Aphrodite, with crinkly hair and a face polished smooth though with sharp, clear-cut lines to the features, rather as in a magnificent head at Boston (pl. 77), which is ascribed to the fourth century though of less massive build than was then customary. ‘The interest in female bodies, that made the statue an improvement on its original, is a feature of the age, exemplified by the Venus of Milo 45 LATE RYG REE KeS Curl Pasur RE and by an admirable fragment (pl. 78) that represented either a nymph or else the deserted Ariadne being found asleep by Dionysus and his satyrs, a scene illustrated on a late Etruscan pediment and in a painting at Pompeii. Among the countless ancient statues using fourth century types for sepulchral monuments, whose imitative character usually rules out the possibility of precise dating, a few are executed in a style definitely attribut- able to the end of the second or the first century. The best of them, the Mourning Woman in the British Museum, was once ascribed to the period it imitates, but now others have been studied it is clear that the face is late, being of a slight build quite different from those of Attic grave-stele, but comparable to the Delos lady’s (pl. 73). There are reminiscences of the Parthenon frieze in the heads and poses of an enormous relief showing deities connected with the Eleusis Mysteries (pl. 79) ; the date is known to be about 100-90. The drapery is remarkable from its use of deeply-cut shadow lines instead of projecting folds, a pictorial rather than sculptural convention which was adopted at Rome ; a more pronounced example belonging to the Augustan period is the curious scene of Drama presenting a tragic actor’s mask to Euripides, in the presence of an archaistic statue of Dionysus, the patron of the stage (pl. 80). 46 DoD PAtt Awl le ONS) Ors tORLl Deb Ra WoO ROK From the repulsive ugliness of early first century portraits, came a reaction to prettiness which was always in some way archaistic. A vigorous school, of which Pasiteles seems to have been the leader towards 50 B.c., executed copies and adaptations of the archaic in a dainty, refined manner, well illustrated by the Capitol bronze of the boy pulling a thorn out of his foot, in which a statue of the Lysippic period has been deprived of its proper head (curly-haired and realistic in the British Museum copy) and given a prettier, the source of which was an archaic standing figure known from marble replicas ; the combiner was not troubled by the laws of gravity, by which the long hair that sat close to the head on an upright figure should fall over the face when looking downwards. Many bronzes in Naples from the villa outside Herculaneum are of the same class, includ- ing the Resting Hermes (probably of Lysippic origin), the dancing girls, and the bearded head of Dionysus, popularly known as Plato. A marble head (pl. 81a) is taken from an Attic votive figure of ¢c. 500, with artificial smile and elaborately curled hair ; art was then as full of mannerisms as at any time in history. This Pasitelean school grew into the Augustan, changing the realistic portraiture of the Greco-Repub- lican style into an idealistic manner fit for the semi- divine imperial family, whilst the Etrusco-Republican high reliefs with a single row of figures gave way to 47 LATE RG ROE RSS Cre LP Ue RoE pictorial low reliefs with carefully graded perspective . (pl. 82), a method adumbrated in the Eleusis relief of c. 100-90. For draped figures of women the Augustan sculptors adopted the late Hellenistic style of the Delos lady (pl. 72) and the Mourner in the British Museum, using the identical types in many cases, and their heads when not distinctly portraits are evidently derived from the same source ; in personifications, such as the fine Germania Captiva (“ Thusnelda”’) in the Loggia det Lanzi, and the pastoral scene from the Ara Pacis, they struck out a new line and set the tone of this most im- portant branch of Roman art. It is noticeable that as time goes on the style gets more sensual and the surface modelling softer, as with the Pre-Raphaelite painters ; nothing could be softer than the bronze “ Narcissus ”’ of Pompeii, or some sculptures from Nero’s villa at Subiaco, the kneeling boy (pl. 14) and the sleeping Ariadne (pl. 81b), a variation of a well-known theme. The Pasiteleans had humbler contemporaries in a group of decorative sculptors whose signatures call them Athenians, and hence are commonly described as the Neo-Attics. They were the makers of those gigantic marble vases (pl. 83) surrounded with a row of figures in relief, each a stock type taken from their repertory without much regard for the context it was destined to adorn; in their other work the same figures are used, repeated on panels and friezes in marble or 48 ADAPTATIONS OF OLDER WORK terracotta or stucco, on furniture, on gems, on the em- bossed Arretine pottery manufactured between 40 B.c. and 80 a.p. ‘The types are borrowed from all possible periods, and no matter what the subject they are all treated in the same fashion, lifeless yet effective as decoration, like Leighton’s pictures of antiquity (pls. 84-87). The school was most productive during the Augustan age, although it originated before the end of the second century. A statuette (pl. 88) is one of its earliest products : the type itself is taken over from the late fourth and third centuries when it is common in Tanagra terracottas, but the thin outer garment is skilfully treated to reveal the folds in the tunic beneath, a trick invented, as we have seen, shortly before the middle of the second century ; the soft modelling of the face is also usual at that time, while elongated bodies are customary in the mannered sculpture of any age. The stucco ceilings of an early imperial house at Rome include good examples of much of the typical decoration of the period at which the Neo-Attics reached theiracme. A winged Victory (pl. 87b) attenuated and exquisitely poised, and wearing a floral crown, is a popular adaptation from a type of the fourth century archaistic school; the panels of women smelling a flower (an archaic motive), have the same affected features as a gravestone from Sardinia (pl. 89) ; and the untidy Italian landscape (pl. 86b) shows the feeling D 49 sy VAT £ RGR EE RSS CoUsiePel Ue Rar for nature only at its mildest, that runs through all Latin literature. The source of reliefs and paintings of country life can be traced back through the Telephus frieze to the Corinth relief of a sacrifice (pl. 41a) ; they are now established as a recognised form of art, but the full development was reserved for the first and second centuries A.D., and is therefore outside the sphere of this book. Its work is done when it has determined Roman art to be in fact an unbroken continuation of Greek art, with the stimulus and guidance of Roman patronage. 50 CHAPTER 6 fev l IN THE HELLENISTIC AGE Ar this period the history of the western Mediter- ranean is almost monopolised by the expansion of Rome, which had already overcome the Etruscans, which crushed the Greek colonies of south Italy early in the third century and obliterated Carthage in 146. Except in France, where art was prohibited on religious grounds till Cesar broke the power of the Druids, Greek influence predominated through this region ; in the fifth century it had even given rise to a vigorous school of sculptors in Spain, though this had died away. A new centre appeared at Carthage. In primitive times Egypt had its effect here as in other Phcenician zones, but soon the local terracotta figurines were in semi-Greek style, and one of the sarcophagi, which alone represent large sculpture, was obviously designed and carved by a Greek, for it is normal Athenian work of the early fourth century. Other sarcophagi of Parian marble are possibly by Greeks, but the figures on their lids take the shape of recumbent effigies, whereas in Greece, cremation had led to the use of upright ceno- taphs, hence no complete analogies can be cited. The finest sculpture yet discovered at Carthage is the coloured Si DAVE EUR 2G REE sR iKees CoUs Libs UeRek sarcophagus of a priestess wearing the robes of Isis and Nephthys, her body hidden by the two wings of the sacred vulture which wraps her round from head to foot (pl. goa). It is singular that the bones within the sarcophagus were those of a very aged woman, though on the lid she appears in the prime of life. An ornamental cuirass from another Tunisian tomb is paralleled by some South Italian specimens; an Etrus- can inscription, moreover, was found in a Carthaginian cemetery, whilst from Corneto comes a sarcophagus of Parian marble closely resembling the Carthaginian specimens. Obviously, artistic relations with Italy were closely maintained. But Italy at this epoch was politically and culturally a greatly diversified country. Most important were the civilised city-states of the Etruscans in the centre and of the Greeks in the south and Sicily, dour Rome (in the hands of those elderly patricians so much admired by their descendants, and bearing much the same cultural relation to Etruria as Canada to the United States), and the scattered Roman colonies. In addi- tion, there were numerous tribes of various stocks and languages that came under Greek influence if they lived in the South, Etruscan if they lived in the Apen- nines, both if they lived in Campania. A mass of Gauls in the Lombard plain imported a few objects of Etruscan art, in rare instances producing unsuccessful imitations §2 fetebenWaelssets [oN T Hoe oH Biol Ee NS i 1 CA GE of them. In the foot-hills of the Alps, in Switzerland and in the Tyrol, was a peculiar form of art, chiefly represented by bronze buckets engraved in bands with crude figures derived from Greek and Etruscan vases of the early sixth century : it lingered on for centuries practically unchanged, so that in the frieze of an arch built in honour of Augustus at Susa, near Turin, can be traced a mixture of this old style and the ordinary Roman. A carved stone throne in the Corsini Gallery (pl. 91), must belong to some such local school of perhaps the third century ; in plan it resembles the chairs used in Etruscan tombs for holding anthropomor- phic vases. The Greek cities of the south coast declined during the Hellenistic period, partly because they came into collision with Rome, partly, it may be, from the malaria that has now resulted in the desertion of large stretches of shore-line which formerly supported a great population. The arts of Magna Graecia flourished most in the fifth century, a decline commencing in many towns in the fourth ; at Tarentum, the most important of them, coins and ornamental vases and _ silver-plate ceased to be of interest in the third century, and soon after ceased to be produced. Canosa seems to have been the only place where the output of vases was con- tinued into the second century, and they can hardly pass as fine art ; it may be significant that its inhabitants a LA T(E. RG REE KyS C UelePad Uy RE were not purely Greek—in Horace’s day they were “ pilingui.”’ A curious relief from the neighbourhood of Bari (pl. gob) gives us a limestone version of the floral decora- tion common on painted Apulian vases ; in the middle is a winged figure of Eros and on the right-hand edge a diminutive griffin. The sloping line of the top suggests the right side of a pediment, which from its scale probably belonged to a tomb. ‘The composition is frankly pictorial, for North Apulia was the home of painting, not of sculpture. On the other hand, South Apulia, the Tarentum region, abounds in terracotta heads and is fairly rich in stone sculptures of the fourth and third centuries, principally friezes and other fragments of sepulchral monuments. ‘The style is fifty years behind the times, scarcely to be distinguished from that of late fifth century sculpture such as the Phigalia frieze in the British Museum. ‘Thus a relief of a soldier (pl. 92a) has recently been ascribed to the early fourth century because of its classic severity, although the under- cutting of its drapery to produce effects of light and shade ought to preclude any dating before 300. A slight» trace of Praxitelean life = hase peer infused into a female head cast in plaster from an ancient mould (pl. g2b); some terracotta heads have features resembling Alexander’s, being no doubt of 54 Deane teVebto wl IeN Db Hoey LEN TS ft G A GE the third century ; sculptures of more recent date are rare. The rest of South Italy and Campania have yielded practically no sculptures, while the Sicilian contribution consists merely of some coarse rock-carvings of local deities and a colossal head of Zeus from the great Altar of Hiero II at Syracuse, in the style of the Pergamon Altar ; a few statues at Syracuse are as likely to be of the Imperial age. A pair of heads found in the sea near Girgenti, now in the British Museum, have been called Hiero and his Queen Philistis, though more like work of 350 than 280. Whatever the causes, it is certain that sculpture had a short and inglorious life in Greek Italy, although among the Etruscans it flourished for six centuries, almost equally ingloriously. The Etruscans had adopted the art of Greece whole- heartedly as soon as it was worth adopting, but utilised its forms to express their own life and religion ; they produced no more slavish imitations after the fifth century. ‘They were a people greatly concerned with Death, who needed sculpture less for the decoration of temples than for sepulchral effigies, the thousands of which follow set types without differing much from one another, like the portraits in Egyptian tombs. ‘This would inevitably make them somewhat dull and, in addition, the quality of the workmanship is usually Bi) DATE R G ROE E Kes C UL Peo eR LE extremely low; yet Etruscan sculpture deserves atten- tion for two reasons, its influence on Rome, and its resemblance to the Renaissance work of the same district. The first is, of course, the subject that concerns me here, though it may not be out of place to attempt an explanation of a remarkable historical phenomenon. The Etruscans, who formed at least the ruling class of the country, were immigrants from Asia Minor, accord- ing to ancient tradition as well as philological and archeological evidence, yet as their invasion did not cause a sharp break in Italian culture, it must be assumed that a large proportion of the original inhabit- ants were allowed to remain ; in historic times the nation appeared to be homogeneous. It spoke an unknown language, and all the information we possess is derived from its monuments and the unflattering descriptions of ancient authors ; the Romans had been Etruscan sub- jects in the far-off days and had fought for centuries before they gained the mastery, so it may be that they were unjustly prejudiced, but the Greeks, too, were shocked at Etruscan habits; gluttony, superstition, and a canine interest in sex, are the failings ascribed to the Etruscans, and the first at least is a fact, of which study of sepulchral figures affords convincing proof. It can be established too that they had full features, thick bodies and short legs; their faces were sometimes handsome, if fleshy, but a large number of both men and 56 Genet Web onl TON Tan Ee Hee LEN PS tt CAG E women were of striking ugliness. ‘This is at the present day the dominant type in the population of central Italy (including Rome), and it would seem that they have to some extent inherited the zxsthetic and moral ideals of the Etruscans as well as their physical aspect. The stock must be strangely persistent, for there are few traces remaining of the ancient Roman element or of the Germans who formed the upper class families in medieval Tuscany. The ordinary type of portrait statue represents the deceased drinking with garlands round his head and neck, a Valhalla motive common in Greece and else- where: the pose originated with the banqueters on archaic Athenian vases, and remained in use till the Etruscans ceased to exist as a nation in the first century B.C. ‘Toscanella,a place near Corneto, is the source of a man’s sarcophagus decorated with sea-monsters (pl. 93), and of an unusually pleasing figure of a woman (pl. 94a) in which the drapery over the legs is arranged in con- ventional folds, although the face shows that Etruria was in touch with the Greece of Alexander’s day ; another man’s sarcophagus from the same site (pl. 95) clearly belongs to a more advanced period, in fact to the third century. The preceding large sarcophagi are intended for the reception of unburned bodies, but the practice of cremation became more frequent in the third century 5, DAT Et Re G2R iE BRS Cy Us Le Pe Rae and the ashes were deposited in rectangular urns, the lids of which retained the traditional figure with a drinking bowl, while the box underneath bore elabor- ately carved reliefs on front and sides; the subjects were usually chosen from Greek mythology. For cheapness’ sake terracotta was much used, and the reliefs of many urns have obviously been cast from the same mould. A marble urn in Florence (pl. 96) has an unusually fine battle scene that immediately recalls the Alexander Sarcophagus, but the involved composi- tion, the extremely vigorous attitudes, as in Pergamene groups, and the painful terror of the fallen, will not allow of an earlier date than the middle of the third century. A kneeling soldier in the left-hand corner is defending himself with a shield of the oval Gallic variety, and side panels deal with incidents in the legendary raid on Rome, interest in which would have revived after the reappearance of the Gauls in the third century. Alexander’s careless, florid beauty, found ready ad- mirers in Italy, and his features are reflected in the heads of this urn and many others as well as in Tarentine terracottas and in the terracotta pediments of the Temple of Apollo at Old Falerii, one fragment of which appears in pl. g7a. Falerii was destroyed in 241 by the Romans, who built a new town four miles away, and although the Temple was left standing among the ruins till early in the Empire, it is safe to assume that its pedimental 58 ereteevWebis tf ol Nyt H Bb Hor DeLee N lS Tol C AGE sculptures antedate the removal of the city. It should be said that the surface of terracotta is better adapted to sculpture than the coarse local rocks of Etruria, life- size painted statues were made of it as early as the sixth century, and its popularity was not affected when the alabaster of Volterra came into general use towards 200 B.c. The marble quarries of Carrara were first worked by the Romans, Etruscan sculptures and temples in the neighbourhood were of terracotta. Of four terracotta heads discovered a few years ago at Arezzo, one is scarcely to be distinguished from Greek work of the beginning of the second century (e.g., the Pergamene Gigantomachy and the “ Dying Alexander”’ of the Uffizi), whilst the others follow the ordinary lines of distant Greek ancestry such as we see on the urns. Other instances of Pergamene inspiration are afforded by a number of bronze statuettes of fighting Gauls, including two found at Telamon, where their invasion of Italy had been finally checked in the battle of 225, and by terracotta groups from the pediments and frieze of a temple near Sassoferrato. In a portion of the frieze reproduced on pl. g4b, the Gauls who raided Delphi in 279 are dropping their loot to escape the quicker from the assaults of Apollo and Artemis. How closely the better Etruscan artists continued to follow the Greek lead is shown by the bronze Orator from Lake Trasimene (pl. 97b). A similar rendering of 3g LYA ST ERY GeRen eR aC Usle rat su. Rak the garment occurs in a statue at Delos of the merchant Dioscurides, dated by the inscription to 138 or 137, and were it not for the unfortunate accident that honorary statues of that time were nearly always in bronze and have therefore been melted down, we should no doubt have many others with which to compare it. The most richly ornamented of all later Etruscan tombs is the family vault of the Volumnii outside Perugia, and one of the urns within it is of equal magnificence (pl. 98). Dennis’ romantic account of “the grand monument of the sepulchre,” conveys the impression aimed at by the sculptor, besides describing the now faded painting. ‘‘ In the centre is represented an arched doorway, and on either hand sits, at the angle of the urn, the statue of a winged Fury, half-draped, with bare bosom and a pair of snakes knotted over her brows. One bears a flaming torch on her shoulder, and the other probably bore a,similar emblem, but one hand, with whatever it contained, has been broken off. They sit cross-legged, with calm but stern expression, and eyes turned upwards, as if looking for orders from on high, respecting the sepulchre they are guarding. ‘The arch- way is merely marked with colour on the face of the monument, and within it are painted four females— one with her hand on the door post and eyes anxiously turned towards the Furies outside—wishing, it would seem, to issue forth, but not daring to pass the threshold 60 Teele Wel Sole loN) tins Es HE LEN USil IGA GE through dread of their stern gaolers.” A subsequent member of the Volumnii family made use of the vault for the reception of his own urn, which is shaped like a Roman temple and bears his name in both Etruscan and Latin; the lettering and ornament alike class it as Augustan. A few scraps of evidence lead one to guess the length of time between the first and last burials as between fifty and one hundred years, so that the incep- tion of the tomb may be placed soon after 100 B.c. That the man who lies in the best urn was the builder of the tomb (or rather the excavator, for the material is solid rock) is attested by the presence of his name and his brother’s on the doorway—the rest of the inscription is of course unintelligible—as well as by the style of the roof and wall carvings, which appear to be by the same hand as the guardian demons. Etruscan sculpture of the last period favours remark- ably high relief, baroque poses and a gealism that, as in contemporary Greece, will mitigate no ugliness. A good example of Volterra alabaster (pl. gg) displays all these tendencies, while a terracotta urn from Chiusi (pl. ro0a) is by no means unsurpassed in fidelity to unpleasant nature. The British Museum has recently acquired the lower part of an alabaster urn (pl. 101) on which is represented a religious procession ; horsemen in Roman equipment and carrying branches are moving two deep, preceded by men playing the lyre and the 61 LACE E Re GeRTEtE KS Cru WEP ey Wikia c: double flute, towards a little shrine where a sheep is being sacrificed. ‘The scene and its details immediately recall Roman usages, and it has been surmised that we have here a troop of knights taking part in the annual ride through Rome that celebrated the battle of Lake Regillus. But there can be no doubt that the urn is of Volterran alabaster, while the mouldings above and below form the customary decorations of Volterra urns ; the style, too, is that of Volterra. ‘The date can hardly be earlier than the first century ; the inhabitants of the town were then Roman citizens, and the man who ordered this urn may have been a knight who wished to advertise the fact. In any case such a well-marked prototype of the Roman historical relief is valuable evidence that the style not only originated in Etruria, but had developed there along the lines maintained in Rome. A glimpse of the condition of sculpture in early Rome may be gained from a monument erected by the Fluteplayers’ Guild about the time of Sulla—the date is established by the lettering. It was a large and pretentious affair, but the figures (pl. 102a, b) are in peperino, a vile form of lava that looks like coke, and they prove, I think, that the Rome of the early first century had barely begun to be an art centre. It was in fact at this time, about 80 B.c., that the ~ second © style’ of Pompeian frescoes made its appearance in 62 (ele be Wet sot ION Tt HE HL be NIS fr C AGE both Rome and Pompeii; previously, walls had merely been laid out in panels, but now they are painted with fantastic architectural conceptions, classical counter- parts to the Albert Memorial. A city that indulged in such art was plainly abreast of the times. Contempor- ary buildings reach a high standard, their decoration being equal to any Rome ever produced, yet figure reliefs are mostly as crude as the Fluteplayers’ Monu- ment, and little can be said in favour of the terracotta votive heads that form the commonest sculptural relics of the Republic, and were still made throughout the first century of the empire (predominantly in Rome, but the idea was possibly taken over from Greek Apulia by the Etruscans). The rapid Hellenisation of society during the life- time of Pompey and Cesar attracted Greek artists to Italy in large numbers ; some had visited Rome shortly after 150 to equip new temples with cult-statues. Republican portraiture is, as I have pointed out above, a continuation of the art that flourished at Delos before the catastrophes of 88 and 69: Greeks must be held responsible for most of the Republican portraits, though a few are due to Italian imitators; thus a limestone head from Palestrina (pl. 103) betrays the local sculptor with Etruscan rather than Greek training, recalling the terracotta urn from Chiusi (pl. 100a) more than the Greek portrait of Pompey (pl. 62a). Such instances 63 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE are rare, the old-fashioned craftsmen largely confined themselves to terracotta, and even in this material the native style soon perished. ‘The depth to which Greek influence penetrated in the applied arts can be judged by the crude bone carvings ornamenting couches of approximately Augustan date: a half-length of a woman (pl. roob) has at first sight an Etruscan air, but the garments can only be intended for Greek, the arm is held in a traditional Greek pose across the breast, wrapped inside the drapery; half-lengths are usual in late Hellenistic sepulchral monuments from Asia Minor ; the whole, in fact, is imitated from a conventional Greek statue. The vast majority of “ Republican ” portraits belong to the century following Cesar’s death in 49; there is no evidence indeed that many are previous to the founda- tion of the empire in 27. The realistic manner was not entirely swamped by the Augustan wave of archaistic sobriety : the idealistic portraiture which enjoyed the patronage of the imperial family did not commend itself to private individuals who desired genuine likenesses, so there is no break in the production of ‘““Republican”’ portraits, merely a gradual improvement exemplified by datable bronze busts from Pompeii, until the style came again into publicity with Vespasian, a man with a sense of humour who felt no need for sham dignity. Perhaps his Italian country origin induced 64 DedeeeeWeboet ION TH ob HEL LEN TS iC A GE him to revert to a less foreign art, for the Etruscan high- relief style used under the Republic, and eclipsed by the Augustan pictorial low-relief, returned to official use in panels of the Arch erected by his son Titus. Credit is justly given to the Etruscans for originating the Roman historical reliefs, but their share in the development of portraiture is a myth, for in this respect they merely followed the course of Greek developments so far as their vulgar taste was able. ‘The Romans them- selves took no share in the growth of their national art, except by reserving their patronage for the style that pleased them and specifying subjects drawn from Roman life. The majority of sculptors in the city appear to have been foreigners from further east, though local workmen and dilettanti imitated them: a divergence in style between the western (Latin-speaking) and eastern (Greek-speaking) sections of the empire is apparent, but most of the rare signatures attached to bi “western” sculptures give the names of Greeks. CH ACPD ER oy THE HELCUCENTS T 1] Gaya ‘Larover the Greek cities of Cyprus and the treaty- ports established on the mouths of the Nile, Greek art was introduced to the admiring East as soon as it had outgrown the crudities of its beginning: the Cypriotes immediately gave up copying the Egyptians and developed along lines similar to those of Greece, and Dr. H. R. Hall has pointed out that Egyptian sculptors adopted the “ archaic smile ” towards the end of the sixth century. The Persians were familiar with the new art before their empire’s extension to Egypt and Cyprus, for the AXgean coast of Asia Minor had long been thickly peopled by Greeks, and other settle- ments were scattered along the south coast. ‘The court art of Darius and later Achemenians, a Mesopotamian development compounded with Egyptian elements, drew much of its technique from Greek sources, so that the old Assyrian rendering of limbs, drapery, hair and eye-sockets became quickly modified in accordance with Greek advances in skill. By the end of the dynasty minor works of art were directly inspired by Greeks, though the royal reliefs kept to the old forms. Alex- ander’s policy of planting Greek cities, enthusiastically 66 Siete eet eh eee boN) Seale Cun tArS sh) followed by his successors, resulted in a speeding-up of the inevitable process of Hellenising Oriental art, but the cities themselves went the usual way of the Levant : their population became cosmopolitan, and, at any rate in Egypt, sense of nationality faded in the original settlers’ families, intermarriage with natives or other foreigners helping to break down their Hellenic culture. These tendencies are clearly visible at Alexandria, where the oldest sculptures are just like those in any other Greek town (¢.g., pl. 17a, b); the third century output is very large, of poor quality and remarkably uniform, the work of monumental masons rather than artists (though the portrait of Queen Arsinoe, pl. 36, is a fine achievement in the best Greek style of the period) ; in the second century the amount is small and the quality lamentable. At the same time Greek residents often patronised native sculptors, who con- tinued to work in the old Egyptian style, though Greek influence is evident in the reliefs of a tomb dated about 300, while in the first century a few portraits of a mixed style appeared, the bodies rendered in traditional attitudes and the heads in asemi-Greek manner (pl. 104¢): apart from these, Egyptian art remained completely Egyptian. The Greek colonies were in fact being fast absorbed in the surrounding population when the Romans revived their culture by increasing their political importance ; the portrait paintings and stucco 67 DA EeR GtRSE EK (Ss C.U else ere E busts of Roman Egypt are the work of half-Orientalised Greeks who mummified their dead and worshipped local deities. Egyptian culture had long ago spread over the nearer parts of Africa and at one of its outposts, Meroe, capital of an Abyssinian kingdom in the Sudan, recent excavations have established the surprising fact that Greek objects were imported intermittently as early as the fifth century and constantly from roo B.c. to the second century A.D., provoking rare native imitations ; the presence of an Etruscan urn proves intercourse also with Italians. Egypt under the Ptolemies was a great power, with protectorates as far away as the Agean ; among its dependencies was the Cyrene district to the west, purely Greek in its civilisation ever since the seventh century colonists had crushed the native Berber population, and Cyprus, inhabited by both Greeks and Pheenicians, whose sculptors tried in their portraits to effect Hellenistic realism with the use of as little model- ling as possible, while in other lines they monotonously repeated older Cypriote types with bad workmanship. Pheenicia also came occasionally under Ptolemaic rule, and there is an Egyptian element in sculpture of the period ; the art of this people was always a more or less incongruous blend of all others known, Greek and Egyptian influences being the most prominent in classical times. One of the best of the later monuments 68 ; 46 DSU 12 ABD AS IG Ae ao sp ey GPa Cte ID ANAS 9b is the gravestone of Baalyaton (pl. 104b), which can be dated by the lettering to the second century ; the figure stands in the Assyrian attitude of worship, the feet are placed one before the other according to conventional Oriental perspective, the details are treated in Greek style, and on the top we see the winged disc of the Egyptian sun- god. Other gravestones of natives show Greek motives inefficiently carried out, whilst the painted stones of mercenaries stationed at Sidon are purely Greek; a certain number, too, of sculptures in the pure Greek style are known, besides the “* Alexander Sarcophagus.” The decay of Greek towns in the Seleucid empire cannot be traced with such detail as Egypt affords, because the evidence is scanty: no important Hellen- istic site has yet been excavated in Syria, inland Asia Minor, Mesopotamia, Persia or Afghanistan, and in these partially or wholly desert regions, fortuitous discoveries do not occur as in Rome or Athens or Alex- andria. Antioch, the final capital of the Seleucids, was one of the largest and richest of Hellenistic towns, yet we know nothing of its art before the Roman period ; Armenia has yielded a fine bronze head of Aphrodite (in the British Museum) in the style of the Telephus frieze ; from Seleucia on the Tigris, the seat of a Seleucid viceroy, comes a head of a priest wearing a fillet, now in the Brussels Museum; in plan and ornament, the theatre at Babylon is purely Greek, and occasional 69 LAIR E RR GREE Roy S Co Libel Ua Rae statuettes of more or less degraded Hellenic work are brought from Babylonia; the ruins of Ionic temples may be seen in Persia and a pair of satyr heads found near Kermanshah seem to be Greek of the third century ; nothing has so far been reported from Afghanistan. The Greek language was widely used for inscriptions (the alphabet, moreover, was adopted, with a few extra letters, for writing the local Semitic dialect), and the colonists were faithful for a while to their old religion, yet there is no reason to believe that the better features of Hellenism endured for long in the new cities, or that their inhabitants were noticeably more artistic than is to be expected in colonists. But the effect on the Asiatics was far-reaching, causing as much alteration in their art as had been’ effected in the previous twenty-five centuries of its existence. Early Seleucid cuneiform tablets from Southern Babylonia were sometimes stamped with Greek carved seals, the distinguishing signets of Semite merchants, and henceforth native-made seals follow Greek models. The local terracotta figurines, the commonest form of sculpture at the period, were chiefly intended for magical purposes, to be buried under the floors of houses as a protection against the devils who caused sickness, hence types already cent- uries old are continued for the sake of their ritual efficacy, but the modelling of heads of drapery and of 7O (eel eetiebeurLebeNele Sela liCGwebrAtse) the nude is freshened by the Greek style; in addition, genuine Greek types are copied, such as the Europa (pl. 105b) and new types are created in Greek technique such as the musicians (pl. 105a, the monkey might prove a stronger exorcist than the woman, for devils feared ugliness as well as noise), The immemorial type of the nude goddess, the religious significance of which remains obscure, is now lightened in accordance with Greek refinements: the clumsy statuette on the left of pl. 105b does not depart far from its prototypes, though its material is Pentelic marble; the smaller figure on the right is of Assyrian alabaster but shows more of the Greek spirit. The modelling of the face in these statuettes and in Europa comes very close to the ancient manner of the country, so that in the case of separate heads it is sometimes hard to decide whether the date be 2400-2200 or 300-200 B.c.; this is especially curious as the work of intermediate periods is distinctive. We have good reasons for supposing that the vast majority of statuettes were made for Babylonians and not Greeks, as well as by Babylonians; thus a recumbent alabaster statuette of a nude woman, found at Babylon, is unusually Hellenising but has the hair applied in bitumen, following the old magical rule of using “ black clay.”’ The eastern half of the Seleucid empire was gradually absorbed by Parthia, a military state founded about 7M) LATER GREEK SCULPTURE 250 on the north-east edge of Persia by adventurers of a nomadic people akin to Turks. They conquered Babylonia towards 150, by which time they were already living in considerable luxury and had acquired an art based on the Achemenian reliefs. Just as the Turks employed Greek architects to build the earlier mosques in Constantinople in the Byzantine manner, so the Parthian kings made full use of the Greeks and called themselves Philhellenes on the coins, which are inscribed in Greek and bear portraits in a style at first profoundly Hellenised and later more Persian (pl. 106a). The Babylonians produced similar figures in terracotta, both coffin-reliefs and statuettes; small bronzes are also known, but few large Parthian monuments before the Christian era exist in Persia or Iraq. In these regions, however, art does not change rapidly (except under external influence such as came in with Alexander), and the later work can be taken as representative, for the coins are but slightly modified in style till they begin to degenerate (simultaneously with the appearance of legends in bad Greek or in Pehlevi) following the reign of Gotarzes, who, in 43 A.D., cut a relief under- neath Darius’ great sculpture on the rock of Behistun ; it can never have been a good relief and is now badly defaced, yet enough remains to bear witness that the composition and poses were inspired by the long-dead Assyrians, while the details owe more to the Greeks. 72 Tele ber Heb Leet eNetes i bi C eR ACS TT It proves, too, that in rock-sculptures the Parthians initiated the style lavishly used by their Sassanian successors ; the same applies in architecture and coins, and, we may guess, in silver-plate and in textiles, for which Persia was already famous. Antiochus of Commagene, who died between 38 and 31 B.c., the king of a small Parthian dependency on the south-west of Armenia, came of a family rather more Persian than Greek, and his large monument on a mountain called the Nimrud Dagh shows that he favoured the mixed Greco-Oriental art adopted by his rulers; a slab of the king in company with Apollo (pl. 106b), an obviously Oriental conception, recalls in its general lines the old Hittite rock-carvings of the same district, although the details are predominantly Greek. ‘The style continues during the Christian era in the sepulchral reliefs of Palmyra, an oasis command- ing the main caravan route from Syria to Mesopotamia, from the Roman to the Parthian empire; the family group (pl. 104a) of a mother seated with her four sons can be ascribed to the first century from its resemblance to the Nimrud Dagh monument, and to other Palmy- rene sculptures, the dates of which are recorded upon them. As time passed and Palmyra from its growing importance came more into closer contact with the West, its style became totally dependent on the Greco- Roman, as may be seen by a bust (pl. 107a) of aS LATER GREEK S\C UsL P TU ROE approximately 100 A.D., so that before the destruction of the city in the third century, its art had become a mere local form of the general art of the Roman empire. Palmyra, however, was not typical of Syria, a naturally divided country in which political and cultural uni- formity have seldom been established : the Phoenician coastal area has already been mentioned, nothing is known of North Syria, there remains the land on either side of the Jordan. A palace built about 180 B.c. for the Maccabean Hyrcanus may be identical with a ruin in Transjordania; the architectureis Oriental with Hellen- ised touches, and the frieze of lions that runs across the porch is of Babylonian derivation. The Nabatean Arabs pushed through this district a hundred years later, penetrating as far as Damascus ; they were soon dislodged from the city and its surroundings, as always happens with these Beduin invasions, but continued to hold the road by which the spices came up from Arabia Felix; they also ruled the isolated piece of corn-land known as the Hauran (fifty. miles south of Damascus), for the greater part of the first century, and have left a few surviving buildings there. These have been in- vestigated by a Princeton University expedition whose leader, the late H. C. Butler, reported that the earliest ruins employ distinctly Greek forms, the accompanying inscriptions being in both Greek and Nabatean; those of the middle of the century are constructed in a mixed 74 THE HELLENISTIC EAST style containing Persian features, inscriptions being now in Nabatean alone, with mason marks occasionally in another Arab script, whilst the latest pre-Roman build- ings are purely Oriental in style, these being presumably subsequent to Herod’s annexation in 23 B.c. Palestine is poorer than ‘Transjordania, and its monu- ments have been more subject to destruction by war or for building purposes: it is not surprising, therefore, that no Hellenistic buildings are extant, and the Mosaic veto on representational art kept it free from sculpture, except for some reliefs of lions in Galilee, one of which, a most primitive-looking piece, is reported to have come from the palace of Herod Antipas at Tiberias (Palestine Exploration Fund, Quarterly Statement, April, 1926, plate facing p. 66); another equally crude example is carved over a Nabatean tomb in the Hejaz (Doughty, Arabia Deserta, plate facing p. 107), which is no accident but due to cultural homogeneity. Another instance of this is the presence outside Jerusalem of early examples of the architecture evolved by the Nabateans at Petra and in the Hejaz: “ Absalom’s Tomb ” and its two companions in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, were cut out of the rock in the reign of Claudius for the Queen of Adiabene (Assyria and Southern Kurdistan) and her sons, converts to Judaism. The main feature of this style is the combination of discordant elements, Doric triglyphs being conjoined with Corinthian capitals, Us) LA“ EER G*R ECE KesiG UlL) PTUs RAE Ionic friezes or Egyptian cornices, and the roofs ter- minating in pinnacles stepped like Flemish gables, the prototypes of which must be sought in Babylonia, in the crenellated tops of brick walls. The Himyarite Arabs bordered on the Nabateans, although their principal towns lay in the mountains of South-Western Arabia; their power extended as far as Aden (the famous tanks are due to them), but their home was the cooler region that lies behind it. They too were reached by Greek objects, for their coins were copied from Athenian issues, just as the Britons copied those of Macedonia, and their crude sculptures give evidence of Greek inspiration (pl. 107b), due no doubt to the images their kings are known to have imported. Aden, then as now, was situated on the sea-route to India, where a great fervour for Greek sculpture grew up at the time of Christ, and the passing traffic was responsible not only for the Hellenic elements that came into Himyarite sculpture, but also for the subsequent Greek influence in Abyssinian. aie. CHAPTER 5 emer CR NISTIC TRADITION IN PmNreaas AON Do HEF ARE AS T Be eanisr an; the N.W. frontier and the Punjab, formed part of the Persian Empire and were duly annexed by Alexander when he supplanted the Ache- menians, but soon after his death in 323, a native prince overthrew the Greek representatives, establishing a dynasty that ruled South Afghanistan and all India except the extreme south. Ten years ago excavators found their palace to be an imitation of Persepolis; terra- cotta statuettes from the surrounding earth-rampart belong to a Mesopotamian class, loosely ascribed to the Parthian period from coins found in association with some specimens, the style, however, seems to have come into being before the Parthian conquest of Babylonia in the second century. The third king of the dynasty was Asoka, to whose Buddhist zeal (he was a convert) the oldest surviving Indian sculptures are due. To propagate the faith he inscribed edicts on ' pillars that follow Achemenian types ; these have come to light in several parts of India and vary greatly in style. The finest of them, at Sarnath, a work of 242- 232, carried a capital surmounted by three lions (pl. 108a); qe LAT ESR G REE KSC OslyP et Ui Ree these animals were formerly common in the desert region of N.W. and Central India; they might, there- fore, have been represented in a life-like manner as in Mesopotamian art, yet here they are obviously heraldic beasts. ‘The convention in which they are rendered is much the same as in Greece, with a slight Mesopotamian flavour in the carving, for which reason it has been urged that the artist must have been a Greek belonging to one of the Asiatic colonies. ‘The suggestion is almost certainly correct ; to the objection that the animals of the reliefs below were confined to India, yet are re- produced with greater accuracy than could be expected from a foreigner, it may be replied that Greeks were always curious about strange creatures, their Russian colonists revealed themselves as consummate draughts- men of the splendid horses bred by the Scythian nomads (the comb, pl. 16a, does not fully exhibit their powers in this respect). Frequent embassies that passed between the Seleucid and Indian courts point to considerable intercourse between these conterminous empires, and the presence of wandering artists is to be expected. The animals on other Asokan pillars are far inferior to those of Sarnath, which I believe is due to their being of native workmanship. ‘The surviving statues of human beings are even poorer, as is usual in primitive arts, and seem to owe more to the Perso-Mesopotamian 78 Totten LEN les DiC LRA DITION IN IN DIA style of the Achemenians and Parthians ; on the other hand, a three-sided capital from Sarnath, with semi- Tonic volutes and a relief of a horseman (pl. 108b), reveals Greek more than Mesopotamian inspiration, though the jungle background appears to be derived from native wood carvings. As far as can be seen there was no sculpture in India before Asoka, except a little wood carving, for his is definitely an incipient art and bears no trace of having had a lengthy development; the earliest pieces which served as models for the rest were probably the work of foreigners, trained in the Greek and Persian traditions that seem to have flourished equally in the Seleucid empire of the third century. Before Asoka’s death, the Greek governor of Bactria (N. Afghanistan) successfully revolted against the Seleucids, and the Parthians deprived them of Persia. The new Bactrian state was controlled by a number of Hellenic baronial families whose culture was com- pletely European so far as it can be judged from their coins ; these are the only surviving relics of it, for the portrait of Euthydemus (pl. 37a) was presumably taken on his visit to Asia Minor, in which locality the marble was quarried. Euthydemus seems to have begun the Greek re-conquest of India continued by his son, who was driven out of Bactria by a civil war and set himself up as ‘‘ Demetrius, King of the Indians,”’ while his successful rival founded another state in N. India 12 LAWVE RVG REE ¥S,C3U 1a PaUeRee with its capital at Taxila. Coins of both kingdoms are plentiful, and one large monument of ¢. 170 stands at Besnagar in Gwalior, a pillar of Persian style dedicated to Vishnu by Heliodorus, Taxilan ambassador at a native court. Meanwhile there are only slight in- dications of Greek influence in native sculpture; a great monument of about 150 survived till recently at Bharhut, a stupa (beehive-shaped edifice marking a holy spot) surrounded by sculptures genuinely Indian in style and in the life represented, and containing examples of many of the figure types to which Indian art was to remain faithful throughout its history ; here too is initiated the pictorial relief crowded with small figures, a variety of carving better adapted to wood than stone. A favourable example of the larger sculptures is the pillar with Kuvera, King of the Devils, and his wife, standing on appropriate pedestals (pl. roga) : the style is essentially that of the third century though more refined, the balance and the clear, smooth model- ling, at least in the male body, suggest Greek training, probably received through a Persian medium for the system of representing folds by parallel incisions is an Achemenian convention (though in some cases the floating scarves terminate in swallow-tails, a Greek archaistic trick, and edges of drapery between the legs are patterned in the ordinary archaic manner, repeated in some later sculptures, e.g., pl. 69). A similar 80 iGeteierliw rh NISL C LRADITION IN ITN DIA rendering of flesh as well as draped surface characterises the later Persian silver-plate of the Sassanian dynasty, and may have occurred on its hypothetical Parthian prototypes. No Parthian plate survives, but as the Oxus treasure contained a piece of fourth century Persian work, and as the Sarmatian silver of South Russia appears to show Parthian influence, it is safe to assume that Persia under this festive dynasty practised an art in which it excelled under the next. Further- more, medallion compositions are common in second century India, and it is hard to believe that reliefs would take this shape except in imitation of painted or engraved dishes like the Sassanian. Early in the first century the Buddh Gaya stupa was surrounded by a sculptured railing on which appear centaurs, “tritons” (pl. 108c), and a chariot of obvious Greek inspiration. Of greater significance is a gold casket containing Buddhist relics discovered in the foundation-deposit of another stupa, together with coins of Azes I, a king of the middle of the century belonging to a Scythian family, who had ousted the Greeks at Taxila and inherited a certain amount of their culture (Azes’ coins are direct imitations of his predecessors). [he decoration consists of heavily draped classical figures standing between pillars that are spanned by ogival arches. The architecture is manifestly not Hellenic, but the figures correspond F 8I LDA TER (GiReE BS CU UP Rae closely to Greco-Indian sculptures of the first century atfer Ghrist: These are very numerous and as a rule reach a high standard (pls. rogb, 110), employing Greek technique and occasionally introducing adaptations of Greek types. The zone over which they extended was at first restricted to Gandhara (S. Afghanistan and the N.W. Frontier), the rest of the country maintained its native (semi-Persian) style, more or less unaltered according to the remoteness or otherwise of the Hellen- ised region (the Amaravati Tope displayed on the Grand Staircase of the British Museum is a familiar example of Central Indian work contemporary with the Greco- Buddhist). Herein the conditions of a hundred years before were perpetuated, for just after Azes had been playing with Hellenism on the Indus, a truly Indian set of gates was erected at Sanchi, and another batch of Scythians at Mathura in Central India dedicated a red sandstone capital, composed of two lions back to back, a form invented by the Achemenians; Persian con- nections are also responsible for statues on the same site of the Gandharan kings who annexed this district, statues from which Greek influence is conspicuously absent and whose closest analogies are with the Nimrud Dagh reliefs of a Parthian subject-king (pl. 106b). In subsequent reigns Mathura became quite a centre of Hellenism, and the expansion of the semi-Greek style is 82 fetter Ee NIS TIC TRADITION FN INDIA therefore to be connected with the Gandharan Empire, the source of which may explain its art. Like so many others in Indian history, it had resulted from a successful invasion. ‘The invaders are first heard of as a horde of nomads on the western edge of China, known to Chinese writers as Yueh-chi. ‘They were turned out of their home by another nomadic people towards the middle of the second century, and stayed awhile in what is now Chinese Turkestan (Khotan), pushing the Scythian inhabitants of this district into Bactria, where they destroyed the Greek kingdom; fifteen or twenty years later, when the Yueh- chi were moved on again, the Scythians went into India and conquered one of the Greek kingdoms there, while the Yueh-chi took their place in Bokhara and Bactria. Here they gave up their nomadic habits and adopted a settled life under the leadership of the Kushan tribe ; ultimately, about 50 a.p., they extended to South Afghanistan and North-West India, annexing the remaining Greek state and the kingdom established by some Parthians, who, it would appear, had recently conquered the Scythians. A semi-civilised people by this time, the Kushans’ veneration for Culture was stimulated by their acquisi- tion of Buddhism, and through their generosity the hybrid Greco-Indian art which Azes had known, rapidly evolved in a more Hellenic direction. The 83 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE stock poses of Greek art were used for Indian deities ; the person of Buddha was now first represented, his presence having formerly been indicated by a symbol when required ; friezes of Greek marine deities or of cupids carrying huge garlands, were introduced ; Cor- inthian pillars and pilasters supplied an architectural frame to the figures in place of the singularly Gothic canopies of Azes’ reliquary. ‘The Gandhara kingdom corresponds in date with the Roman Empire, and its sculpture kept up with the developments of classical art: the pillars of its backgrounds are often identical in type with those of Syrian and Palmyrene architecture ; the decorative foliage is certainly taken from the same source (a relief from the Frontier is almost a replica of Palmyra and Hatra carvings of cupids and animals amid foliage) ; compositions in which large figures are placed one behind the other in perspective, are remini- scent of the historical reliefs of Roman arches; the clear-cut refinement of the best Gandhara statues (e.g., the saint, pl. rogb), is the principal merit of the archaistic school that supplied the Romans with delicate copies from the antique and was adopted in the portraits of Palmyrene tombs; the smooth-running, parallel folds revealed to artists by study of the toga, are respons- ible for the drapery of Buddha (as of our medizval saints) ; the crispness of Gandharan folds is a Palmyrene feature ; terracottas at I’axila are comparable to the 84 Hien LENIS TiC TRADITION IN INDIA products of Greco-Roman Egypt; an occasional re- miniscence of Alexandrian ivories crops up. It will be seen that there is less evidence of borrowing from Rome itself than from the eastern edge of the Empire, and it is worth remark that one of the few classical objects imported into India is a bronze Harpocrates of Greco- Egyptian manufacture. It is true that Indian embassies are recorded to have visited Rome occasionally, and other Indians may have penetrated as far; nevertheless, it may not be overbold to ascribe all the classical influence that distinguishes Kushan sculpture from that of Azes to Syria, Palmyra and Egypt. The connection was of course maintained by sea (a first century guide-book to the route by an Egyptian Greek still exists), and the volume of trade between India and the Red Sea was very considerable at this time of world peace, drawing off £4,500,000 of Roman coins per year as early as the reign of Nero. The Nabatean state of Petra, situated at the junction of caravan routes to the Persian Gulf, South Arabia, the Mediterranean, and the eastern horn of the Red Sea, grew rich by a duty of 25 per cent. on imports, and was therefore annexed by Trajan ; forts were built along the routes from the harbours of the Sudan to the Upper Nile, to protect caravans from beduin robbers ; a canal was kept open from the lower Nile to the Gulf of Suez. Meanwhile, Aden and its hinterland enjoyed prosperity under the Himyarites, 85 LATER GREEK SCULP2U RE whose system of water conservation made life easier in a country now largely desert, and whose position on the sailing route brought them wealth and civilisation. The Greek element in Indian sculpture faded away towards the fourth and fifth centuries, not before it had caused a profound change in the art of China. Gandhara naturally controlled the passes leading from Kashmir to Khotan, in what is now Chinese Turkestan, and as the art of Gandhara was the most advanced of these countries, Khotan adopted it. China, which had been in occasional touch with that region from the latter part of the second century B.c., struggled with the Gand- harans for its possession, but an outbreak of the chronic national anarchy enabled the distant provinces to secure their independence ; caravans still carried silk across Khotan on the way to India or Mesopotamia (both roads led eventually to Rome), but the goods passed through several hands and China derived nothing from the trade except money and a knowledge of Buddhism. Its art had been fully formed in all essentials when con- tact was re-established in the fifth century by ardent Buddhists, who penetrated to their Holy Land to bring back books and images. The first party of pilgrims spent six years on the overland route to Central India : the journey lay through a ghastly succession of deserts as far as Khotan, even in those days when cities flour- ished that are now buried under wind-blown sands, 86 itp Heb LLENISTIC TRADITION IN INDIA and the range on the Indian frontier was snow-covered throughout the year, besides being infested with “venomous dragons, which, if provoked, spit forth poisonous winds, rain, snow, sand, and stones: of those who encounter these dangers, not one in ten thousand escapes.” (The Travels of Fa-hsien, re-translated by H. A. Giles, 1923). Large ships, carrying up to two hundred passengers besides cargo, plied between India and Java, between Java and Canton, but the perils of haphazard navigation were enhanced by numerous pirates. Altogether, the returned traveller had some justification for his remark, ‘‘ Looking back upon what I went through, my heart throbs involuntarily and sweat pours down.” With all these difficulties there cannot have been many images introduced, and the exactitude with which the Chinese copied their style becomes amazing. ‘The oldest dated example of Chinese Buddhist art is a bronze statuette of 437, and sculp- tures in high-relief or in the round became plentiful soon after ; the first large rock carvings were, however, made by a tribe of immigrants from Central Asia. Buddhist sculpture was invariably in a style based on the Gandharan, for there had previously been scarcely any Chinese sculpture except reliefs which were, in fact, merely incised drawings with a flat surface to the figures, like the monumental brasses of medieval Europe, and for a while artists continued to employ this 87 LACT ER GR BeE Re SeCcU tLe Per Ree method of representing native personages and deities, though the Buddhist intruders appeared in high relief ; the two techniques occasionally occur on the same slab (pl. 111a). ‘The Buddhist art remained primitive and monotonous till the seventh century, when the T’ang Dynasty renewed intercourse with the West by land and sea, with the result that Indian work of a better class was introduced, and stimulated development along native lines. By that time the Gandhara style had given way in its own country to more truly Indian sculpture based upon it, but in Chinese religious art the influence of the first century was still supreme. The type of heads undergoes some modification to suit a Mongolian race (pl. 112a), but the Greco-Indian source can still be traced, the technique remains un- altered (pl. r11b), the ritual attitudes of Buddhist iconography are rendered in the first century manner, and we even find the motive of a line of cupids carrying a garland, but they have Chinese’ countenances and wisps of geometric clouds appear in the distance. The absence of Roman coins in Further India and China is an indication that no direct commercial re- lations were maintained, hence no direct Greek influence at this most flourishing period of Chinese sculpture can be admitted : the Greek aspect of many of the T’ang glazed statuettes is due to the mixed character of the Gandhara school, whilst the statuettes of actors masked 88 tenet ele beN TST. ec TRADITION IN -IN DIA in the Greek manner, can be accounted for by the existence at Kutcha in Turkestan, of a form of enter- tainment derived from the Greek mime. But the Freer Museum at Washington owns two late Roman (perhaps fourth century) statuettes of soldiers which came out from China with a miscellaneous lot of antiquities, and may safely be presumed to have been found there : the date of their introduction is, one would think, not long after that of their manufacture, and it was probably effected by a returned silk-merchant, though Roman subjects may have occasionally reached China by sea (somebody purporting to be an ambassador from Marcus Aurelius, visited the Chinese court in 166). Greek inspiration gradually faded in India when it had achieved the technical freedom of local artists and given them certain ideals of sensuous grace. Through the medium of Gandhara, the Greek subjects of the Roman Empire were responsible for the Chinese Buddhist statues (condemned by the native scholars as foreign and not art at all) and for giving an appearance of depth to Chinese reliefs and paintings ; early painters like Ku K’ai Chih and the early sculptors of two-plane reliefs had failed in the representation of three dimen- sions. ‘Through China and Korea, the Greco-Buddhist influence gave rise in the sixth century to Japanese art ; many of the consecrated types created in Gandhara were handed on, as will be realised by comparing an 89 LATER GREEK S CU LP DURE archaic Japanese statuette (pl. 112b) of the goddess of mercy (who originated as a male) with a Chinese statue of the same deity (pl. 111b) and the Indian saint (pl. 109b), while the earliest frescoes in Japan resemble the Ajanta cave-paintings, the first of which belong to the Gandhara period and served as models for the rest. The debt of all Asia to the later Greeks becomes plainer and more impressive with each increase in knowledge. gO Beles lO Gaon Pabiey itzenr are only two recent books on the main subject, Guy Dickins, Hellenistic Sculpture (Oxford University Press), an incomplete posthumous work, and Wilhelm Klein, Vom antiken Rokoko (Hotzel, Vienna), which is useful as a collection of material, though based on an unfortunate theory that Greek and Renaissance sculp- ture developed along identical lines. A most con- venient, well-chosen collection of small reproductions is given by Winter, Hellenistische Skulptur, being Parts 11-12 of Kunstgeschichte in Bildern (Kroner, Leipzig. Price, Marks 4). Among articles intended for special- ists, Krahmer’s Szi/phasen der Hellenistischen Plastik (Romische Mitteilungen, xXxxvVill-Ix, 1923-4, pp. 138- 184), is of general import ; two articles by the author (fournal of Egyptian Archeology, x1, 1925, p. 179; Annual of the British School at Athens, xxvi, forth- coming), attack the theory of independent local schools in Alexandria and Rhodes. For archaistic art see Bulle, Archaisiriende Rundplastik; Ed, Schmidt, Archaistische Kunst in Griechenland und Rom. For the culture of the time see, J. B. Bury and others, The Hellenistic Age, historical essays largely based on recently discovered documents; Pfuhl, Malerei und Zeichnung der Griechen, deals fully with Hellenistic Painting. gI LAUER GREE KSC Usa Pa UaRe For relations with Rome and with foreign arts, refer- ence may be made to the following :— P. Ducati, Etruria Antica. E. Strong, La Scultura Romana (second English edition in the press). G. A. 5. Snijder, Romeinsche Kunstgeschiedenis (Tijd- schrift voor Geschiedenis, xl, 1925). H. C. Butler, American Expedition to Syria, 11; Princeton Expedition to Syria, u1. J. B. Chabot, Choix d’Inscriptions de Palmyre. O. M. Dalton, Treasure of the Oxus, second edition. Koldewey, The Excavations at Babylon. Sarre, Kunst des alten Persiens (also French edition). Rostovtzeft, Iranians and Greeks in South Russia. Vincent A. Smith, History of Fine Art in India and Ceylon. E, J. Rapson and others, Cambridge History of India, Voli: O. Sirén, Chinese Sculpture. Karl With, Buddhistische Plastik in “fapan. | Langdon Warner, ‘fapanese Sculpture of the Suiko Period. W. H. Schoff, The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea, translates the Greek account of the sailing-routes from Egypt to Zanzibar and India, with very elaborate and interesting notes on the places and articles of commerce mentioned. “by: APPENDIX The following list is arranged in groups which slightly overlap ; it makes no pretension of including all published Hellenistic sculptures but I believe it includes most of those which can be approximately dated in the present state of our knowledge. On the other hand, objects in private collections, or in Spain, Russia and North Africa, are often omitted because I have not seen the originals ; the Alexandrine and Late Republican periods are treated in less detail because of the familiar- ity of the material; reliefs of no artistic merit are excluded, and I have reserved sculptures of children for a forthcoming article (B.S.4., xxvii.). ‘The abbreviations are, in general, those employed by the ‘fourn. of Hellenic Studies, but : Greek names are transliterated into Roman characters; Bulle refers to Bulle, Der schéne Mensch, 2nd edn. ; Helbig to Helbig, Fiihrer durch Sammlungen in Rom, 3rd edn. ; Hekler to Hekler, Greek and Roman Portraits (Bildniskunst); W. to Winter, Kunstgeschichte in Bildern, parts 11-12, Hellenistische Skulptur. ‘Vhe National Museum, Athens, is quoted as Athens ; the Metropolitan Museum, New York, as Metr. Mus. ; the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, as Ny C.G.; the Rhode Island School of Design, Providence, as Providence. Museum numbers after the name of the place (thus Naples, 819) have reference to the latest catalogue or guide : this in the case of Athens is the catalogue by Kavvadias ; of Bologna, the Guida by Ducati; of Munich, the Fithrer by Wolters ; of Naples, the Guida by Ruesch ; of the Ny C.G. the catalogue by Jacobsen with supplements (T7//aeg) by Poulsen in 1914 and 1925, and plates (Bél/edtavler) with one Tillaeg. The numbers of plates are given either in Roman or in Arabic numerals in accordance with the method adopted by the book quoted. THE BEGINNING OF THE HELLENISTIC AGE, CIRCA 334. Statues of 340 from the Theatre at Athens: Aeschylus (Ny C.G., 421, Billedt. xxx, and Tillaeg, 1914, p. 151) 3 Euripides (Hekler, 89 ; ze LATER GREER SC UiL Piotr URE Ny. C.G., 414b, Billedt. xxrx ; Poulsen on the types, Ti//aeg, 1925, 414a) ; Sophocles (Hekler, 52, 54; Studniczka, 7.H.S., xii, 1923, p- 57, and next vol., p. 281). Archidamus of Sparta, Naples (Hekler, 11; Delbriick, Portraits, pl. 18), probably represents the third king of this name, 361-338. Aristotle, 384-322 (zbid., pl. 19 ; Hekler, 87-88). Alexander Azara, Louvre (thid., 62b ; W. 334.1, 2): head in Acro- polis Mus., pl. rob (Hekler, 63): Rondanini statue, Munich (Hekler, 61b; Schreiber, Bildn. Alex., p. 272, interprets as Antiochus Grypus ; W. 335-3), a poor reproduction of an old type: Alexander wearing zegis, Louvre marble and Brit. Mus. bronze (Zon. Piot, xx1, 1913-14, p- 59, pls 1v, v); bronze statuette, Edm. de Rothschild Coll. (Rev. Arch.,* Vv, 1905, I, p. 32, pls. 1, 11): statue from Magnesia ad Sipylum, found near the signature of Menas the Pergamene, Constantinople, 536 (Hekler, 64 ; Bernouilli, Darst. Alex., figs. 12-14; W. 335.6), face of Lysippic type, the workmanship second century like the inscrip- tion ; the gold medallions of Abusir are condemned as forgeries by Svoronos (fourn. Inter. Numis., X, 1917, p. 369, pls. x-x1v) ; Tarsus medallions (zdid., pl. vit). Statue of Nicocleia, from Cnidus, Brit. Mus. (Cat., 11, 1301). Artemisium of Ephesus, drums in Brit. Mus. (Br. Br., 52, 173). According to an anecdote of Alexander, the temple was incomplete in 334, but Pliny remarks that the cypress doors were 400 years old, and it was therefore finished soon after: Lethaby (Greek Buildings in Brit. Mus., p. 33) says the Priene temple of 345-344 copies the order of the Artemisium, which was, therefore, standing to its full height. Frieze of Lysicrates Monument of 334 (Br. Br., 488 ; 4.7.4.,! Vint, 1893, p. 42, pls. 11, 11). Statuette of boxer, pl. 5, Metr. Mus. (Bul/., January, 1921, p. 11, fig. 4; Br. Br., text to 527, figs. 1, 2). Head from Chios, pl. 6, Boston, 29 (Marshall, Fahrb., xxiv, 1909, P 73)- Small head of a girl, said to be from Greece, Metr. Mus. (Bull., Feb., 1916, p. 41, fig. 33 Chase, Sculpture in America, fig. 145), resembles the Chios head but may be a few decades later. Head of a goddess, Boston (Caskey, 4.7.4.,? xx, 1916, p. 383, pls. 94 fey 12) 2) AO, WE TOY DL 94 XVI-I1I, compares Chios head and ascribes to Praxitelean school of after 350). Female bust in Goldman Coll. (Metr. Mus., Bull., Aug., 1920, p. 177, fig. 1; Art in America, 1917, p. 130), looks from the photo- graphs as though it might be similar to Chios head. Head from Cyzicus, pl. 4b, Dresden (Br. Br., 390; Rev. Arch.,§ XXV, 1894, 1, pls. xvi1-vu11). Aphrodite, pl. 7, Capitoline (Cat., p. 182, pl. 45); heads in Dresden, 239 ; Boston, 79, 80 ; Munich, 479 (Bulle, ill. on p. 342 3; Sieveking, Miinchn. Fahrb, 111, 1918, p. 1, attributes the original to Leochares). Head of woman, pl. 8, Fogg Mus. (Delbriick, Portr., pl. xxiv, fig. 12 ; Exhibition of Greek Art, Burlington Club, pls. xxviu1-vul a). Female statue, pl. 9a, Metr. Mus. (Bu//., May, 1906). Nereid, Ostia (4usonia, vill, 1913, p. 191, figs. 1, 23 Boll. d’Arte,? Il, 1922-23, p. 320, fig. 13), cf. the Maenad of Scopas, pl. gb, (Stud- niczka, Artemis und Iphigenie, p. 103, figs, 82, 83). Artemis and Iphigenia, Ny C.G. (Studniczka, Art. u. Iph., dates 340-330). Head of a boy, pl. 10a, Metr. Mus.: bought in Rome, accession ROL .2 32.5. Lysippus: the Agias at Delphi is of 338-4, is so like other statues of the same dedication that the Lysippic original cannot have been followed very closely (W. 331.3) ; Jason, pl. 11a (Arndt, Glypt. Ny C., pls. 128-9, and text figs.; W. 332.1); Apoxyomenus (W. 331.1 and 2); Eros drawing a bow (7.H.S., XL, 1921, p. 242 3 W. 332.2). Praying boy, Berlin, 2 (Br. Br., 283 ; W. 340.3). Resting Hermes, Naples, 841 (Bulle, 166, 214; Lippold, Kopzen, p- 129 ; W. 333.1), copy contemporary with the gem by Dioscurides. Head of Dioscurus, Houghton Hall (Poulsen, Portraits in English Colls., p. 12, fig. 9), Antonine copy of Alexandrine type. Torso of Dionysus, Providence (4.7.4.,? XXVI, 1922, p. 488, fig. 2 5 Chase, Sculp. in Amer., fig. 91) ; post-Praxitelean. Dancing girls from the Silphium Column, Delphi (Keramopoullos, Fourn. Intern. Numis., X, 1907, p. 295, pl. XV, gives reasons for supposing it to be a dedication by the Ampeliots of Cyrenaica ; Bulle, 140; Rev. 95 LIA ST LE RIG) REE Eke Ss) GC URLs Palaver s Arch.,® Vv, 1917, pls. tv, Vv); a first century dedication from Roman Africa is politically improbable, so the hypothesis of late date may be abandoned, and the obvious points of resemblance to Praxiteles’ Aphrodite, Mausoleum frieze, egea pediments and Amazonomachia sarcophagus date it early in the second half of the fourth century. Head of Apollo, Delphi (Fouilles de Delphes, 1v, pl. txxtv), con- temporary with the above. Head of goddess from Rhodes, Warocqué Coll., 10; Cumont suggests it is an original of the time of Alexander. Amazonomachia sarcophagus, Vienna (Br. Br., 493 ; Robert, Sark.- reliefs, 1, p. 78, pl. xxvir; Altmann, Archit. u. Ornam. d. ant. Sark., figs. 4, 4a 5 Schrader, Phidias, figs. 80, 81) ; style comes in the direct line of descent from the Mausoleum frieze, and it belongs to the same generation, for the Amazons wear the girdles low ; probably from Cyprus and ordered for a Phoenician like the Alexander sarcophagus. Relief of lion-hunt, from Messene, Louvre (Fahrb., 111, 1888, p. 189, pl. vir; W. 334.8). Relief of Artemis Bendis and a hero with votaries, of 329, Ny C.G. (231, Billedt. xvur ; Arndt, Glypt, pl. 88). Relief of 330-29, Athens (Eimz., 1474). Stela with lecythus and two dancing youths on the neck, Pirzeus (Conze, 1354.3 Snijder, Rev. 4rch.,> xx, 1924. 145 Daeayan ee inscription of late fourth century, figures interesting as prototypes of Neo-Attic types. : Caryatid, from ‘Tralles, pl. 70, Constantinople (Ed. Schmidt, Archaist. Kunst, p. 65). LAST QUARTER OF THE FOURTH CENTURY: Statue of Aeschines, 389-314, Naples, 1139 (Hekler, 53, 55); head in Ny C.G., 437, Billedt., xxxt1. Head identified as Demetrius Poliorcetes, active 315-283, Naples, 1146 (Hekler, 72b). Fora possible later portrait of Demetrius see p. 99. Helmeted head in Naples, 1153 (Hekler, 71a ; W. 338.9) has been identified (Arch. Anz., 1894, p. 17) with a head from the Alexander sarcophagus ; this is accepted by Studniczka (Fahrb., 1x, 1894, p. 243) and by Willrich (Hermes, xxx1v, 1899, p. 236), who identifies as Craterus. 96 Asbo Ne DETsx: “ Aristippus ” (Esdaile, 7.H.8., xxxiv, 1914, p. 47, pls. m-vir; Lippold, Rém. Mitt., xxx, 1918, p. 18, fancies Zeno the Stoic, for which there is no evidence). Cast of male portrait head, Thorvaldsen Mus., Copenhagen (Einz., 1484-5). Alexander sarcophagus, Constantinople (Cat., 1, pp. 28, 196; W. 336-7). Nike of Samothrace (Lawrence, .H.8., xxv1 forthcoming ; Viena 4 221502). ““ Eubouleus,” Athens (Br. Br., 74; Ant. Denkm., 1, 34). Niobid group (Studniczka, rt. u. Iph., p. 84). Head of Ariadne, from South slope of Acropolis, pl. roc, Athens (tbid., p. 60); a Roman head at Split seems to resemble it (Hekler, ‘Fah- resh., XI, 1908, p. 115); a head in Cherchel (Cat., pl. v1.3), perhaps copies a work of same school. Female head, Athens (Ezmz., 652-3). ** Tlioneus,” Munich, 270 (Bulle, 183 ; Br. Br., 432) ; a poor copy, to be classed with the Niobids. Cf. a crouching Ganymede, Nimes (ieevuearen.,” XLI, 1902, 11, pl. 1). Boy from Subiaco, pl. 14, Terme (Lippold, Kopzen., p. 101 ; Stud- micrkay art. u. Iph., p. 75, no. 6). Bronze wrestlers, Naples, 861-2 (Bulle, 91). Cf. heads with the supposed Demetrius Poliorcetes, Naples, 1146. Head from Ialysus, Metr. Mus. (Handbook, fig. 140; B.S.A., xxv1, p. 67, pl. vrr.1). Satyr on Dolphin, Villa Borghese (Helbig, 1560; Eznz., 2761-2 ; Amelung, Strena Helbigiana, p. 1, fig. 1, considers the head to be of early Hellenistic type and the body to be contemporary because of the contrapposto). Crouching boy, from Cythera wreck, pl. 15, Athens (Studniczka, remeten. 1021, p. 334, figs. 13, 15 ; W. 368.8). Large statuette, pl. 11b, Providence (Br. Br., 650). Satyr on tiptoe, found near Lamia, Athens (Eznmz., 641-2 5 Bulle, 78). “* Ariadne,” Uffizi (Amelung, Fihrer 33, fig. 6). Cf. Niobe and daughters. Aphrodite on bird, Boston, 36 (Br. Br., 577); Furtwangler noted c 97 LATER GREE KX 3S CUUL PeTiveRsE that the head resembled the Themis of Chaerestratus ; but the drapery has slightly older treatment, comparable to that of an Attic votive relief of ¢. 325 (Einz., 1231), and a certain similarity to late vases may also be traced in the drapery of bust and shoulders and general scheme. A Hygieia type (¢.g., Not. Scavi, 1914, p. 320; Bull. Comm., x.u, 1914, pls. 1, 11) can be approximately dated by the above-mentioned relief. Selene, Vatican (Cat. 1, Braccio Nuovo, 50, pl. 9), cf. Niobe and daughters. Female torso, Budapest (Br. Br., 640, Hekler compares with the Niobids, cf. postscript by Poulsen). ;, Fragment of relief of Pan, Small Acrop. Mus., 180 (7.H.S., xxx, 1910, p. 264), lettering of the end of the fourth century. Relief of Euphron, 323-2 (Studniczka, Art. u. Iph., p. 92, fig. 74). CIRCA 300. Menander, 342-291, pl. 18b (Hekler, 105-7 ; Delbriick, Portr., pl. 20; Hinz., 610, 611, in Corfu ; Philadelphia Mus. Fourn., v, June, 1914, p. 122, fig. 68 ; Studniczka, Menander ; Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., p. 25, pl. 13, agrees in considering it to be Menander, Lippold believes it to be Virgil !; Ohman, Portrattet i den Gr. Plastiken, p. 136, remarks on the likeness to Alexanders and thus dates stylistically to the time of Lysimachus). Theophrastus, 372-287 (Hekler, 96a), shows the transmission from Aristotle to Demosthenes heads. Seleucus I, King 306-281, may be represented in a bronze bust from Herculaneum, Naples (Delbriick, Portr., p. 22, figs. 11-15; F.H.S., XXV, 1905, p. 93, pl. vir.2; W. 338.7). A head from Pergamon (//t. v. Perg., V1.1, p. 150) and the so-called Ptolemy I (Ny C.G., Tillaeg 1925, 453a) are identified by Poulsen as Lysimachus of Thrace ; which holds good stylistically ; cf. Lippold, Gemmen, pl. 70.1 5 but these heads do not portray the same man as the coin which Imhoof-Blumer believed to represent Lysimachus (Portrdat- hopfe auf Miinzen, p. 17, pl. 1.143 Képp, 52 Winck. Berlin, 1892, p. 12, considered it an Alexander ; W. 338.12). I am disposed to identify the person on the coin with a diademed head from Pergamon in Berlin (Alt. v. Perg., vil, no. 136, pl. xxxiv; Klein, Prax., p. 410, figs. 85, 98 + ee Ay Pere hens Datex 86). “This seems to be an idealistic portrait rather than the head of a god: Attalus I was the first of the Pergamon dynasty to take the title of king, and, as this diademed head is too early to represent him or his successors, Lysimachus is the person historically indicated as most prob- able. It is a fairly young face and the diadem was not in marble, and thus may have been a later addition, hence the head may antedate 306, the upper limit of Lysimachus’ reign ; in any case it could be no later than 283, the year of Philetaerus’ rebellion against him. The above-mentioned coin of Lysimachus has also been compared with a small head said to have come from Athens, Munich, 480 (Sieve- king, Miinchn. ‘fahrb., x, 1916-7, p. 179, fig. 5, two pls.), and one in the Vatican (Cat., Sala det Busti, 338, pl. 72 ; Sieveking, op cit., figs. 1,6; W. 338.11) of which a copy exists in Houghton Hall (Poulsen, Portr. in Eng. Colls., p. 39, pl. 11). The features of these heads are more Alexandroid than the Berlin head, and they have even been identified as Alexander himself, though Wace has suggested Demetrius Poliorcetes, 337-283, for the Vatican copy. Head of youth, Brit. Mus. (Cat., m1, 1783; B.S.4., xxv, p. 68, pl. vurr.2), cf. above group. Bronze statuette known as Alexander on horseback, Naples (Br. Br., 355b3; Bernouilli, Darst. Alex., p. 98, figs. 29, 30 ; Pottier, AZélanges Nicole, p. 427; W. 335.1), does not represent Alexander but rather one of his immediate successors : the style is slightly more advanced than that of the Alexander sarcophagus. Male portrait head, Turin (7.H.S., xxv1, 1916, p. 239, pl. 16), remini- scent of early Seleucid coins. Head of Ptolemy I, Thera (Thera, 1, p. 245, fig., pl. xxz), in bad condition. Inscribed bust of Olympiodorus, Oslo (Poulsen, Coll. Ustinow, p. 21, figs. 23-25; 4.7.4.,2 xxv, 1921, p. 163, fig. 2) ; he was a general of the beginning of the third century and the head has been compared with the portraits of both Demosthenes and Aristotle. Head of a foreigner (?), Terme (Poulsen, De/phi, p. 323, fig. 163). Bearded head, Delphi (Fowslles de Delphes, 1v, pl. txxtr; Poulsen, Delphi, p. 320, figs. 158-9). So-called Apollonius of Tyana; Poulsen (Portraits in Eng. Colls., 99 LeACT ERG RCE E ees Cour lara eka p. 45, pl. 18) agrees with Lippold in calling it Homer and places it at the beginning of the third century. Bronze bust called Ptolemy or Lysimachus, Naples, 888 (Hekler, 69 ; W. 338.13). Small head of a bearded man, pl. 18a, Metr. Mus. (Acc. no. 08.258.40) bought in Rome. Statue of Diogenes (?), died 323, Villa Albani (Hekler, 113 ; Helbig,? 1856, accepts as a posthumous type that originated under Alexander’s immediate successors, but Poulsen, Portr. in Eng. Colls., pl. 16, rejects the identification as Diogenes) ; Aix copy of the head, Einz., 1407-8. Cf. a terracotta medallion from Corinth in Berlin (Winnefeld, Hell. Silberreliefs, 68, Winck. Berlin, 1908, pl. 111.3) which may represent the same person. Head of Alexander, from Alexandria, Brit. Mus. (Cat. m1, 1857, pl. x.2; Bulle, 218), comes nearest to the coins of Lysimachus (Hill, Hundred Masterpieces of Sculp., p. 148). Head of Alexander (as Apollo ?), Rossie Priory (Poulsen, Portraits in Eng. Colls., p. 38, pl. 10). Head of Alexander, from Cos, Constantinople, 539, second century copy. Head of Alexander as Helios, Capitoline (Helbig, Aon. Ant., v1, 1896, p. 87, pl. 11); copy from Ptolemais in private collection (zbid., pl. 1; accepted as genuine by Schreiber, Bi/dn. Alex., p. 74) 5 copy of doubtful antiquity, Holkham Hall (cdzd., fig. 10) ; later variation of the type, Prado (Bernouilli, Darst. Alex., p. 84, fig. 26 ; Arndt-Br., 483-4). The original was probably early third century. Bust of Alexander, from Egypt (Sale Cat. of Lambros and Dattari Colls., No. 317, pl. xxxv), early third century appears to be the most likely date. . ‘“Tnopus”’ bust, from Delos, Louvre (Bernouilli, Darst. Alex., fig. 27 5 Schreiber, Bildn. Alex., p. 81, says a colossal copy of the head exists at Avignon), a late second century copy. Head of Heracles, from Egypt, Louvre (Waldstein, Gr. Sculp. and Modern Art, pl. xxxix ; Lawrence, Fourn. Egypt. Arch., x1, 1925, p. 183, pl. xx1). Bearded head of a god, pl. 17a, Alexandria (zbid., p. 182, pl. xrx, 3). IOO ASE Pre Nm pre Head of Poseidon, from Chios, Vienna (Ubersicht d. Kunsthist. Samml. 192.4, U1, X1, 118) of similar tendencies to the above heads from Egypt. Herm of Heracles (Bull. Comm., 1, 1873, p. 97, pl. 13 Conservatori Cat., Giardino, 99, many copies from the Peloponnese). sixiton, Berlin, 286 (Wace, B.S.4., 1x, 1902-3, p. 222, fig. 2): date uncertain, but later than Eutychides and considerably earlier than the Gigantomachy. Aphrodite and Triton, Dresden (zbid., fig. 1; Dickins, Hell. Sculp., fig. 25 ; Lawrence, fourn. Egypt. Arch., x1, 1925, p. 183, pl. xx). Odysseus, Venice (Furtwangler—Urlichs, Denkm.,° p. 142, pl. 43), Vatican (Cat. 1, Chiar. 704, pl. 85 ; Dickins, Hell. Sculp., fig. 35). Bronze head of a boxer, from Olympia, pl. 16b, Athens (Bulle, 235, fig. 154; Hekler, 36; Br. Br.. 247; Furtwangler, Olympia, Bronzen, p- 10, identified as an original by Lysippus ; Schrader, Marmorkopfe eines Negers, 60, Winck. Berlin, 1900, p. 17, two figs., dates to 400 !) : the closest parallel I know on Attic stelz is a wild-haired old man on Athens, 731. Silenus carrying the infant Dionysus, pl. 19, Munich, 238 ; Louvre (Fr.-W., 1430; Br. Br., 64); Vatican (Cat., 1, 11, pl. 2). Bronze Silenus as support of candelabrum, Brit. Mus., 284 ; Naples, 816 (Overbeck and Mau, Pompeji, fig. 289). Cf. head of boxer from Olympia. * Satyr with the boy Dionysus sitting on his shoulder, Minto (4us., VIII, 1913, p. 90) points out that the early Hellenistic character is clearly revealed by the Florence copy (pl. 1v, head fig. 7; 4.7..,? xx, 1916, p. 225, fig. 2); Bologna copy (Minto, op. cit., fig. 4; Ducati, Rev. Mieneee Vi, 1911-2, p. 143, fig. 8); Prado (Hinz. 1570-1) ; Vatican (Fahresh., x1x-xx, 1919, p. 259, fig. 177). Herm of Pan, from Pergamon, Berlin (Kekulé v. Stradonitz, Hand- buch,® p. 285, fig.), Minto compares with the above. Silver statuette of Pan, Metr. Mus. (Bul/., June, 1922, p. 135, fig. 3) Head of Pan, from a relief from Cyzicus, Constantinople (Cat., 11, 571; B.C.H., xu, 1889, pl. 1x.2); the inscription may have been a decree of proxenia for a citizen of Panticapaeum but the features are not IOI LATER GREEK SCULPTURE so bestial as on the coins of that town. ‘The lettering would admit of a fourth century dating. Statue of Pan, pl. 20a, Dresden, 261. Group of Pan teaching a boy to play the pipes (Klein, Fahresh., x1x-xx, 1919, p. 260, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 60; Lippold, Kopten, p. 50) ; terra- cotta in Berlin (Priene, p. 346, fig. 407). “There is no authority for the old ascription to a certain Heliodorus of whom nothing is known : the original appears to be of third century date, perhaps somewhat late in the century, but I place it with the other Pans for convenience. Themis, by Chaerestratus, from Rhamnus, Athens, 231 (Br. Br., 476; Ephem. Arch., 1891, pl. 43 Lippold, Miinchn. Fahrb., vit, 1913, p. 244; Dickins, Hell. Sculp., fig. 40; W. 344.1). Epigraph- ically dated to the end of the fourth century or beginning of the third. Apollo and the Muses, on a basis from Mantinea, Athens (B.C.H., xu, 1888, pls. 1-1; Br. Br., 468 ; Fougéres, AZantinée, pls. 1-1v, in- cluding one pl. of heads from casts ; Svoronos, Nat.-MJus., pl. xxx). The old ascription to Praxiteles is disputed by Vollgraff, who produces external evidence suggesting a date of c. 300 instead of 370, and he at- tributes it to a homonymous grandson of the great Praxiteles (B.C.H., XXXII, 1908, p. 236 5 opposed by Ducati, Zon. Ant., xxt, 1912, p. 291 ; accepted on stylistic grounds by Sieveking and Buschor, Minch. Fahrb., VII, 1912, p. 125); Svoronos describes it as a composition not earlier than the middle of the third century incorporating Praxitelean and older types (‘Fourn. Intern. Num., v, 1902, pp. 169, 285). A relief with similar spacing, Small Acrop. Mus., 391, has a fourth century inscription. Female statue from the Louvre (Collignon, Stat. fun., p. 158, fig. 90), cf. Mantinea basis. Female statues known as “ Euterpe,” Vatican (Helbig,* 260) and Vicenza (Arch. Zeit., 1867, p. 101), probably not a muse, cf. Mantinea basis. Tyche of Antioch by Eutychides, whose floruzt given as 296 by Pliny probably refers to this, his most famous work, especially as the city of Antioch was founded in 300. The head of the Vatican copy does not belong (Br. Br., 154; Helbig,® 362; Forster, Fahrb., xu, 1897, p. 1473 W. 340.1): little copies in metal are complete (Br. Br., text 102 q ! : Al Pepe Ba N @DE TSX to 610, figs. 1,3; Metr. Mus., Bronzes No. 259; F.H.S., 1x, 1888, pl. v), they do not make it possible to dogmatise about the original head but suggest that a Cybele in Copenhagen comes near to it (Ny C.G., 334, Billedt. xxi ; Arndt, Glypt., pl. 135). The statuettes give reason for considering the Vatican copy less trustworthy than the one in Buda- pest (Br. Br., 610) in which the drapery over the legs is streaked to represent a crinkly material ; a headless alabaster copy in Copenhagen, Thorvaldsen Mus. (Eimz., 1480.1). The turreted crown is derived from that worn by a Mesopotamian astral goddess, Sidney Smith, Babylonian Historical Texts, p. 66; Z. fiir altestamentl. Wissenschaft, vee exrivero20.p, 74.5 cf. P.E.F., O.8., April, 19215 p. 82. Torso of a river-god, Vatican, (Cat. 1, Gall. Lapidaria 101, pl. 27 ; Helbig, 54; Rém. Mitt., vu, 1893, pls. v-v1 ; W. 340.2) 3 conjec- tured to be the Eurotas of Eutychides, which suits the style, but Lippold raises a point against the identification (Rém. Mitt., xxxtt1, 1918, p. 96). Head of goddess, from the Serapeum, pl. 17b, Alexandria (Fourn. Egypt. Arch., X1, 1925, p. 185, pl. xx1). Female statuette from Thasos, Budapest (‘Fahresh., x1, 1908, p. 156, figs, 49, 50); Hekler (4z Antik Plasztikai, Rm. 1, 13) speaks of Chaerestratus and produces the Brit. Mus. statuette (Cat., m1, 2091, pl. xx11) as a second or first century development of such types, another example of which is the so-called nymph in Syracuse (Plasztikai, fig. 2 ; Mauceri. Italia Artistica, Siracusa, p. 98, fig.), in reality a draped Aphro- dite, for the type occurs as such on Roman sarcophagi of the second century, A.D. For other copies of the Brit. Mus. statuettes see Ny. C.G. Cat., Tillaeg, 1925, p. 52, No. 312a. Ippel, Bronzefund von Galjab, p. 30, has a study of the type. Seated girl, pl. 23, Conservatori (Bulle, 171; Br. Br., text to 601, fig. 6; W. 371.4), bronze copy in Louvre, Br. Br., fig. 7; copy on a gem (Rém. Mitt., xxxin, 1918, p. 68, fig. 2), from an original by Eutychides as is almost universally admitted, the only considerable voice against the theory is Klein’s (Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 99, pl. 1). Sleeping Ariadne, Vatican (Br. Br., 167), Prado (Eimz., 1552), Flor- ence Mus. (Milani, R. Mus. Arch., pl. crit) and Pal. Pitti (Br. Br., 168) ; motive occurs on Magnesia frieze (Watzinger, Magnesza, pl. vit), on Vatican relief (Fahrb., xxv, 1910, p. 141, fig. 6), Megarian bowls 103 LeA ST ER Ge Reb br ha ss Caton a ee Ub; (B.C.H., Xxxvul, 1913, p. 424, fig. 6, No. 708, p. 434 3 Courby, Vases a reliefs, p. 463), on arm of a couch such as was found in the Cythera (Cerigotto) wreck and is typical of the early Empire (Neugebauer, Meisterwerke in Berlin, Gr. Bronzen, pl. 32). Girl from Anzio, Terme (Helbig,? 1352; Br. Br., 583-4; Bulle, 136-261; Bull. Comm., xxxvii, 1909, pls. viti-x1; ‘Fourn. Intern. Num., XII, 1909, pls. m1-viir; W. 358.3-5) ; Furtwangler (Miinchn. Fahrb., II, 1917, p. 1) considered it a copy from the Lysippic school of which Eutychides was a member, and in fact it wears streaky drapery of the same kind as the Antioch ; analogous poses are found in Thessalian coins of the early third century (Rém. Mitt., xxix, 1914, p. 12) and statuettes have been cited as similar (zdzd., pl. 1, from the Ilissus ; Bull. Comm., XXXVII, 1909, p. 208, figs. 11, 12, from Rome). ‘There is no justification for treating the Terme statue as an original, for it is mani- festly of bronze technique and the work is mechanical, and a smaller replica has been found in Rome (Boll. d’ Arte, x11, 1919, p. 102). Female statue from Macedonia, Brit. Mus. (B.S.4., xx11, 1918-19, p. 24, pl. x.3), another example of streaky drapery, but in a marble original, and therefore to be contrasted with the bronze technique of the Anzio Girl. Similar drapery is found in numerous statues of children, e.g., those from the Ilissus (Ephem. Arch., 1917, pls. 1a and 2) and a girl from Tanagra, Berlin, 505 (Furtwangler, Samml. Sabouroff 1, pl. xxxv). Votive relief, Louvre (Heuzey, Mission en Macedoine, pl. 25 ; Arvan- itopoullos, Ephem. Arch., 1910, p. 378) 3 votive relief, Volo (cbid., fig. 9) ; both said to be dated by the inscriptions to the first decades of the third century. Funerary relief from near Eleusis, Athens ; Foucart (B.C.H., tv, 1880, p. 63, pl. 1) dates the inscription to the beginning of the third century. Unclassic grouping of the figures. Monument of Carystius at Delos (B.C.H., xxx1, 1917, p. 504, figs. 18-20, pl. x11), a pretentious thing of merely decorative workmanship, has a seated lion on top and reliefs round the base, of a phallus-headed cock in front and a Bacchic scene on either side ; it bears an inscription more likely to belong to the first decades of the third century than to the end of the fourth. 104 AS PSP rT Ee Neb als x Reliefs of nymphs dancing in the caves of Pan seem to begin towards the end of the fourth century, but most of them belong to the early third century (Wace, B.S.R., v, 1910, p. 174.3 Ephem. Arch., 1905, P- 99; Svoronos, Nat. Mus., pls. -xxit-1v, xcvi-u, xcix; 4.F.4.,? VII, 1903, p. 301, pls. 111-1x, from the cave at Vari 3 Arch.-epig. Mitth. aus Ost., 1, 1877, pl. 1, from Gallipoli. Basis with athletes in relief, found in the sea off Euboea, Carystus (Hekler, Fahrb., xxx1, 1916, p. 98, fig. 2, remarks on its post-Lysippic character). Similar basis with inscription of transition from fourth to third century, Small Acrop, Mus., 401 and 4o1!a. Relief of athlete, Munich (Wolters, Arch. Anz., 1913, p. 12, fig. 1, ascribes to end of fourth century). FIRST HALF OF THE THIRD CENTURY. Poseidippus, Vatican (Br. Br., 494 ; Hekler, 110a, 11 1a). Demosthenes head, pl. 20b, Oxford (Casson, F.H.S., XLVI, 1926, p. 72, Dlev)3) others, Helbig.* 22; Hekler, 56-7, fig. 3; on the statue’s stylistic novelty, Krahmer, Rém. Mitt. xxxvui-Ix, 1923-4, pp. 139, 154. Epicurus, 342-70 (Hekler, 100, 1o1a, fig. 11; Delbriick, Portr., pl. 25; Poulsen, Portr. in Eng. Colls., p. 43, pl. 16). Hermarchus, colleague of Epicurus (Hekler, fig. 14; Delbriick, feet te;) Foulsen, B.C.H., xtvii1, 1924, p. 377) ; Hekler, Az Magyar Muzeum, Evkinyvet, 1, 1919-20, p. 1, figs. 1, 3, head in Budapest ; seated figure in Florence (zid., fig. 5; Milani, R. Mus. Arch., p. 318, pl. civ1, there called Sophocles). Metrodorus, colleague of Epicurus (Hekler, fig. 12; Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., p. 73, pls. 31-35 ; Hekler, 102, labels the Athens head ““ Hermarchus,”’ the fact is that the two are almost indistinguishable ; for latest references to both, see Ny C.G., Tillaeg, 1925, 4174, 416a. Zeno the Stoic, c. 270 (Hekler, 104, fig. 13 3 Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., p. 153 Lippold, Rim. Mitt., xxx, 1918, p. 18, endeavoured to revive the identification as Zeno the Epicurean). Statue of Nikeso, from Priene, Berlin (Priene, figs. 118, 120 3 Inschr. v. P., No. 1733; Krahmer, Rém. Mitt., xxxvu-Ix, 1923-4, p. 155, places with the Demosthenes ; W. 334.3). 105 LATER GREE KS €C Ui Pe TU RoE Relief with head of old man, Barracco Mus. (Hekler, 49a ; Helbig,’ 1138 ; W. 334.4), cf. Demosthenes, but may be slightly earlier. Bronze statuette resembling Hermarchus, Metr. Mus. (Cat. Bronzes, 120; Delbriick, Portr., fig. 13, pl. 26). Seated poet, Ny C.G. (430, Billedt. xxx1; Br. Br. 477; Hekler, 118b, 120); headin Louvre (Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., pl. 24). “The date can be roughly ascertained by comparison with the Demosthenes, the Silenus holding the infant Dionysus (cf. especially eyes and stylised hair) and the Hermarchus bronze statuette (cf. especially the chest, shoulders and face) ; it is usually placed earlier than the Demosthenes but may not be so. Statuettes of poet, from Egypt (Arch. Anz., 1922, p. 85, No. 37, in Berlin), cf. the above. Bronze head, Naples, 881 (Hekler, 94b; W. 345.2); Winter (Tod. d. Archimedes, 82, Winck, Berlin, 1924, p. 11, fig. 4) identifies as Archimedes on the ground of a certain resemblance toa mosaic: I should be inclined, however, to put it before rather than after the Demosthenes, and Archimedes was not killed till 212. Bronze head, Naples, 880 (Hekler, 92b), perhaps later than Demos- thenes. Bearded head, Prado (Ezmz., 1653, compares Demosthenes). Head of a poet, Ny C.G., 425, Billedt., xxx1 (Einz., 157-8 ; Arndt Br., 915-6 3 Poulsen, Col/. Ustinow, p. 23, fig. 26, agrees with Arndt in placing with Demosthenes and identifies with the comic poet Philip- pides whose statue was set up in the Theatre at Athens in 287-6). Portraits of Ptolemy II, from Egypt (Fourn. Egypt. Arch., x1, 1925, p. 185). Supposed head of Pyrrhus, Ny C.G., 449, Billedt.. xxxu; style suits the identification. Pedimental statues from Samothrace, Vienna (Conze and Benndorf, Samot., 1, pls. xxx-xt1 ; W. 342.4). Colossal female torso, Boston, 51, cf. Samot., 1, pl. x11. Artemis of Versailles, Louvre (Br. Br., 420; Studniczka, rt. u. Iph., p. 79, considers a later version of an original of the time of Lysippus), cf. Samot., 1, pls. XxXIX-XL. Dionysus, from choragic monument of Thrasyllus, Brit. Mus., 4323 Reisch, 4th Mitt, xi1., 1888, p. 389, pl. vit, dates to the 106 Ae Pe be ieNe Delo xX reconstruction of 271, but the Cat. is in favour of 319, the date of the original building ; Br. Br., 119; W. 344.2. Should resemble Attic stelz if it belonged to 319, and I cannot see that it does. Serapis of Alexandria, copies in Alex. (von Bissing, 4th. Afitt., XXXI, 1906, p. 55, pls. v1, vir ; Amelung, 4us., 111, 1908, p. 121, fig. 20 3 Breccia, Alex. ad. Aeg., p. 96): Clement of Alexandria (Overbeck, 1325) records the introduction of the cult under Ptolemy II, 284-247, and he calls the artist “ Bryaxis, not the Athenian, but somebody else with the same name as the great Bryaxis.” I accept this statement as accurate, the artist presumably was the Bryaxis responsible for the Apollo at Daphne which cannot be earlier than 300, the year of the foundation of Antioch (Zielinsky, Szbylle, pp. 75, 90). Comparison with Thrasyl- lus’ Dionysus points to the contemporaneity of the Serapis. The Vatican group of Muses consists of seven figures (Helbig, 264-270 ; W. 362.4, 5) and an Apollo, originally completed by a seated figure (Schreiber, Ludovisi Cat., 2; Alinari, photo. 1284) and the so- called Maenad (Einz., 395, 1993), the Dresden head of which 1s illus- trated, pl. gb (identified by Herrmann; Waldstein, Gr. Sculp. and Modern Art, pl. xxx) ; other heads from the group (Amelung, Basis d. Prax., figs. 11-17) ; the Prado group (Einz., 1556-68) dispensed with the standing figures and therefore duplicated two of the Vatican seated types and created two new ones. ‘The originals must have resembled Thrasyllus’ Dionysus, but the copies vary greatly in details. See in general Lippold, Kopzen, p. 169. Female statue, Conservatori (Helbig,? 928 ; Bull. Comm., 111, 1875, pl. 10), resembles Vatican Muses above the waist and the Myronic Athena below, is either Roman or from an unusually archaistic original of the time of the Muses. Aphrodite Kallipygos, Naples, 314 (Br. Br., 5785; Bulle, 162 ; Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 92; W. 381.6, 7); goes back to a small original which was probably of the school that produced the Vatican Muses. Two types called Niobids, Berlin, 584 and 585; Naples, 248 ; Louvre, Exped. de Morée, 111, 86.2, cf. the sketches of the Vatican Muses without the restorations (Rev. Arch.,4 x11, 1908.2, p. 359, pl. XVII). 107 Lo AcE ER GREEK SC DLP PaTaUeka kr So-called Nurse of the Niobids, Uffizi (Amelung, Fihrer, 173 ; Einz., 364-5), cf. Muses. Small Nike from Samothrace, Vienna (Conze and Benndorf, Samot, I, p. 27, pl. xivimr) ; if third century at all is early in the century, tall and thin like the Borghese Daphne (Br. Br., 260 ; Collignon, Sculp. grec. U, fig. 308). Dionysus (“ Ariadne”), Capitoline (Br. Br., 383; Cat., p. 344, 10, pl. 86; W. 376.7): not far removed from the Muses. Medici Venus, Uffizi (Bulle 156 ; Br. Br., 374; Lowy, Gr. Plastik, pl. 110; Klein, Prax., fig. 41; W. 280.4).. The Vliasto alabaster copy and other heads (Mon. Prot, xx111, 1918-19, pls. v, vr; Milani, Strena Helligiana, p. 188); the Altoviti Venus belonging to J. D. Rockefeller is a forged copy (Art and Arch., v, 1917, 1, pp. 181, 299). Cf. the head with the Muses, especially in the Dresden copies. Heads from a battle-group (Bienkowski, Darst. Gall., figs. 34-8) 5 Poulsen, Portr. in Eng. Colls., p. 40, pl. 12); the head in the Antiq., Rome, is the only one familiar to me and I believe it to be a copy from somewhat later than the Demosthenes. Bronze boxer, pl. 28, Terme (Hekler,85,86; Helbig,? 1350; W.339.1) Stela of horseman and his squire, from Abdera (Arch. Anz., 1918, p. 49, fig. 55), with third century lettering, a later version of a well- known fourth century type. Votive relief with head of Helicon from Thespiz, Athens (Jamot, B.C.H., xtv, 1890, p. 546, pls. rx, x, says the inscription cannot be later than the third century ; Robert, 4rch. Hermeneutik, p. 55, fig. 42) 5 cf. the head of old man on Athens stela, 731. Stela of two youths in hunting dress, bought at Smyrna, Brit. Mus., inscribed in third century letters with the name Numenius, son of Seuthes, of Lysimachia, a town in the Thracian Chersonese, founded 309-8 (B.C.H., xxi, 1889, p. 558, fig. 1). MIDDLE OF THE THIRD CENTURY. Portrait resembling coin-type of Aratus of Soli, who died ¢. 240 (Hekler, 99 ; W. 344.10). Portrait identified as Philetaerus, reigned 283-263, Naples, 1151 (Hekler, 70). 108 ApPeE baNe Detox: Rock-cut medallion head of Artemidorus of Perga, Thera (Thera, III, p. 97, pl. 5), inscription of middle or late third century. Head identified as Pyrrhus, Naples (Hekler, 71b ; W. 339.2). Head in Terme (Helbig,? 1386; Wace, F.H.S., xxv, 1905, p. 94, no. 3, compares with the above). Diademed head, Naples (Hekler, 72a ; W. 338.2). Portrait head, pl. 24b, Leyden. Bronze head with corkscrew hair, Naples, 884 (Hekler, 74): the hair is greased after the African custom which may, however, have then prevailed among savages elsewhere, and it is not certain that an African chief is represented. “Arundel” bronze head of Sophocles (?), Brit. Mus. (Fahré., x1, 1896, p. 172, pl. 1), a free copy, resembling Herculaneum copies, of an original to be placed between the Demosthenes and Chrysippus. Head of a Berber, from Cyrene, pl. 27, Brit. Mus. (Bronzes, 268 ; Hekler, 36); for photographs of Berbers see Maciver and Wilkin, Libyan Notes, pls. Xx-xxiv. Bearded head formerly in Catajo, now in Este Coll., Vienna (Hekler, 76; Fahresh., xu, 1909, pl. vir; Poulsen, Delphi, figs. 161-2) ; seems to be later than the other portraits in this section and only slightly earlier than the Dying Gaul of the Capitol. Aphrodite at the Bath, by Doedalsas (Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 32, and, Prax., p. 270, note 3); bronze statuette, from Beirut, pl. 25a, (Syria, VI, 1925, p. 312, pls. XL-XL1). Seated Heracles, pls. 25b, 26, formerly in Valladolid, Metr. Mus. (Handbook, fig. 145) ; parallel to the above in the pose and the surface anatomy which is careful to the point of ugliness. Torsos of fighting men (Bienkowski, Darst. Gall., p. 16, nos. 6-8) ; I am only familiar with no. 7, which is in the same marble as the Perga- mene figures, but appears to be more primitive than any of them. Ludovisi group of Gaul killing his wife and himself (zdid., no. 3, figs. 6-11 and 155, pl. 1; Studniczka, Art. u. Iph., p. 62, accepts Kjellberg’s dating of c. 250; W. 348). Marsyas group. Lippold, Kopizen, p. 110, on the white and red types ; reply by Amelung in Conservatori Cat., p. 166; the so-called third type represented by the Zagreb statue (‘Fahresh., x, 1907, p. 319, 109 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE figs. 93, 94) and the Capitoline head (Cat., p. 88, Gal/., 6, pl. 26) re- sembles a Marsyas of the Porta Maggiore underground basilica (F.H.8., XLIV, 1924, p. QI, fig. 14), but may be merely an architectural figure of the early second century style. Copy of “white”? Marsyas, from Tarsus, pl. 29, Constantinople, 534; cf. W. 347.2 (Berlin); Knife- grinder, pl. 30a, Uffizi (Amelung, Fuhrer, 68 ; W. 347.4). Bloated and shaggy-bellied Silenus, Vatican (Cat., 1., Chiar., 544, pl. 71). Other copies point rather to an early second century original. Head of Silenus, pl. 34a, Naples, 265. Satyr holding up bunch of grapes (Capitoline, Cat., p. 309, Fauno 1, pl. 77; Vatican Cat., 1, Gab. d. Maschere, 432, pl. 76); cf. the torso with Ludovisi Gaul. Group of satyr inviting a nymph to dance, pls. 30a, 31 (W. 368.5, 7). Latest treatment in text to Einmz., 2641-2; another copy of the satyr must now be added to the list, a bronze statuette from Constanza in Bucharest (Parvan, Incepturile Vietit Romane, p. 195, fig. 93). Bronze head of a satyr-boy, pl. 22b, Munich, 450 (Br. Br., 5b) ; the smoothness of the modelling and the treatment of the hair place it before the Pergamene sculptures, and it belongs at earliest to the time of the “‘ Pyrrhus,” Ny C.G., 4409. Satyr turning to look at his tail, copy with head in Florence, Mus. Arch. (Boll. d’ Arte, x1v, 1920, p. 47, fig. 8) ; large copy in black marble, Munich, 466, probably an enlargement and not to be taken as proof that the original was life-size. Bronze statuettes of dancing hermaphrodites, Epinal (Br. Br., text to 578, figs. 4, 5 3; Neugebauer, Bronzestatuetten, pl. 45), Vienna (Arch. Anz., 1892, p. 51, fig.), Blanchet Coll. (Rev. Arch.,? xxvu1, 1896, I, p. 160, pl. rv) : perhaps derived from one original contemporary with the above satyr. Bronze statuette of Aphrodite, formerly in Pourtalés Coll., Brit. Mus. (Cat. 1084, pl. v), similar statuette in Dubois Coll. (Rev. Arch.,§ XXXV, 1899, 11, p. 369, pl. xx) ; cf. these generally with the above. Satyr struggling with a hermaphrodite (Arndt, Glypt. Ny C., pl. 139 right, text illustrates Dresden and Antiquarium copies ; Lippold, Kopzen, XV, note 17 ; fresco in Naples, Roux, Herc, et Pompé, vim, pl. 17a) ; usually dated later on account of the loose composition (Krahmer, Rém. IIo Ae be EeN 2D eax Mitt., xxxvul-1x, 1923-4, p. 165), but the details show no Pergamene influence and the composition is merely bad. Adequate publication of the Ince-Blundell copy will render the early date more obvious, for in it both the heads are in a good state of preservation. Terminal figure, from Rhamnus, Athens, 313 (Ephem. Arch., 1891, p. 56, pl. 7, Stais dates the inscription to the middle of the third century ; Kavvadias’ Cat. says it is certainly of the third century). Relief of Apollo and Artemis beside an omphalus, from Eretria (Kourouniotes, Ephem. Arch., 1911, p. 32, fig., says the lettering belongs to the middle of the third century), conventional work. Silver statuette of a boy and goose, found at Alexandria with coins of 240, Brit. Mus. (Cat. Si/ver Plate, 7, pl. vir; ‘F.H.S., v1, 1885, pl. 1; Rém. Mitt., Xxxvuil-1x, 1923-4, p. 161, note 1). Terracottas from a tomb at Eretria (including the Erotes, pl. 1), Boston (Ephem. Arch., 1899, p. 222, Kourouniotes dates inscriptions end of third century ; Vollmdller, 4th. Mitt., xxvi, 1901, p. 333, pl. xv, dates the first interment before Alexander). A gem signed by Gelon was also in the tomb (Beazley, Lewes House, no. 102). PAYER. GHIRD CEN LORY. Bronze statuette, Naples, 808 ; identified as Antiochus II, by Schreiber, Bildn. Alex. p. 272, figs. 30, 31, and Dickins, 7.H.S., XXXIV, 1914, p. 307, fig. 10.1. The resemblance to Seleucid coins of this time is at least enough to date the type. Portrait head, Prado (Eimz., 1654), subsequent to the Demosthenes, no criteria for accurate dating. Diademed head, Ny C.G., Tillaeg, 1914, 450 a., Billedt. Tillaeg, vur; Poulsen (K. Danske Vid. Selskab, 1913, no. 5, Tétes et bustes) notes that the beard is worn in similar fashion by Philip V, but he ascribes it elsewhere (La Collection Ustinow, p. 24, fig. 27) to the beginning of the third century. First dedication of Attalus (Lowy, Inschr. gr. Bildh., p. 119 3 Bien- kowski, Darst. Gall., nos. 1, 2, 3) 45 5) 10, 11, 12,13; W. 348.4, 349.1, 25 4, 5) 3 head of dying Asiatic, pl. 33, Terme (Br. Br., 515 ; Helbig, 13543 W. 349.6). III Di Av) EAR Ge RS ER RScCoUrLerar Or her Bronze statuette of satyr from Pergamon (Furtwangler, Satyr aus Pergamon, 40 Winck. Berlin, 1880; W. 368.4). — Bronze satyr with wine skin, Naples, 815 (Lippold, Kopien, p. 134, on the larger marble copy in Madrid, Einz., 1740; Overbeck and Mau, Pompeji, fig. 285). Terracotta satyr with skin, Cairo (Zon. Piot, xvii, 1910, p. 76, fig. 15). Heads of Gauls, Alexandria (zbid., pl. vit). Ludovisi Fury, pl 35, Terme (Br. Br., 238; Bulle, 262; Helbig, 1301; W 347.5) Barberini satyr, pl. 34b, Munich, 218 (Bulle, 178, 220; sug- gested restoration by Bulle and Habich, fahrb, xvi1, 1902, p. 31 3 W. 346.1). Gaul, from Cervetri, pl. 38, Metr Mus. (Bull. March, 1909, p 453 Mon. Piot, xxi, 1913-14, p. 180, figs. 6, 7). Drunken satyr as represented on coin of Nicaea (Lippold, Kopien, p. 128); basalt copy, Munich, 502 ; bronze copy, Naples, 858 (Einz., 2943-4; head, Magnesia, p 220). Satyr head, from Magnesia (zbzd., p. 219, pl. virr), similar to above. Bronze statue of sleeping satyr, Naples, 842 (Fahrb., xvi, 1901, p. 114, fig. 6; W. 346.2), poor copy. Basalt head of satyr, Ny C.G., 370, Billedt., xxiv, possibly an Aphro- disian original. Head of youth sucking wine through a pipe, , Ny C.G., 369, p. 148, Billedt., xxiv. Guanes of wrestlers, Uffizi (Bulle, 184.3; Arch. Anz., 1894, p. 192 ; W. 340.4); the heads do not belong ; copy in Italian marble Menelaus carrying dead Patroclus, Loggia dei Lanzi (Amelung, Fiihrer, 5 ; Br. Br. 343 3 side view, Studniczka, Farnes. Stier, Zeitschr. fur bild. Kunst, N.F., xtv, 1903, p. 179, figs. 9, 10), “ Pasquino ” (Amelung, Fiihrer, fig. 2; Br. Br. 3474), head of Menelaus, Vatican (Cat., 1, Sala dei Busti, 311, pls. 68, 73), head of Menelaus, Leconfield Coll. 23, head of Patroclus, Leningrad (Sbornik, 1, 1921, pls 1-vit), a group from the Peloponnese is mentioned by Leake (Travels in the Morea, u, p. 488); two similar figures from the Cerigotto wreck, Athens (Stais, Euremata, p. 44, figs. 19, 20) ; the group is imitated in a I12 AGP. P EN Des terracotta from near Sassoferrata, Bologna (Not. Scavi, 1903, p. 184, fig. 5), which condemns K lein’s date of c. 50. Bronze statuettes of fighting men resembling the Menelaus, Parma (Einz., 72b 5 Arndt, Glypt. Ny. C., text to 110 right), and from Egypt (Arch. Anz., 1907, p. 357, figs. 1, 2). Amazon, Borghese palace (Br. Br. 347b ; Lowy, us., vit, 1907, p. 79, figs. 2-5 ; us., VIII, 1913, p. 195, fig. 4), female counterpart of the Menelaus. CIRCA 200. Head from Pergamon, perhaps of Attalus I, Berlin (Hekler, 75 ; W. 348.5). Smaller dedication of Attalus (Bienkowski, Darst. Gall., p. 373 Venice copies, Einz., 2542-4, 2550-1 ; Bulle, 223 ; W. 350, 351). Altar from Magnesia of 221-207 (Magnesia, p. 175, pls. vi, vir; W. 356.2). Portrait of Chrysippus, 280-207 (Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., p. 12, the Steensgaard head is now in the Copenhagen Nat. Mus.; Ny C.G., Tillaeg, 1925, 425a, Billedt. Tillaeg, vir 3; Hekler, 116; W. 344.6-8). Similar head in Uffizi (Amelung, Fiihrer, 136 ; Hekler, 115b). Head of Euthydemus of Bactria, pl. 37a, Mus. Torlonia (Rém. Mitt., fe1o04,p. 107, pl. Vv; Delbriick, Porir., pl. 29 ; W. 339.4; 5)- Supposed head of Antiochus ITI, reigned 222-187, Louvre (Hekler, 123; Dickins, 7.H.S., xxxiv, 1914, p. 308, fig. 11, identifies with Agathocles of Bactria, of the early second century). Head called Aratus, Naples (Hekler, 73b; Wace, F.H.S., xxv, 1905, pl. 1x.2 ; Bienkowski, Darst. Gall., figs. 39, 40 ; W. 349.7). Heads of Ptolemy IV, 221-203, and his wife, Arsinoe, pl. 36, Boston, 57, 58 (fourn. Egypt. Arch., X1, 1925, p. 187, pl. xxiv). Head of a barbarian, Brussels, 23 (Furtwangler, Coll. Somzée, 48, pl. xxiv), the hair is knotted up in the method later employed by the Germans. Pair of centaurs, Capitoline (Cat., p. 2743; Br. Br., 392; W. 382.2, cf. 382.1 in Louvre); young centaur, Doria Gallery (Bull. Comm., XLVIII, 1920, p. 40, pl. 11; Ezmz., 2271-2) ; heads of the old centaur, Berlin, 205, Barracco (Helbig, 1125); heads of young centaur, Aix (Einz., 1391), Munich, 222 (Br. Br., 5a). H 113 LACT ERY GURAE ByK Ss Cau Patek ee Bronze statuette of dancing satyr, Naples, 814 (Bulle, 102 ; Dickins, Hell. Sculp., fig. 3 3 W. 368.3). Satyr playing flute, Villa Borghese (Br. Br., 435; Bulle, 79; Einz., 2767-8 ; Helbig, 15643; W. 343.13; Boll. d’Arte, x1v, 1920, p. 46, fig. 7); a more trustworthy head in Florence (zdid., fig. 6 ; Milani, R. Mus. Arch., pl. cri); bronze statuette in Florence (zdid., pl. cxxxvit), Naples (Bulle, fig. 30) ; I cannot agree that the Conservatori fragment (Bull. Comm., vit, 1880, pl. xrx ; Helbig, 945) is of earlier and simpler style, it is rather of late and barbarous incompetence. Torso of fighting giant, Ny C.G. (193, Billedt., x1v ; Einz., 1799, 1800; Bienkowski, Darst. Gall., 30a, figs. 73a, b). Small figures of fighting satyrs, Conservatori (Bull. Comm., xvu, 1889, pls. 1,11; W. 368.1); Ny C.G. (486, Billedt., xxxvur ; Arndt, Glypt., p. 194, pl. 140, combines with the torso of the Villa Albani, Einz., 1107-8) ; another figure in Metr. Mus. Sleeping Hermaphrodite, pl. 40, Terme (Helbig, 1362; Bulle, 179; Br. Br., 505, in the text Arndt expresses the view that the style is that of the transition from third to second century ; Dickins, Hell. Sculp., p. 57, fig. 42 5 W. 381.1) 3 the statue of a sleeping Maenad, Athens, 261, is a variant of Roman decorative workmanship. Sleeping Eros, pl. 41b (Ashmole, 7.H.S., xi11, 1922, p. 244, pl. x ; Bulle, 189 ; copy from Tralles, Smyrna Evangelical School (Ephem. Arch., 1923, p. 84, fig. 243) Metr. Mus. Bronzes, 132, Handbook, fig. 100). Bronze head called Berenice, perhaps an Amazon, Naples, 849 (Br. Br., 385; Rayet, Aon. de l’Art ant., u, pl. 51); cf. Attalid Amazon. Sacrifice relief, pl. 41a, Munich, 206; cf. relief with seated poet, from Athens (4th. Mitt., xxvi, 1901, p. 126, pl. v1). For older literature on landscapes see Pagenstecher, Landsch. Relief, latest treat- ment by Schober (Vienna Fahrb. f. Kunstgeschichte, 11, 1923, p. 38) and Krahmer (Fahrb., XL, 1925, p. 191). } Stela of Parmeniscus from Avlona, Vienna (Fahresh., xxI-1l, 1922, p. 128, fig. 47), with lettering ascribed to the second century and battle- scene showing Pergamene influence. A similar stela near Avlona (Praschniker and Schober, 4rch. Forschungen in Albanien u. Montenegro, I14 APPENDIX p. 72, fig. 87) bears an inscription of c. 200. The peculiar features of these stelze must be set down to a local artist or artists. Frieze of the labours of Heracles, from Pergamon (v. Salis, Altar v. Perg., p. 91, fig. 15), recalls Megarian bowls. Two stelz, from Chios (4th. Mitt., x11, 1888, pp. 195, 363, pl. m1) : the one in memory of Metrodorus, pl. 42, is now in Berlin, 766a. Studniczka placed the inscriptions in the early second century, Bruckner considered they resembled those of Attalus I more than anything else, Prof. Wilhelm informed me that they were probably third century but could only be vaguely dated. Cf. the Avlona stelz, and the stela of Diogenes from Imbros, Constantinople, 963. Frieze of the temple of Artemis Leucophryene at Magnesia, now in Berlin, Louvre and Constantinople (AZagnesia, pp. 84, 185, pls. x11-x1v ; W. 356.1). The temple was not finished till 129, and Krahmer (Fahrb., xxxx, 1925, p. 197) considers this to be the date of the frieze : to my eyes it closely resembles the dead Amazon of the smaller dedication of Attalus (Br. Br., 482), the Gigantomachy, and the stela of Met- rodorus, and the date should therefore lie between 200 and 170. In the absence of any later work of the same style, a lower date than 170 is inadmissible. Frieze at Teos (Einz., 1345-8 ; W. 356.7), cf. Magnesia frieze. Frieze at Cos (Benndorf, Reisen in s.-w. Kleinasien, 1, p. 13, pls. u-1v ; W. 356.6), cf. Magnesia frieze. Bavcsot a pirl, Lerme (4us., x, 1921, p. 53, pls. 1, 1), cf. Attalid Amazon and Magnesia frieze. Mounted Amazon fighting two soldiers, Villa Borghese (Einz., 2779- 2781 ; Fahrb., 11, 1887, pl. vit), has been compared with small dedi- cation of Attalus but is more like the Magnesia frieze. Frieze from the Theatre at Delphi (Krahmer, ‘fahrb., xxxx, 1925, p. 196, fig. 8), cf. Magnesia frieze and the Gigantomachy. EARLY SECOND CENTURY. Diademed head, Naples, 889 (Hekler, 738 5 W. 338.1); Ippel, Bronzefund v. Galjtb, p. 65, compares coins of Ptolemy V and VI, and Antiochus IV, all of this period. EVs LATER G REST KY SiC OL Per ore Gigantomachy from Pergamon, Berlin: begun after peace of 188, Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 20 ; style, v. Salis, A/tar v. Perg., p. 150 5 the slabs apportioned to artists, Schuchhardt, AZerster des grossen Frieses v. Perg., with good plates ; W. 352-5. A group at Wilton House is paralleled on the Gigantomachy (4rch. Zeit., 1881, p. 161 3 Klein, Gr. Kunst, 11, p. 127). Sculptures from Pergamon in the style of the Gigantomachy. 4/t. vu. Perg., Vil, nos. 43, 475 50, 51590, I12, 115, 123, 130, aanepe te interesting to compare the female head pl. 44 (no. 90; W. 359.1, 2) with a fragment from the Altar of Magnesia (Magnesia, fig. 181). Imitations of fifth century sculptures, Krahmer, Rém. Mitt., xt, 1925, p. 67. The female figure with the sword-belt (no. 47 ; W. 359.3) dates the so-called Muses of Philiscus, of which apparently this figure was one (Lippold, Kopzen, p. 170; Sardis, v.1, p. 64); Schede (Rém. Mitt., XXXV, 1920, p. 65) condemns as an ancient forgery the Philiscus signature attached to a female portrait statue from Thasos, Constantinople, 136 (Dickins, Hell. Sculp., fig. 33; W. 361.7), the style of the figure is certainly Imperial as he says, and I think its period is c. 100 A.D. Head of centaur, pl. 46b, Conservatori (Helbig, 925 ; Br. Br., 535), cf. the giant’s head of the Gigantomachy (Léwy, Gr. Plastzk, pl. 105.1913 W. 383.3) ; an Imperial copy. Fighting man from Delos, Athens (Br. Br., 9 ; W. 350.1), formerly attributed to Niceratus (Leroux, B.C.H., xxxtv, 1910, p. 486). Torso of a god or king, Berlin, 1486 (Kurze Beschr., pl. 55c). Male torso from Magnesia (AZagnesia, p. 218, pl. x). Torso of Triton, from Delos, Brit. Mus. (Caz., 111, 2220, fig. 36). Metopes, from Troy, Constantinople and Berlin Aus. fir Vélker- kunde (Br. Br., 162a ; W. 341.1, 23; Dérpfeld, Troja u. Ihon, p. 429, Beilagen 49-51). Head of Zeus, from Troy, Constantinople (zbid., p. 438, Beilage 54), cf. Zeus of Syracuse (below), of uncertain date. ‘““ Dying Alexander,” Uffizi (Br. Br., 264 ; Amelung, Fihrer, 151). Similar head, Ny C.G. (Cat., 372, Billedt., xxv, Tillaeg, 1914, p. 148), copy. Head of Gaul, Cairo, 27475 (Bulle, 222 ; W. 349.4); its Perga- mene character is obscured by its unfinished condition, but is recognised 116 AG Pele heN ED lex by Klein, Gr. Kunst, u1, p. 73 3 Wace, B.S.4., 1x, 1902-3, p. 235 ; and Dickins, Hell. Sculp., p. 11, fig. 6. Head of Gaul or giant, formerly in Mykonos, Delos (Bienkowski, Darst. Gall., figs. 46-7 ; B.C.H., xxx1v, 1910, pls. 9, 10; Rev. Arch.,4 RVatOLO.1, p. 341. Head of Zeus from altar of Hiero II, Syracuse (Mauceri, Italia Artistica, Siracusa, p. 46, fig. ; della Seta, Italia Antica, fig. 136). Heads of Homer (Hekler, 117, 118a; W. 345.5), possibly derived from a statue at Pergamon the base of which has been found (Inschrif- Pein 67-0... 2.03). So-called Seneca, pl. 48 (Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., p. 41 5 W. 345.4) 3 Wace (B.8.4., x, 1903-4, p. 111) ascribed to Myron, the sculptor of the drunken old woman, and Six adopts the idea on the ground that the mouth is open in each case (B.C.H., xxxvul, 1913, p. 370). Similar head, Naples (Hekler, 94a), copy. Head of sea-centaur, Vatican (Br. Br., 139 3 W. 375.3), copy. Torso of satyr, Uffizi (Amelung, Fuhrer, 153 ; Bulle, 107), copy. Belvedere torso (Br. Br., 240; Sauer, Torso von Belv., identifies as a Polyphemus shading his eyes with his hand), Neo-Attic copy. Sriton. vatican (Br Br., 137; Bulle,219g; Cat., nu, Galled. Stat, 253, pl. 463; W. 375.2), copy. Torso of satyr, pl. 47, Naples, 287 (Ezmz., 539, 540), copy. “* Marsyas,”’ Zagreb and Capitoline, see p. 109. Scylla group (Klein, Gr. Kunst, 1, p. 322); on a mirror cover in Berlin (Neugebauer, MJeisterwerke in Berlin, Gr. Bronzen, pl. 22) ; represented on the breast-plate of a statue of the Odyssey signed by Jason, the Athenian, probably from Hadrian’s library, Athens (4th. Mitt., xIv, 1889, p. 162, pl. v); on Megarian bowls (Courby, Vases gr. d reliefs, p. 344, no. 23, p. 381, no. 35). Satyr and Maenad in “‘atto poco onesto”’ (B.M. Cat., 11, 1658 5 Helbig, 1062), cf. a Pompeian fresco (Fahresh., x11, 1910, p. 148). The female figure is a modification of the Aphrodite of Doedalsas ; another modification of this type is found in a relief epigraphically dated to the beginning of the second century, a nymph in a cave of Pan (4th. Witt. XXXVI, 1911, p. 295, fig.. 3). in] LATER GREE KAS CC UPgl Por UpRoe “* Juno Cesi,”’ Capitoline (Cat., p. 340, Glad. 2, pl. 85 ; Bulle, 135 ; the head, Eimz., 470-1 5 W. 360.4). Drunken old woman, by Myron, Munich, 437 (Br. Br., 394 ; W. 345.8), Capitoline (Cat., p. 89, pl. 18); Leroux, Lagynos, p. 73, notes five plastic vases which reproduce this motive as well as a mould found at Pergamon, one of the vases has an inscription of late second century (Ephem. Arch., 1891, p. 143, pl. x). A signature of the artist found at Pergamon is of the second century. Female head, Barracco, 178 (Helbig, 1128). Mourning female head, Lyons (Adon. Piot, xxi11, 1918-19, p. 27, pls. 11, 111), conceivably from a Pergamene original. Female head from ‘Trralles, Smyrna Evangelical School (Einz., 1342-3; Furtwangler, Masterpieces, fig. 174; W. 376.4). “Urania,” Vatican (Cat. u, Gall. d. Statue, 270, pl. 51; Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 102), slightly later than Gigantomachy. Fragments of group and statue, from Magnesia (AZagn., figs. 187-9, 191; W. 364.7, 8); cf. the above, the tremendous accumulation of drapery and semi-transparency place them between the exuberance of the Gigantomachy and the schematic transparent ordering of the Tele- phus frieze. MIDDLE OF THE SECOND CENTURY. Telephus frieze, about 25 years later than the Gigantomachy, 1.e., c. 160 (Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 14.3 W. 354, 355)- Stela from Chios with figure resembling the Auge of the Telephus frieze (Fahrb., xx, 1905, p. 54, fig. 9 3 von Salis, 4/t. v. Perg., fig. 20). Frieze from the tomb of the schoolmaster, Hieronymus, from Rhodes, Hiller von Gaertringen Coll. (Hermes, xxxvil, 1902, p. 121, pl. facing ; B.C.H., XXxVi, 1912, p. 237, fig. 2; Br. Br., 579); lettering of first half or middle of second century. Reliefs of drunken Silenus persuading a nymph to fetch him more wine, Zagreb and Arezzo (Rim. Mitt., xvu1, 1903, p. 58, figs. 1, 2) 5 a similar painting on marble was found at Herculaneum (Robert, Der miide Silen, xx111, Winck. Halle, 1899), perhaps from an original in the style of the Telephos frieze. Frieze from the monument of Aemilius Paulus of 167, Delphi 118 APPEN DIX (Homolle, AMélanges Boisster, p. 298; B.C.H., xxxi1v, 1910, p. 433, both with drawings). Frieze from the temple of Priene, probably contemporary with Orophernes’ foundation deposit of 158 (Priene, p. 118; Brit. Mus., 1165-76; W. 356.3-5). Bronze statue of Demetrius I, 162-150, pl. 51, Terme (Hekler, 82-4 ; Schick, Newe Fahrb. kl. Alt., xxxtt1, 1914, p. 19, for identifica- tion; W. 339.6, 7). Similar statue of C. Ofellius, by Dionysius and Timarchides, Delos (B.C.H., v, 1881, p. 390, pl. x1t), probably dates 150-130 (Lowy, Inschr. gr. Bildhauer, p. 176). Now more damaged than when published. Carneades, 214-129, statue erected at Athens apparently shortly before 162 by Attalus of Pergamon and Ariarathes of Cappodocia (Arndt-Br., 505-6 ; Poulsen, Portr. in Eng. Coll., p. 46, pl. 20; cf. Lippold, Gr. Portratstatuen, p. 84, on the statue by Zeuxis in Metr. Mus., Handbook, fig. 147). Riise head of philosopher, Woburn Abbey eels, Statuen- kopien, p. 46, pl. viit). Portrait of Queen Apollonis (?), Berlin (4/t. v. Perg., vu, 87, Betb- latt 12). Other statues from Pergamon (zbid., 53, 54, 68), and statue at Metz (Michaelis, Frauenstatue zu Metz, fahrb. léthring. Gesch., xvit.1, 1905, Dez ty, pl.t). Statue of Zeus, pl. 52, from atemple built at Pergamon by Attalus II, 159-138, Constantinople (4th. Mitt., xxxvul, 1912, p. 316, pl. xxvi ; Ant. Denkm., W1, 19, text illustrates an analogous high-relief figure ; Lippold, Kopzen, p. 21, notes a similar statue in the Louvre). Boy and goose by Boethus (W. 370.1, 2; Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 26, date of Boethus, who was active 190-160, note 29, for list of replicas); bronze herm with signature of Boethus, from Mahdia wreck (zbid., p. 33, fig. 9; Mon. Prot., xvi1, 1909, p. 42, mee st..2, pl. Iv). Eros and Psyche (Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 35 3 W. 371.6; Wie- gand, Anatolian Studies presented to Ramsay, p. 405, pl. x11, a bronze relief from Amisus which should be compared with local terracottas of the beginning of the Christian era). 119g LAT SE Re GaRI Bebe won Ca We icary erliee he be ‘“‘ Innocentia,” Capitoline (Cat., p. 349, pl. 87; Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 100, fig. 42 5 W. 371.2), copy in Luna marble. Groups of little boys quarrelling, Lateran (Eimz., 21973; Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 34, fig. 10, accepts as a work of Boethus) ; Vienne, now destroyed (Rev. Arch.,* xx, 1912.11, p. 381, fig. 1 5 next vol., p. 300) composition of second century elements; Brit. Mus., 1756, original not earlier than first century B.c. Farnese Bull (Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 18, dates about 160; Was 71). Dancing girl, Budapest (AZélanges Perrot, p. 203; Exhib. Greek Art, Burlington Club, 35, pl. xxvir; Hekler, 4z antik Plasztikai, Rm. 11, 44, with pl., compares Myrina terracottas of second century). Bronze Nike, Naples, 832 (Br. Br. 585; Neapolis 1, p. 19), cf. Myrina terracottas. Statues of Isis are usually in the style of the Telephus frieze, ¢.g., Naples, 708. Bronze head of Aphrodite, from Satala (Erzindjan) in Armenia, Brit. Mus. (Cat., 266 ; Select Bronzes, xv ; Bulle, 260 ; W. 379.7) ; formerly ascribed to the fourth century but cannot be earlier than the second, cf. Telephus frieze. Similar head, from Rome, Metr. Mus. (Bull., Feb. 1915, p. 25, fig. 3). Female statue in transparent drapery, pl. 50, from Magnesia, Con- stantinople, 549 (Adagnesia, pl. 1x; Dickins, Hell. Sculp., fig. 31 3 W. 361.2) ; perhaps antedates the ‘Telephus frieze. Lower half of statue of Demeter, Syracuse (Hinz., 755), cf. the above. Statue in transparent drapery, pl. 48c, Tegea, found in the neighbour- hood. A statue of slightly older type is from the same spot ; Krahmer (Rim. Mitt., XXXVIII-IX, 1923-4, p. 174, pl. vi) ascribes to the end of the third century, but I do not consider it need be as early as this, cf. ‘Telephus frieze for the style ; cf. also an Oxford statue, 7.H.S., xii, 1923, p. 53, pl. Female figure in transparent drapery, Thera (Thera, 1, p. 208, pl. 23 ; Wr3261- 2) Fragments of cult-statue of Zeus Sosipolis, from Magnesia ((ag- nesta, figs. 185-6, Watzinger puts it a little earlier than Damophon’s Anytus). 120 AYP PEON D TX Damophon’s group at Lycosura, pls. 54, 55 (Dickins, He//. Sculp., p- 50, figs. 45-48, and B.S_A., x11, 1905-6, p. 109, next vol., p. 357 5 A.F.A.,* X, 1906, p. 304 3 Ann. Scuola di Atene, 1V-V, 1921-22, p. 97 ; W. 373.1-4). “Terracottas with animal heads, from Lycosura (B.C.H., xxl, 1899, p. 635; Ephem. Arch., 1912, p. 159). Wolters points out that Damophon cannot have been concerned with the Olympia pediments if our date of 40 B.c. for the restoration is correct (Inschr. von Olympia, p. 697). Female head ascribed to Damophon, Capitoline (Cat., p. 122, Gall. Pe tee DICKins, 7.72.5., XXXI, 1O11, p. 314). Colossal sandal, Conservatori (zbzd., p. 308, ascribed to Damophon). Cf. frieze from Lamia, Athens, 221. Porphyry heads of satyrs (Vatican, B.S.4., x1, 1904-5, p. 173, pl. rv 5 Ny C.G., 285, Billedt. xx ; another copy in Vienna, Rm. x1, 116), probably by Damophon Male head, Valetta (F.R.S., v, 1915, p. 77, fig. 33, P. Gardner compares with the Anytus of Damophon). Relief of Polybius, Kleitor (4th. Mitt., xxxvill, 1913, p. 274, fig. 3 3 Studniczka, Polybius u. Dam., ascribes to Damophon, but I do not believe it to be from his hand though a product of the same school). Head of Zeus, from Aegira, Athens (Fahresh., x1x-xx, 1919, p. 1, pls. 1, 11 3 ext vol., p. 120; W. 373.7), probably part of the cult-statue by Eucleides of Damophon period, although the head in Leyden which resembles it (Br. Br. 155 ; W. 373.9) appears to be Hadrianic. Upper part of Asclepius, from Pirzeus, Athens, 258, body of Perga- mene character, cf. head with Damophon. Athena head from ‘alles, pl. 53, Constantinople, 546 (B.C.H., XXVIII, 1904, p. 68, pl. 111). LATE SECOND AND EARLY FIRST CENTURIES. Portrait statue, from Delos, pl. 57, Athens (Hekler, 127b). Bronze head, from Delos, pl. 56b, Athens (AZon. Prot, xxiv, 1920, p. 83, fig. 3, pls. u-1v ; Poulsen, [kon. Misc., p. 37, pls. 17-19). Portrait head, Delos (Zon. Piot, xxiv, 1920, p. 93, fig. 2) of the black-and-white class which seems to be the latest on the site, very like the old man on the Berlin relief, pl. 60, therefore probably a Greek ; I21 LATER GREER SS CUCL Pil URE the preceding unwrinkled class is represented by two male heads (B.C.H., xIx, 1895, p. 479, figs. 6, 7); another male head (B.C.H., 1x, 1885, p. 18, pl. xvir) is probably not a portrait but an ideal athletic type based on Polyclitus, as is a head in Oxford (Exhibition of Greek Art, Burling- ton Club, no. 24, pl. xxrv). Statue of Billienus wearing cuirass, of c. 100 (B.C.H., xxx1ul, 1909, p. 4433; Délos, v, p. 43, fig. 60). The Athenians Dioscurides and Cleopatra, dated 138-7 (Délos, vu11, fig. 143; C. alone, B.C.H., xx, 1917, p.° 415, ng) eee and similar female statues, Krahmer, Rom. Mitt., xxxVulI-1x, 1923-24, p- 149). Headless, draped statue, from Priene, possibly of the builder of a gymnasium of c. 125 (Priene, p. 269, fig. 274). Bust with the name of Poseidonius, Naples, 1088 (Hekler, 126) ; he was a Stoic from Apamea in Syria, 135-45, and from his apparent age this portrait must date from c. 80. Male portrait head, Thera (Thera, 111, figs. 93, 94), perhaps of the middle of the Delos series between the bronze head and the black-and- white style. Statue of “‘ Menander,” pl. 61, Vatican (Br. Br. 495; Hekler, 110b, 111b; Poulsen, Lkon. Misc., p. 76, suggests a Roman poet). Head identified as Antiochus IV, 145-143, Terme (Wace, 7.H.58., RXV, 1905; 0075 Din Xt Supposed portraits of Mithradates VI: as Heracles, Louvre head (Fahrb., 1x, 1894, p. 245, pl. vir; W. 384.1); as Perseus, head from Samsun, Warocqué Coll., 263 (Cumont, Rev. Arch.,* v, 1905, I, p. 180, figs. 1-2); as Heracles, bronze colossus, Conservatori (Krahmer, Fahrb., XXXX, 1925, p. 183, figs. 13, 14, pl. 9), and in Prometheus relief from Pergamon, Berlin, which symbolises the expulsion of the Romans from Asia (zdid., figs. 1, 2 and 10-12; W. 364.1). Head, from the Odeum, perhaps of Ariobarzanes who financed the reconstruction of 86 B.c., Athens (Arch. Deltion, v, 1919, Parartema, p. 7, figs. 6,7 3 cf. Praktika, 1914-15, p. 99, fig. 14). Portrait head on herm of Lentulus Marcellinus, from Cyrene, Brit. Mus. (Cat., 11, 1383 ; Smith and Porcher, pls. 65, 77), wears a diadem and so presumably is one of the kings who ruled Cyrene till 96. 122 APPENDIX Bearded head in bronze, from the Cythera wreck, Athens (Hekler, 81 ; Svoronos, Nat. Mus., 1, p. 29, pl. 3). Head of old man, Athens (Hekler, Ffahresh., xvi, 1915, p. 61, ascribes to the first century Rhodian school, together with the Homer portrait which it resembles) ; cf. the Berlin relief, pl. 60; is probably first century and contemporary with the Homer head in Boston, 55 (Hekler, 118a) a variant from the second century type. Portrait of a young man, pl. 59a, Athens, 321. Portrait of an old man, pl. 59b, Athens, 320. Portrait head of a young man, Athens (Schrader, 4th. Mitt., xx1, 1896, p. 281, pl. x, compares the hair with Asiatic coins of second cen- tury kings, especially Iryphon; Blum, B.C.H., xxxtx, 1915, p. 26, figs. 1-2, identifies it with coins of Antiochus Grypus, 126-5). Small head of a youth, Thera (Thera, 1, p. 210, pl. 24); compare heads of Herms at Delos; from the Ptolemaic gymnasium where a second century female statue was also found (dzd., pl. 23). Female portrait head, Delos (B.C.H., x1x, 1895, p. 479, fig. 8). Turbaned head, pl. 64, Athens, 457 (Arndt, Eimz., 1207-9, rejects the identification as Juba II and considers it an athlete wearing ear- protectors, but Schober, Xenia, Hommage intern. a l’Universite nat. de Gréce, 1912, p. 63, 3 pls., demolishes this theory ; he agrees with Kastriotes that the other copy, 458, is a forgery). Priestess Aristonoe, from Rhamnus, Athens, 232 (Ephem. Arch., 1891, p. 53, pl. 5), conventional, inscription of second century according to Kavvadias. Lower part of bronze female statue, from Cyzicus, Berlin (Br. Br., fig. after text to 558). For other female statues of stock types see Hekler, Miinchn. Studien, Rém. weibl. Gewandstatuen : add to his list of the larger Herculaneum type a figure in Thera (Thera, 1, p. 209, no. 2, fig.). “Trentham Hall sepulchral statue, Brit. Mus. (7.H.8., xxvii, 1908, p. 138, pls. xxvur- x; Hekler, Joc. cit., p. 247, ascribes to first century) ; similar statues (Arch. Anz., 1921, p. 299, figs. 2, 10, and list on p. 306). Stela from near Athens, pl. 60, Berlin, 1462 (Rém. Mitt., xxxu, [G0 7, pat 30, pl. 11). Stela from Smyrna, pl. 58b, Berlin, 809. 128 LATER GREEK SCULPT URE Stela from Rhodes, Constantinople (B.S.4., xxvi, p. 69, pl. x). Relief of sacrifice, from Pergamon, Constantinople, go (B.C.H., xin, 1889, p. 309, pl. 1x), resembles Delos and Magnesia material. East Greek reliefs, Pfuhl, ‘Fahrb., xx, 1905, pp. 47, 123 3 most are from Smyrna and a fair amie from Samos, of second century B.c. to first century A.D. Relief of Apotheosis of Homer, by Archelaus of Priene, Brit. Mus. (Schede, Rim. Mitt., xxxv, 1920, p. 65, dates 150-50 and probably of c. 125, by epigraphic evidence ; Hauser compares with portraits of Alexander Bala, ‘fahresh., vitt, 1905, p. 85). Cf. Delos relief (B.C.H., XXXI, 1907, p. 525, fig. 24) and Cybele statuette of an old type (B.C.H., Xxx, 1906, p. 558, fig. 22; Déos, vit, fig. 97), a statuette from Crete, Athens, 224, and a statue from Canopus (d4on. de l’ Egypte gr.- rom., 1, 1926, pl. xxrx. 4). Large votive relief of Lacratides, pl. 79, Eleusis (Festschrift Benndorf, p. 111, pl. iv; Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, 111, pl. 11) ; the donor was a thesmothete in 97, the relief was made when he was at a con- siderable age and therefore can be dated c. 100-90. Relief of Demeter and Persephone, Eleusis (Festschrift Arndt, p. 44, fig. 4); cf. the above. Cybele relief dated 119 (Conze, Reisen auf Lesbos, p. 63, pl. x1x). Stela, with half-length figure of Olympias, from Magnesia (Fahresh., XVI, 1913, p. 178, pl. Iv) ; inscription of early first century. A half- length female statue from Thera, Athens, 780 (Fahresh., 1, 1898, p. 4, fig. 2; Colligron, Stat. fun., fig. 190), is probably of same date. Poseidon of Melos, Athens, 235 (Br. Br., 550 ; Bulle, 74 ; Krahmer, Rim. Mitt., xxxvul-Ix, 1923-24, p. 146, dates 140-120 ; W. 374.8), contemporary with a Delos statue (B.C.H., xxx, 1906, p. 556, figs. 21, 21b; Délos, vin, fig. 96). Borghese Warrior by Agasias of Ephesus, Louvre (Br. Br., 75 ; Bulle, 88 ; Arndt, Glypt. Ny C., figs. 105-7; W. 382.3): the artist worked at Delos c. 100-90. Head of Gaul, Delos (B.C.H., xxxtv, 1910, p. 496, figsiOy 7a W. 349.3), cf. portraits of Mithradates. Draped herm. Delos (B.C.H., xx1x, 1905, p. 16, fig. 1), cf. the above. 124 ASPePsbe Ne Dalex Herm of young satyr, Delos (B.C.H., xt, 1916, p. 227, figs. 35-6), cf. the supposed Antiochus Grypus. Pair of Silenus statues, Delos (B.C.H., xxx1, 1907, p. 517, pls. x-x1), foreheads lumpy, not corrugated with wrinkles like their successors, the supporting figures of the Athens theatre (‘Fahrb., xxiv, 1909, p. 215, figs. 25-30, and xxxI, 1917, p. 80, fig. 46); cf. a Capitoline statue (Bull. Comm., 111, 1875, p. 135, pls. xtv, xv) and fragment (Bull. Comm., XXXVI, 1908, p. 284, fig. 2), also a terracotta (B.C.H., vii, 1888, pl. rx). Apollo with foot on Galatian shields, Delos (Fahresh., xtx-xx, 1919, p- 194, fig. 122; Délos, vin, fig. 99) ; twisted pose, body sleek like the Aphrodite of the erotic group, cf. head with Telephus frieze. Work resembles a Dionysus of an older type (B.C.H., xxx1, 1907, p. 511, igs) 21, *22). Statuettes from Priene (Priene, figs. 461-470; W. 377.2). Small head of Hermes, from Pharsalus, Athens, 196 (Rev. Arch.,4 XXI, 1913, I, p. 272, fig. 2), archaistic influence. Statuette of Asclepius, from Cos, Dresden, 215 (Arch. Anz., 1892, p.158, no. 2); probably a second century version of a fourth century type, note heavy pectoral muscles and abdominal hollows emphasised by the copyist. Erotic group, pl. 63, from Delos, Athens (B.C.H., xxx, 1906, pls. x1mt-vi1. Heads of Pan, Dresden, 262, and Vatican (Br. Br., 199) are probably of earlier type. Head of Poseidon said to have come from Crete, Ny C.G., Tidlaeg, 1914, 470a, Billedt. Tillaeg, vi11 ; Poulsen ascribes it to some Hellen- istic school related to the Pergamene, and IJ think it may belong to the time of Mithradates. Apollo, from Cyrene, Brit. Mus. (7.H.8., xii, 1921, p. 2343 W. 376.2, 3) 3 copy in Capitoline (Cat., Salone 7); cf. Metr. Mus. (Cat., Gems, 137); a variant as Dionysus leaning on a satyr, Tripoli (Notiziarto rite ii, 1622, p. 73, figs. ). Apollo, from Tralles, Constantinople, 548 (Br. Br., text to 593, fig. 4; Bulle, 216; W. 376.6); found in a building of c. 2003 cf. head in Capitoline, Gal/., 13. Boy, from Tralles, pl. 74, 75, Constantinople, 542 (Aon. Prot, x, 1903, p. I, pl. 1v), a merely superficial resemblance to the Delphi Thessalian in similar dress (B.C.H., xxu1, 1899, pl. xxva). noe LATER GREEK SCULPT U RE Upper part of youth, from Tarsus, Constantinople (Gaz. arch., 1883, pl. 11); apparently somewhat later than the Tralles boy, but may be pre-Augustan. Youth, from Eretria, Athens, 244 (Br. Br., 519; Einz., 264 ; Collignon, Stat. fun., p. 282, figs. 175-7); the head is of an old athlete type and the body of another old type (Bieber, ‘Ffahrd., xxv, 1911, p. 275). Torso of Nike, perhaps from Monument of Euboulides, Athens, 233 (Br. Br., 49; W. 373.5), cf. Lacratides relief. Small female head, from Athens, Constantinople, 408; cf. tur- baned youth, Athens 457, and Priene statuettes. Artemis, from Delos, Athens, 1829 (Arch. Deltion, 11, 1916, Parar- tema, p. 79, no. 4, fig. 3), cf. Aphrodite of erotic group and Lycosura Artemis’ drapery. Head of girl carrying water-pot, from Pergamon (4th. Mitt., xx1x, 1904, p. 189, fig. 21). . Small head of Aphrodite, Samos (4th. Mitt., xxv, 1900, p. 161, no. 23), poor. Head of Hygieia, from Aegion, Athens, 192. Head of Aphrodite, from Athens, pl. 77, Boston, 28. Fragments of head and torso of female statue, from Pergamon (4th. Mitt., XxxV, 1910, p. 494, pl. xxm). Venus of Milo (Hill, Hundred Masterpieces of Sculpture, mentions coins with similarly precarious drapery, all representing Nike and of c. 300; Collignon, Sculp. gr., 1, p. 472 on the drawing of the base attached to a herm; Krahmer, Rém. Mitt., xxxvuI-Ix, 1923-24, Piso AW. 387) “Kore” head, from Tralles, Vienna (Einz., 864-5 ; W. 379.1, 2), the resemblance to the Venus of Milo has long been recognised. Torso of Aphrodite, Brussels, 18 ; Furtwangler compared to Milo (Coll. Somzée, 35). Fragment of Sleeping Ariadne ?, pl. 78,° Prado (Eimz., 1574-6; Klein, Vom ant. Rokoko, p. 95), cf. Sassoferrato pediment, Bologna (Not. Scavi, 1897, p. 285, figs. 1, 2, 8), fresco from House of Vettii (Fahresh., x1, 1910, p. 444, fig. 67). Aphrodite, from Cyrene, pl. 76, Terme (Boll. d’ Arte, vil, 1914, p. 177, pls. 5; W. 280.6). 126 AD PSP EON] DAleX Athena, from Cyrene, Brit. Mus. (F.H.8., 1921, p. 239, pl. xvu. 2) imitation of a bronze of c. 400. Aphrodite of Aphrodisias (Athens copies, 4th. Mitt., xxu, 1897, p. 361, pls. x1, x11) appears first on coins of Augustus ; the robes are embroidered in the manner of Damophon with a group of the Graces and other Hellenistic scenes; Wagenvoort (Meded. Nederland. Inst. Rome, 1, 1921, p. 108) compares the Tellus scene of the Ara Pacis with this Aphrodite, there wrongly referred to as Ephesian Artemis ;__ cf. generally Zeus Heliopolitanus and Ephesian Artemis, whose coin-type dates from 87-84 (Rém. Mitt., xxix, 1914, p. 200) ; and for embroid- eries cf. Chigi Athena (F.H.8., xxxtl, 1912, p. 43, pl. 1). Head of Athena, perhaps from the monument of Euboulides, Athens, 234 (Hekler, Miinchn. Studien, p. 122; Milchhofer, Arch. Studien Brunn, p. 37; W. 373. 6), copy of the Velletri type. Female head from Mantinea (Fougéres, Mantinée, fig. 54, pl. v1). Female heads, from Priene, Berlin (Priene, figs. 124-6). Headless statue of a girl, from Priene, Brit. Mus., 1154 (4. 7.2.,? XXVI, 1922, p. 421, fig. 7), work of the same class as the Tralles boy, imitating fifth century. Female torso, from Philadelphia, Smyrna Evangelical School (B.C.H., v, 1881, p. 279, pl. xi) ; the town was founded in mid second century, the statue seems to be an imitation of late fifth century. Pemalesliead, Delos (B.C.H., xxx, 1906, p. 560, figs. 23, 23b; Délos, vit, fig. 100), cf. the statue from Delos. Relief head of Phoebe, Delos (B.C.H., x1, 1916, p. 191, fig. 20), cf. the semi-Polyclitan athletes of Delos : similar bust of a veiled woman (irc, XXtx, 1905, p. 17, fig, 11). EARLY NEO-ATTIC. Bronze relief, Delos (Br. Br., text to 621, fig. 1 3 Mon. Prot, xvin, 1910, p. 19, pl. v1; Vallois, B.C.H., xtv, 1921, p. 242, finds it men- tioned in an inventory of 156-5), cf. the goddess with archaistic work from Pergamon, therefore more likely to be second than third century. Silver, from a tomb in Thessaly, Athens (Arvanitopoulos, th. Mitt., xxxvu, 1912, p. 73, pls. 11-v, dates tomb c. 150) ; an alabastron is decorated with repoussé scenes, of Erotes like Eretria-Myrina types C7 LA TE RR GUREE EK ore Os Pe Usher (pl. 1), and of Silenus watching two nymphs nursing the infant Dionysus ; a pyxis has figures of Maenads, prototypes of the Neo- Attic representations. But these of course were ultimately derived from Scopas and are already fairly developed in some early Seleucid seal- impressions on cuneiform tablets. The Pyrrhic dancers on a Vatican slab (Helbig, 291) are paralleled on a basis in the Small Acropolis Mus., 402, 402a, dated by the lettering to the latter half of the fourth century. Circular altar, Delphi (Bourguet, De/phes, p. 325), cf. relief in Small Acrop. Mus., 458, which Walter considers fourth century ; and cf. Lippold, Gemmen, pl. 58. Statuette of Demeter ?, pl. 88, Vatican (Fahresh., xvi, 1913, p. 206, figs. 102-4). Relief of young man and three courtesans, Naples, 578 (Bulle, 285 ; Klein, Yom ant. Rokoko, p. 145, pl. v), figure on extreme left is in fully- developed Neo-Attic style. Neo-Attic vase, pl. 83, Metr. Mus (Richter, 7.H.8., xtv, 1925, p. 201, pls. vi-rx, deals with the style and prototypes of other reliefs). LATER FIRST CENTURY. Head of Cotys, King of Thrace, pl. 62b, Athens, 351 (7.H.8., xvul, 1897, p. 321, pl. x1; Klein, Gr. Kunst, 111, p. 197, calls it Attic of the end of second century or possibly beginning of first, for reasons I do not appreciate). Male portrait head from Cyme, Constantinople, 599 (Rev. Arch., 1888, 1, p. 84, pl. xv, 2nd row ; Wace, 7.H.S., xxv, 1905, p. 96, E, says early imperial), perhaps Augustan. Pair of male and female portrait heads from Asia Minor, Athens, 362-3 (Poulsen, Ikon. Misc., p. 35, pl. 15), perhaps Augustan. Head of young man, Thera (Thera, 1, p. 224, pl. 17), late first century. Hoard of terracottas including the life-size head of a man, ‘Thera (Thera, 11, p. 171, figs. 164-9), about the end of the first century. Portrait statues of women, from Magnesia, Constantinople (AZagnesta, p. 198, figs. 198-200) ; similar sepulchral statues from Asia Minor, Oxford (Michaelis, Frauenstatue zu Metz, figs. 1-3). Bronze youth, from Cythera wreck, Athens (Ephem. Arch., 1902, 128 ASPSPSraNe Dy lex pls. 7-12; F.H.S., xii, 1923, p. 142); head of a late Polyclitan or Naucydes type brought up to date in the first century B.c. One of the ships’ instruments mentions a month not found before 30 (Leroux, Lagynos, p. 102). Youth, from Epidaurus, Ny C.G. (Collignon, Rev. 4rch.,5 1, 1915, I, p. 40, figs. 1-3, dates end of first century B.c. to early first a.p. ; Fra Ny C.G. Samml., 1, p. 1). Female head, from Magnesia, Constantinople (Magnesia am M., p. 201, fig. 201), cf. supposed monument of Euboulides. Female head, bought at Smyrna, Brussels, 22 (Rev. Arch.,4 1, 1903, Fy pi, ple 2a). Female bust in terracotta, bought at Smyrna, Brussels (¢dd., p. 3, pls, 1; 1b). Female head, from Pergamon (4th. Mitt., xxxVvul, 1912, p. 315, pl. xxv), portrait of the middle of the first century. Small female head on bust that does not belong, Naples, 793 (Ame- lung, Bull. Comm.,® xxv, 1897, p. 130, fig. 10; cast in Ashmolean) ; small female head, Basel (zbzd., figs. 8, 9 ; Einz. 899, 900, Arndt com- pares preceding and the head in Taormina, Eimz., 573, 574) 3 cf. alsoa head from Capri, Cleveland (Bul/., April, 1919). Female head, from Rhodes, Shear Coll. (4.7.4.,? xxv. 1920, p. 313, pls. 11, 111), conventional work of second or first century. Head of Muse, Lateran (4tti Pontif. Accad.,2 xv, 1921, p. 284, pl. v) ; Dr. Krahmer has drawn my attention to the similarity of Athens, 363 (p. 128). Pair of Caryatids, from Eleusis, Eleusis (pl. 65b) and Cambridge (Annuario, Scuola di Atene, UW, 1916, p. 201, fig. 43; Michaelis, Anc. Marbles, p. 242, no. 1, drawings) ; the architectural ornament supports identification of this propylaa with that of Appius Claudius Pulcher, who died in 48 B.c., and cf. Lacratides relief of c. 100-90. Statue of nymph, from Tralles, Constantinople, 543 (Rev. Arch.,! IV, 1904. m1, pl. x1); poor work resembling that of the Magnesia statues of women, the drapery has a fringe like that of the Cyrene Aphrodite with which it may be compared for its solidity yet relative slimness, especially at the back. Statue of ‘“ Niobid,” from Leptis, Constantinople, 581 (Br. Br., text I 129 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE to 640, fig. 415; Romanelli, Leptis Magna, fig. 18); not a Niobid but probably a dancing nymph, for it resembles figures on fourth and third century reliefs of nymphs dancing in the cave of Pan; cf. style of the Magnesia women and the terracottas of Myrina. Statue of a girl, from Ak Shehir, Constantinople, 583 ; cf. the Mag- nesia women. Reliefs on the Tower of the Winds, Athens (Br. Br., 30; W. 375.5, 6). Frieze of the Hecateum at Lagina, Constantinople (Caz. 1, p. 428, Mendel ascribes to end of first century ; Studniczka, Fahrb., xxxvut- IX, 1923-4, p. 120). Reliefs from Miletus, Constantinople ; Knackfuss (AZi/et, 11, p. 87, pls. xvi-xvu1) compares the Lagina frieze. Laocoon, W. 383.1, 23; for copies see Fahrb., xx1, 1916, p. 1 ; Mon. Piot, xvi, 1909, p. 209, pls. xxur-u1; for dating, Blinkenberg et Kinch, 11 Rapp., 1905, pp. 75-81. Bronze statuettes, etc., from a wreck near Mahdia, Tunis Mus. (Mon, Piot, xvir and xvur; Studniczka, Art. u. Iph., p. 69, note 2) ; apparently of late first century, there were Neo-Attic vases on board. Sculptures, from Cyme, Constantinople, 597, 598, 600 (Rev. Arch., 1888, 1, pl. xv), all very late Hellenistic or Imperial. Group of sea-centaur carrying off a woman, Vatican (Cat., m1, p. 386, no. 228, pl. 43; Br. Br., 258), largely restored but the style seems akin to that of the Laocoon. Cf. gems. Head of old peasant, pl. 68b, Dresden, 178 (Br. Br., 395). Statue of old woman, pl. 68c, Metr. Mus. (Handbook, fig. 144 5 Not. Scavi, 1917, p. 526, figs. 45, 46; Bull. Comm., xxxv, 1917, pl. vit). Head of old woman, pl. 68a, Dresden 176 (Br. Br., 395b). Basis of Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, pl. 66, Munich and Louvre (Fahresh., X11, 1910, p. 95 3 Strong, Scu/tura Romana, pls. 1-11 ; W. 384.45 5). AUGUSTAN. Arretine ware, according to Chase (Boston Cat., Arretine Pottery) was made from 40 B.c. to 80 a.p. ; the finest products are of Augustan date and decadence sets in after 60 a.p. ; the sources drawn upon include all sculpture from the fifth century onwards. 130 APPEN DIX ““ Campana ”’ terracotta plaques belong to reigns of Augustus and the next few emperors (v. Rohden, Antiken Terrakotten, 1v.1, p. 22). The Egyptian elements are discussed from the Egyptologist’s point of view, Proc. Soc. for Biblical Arch., Xxx1V, 1912, p. 300. “Narcissus,” bronze statuette of Dionysus, from Pompeii, Naples, 817 (W. 377.1), appears to be a free version of a statue a life-size copy of which exists in Florence (Amelung, Fiihrer,103) ; cf. the modelling of the head with the Julio-Claudian portraits on two terracotta medallions (Winnefeld, 68. Winck. Berlin, 1908, p. 19, 20, pl. 111.6, 7). Head of Sleeping Ariadne, from Nero’s villa at Subiaco, pl. 81b, Terme (Helbig, 1355). Relief of Euripides, pl. 80, Constantinople, 574 (Lippold, Portrat- statuen, p. 52, and Poulsen, Coll. Ustinow, p. 21, agree that a fourth century statue of Euripides is represented). CARTHAGE. Delattre, Musée Lavigerie, catalogues recent finds. For sarcophagi see, Mon. Piot, x11, 1905, p. 79, pl. vir ; Carcopino (4¢ti Pontif. Accad., 111, Memorie, 1, 2, p. 109). Mabel Moore, Carthage of the Phoenicians, gives many useful illustrations. THE ALPS. Koepp, Bonner Fahrb., 125, p. 38 3 Studniczka, Fahrb., 1903, p. 1, pl. 1, deals with Augustus’ arch at Susa; Ducati, MZon. Ant., xxiv, 1916, p. 401, 8 pls., on the Corsini throne (pl. 91) which he dates 350-250. MAGNA GRECIA. Relief from Ceglie, N. Apulia (pl. gob), Boston, 49. The askoi of Canosa come from tombs dated by Ptolemaic inscribed bowls to the third and the end of the fourth centuries ; the town was sacked in 199 and again in 89, and most of the vases and statuettes are of the third century (Mayer, 4pulien, p. 71 and 305 ; Pagenstecher, Nio- biden, p. 27 3 Bienkowski, Neapolis, 1, p. 307 ; relief of two horsemen fighting, Metr. Mus., Bul/., August, 1913, p. 175, fig. 3). Ut LAT EVR G RYEESK po. CUn Ler T URE The terracotta mould from Taranto, pl. 92b, Scheurleer Coll., Hague, bears the letters “ API,” short for Ariston (os) probably, and a mould in the Brit. Mus. bears the same mark, as I am informed by Dr. Scheurleer. Limestone relief of warrior, pl. 92a, from Taranto, Scheurleer Coll. (Arch. Anz., 1922, p. 212, fig. 7); Rumpf (Rém. Mitt., xxxvi-1x, 1923-4, p. 469) ascribes to early fourth century in an article collating most of Tarentine fourth century sculpture. Two limestone reliefs, from Taranto, Berlin (4rch. Anz., 1919, p. 106, nos. 26, 27, ascribed to fourth century on comparison with vases). Four caryatids and a frieze of cupids drawn in chariots by lions, from a tomb at Vaste, in private collection at Spongano and Lecce Mus. (Rim. Mitt., x1, 1897, p. 128, figs. 7-10; Ed. Schmidt, Archaist. Kunst, p. 65, dates middle of the fourth century by the drapery). Hypogeum at Lecce with frieze of battle and frieze of floral decora- tion, contains Messapian grafhti (4us., vill, 1913, p. 7, pl. 1, Bendinelli dates early third century rather than end of fourth), uninteresting work. Terracotta heads from Taranto, Berlin (Fourn. Int. Numism., rv, - 1901, p. 94, pl. 7, 8). Bearded head from Taranto, Taranto Mus. (4rch. Anz., 1914, p. 199, fig. 8), middle of the third century, cf. ““ White ” Marsyas and ‘Terme Boxer. Relief of hoplites and cavalry fighting, from Lecce, Budapest (Fah- resh., XVII, 1916, p. 94, pl. 1, Hekler dates towards the end of the third century) ; cf. groups from Canosa vases. Terracotta Niobids from a tomb with Gnathian ware, Vienna, Mus. fiir Kunst und Ind. (Masner, Samml. Vasen u. Terrak. im K.K Mus , nos. 860-873; Stark, Nzobe, pl. vit, badly restored ; Pagen- stecher, Niobiden, p. 1) ; Gnathian ware is found before 282 (B.C.H., XXXV,10F1, p. 202), Limestone statue of a boy, from Taranto, Berlin, 502 (Collignon, Stat. fun., fig. 126), similar to the servant boys on a first century relief from Smyrna, Berlin, 768, and on other East Greek stelz. Terracotta reliefs from Taranto, Arndt Coll. and Trieste (Pagen- stecher, Unterital Grabdenkm., pl. xviu), cf. Campana reliefs but less developed and probably earlier. E32 AP PEN Delx Sieveking, Miinchner ‘fahrb., x1, 1921, p. 117, on a Tarentine school of decorative art of fifth to fourth century ; cf. Pernice, Fahrb., KX, 1920, p. 83. Numerous votive figurines, from Capua, Campano Mus., Capua (Rim. Mitt., xxt1, 1907, p. 412, pls. x-x1r), evidence of stagnation of about two centuries in the tufa work, the terracottas are better. Bronze cuirass with Athena heads in relief, from a Punic tomb of c. 200 near Ksour es Saf, Tunis Mus. (Aon. Piot, xv, 1909, p. 125, pls. xi11-x1v, Merlin believes it to be Campanian and cites a similar culrass in the Naples Mus.), hard, wide-eyed type like Taranto terra- cotta heads. Hellenistic Hypogeum at Reggio di Calabria (Neapolis, 11, p. 100, pl. v). High relief, from Palazzolo Acreide, Sicily (Arch. Anz., 1921, p. 195, fig. 49), probably early Hellenistic. Rock-sculptures at Palazzolo Acreide (Mauceri, Italia Artistica, Siracusa, figs. pp. 135-6). Head of Zeus, from the Altar of Hiero II, Syracuse Mus. (édid., p. 46, fig. ; della Seta, [taka Antica, fig. 136), style of the Pergamon Gigantomachy ; other sculptures at Syracuse illustrated by Mauceri are probably imperial. Greco-Phcenician stela of a girl, from Lilybeum, Marsala Mus. (Pagenstecher, Nekropolis, p. 22 and fig. 12). CEN ERAT. TUALLY: I reserve a detailed examination of Etruscan and early Roman sculp- ture for an article ; in general my dating is based on Cultrera’s note on the Volumnii tomb (Not. Scavt, 1916, p. 25). 33 ADDENDA RECENTLY PUBLISHED SCULPTURES A female head from Cos, apparently belonged to the cult-group by the sons of Praxiteles. Bieber (Fahrb., xxXVIII-Ix, 1923-4, p. 242, pl. vi), dates early third century and collects similar heads, to which I should like to add Boston, 54. Head of Artemis (?), Taranto (édid., p. 262, fig. 13) ; based, like the Chios head, on the early period of Praxiteles. Other Tarentine sculptures (Bull. Comm., L111, 1925, p. 96, pls. 1, 11). Maenad as caryatid, from Theatre, Syracuse (4rch. Anz., 1926, p- 170, fig. 33; Rizzo, Teatro gr. di S., fig. 42, pl. vt) ; rough work in sandstone, probably a support of the Hellenistic stage. A similar Telamon (tid., figs. 43, 44) and a relief of Pan (id:d., fig. 46) are both from Syracuse. A frieze from the Theatre, Corinth (4.7.4.,2 xxx, 1926, p. 456, figs. 9-14), Is said to be of Pergamene age. ADDITIONAL REFERENCES. To p. 12,95. Female head from Cyzicus, Dresden. Bieber (Fahrb., XXXVIII-IX, 1923-4, p. 262, figs. 14, 15) associates with the sons of Praxiteles. To. p. 14, 97, Winter identifies the Niobe Master with Timotheus (Fahrb., XXXVII-IX, 1923-4, p. 49). To p. 14,97. Crouching youth from Cythera wreck and youth from Subiaco, interpreted as wrestlers, Arch. Anz., 1925, p. 209, 210. To p. 15, 103. Head of goddess, Alexandria. Waldmann, Gr. Originale, pl. 177. To. p. 30. Head of Persephone, Metr. Mus., Bull., Dec. 1910, p. 27, figs. 2-4. To. p. 94. Alexander. Head found near Alexandria, Geneva (Jon. Piot, xxvu, 1924, p. 87, pl. vit) ; resembles Azara head. To p. 97. “ Aristippus.”? Headless statuette, Metr. Mus. (4. 7.7.,? XXIX, 1925, p. 152). 134 ADDENDA To. p. 99. Bearded head, Delphi. Studniczka suggests Paulus Aemilius or some other Roman of the second century (Drei friihe R émerk opfe). To. p. 100. Head of Alexander from Cos, Constantinople. Bieber (Fahrb., XXxx, 1925, p. 167, pls. vir, vitr), considers an original of early third century. To p. 103. “‘ Nymph,” Syracuse. Rizzo, Teatro gr. di 8., p. 156, figs. 73, 74. To p. 105. Demosthenes. Bronze statuette, B.C.H., xLvit, 1924, p. 504, fig. 19. To. p. 105. Hermarchus. Head in Ny C.G,, ibid., p. 377, pls. Riv, XY: ; To. p. 109. Bronze head with corkscrew hair, Naples. Lehmann- Hartleben gives reasons to identify as Thespis (Rém. Mitt., xt, 1925, p- 139). To. p. 110. Satyr struggling with hermaphrodite. Marconi dates late in Pergamene kingdom, in a long essay on erotic groups, Bull. Comm., LI, 1923, p. 225. To. p. 112. Barberini satyr. Miinchner Fahrb., xu, 1921-2, p. 90. To p. 113. Chrysippus. Head on “ Aristippus” statuette, Metr. Mus (4. F.4.,? xxix, 1925, p. 152). To p. 114. Bronze head called Berenice, Naples. Copy from Perin- thus, B.C.H., xLvit1, 1924, p. 276, pls. 1v-vi1. To. p. 117. So-called Seneca. Identification as Epicharmus, Bull. Comm., XLU, 1924, p. 241. To. p. 117. Satyr and maenad. Marconi dates in first half of second century, Bull. Comm., x1, 1923, p. 225, pl. 1. To. p. 118. Female head from Tralles, Smyrna. Ephem. Arch., 1923, p. 67, figs. 5, 6. To. p. 121. Olympia restorations. Latest treatment, Schrader, Phidtas, p. 124. To p. 125. Erotic group from Delos, Athens. Arch. Deltion, 8, 1923, Pp. 175. To p. 129. Nymph from Tralles, Constantinople. Ephem. Arch., 1923, p. 80, fig. 19. 135 . ’ 6 -d “(unasny uossog) SOMA AO SALLANLV.LS V.LLOOVUYAL Prare 2. j 6 +d (unasnyy uvryodourayy Y40{ 29N) SUOLOV OLNOO AO SVLLOOVYNEL PLATE 3. TERRACOTTA OF NEGRO BOY SLEEPING BESIDE A POT (Oxford, Ashmolean Museum), p. 9. $4 / zs SA ICR it (4) (¢) TTANAGRA TERRACOTTA OF OLD TERRACOTTA OF IDIOT, FROM WOMAN AND CHILD (Dresden, CABEIRIC SANCTUARY (Boston Albertinum), p. 9. Museum), p. 9. PLaTE 4. ‘21d *(unusuagyp ‘uapsa4q.) SANOIZAOD WOU AVAH (7) ‘rid “(20payy oyjtd °9uoy) AAOVATAWN (7) PLATES. MARBLE STATUETTE OF BOXER (New York, Metropolitan Museum), p. 11. PLATE 6: HEAD FROM CHIOS (Boston Museum), p. 12. PLATE c 1 ‘d ‘(unuijsagip ‘uapsiiq) (9) ae IdOuHdV AO AVHH . a c 1 ‘d ‘(anasnpy au1joj1g0y (7) ‘auod) ALIGOWHdV PLaTE 8. By Courtesy of the Fogg Art Museum FEMALE HEAD (Cambridge, Mass.—Fogg Art Museum), p. 12. PLATE 9. ck . d c (wnuisag] p ‘uUapsetq ) GVNAVIN ©) ‘cid “(anasnpy uvzipodoujapy ‘¥40[ aN) HOLVLS IVA (7) IPwNGIe eey C1 +d ‘(wnasnpy jvuouen ‘suayip) AINAVIYV ‘cid “(unasnpy sijodowp ‘suayip) YHANVXATV ‘cid “(unasnpy uvjijodouapy ‘y¥s0{ aN) AO (7) “fr -d “(ustsaq fo 700499 puvjsy apoyy ‘s2uspiaodd) F1.LAQ.LVLS ‘zx -d “(asan0T) NOSWL GATIVO-OS (7) ‘LUpUuYE “010YT _ _ [ea] is < 4 A — Jeng ane Sie. Photo., Anderson. Photo., Brogi. SON OF NIOBE (Florence, Uffizi), p. 13. PLATE 14 Photo., Brogt. YOUTH FROM SUBIACO (Rome, National Museum), p. 14. Photo., Alinari. YOUTH FROM CYTHERA WRECK (4¢hens, National Museum), p. 14 PLaTE 16. ‘oi -d (wnasnypy pouonon ‘suayip) YAXO@M AZNOUA (9) “pid (aionusayy (possuiuaT) VAMO'IOS WOU AINOO ATOO (7) ‘“(unasnYy v1upuoxP) SSTqddOD (7) ¢ I ‘d “(anasnyy DIAPUDX II P ) dO ~) GOaaadv: + | d PLATES Tor “Sid “(wnasnpy Misuse “viydepr7iyd ) AAANVNAIN (7) YsOL “Sid “(anasnypy uvpijpodouayy “N) YAHdOSOTIHd AO GVAH TIVINS (2) PLATE 19. — ‘3 ( f SILENUS CARRYING INFANT DIONYSUS (Munich, Glyprothek), p. 16. ‘oid ‘(unasnyy uvsouysp “pa ) SHNAH.LSOWAd ‘gid “(wnursagyp ‘uapsasq) NWd (7) (2) fo) N [<2] io < J Ay REATE 2 Ts GIRL WITH DOVE (Munich, Glyptotheh), p. 17. "Li vd “(yaysordt7y ‘yaunyy) KOP-UALVS AZNOU ‘Lid (unasnpy viupuoxap) KO (7) (7) "YUN ‘uunuyonag * qt “O10YT a nN aa] = < =| Ay PLATE "Lid “(uoou0, \ 1) XGAOVAL AO (7) r HS OW “ANH NOdTAW "Lid “(su0gvasasuory 1ap 0%% (7) eM: O-de$ ojo ‘ 20d) TALD 24. PLATE ‘gi td “(sayinbyup fo unasnpy ‘uapseT) FONIYd WV (7) "Lid ‘(wnutpsaqyp ‘uapseqd) ASNIN V gid “(wnasnpy uvzijodossa Jy (7) ‘y40{ 2IN) SA'TOVYAH ‘Lid ‘(asan0T) YLIGOWHdV AO ALLAO.LV.LS AZNOU (2) PLaTE 26. me une ie inst ies NT . RES HERACLES (New York, Metropolitan Museum), p. 18. BRONZE HEAD OF A BERBER (British Museum), p. 18. Prampe2ie. (7) "gi cd “(wnasnyy yououon ‘amwoy) YAXOW AZNOUA Pi LA E 2 rs 9 M u 5€ um) > Pp mai PLATE 30. Hegise! (uononysuodel) FONVA OL pee ONILIANI 7 UALVS ‘gid “zWlpQ ‘a2uas0p 7) eae ONIGNIYD FZAVIS D "YUNA ‘UuunuUyonag “J “o10yg ‘61 +d “(wnutsagrp ‘uapsaiq) dNOUD NOLLVLIANI tO Hd NAN 61 +d “(asano7T) dNOUD NOLLVLIANI HOseLAG IY 5 PLATE ‘oz *d “(wnasnpy autzoqidey ‘aum0oy) TAVSD ONIAA PLATE. 33. Photo., Anderson. DYING ASIATIC (Rome, National Museum), p. 20. PLATE 34. ‘red (yayindt7y ‘yrunyy) URLVS INIUACUVE (7) “YIlUNyAy “UUDUYINAG “yf “0j0Y “LDU “0104 ‘oz ‘d “(wnasnyy sazdon) SON ATIS PLATE 35. Photo., Alinari. SLEEPING FURY (Rome, National Museum), p. 21. PLaTE 36. ARSINOE III, QUEEN OF EGYPT (Boston Museum), p. 21. RLATESs 7. (2) Photo., German Institute. KING EUTHYDEMUS OF BACTRIA (Rome, Torlonia Museum), p. 21. SEB? ree x Re E as dE I lami (4) WOUNDED GREEK (Venice Museum), p. 22. FIGHTING GAUL (New York, Metropolitan Museum), p. 22. PLATE 39. MARSYAS ABOUT TO BE SKINNED (Rome, Palazz> dei Conservatori), p. 22. "Ez *d “(unasnpy pouoren ‘auwoy) ALIGOUHdVINUAH DNIdvATS ‘uosszapupy “oloUg PLATE 41. (2) SLEEPING EROS (Rome, Palazzo dei Conservatori), p. 23. PLATE 42. GRAVESTONE OF METRODORUS (Berlin Museum), p. 23. "Sz -d “(unasnyy 449g) SLNVID AGNV SGOD AO ATLLLVE SULNASN TAT -UOWDSAIT Sap uainygjnys ald MOAT ) "COD & 42]ANAD ap 4az]D 4 ‘ UNIT) PLATE 44. HEAD FROM PERGAMON (Berlin Museum), p. 28. PLAT Ded ce DANCING GIRL (Constantinople Museum), p. 28. Photo., F, Bruckmann, Munich. roe. I SS wT 00 N a = g S Sy iS S x S S 8 S N N ~ Ss) Q, th S S Re Cae a4 ~ << = Z x] O (2) ALEXANDER (Constantinople Museum), p. 28. PLATE 47. inare. Photo., Al SATYR (Naples Mu Seum), p. 28. Pirate 48. “62 -d “(wnasnpy vasa.) AA.LV.LS HIVNGAA gz *d “(wnasnyy sajdon) VOANAS GATTIVO-OS (7) ez -d ‘(wnasnpy jouo1en ‘auoy) VOANAS GHYTIVO-OS PLATE 49. "gcd ‘(wnasupy utjueg) TZALWA SQHdA TAL COD Q 4a1kndy ap 4aq]V A ‘UIj4ag) ., SWnasn]A,-UuowUDsAIg Sap UaANGNYS aiq ,, MOAT PLATE 50. FEMALE STATUE FROM MAGNESIA (Constantinople Museum), p. 29. "62 -d “(wnasnpy jouoijon ‘auoy) | (7) SOLA LAWAd AHO AN.EV.LS HZNOUd (v ) PLATE 52. ZEUS FROM PERGAMON (Constantinople Museum), p. 29. py 53. PLATE ATHENA (Constantinople Museum), p. 29. PLATE 54. “of +d ‘(wnasnpy vunsor] uz osson £ wnasnyy peuounyy ‘suyiP) NOHMOWVA AG SLNAWOVUA ) (9) Bite ngs Lio Selig "YQWnTAy ‘UuDiuyonag * J 0104 PLATE DRAPERY BY DAMOPHON (4¢hens, National Museum), p. 30. PiaTE 56. bE -d S(wnasnpy jououen ‘suyip) SOTAGC WOU LIVULYOd AZNOU (7) ‘of ‘d ‘(wnasnyy uvjyodouap ‘Y4of aN) ANOHdASUAd () Photo. Alinari. = Lo ey a ee NS S ~ ~ SN SN is) Ss = is S = a cee n eo) 4 ea SQ = © a4 fy LH — x (a4 = [a4 © A, PraTE 58. bE -d ‘(unasnyy uypag) ANOLSAAVAD “L$ ‘Id *TIVULYOd AO AVAH (2) ‘aInyusuy uvulsayy “o,OYT 59. PLATE "SE -d “(unasnpy jououeN ‘suayip) NVI CATO (9) “OIN]ISUT UDULAA £) “OVOUT “hE +d “(anasnyy aqNqYsUuy UDWAIL) ‘°0JOY [0U01ION ‘suayIp (2) ) NVW ONNO x. PLaTE 60. FAMILY GROUP (Bertin Museum), p. 35. PLATE 61. AUTHOR, SO-CALLED MENANDER (Vatican), p. 35. PLATE 62. “SE -d ‘(unasnpy pououon ‘susyip) JOVUH.L AO SALOO ONIN SE d “(yapord(7H Suagspsvy Wn ‘uasoyuadoy) KAAINOd (9) (2) | a 5 foe) a, Ss Si S = SS S NS aS S =, a zg S SS Ss A, 2) © ad ©) 2 HH © (a4 joa} PiaTE 64. TURBANED YOUTH (Athens, National Museum), p. 38. Pirate 65. "Of +d “(unasnyyy 150317) CL LWAUVO (7) “6 -d “(augvay J, ‘suayiv) SANATIS (7) PuaTeE 66. ‘ob -d ‘(yaysoid 75 ‘yrtuny) SATAVAONAHV AO SISVA WOU SUALSNOW-VAS —— PLaTE 67. Photo., Altnari. LAOCOON (Vatican), p. 40. Piate 68. (2) OLD WOMAN (Dresden, Albertinum), p. 41. (2) OLD PEASANT OLD WOMAN (Dresden, Albertinum), p. 41. (New York, Metropolitan Museum), p. 41. Photo., Alinart. ARCHAISTIC RELIEF OF THE SEASONS (Louore), p. 43. PLATE 70. CARYATID (Constantinople Museum), p. 43. Pinte? DANCER (Berlin Museum), p. 44. PLATE 72. LADY FROM DELOS (Athens, National Museum), p. 44. 73: PLATE Photo., Alinari. AD OF LADY, pl. 72. HE PLATES 74. BOY BOXER (Constantinople Museum), p. HEAD OF BOY BOXER, pl. 74. PLaTE 76. Photo., Anderson. APHRODITE FROM CYRENE (Rome, National Museum), p. 45. APHRODITE (Boston Museum), p. 45. 2W) ¢ ANAVIUV ‘uosdapup “oJoud ‘Mou py “o104d ob ‘d € (wnasayy 5180777) SACIALVUOVT AO AMITAY ‘SALLING NVINI 2 OaTaA gh -d “(unasnyy adouszuvisuoy) SACIAIUNA AO AAITAY ALANA es ea ee a ° oe) 3) & ® %S mR Pie PLaTE 105. (2) TERRACOTTA MUSICIANS FROM BABYLONIA (British Museum, Nos. 91796, 91817), p. 71. (4) STATUETTES FROM BABYLONIA—MARBLE GODDESS, TERRACOTTA EUROPA, ALABASTER GODDESS (British Museum, Nos. 91669, 91782, 91671), p. 71. PLATE 106. ‘EL -d “(ys0q pnsuin) GdOO-NNS FHL ANV Ng Stes 4O SMHOOLLNV “ ate A a kegel corer sora L$-Ll—q ¢Ll-gg— {99-f21—g fora gf 1-121-—p ‘cL -d S(wnasnpy ysul4g) SNIOO NVIH.LUVd Prare 107- ‘gol -d ‘(wnasnypy sjassnsg) ‘GV AYUO.LNAO GNOOUS “dVaH ALIYVAWIH (9) ‘€L -d “(auanoT) ANOLSHAVAD AN + Rel KW'IVd PLATE 108. Photo., Government of India. () CAPITAL (Sarnath Museum), p. 79. ’ ima ee ee a ee Photo., Indian Museum List, 57. (*) Photo., Government of India. (2) RAILING FROM BUDDH GAYA CAPITAL (Sarnath Museum), p. 77. (Calcutta, Indian Museum), p. 81. PLATE 109. Photo., India Office, Record No. 2274. Photo., Victoria and Albert Museum, No. 27847. (2) (4) PILLAR FROM BHARHUT BUDDHIST SAINT FOUND NEAR (Calcutta, Indian Museum), PESHAWAR (Berlin, Museum fiir p- 80. Vilkerkunde), p. 82. PLATE TO. Photo., Victoria and Albert Museum, No. 27849. PANEL FOUND NEAR PESHAWAR kunde), p. 82. Museum ftir Volker 5; Lin (Ber Prawn tye By Courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. (2) (2) CHINESE STELA OF EARLY KUANYIN, GODDESS OF MERCY, SIXTH CENTURY A.D. CHINESE OF SEVENTH CENTURY (Chicago, Art Institute), p. 88. A.D. (New York, Metropolitan Museum), p.88. Prameein2: Se ae ap eae ee ye ee eS Te) at LT ae ‘06 +d “(r/nuozy ‘740N') ADNAN TANI | NVdYON YAGNNA ‘C'V AUN.LNAO H.LNAAAS ATAVA AO AZNOU ASANVdVI ‘AOUAW AO SSAAAOD ‘NONNVY (9) LVI "gg °d “(omsusuy tap 0800149) ‘TV AUOLNAO H.LXIS dO ASANIHO ‘LNIVS .LSIHGGNd INDEX OF SUBJECTS (No references to Appendix alone, except for portraits and general subjects not quoted in Index of Places). Abyssinia, 68 76. Actors, terracottas from Athens, 9, pl. 2 ; Chinese statuettes, 88. Aden, tanks, 76. Aeschines, 96. Aeschylus, 93. Agasias, 35, 124. Agathocles of Bactria, (?), 113. Agrippina head, Thera, 38. Ahenobarbus, basis of, 40, 130, pl. 66. Alabaster, 59, 61, 108. Alexander, 12, 28, 94, 98, 100, 134, 135, pls. rob, 46a; Bala 124; Sarcophagus, 14, 97. Alexandria, 67, 91. Alpine art, 53, 131. Amaravati tope, 82. Antioch, 16, 69, 102. Meeecuusi1(!), 111 ; 11 (?), 1133 rv (?), 1223 Grypus (?), 94,123; of Commagene, 73. Anzio girl, 16, 104. Aphrodite, Capitoline type, 12, 95, pl. 7 ; crouching, by Doedalsas, 17, 109, pl. 25a; of Melos, 35, 126; in Delos group, 38, 125, pl. 63 ; head from Athens, 45, 126, pl. 77; from Cyrene, 45, 126, pl. 76 ; bronze head from Armenia, 69, 120 ; of Aphrodisias, 127. Apollo from Cyrene, 45. “ Apollonius of T'yana,” 99. Apulia, 53, 54.131, 132. Ara Pacis, 48, pl. 82. Aratus (?), 108 ; so-called, 113. Arch at Susa, 53, 131. Archidamus, 94. Archimedes (?), 106. R 137 LAT EVR GREE KS CU Li Pv Ur Ee Ariadne, 17, 103 ; head from S. Slope, 13, 14, 97, pl. toc ; head from Subiaco, 48, 131, pl. 81b; fragment, 46, 126, pl. 78. “Aristippus,” 97, 134. Aristotle, 94. Armenia, bronze head of Aphrodite from, 69, 120. Arretine ware, 49, 130. Arsinoe, 21, 113, pl. 36. Artemis of Ephesus, 127. Asiatic, head of dying, 21, 111, pl. 33. Asoka, 77. Attalus I (?), head of, 1133 first dedication, 20, 111, pls. 32, 33; second, 21, 27, 113, pl. 37b; A. II, Zeus of, 29, 119, pl. 52. Baalyaton, 69, pl. 104b. Babylonia, Greek influence in, 69-71. Bactria, 21, 79, 83, 113. Barberini satyr, 21, 112, 135, pl. 34b. Basis of Ahenobarbus, 40, 130, pl. 66. Berber head from Cyrene, 18, 109, pl. 27. Bharhut reliefs, 80, pl. 109ga. Blomfield, Sir R., quotation from The Mistress Art, 24. Boethus, 119. Bone carvings, 64, pl. 1oob. Borghese warrior, 35, 124. Boxer, marble statuette, 11, 94, pl. 5 ; bronze, 18, 108, pl. 28 ; bronze head, 16, 101, pl. 16b. Boy, Lysippic head, 12, 95, pl: 10a; from Subiaco, 14, 48, 97, 134, pl. 14; crouching, 14, 97, 134, pl. 15; head from Alexandria, 17, pl. 22a; from Tralles, 44, 125, pls. 74, 75 ; pulling out thorn, 47. Buddh Gaya, railing from, 81, pl. 108c. ““ Campana ”’ reliefs, 131. Canosan vases, 53, 131. Caricatures, 9, pl. 3. Carneades, 119. Carrara marble, 59. Carthaginian sculpture, 51, 131, pl. goa. 138 DNDEX OFS U By ECTS Caryatids, Silenus as, 39, 125, pl. 65a; female busts, 39, 129, pl. 65b ; archaistic, 43, 96, pl. 70. Casket from Bimaran, 81. Centaur head, 28, 116, pl. 46b ; old and young c., 22, 113. Cerigotto wreck, 124. Children, 16, 93, 104. China, 15, 86-90. Chrysippus, 113, 135. Comb from Solokha, 14, pl. 16a. Commagene monument, 73, pl. 106b. Cotys, 35, 128, pl. 62b. Couches, carved, 64, pl. 100. Country scenes, 9, 114. Cuirass, 52, 133. Cupids, 9 ; on Chinese bowl in Toronto Mus., 88. Cyprus, 66, 68. Cyrene, 68. Cythera wreck, 128. Damophon’s group at Lycosure, 30, 121, pls. 54, 55. Delos, 32, 33. Demeter (?), 49, 128, pl. 88. Demetrius I, 29, 34, 119, pl. 51 ; Poliorcetes (?), 96, 99. Demosthenes, 16, 105, 135, pl. 20b. Dennis, quotation from Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria, 60. Diogenes (?), 100. Dionysius, 119. Dionysus, “ Plato” head, 47 ; “‘ Narcissus,”’ 131. Doedalsas, 17, 19, 109. East Greek reliefs, 124. Egypt, 66, 67, 91. Epicurus, 16, 105. Eros, terracottas, 9, 111, pl. 1; sleeping, 23, 114, pl. 41b; drawing bow, 95; in group, 38, 125, pl. 63 ; with Psyche, 119. Erotic groups, 38, 125, 135, pl. 63; 110, 117, 135. Etruscans, 51-53, 55-605. Euripides, 93 ; relief, 46, 131, pl. 80. 9 LATE RY G RSE ERTS CULL Pit U RE Euthydemus, 21, 79, 113, pl. 37a. Eutychides, 16, 17. Female figures: draped statue, 12, 95, pl. 9a; girl from Anzio, 16, 1043; girl with bird, 17, pl. 21 ; seated girl, 17, 103, pl. 23a; in transparent drapery, 29, 49, 120, 122, 128, pls. 48c., 50 ; caryatids, 39, 129, pl. 65b, 43, 96, pl. 70; drunken old woman, 41, 118 ; old woman, 41, 130, pl. 68c ; archaistic dancer, 44, pl. 71 ; statues of stock types, 35, 44, 122, 123, pls. 72, 73 ; mourner from Trent- ham Hall and similar statues, 46, 123 ; dancing girls from Herculaneum, 47. Female head, from Alexandria, 15, 103, 134, pl. 17b3 archaistic, 47, pl. 81a; from Chios, 12, 94, pl. 6; from Cyzicus, 12, 95, 134, pl. 4b; ‘“‘ Amastris,” “ Olympias,” 12, 95, pl. 8; old woman, 41, 130, pl. 68a ; from Pergamon, 28, 116, pl. 44. Female nudes, 6, 7. Fighting Gaul, 22, 58, 59, 112, pl. 38; Greek, 22, 113, pl. 37b; soldier from Taranto, 54, 132, pl. 92a. Fluteplayers’ monument, 62, pl. 102. France, sculpture prohibited in, 51. Fury, 2! 112,ph 35, Gandharan empire, 82-86. Gauls, invasions of, 6, 20; Pergamene statues of, 20, 21, 22, 109, 112, 116, 117, pls. 32, 38; in Lombardy, 52; Italian represen- tations of, 58, 59, pls. 94b, 96. Gigantomachy, from Pergamon, 25, 116, pl. 43. Girl from Anzio, 16, 104; with bird, 17, pl. 21; seated, 17, 103, pl. 23a; dancing, 28, 44, 47, pls. 45, 71; head from Chios, 12, 94, pl. 6. Gold comb, 14, pl. 16a ; casket, 81 ; medallions, 94. Grouping, 18. Half-length figures, 64, 124, pl. roob. Harpocrates from Taxila, 85. Hauran ruins, 74. Hejaz, relief at Medain Salih in, 75. Heracles from Valladolid, 18, 109, pls. 25b, 26 ; bearded herms, rot. Hermaphrodite sleeping, 23, 114, pl. 40. 140 LN DEX oO Fes'U By E Crs Hermarchus, 105, 135. Hermes resting, 47, 95. Herod Antipas, relief from palace of, 75. Hiero and Philiscus (?), 55. Himyarites, 76, 85. Homer, 28, 117, 123. Hygieia, 98. Hyrcanus’ palace at Arak al Amir, 74. Idiot, terracotta, 9. pl. 3c. Imitations of fifth century sculptures, Pergamene, 44, 116. Invitation to dance, 18, 110, pls. 30b, 31. Isis, 120. Japan, 89, 90. eason, 12,95, pl. 11a. Kannon, statuette, go, pl. 112b. Khotan, 83, 86. Korea, 89. Krahmer, Dr. G., quotation from “ Sti/phasen,” 36. Kuanyin, statue, 90, pl. 111b. Kushan empire, 82-86. Lacrateides relief, 35, 46, 48, 124, pl. 79. Landscape reliefs, 9, 24, 29, 49, 50, 114. Laocoon, 40, 130, pl. 67. Local styles, see Reliefs. Lombardy, 52. Lysippus, 14, 95. Maenad of Scopas, 12, 95, pl. gb. Magic, 70, 71. Mahdia ship, 130. Male figures: youth fastening sandal, 12, 95, pl. 11a; statuette from Cnidus, 13, 97, pl. 11b 3 crouching youth from wreck, 14, 97, 134, pl. 153 youth from Subiaco, 14, 49, 97, 134, pl. 143 portrait from Delos, 34, 121, pls. 57, 58a; author, 35, 122, pl. 61; boy from Tralles, 44, 125, pls. 74, 753 orator, 59, pl. 97b. Male heads: boy, 14, 95, pl. 10a; philosopher, 15, 110, pl. 18a; bearded God, 15, 110, pl. 17a; bronze boxer from Olympia, 16, 141 LAT E.R GREEK SiC Ur Le Pt URE 101, pl. 16b; Berber, 18, 109, pl. 27; prince, 18, 109, pl. 24b ; portraits from Delos, 34, 121, 122, pls. 56b, 57, 58a ; from Athens, 34, 35 38, 123, pls. 59, 64 3; peasant, 41, 130, pl. 68b; portrait from Palestrina, 63, pl. 103. Marsyas, 18, 22, 109, 117, pls. 29, 39. Mathura, 82. Meleager, 11, pl. 4a. Menander, 15, 98, pl. 18b 3; so-called, 35, 122, pl. 61. Menelaus, 21, 112. Meroe, 69. Metrodorus, stela of, 23, 115, pl. 42 ; the Epicurean, 105. Mithradates VI, 122. Muses, Vatican, 17, 107; of Philiscus, 116. Nabateans, 74-76, 85. “* Narcissus,”’ 48, 131. Negro boy, 9, pl. 3a. Neo-Attic, reliefs or vases, 48, 49, 127, 128, 130, pls. 83-87. Nike of Samothrace, 13, 97. Niobids, 13, 14, 18, 97, 134, pls. 12, 13. Nymphs dancing in caves of Pan, 105. Ofellius, 33, 119. Old peasant, 41, 130, pl. 68b ; woman, 9, 41, 118, 130, pls. 3b, 68b, c ; Palestine, 75. Palmyrene sculpture, 73, pls. 104a, 1072. Pan statue, 16, 102, pl. 20a ; in erotic group, 38, 125, pl. 63 ; teaching boy to play, 102. Panathenaic vases, 42. Parthian coins, 72, pl. 106a ; Parthians, 71, 77, 81, 82. Pasiteles, 47. Persephone, 30, 134, pl. 56a. Persia, 66, 70. Petra, 75, 85. Philetaerus, 108. Philiscus, 116. Phoenicia, 68, 69 ; Phoenician stelz, 69, 133, pl. 104b. Poseidippus, 105. 142 INDEX OF SUBJECTS Poseidonius, 122. Praxiteles’ sons, 15, 134. Ptolemy I, 99, (?), 98, 100; II, 106; IV, 113. Pyrrhus (?), 106, 109. Reliefs, Albanian local style, 1143; N. Apulian, 54, 131, pl. gob; S. Apulian, 54, 132, pl. 92a; “ Campana,” 131 ; Chiot, 23, 115, pl. 42; Landscapes, 9, 24, 29, 49, 50, 114, pls. 41a, 86b ; Roman style, 47, 48, 65. Republican portraits, 33, 63, 64. Russia, metal-work from, 15, 78, pl. 16a. Samothrace, Nike of, 106. Sanchi gates, 82. Satyr boy, 17, 110, pl. 22b; inviting nymph to dance, 18, 110, pls. 30b, 31a; Barberini, 21, 112, 135, pl. 34b; dancing, bronze, 22-5114); torso, 28, 117, pl. 47.5 turning to look at tail, 110; playing flute, 114; fighting, 114 porphyry heads of, 121; in erotic groups, 110, 117, 135, carrying Dionysus, 101. Scylla, 117. Scythians, 14. Seals, Babylonian, 70. Seleucus I, 98. ** Seneca,” 28, 117, 135, pl. 48a, b. Serapis, 107. Siberia, 15. Sicily, 55, 133, 134. Silenus carrying infant Dionysus, 16, 101, pl. 19; head, 20, 110, pl. 34a ; as support, 39, 125, pl. 65a. Sophocles, 94, 109. Spain, sculpture in, 51. Stucco reliefs, 49, pls. 86b, 87b. Subiaco boy, 14, 48, 97, 134, pl. 14 5 head of Ariadne, 48, pl. 81b. Sudan, 68. Tarentine art, 53, 132, 133, 134. Telephus frieze, 28, 118, pl. 49. Terracottas, manufacture of, 2 5 of Eros, 9, 111, pl. 1 5 comic, 9, pls. 2, 33; mould 54, 132, pl. 92b; Etruscan, 58, 59, 61, 63, 126, pls. 143 LATER GREE RUS C ULiP Tt Ul Ree 94b, 97a, 100a; Italian votive heads, 63; from Babylonia, 70, 71, pl. 105 ; Parthian, from palace at Pataliputra, 77. Theophrastus, 98. ‘Thespis, 135. Throne, carved, 53, 131, pl. gt. Toscanella sarcophagi, 57, pls. 93, 94a, 95. ‘Transjordania, ruins at Arak al Amir, etc., 74. ‘Transparent drapery, 29, 49, 120, 122, 128. Trentham Hall statue, etc., 48, 123. Tryphon (?), 123. Turbaned youth, 38, 123, pl. 64. Urns, Etruscan, 58, 60, 61, 62, pls. 96, 98-101. Venus Medici, 17, 108 ; of Milo, 35, 126. Victory, of Samothrace, 13, 97 ; stucco, 49, pl. 87b. Volumnii, tomb of, 60, 133, pl. 98. Zeno, 105. Zeus from Pergamon, 29, 119, pl. 52. 144 PNDEX OF BLACES AND MUSEUMS (Private collections grouped together at the end). AIX EN PROVENCE. Museum. Head of Diogenes (?), 100. Head of young centaur, 113. ALEXANDRIA. Greco-Roman Museum. Bearded head of god, 15, 67, 100, pl. 17a. Head of goddess, 15, 67, 103, 134, pl. 17b. Head of boy, 17, pl. 22a. Serapis, 107. Heads of Gauls, 112. Statue from Canopus, 124. ARAK AL AMIR, TRANSJORDANIA. Ruin with frieze of lions, 74. AREZZO. Museum. Relief of drunken Silenus and nymph, 118. ATHENS. Monument of Lysicrates, frieze, 94. “Theatre, supporting figures of Silenus, 39, 125, pl. 65a. “Tower of the Winds, reliefs, 130. Acropolis Museum. Head of Alexander, 12, 94, pl. rob. Small Acropolis Museum. Relief of Pan, 98. Relief, 102. Basis with athletes, 105. Pyrrhic dancers, 128. Relief, 128. National Museum. Head of Ariadne, from S. Slope, 13, 14, 97, pl. roc. Crouching boy, from Cythera wreck, 14, 97, 134, pl. 15. Bronze head of boxer, 16, 101, pl. 16b. Fragments by Damophon, 30, 121, pls. 54, 55. Portrait statue, 34, 121, pls. 57, 58a. Bronze head from Delos, 34, 121, pl. 56b. Head of young man, 34, 123, pl. 59a. Head of old man, 35, 123, pl. 59b. Head of Cotys, 35, 128, pl. 62b. Lady from Delos, 35, 44, pls. 72, 73. “Turbaned head, 38, i293, 0)264. Hrotic group, 38, 125, 135, pl. 63. Relief of 330-329, 96. “Eubouleus,” 97. Female head, 97. Satyr on tiptoe, 97. Relief of Euphron, 98. “Themis by Chaerestratus, 102. Basis from Mantinea, 102. Children from the Ilissus, 104. Funerary relief, from near Eleusis, 104. Reliefs of nymphs dancing in cave of Pan, 105. Head of Metrodorus, 105. Relief of Helicon, 108. Term. from Rhamnus, 111. Figures resembling Menelaus and Patroclus, 112. Sleeping maenad, 114. Fighting man from Delos, 116. Odyssey by 145 LAT E Ro GREE KS 'CoU Leer Rae Jason, 117. Frieze from Lamia, 121. Head of Zeus from Aegira, 121. Asclepius from Piraeus, 121. Head from Odeum (Ariobar- zanes ?), 122. Bronze head from wreck, 123. Head of old man, 123. Head of young man (Antiochus Grypus?), 123. Aristonoe, 123. Statuette from Crete, 124. Female half-length, 124. Poseidon of Melos, 124. Head of Hermes from Pharsalus, 125. Youth from Eretria, 126. Nike (by Euboulides?), 126. Artemis from Delos, 126. Head of Hygieia from Aegion, 126. Aphrodite of Aphrodisias, 127. Head of Athena (by Euboulides ?), 127. Silver from Thessaly, 127. Pair of male and female portrait heads, 128. Bronze youth from wreck, 128. BABYLON. Museum. Ornament from Theatre, 69. Female statuette, 71. BASEL. Art Museum. Female head, 129. BEHISTUN. Rock-carving of Gotarzes, 72. BERLIN. State Museums. Stela of Metrodorus, 23, 115, pl. 42. Giganto- machy, from Pergamon, 25, 116, pl. 43. Sculptures from Pergamon in style of Gigantomachy, 28, 44, 116, pls. 44, 45. Telephus frieze, 28, 118, pl. 49. Stela from Smyrna, 34, 123, pl. 58b. Stela from near Athens, 35, 123, pl. 60. Archasistic sculptures from Pergamon, 44, 116, pls. 45, 71. Portrait head from Palestrina, 63, pl. 103. Praying boy, 95. “Iwo heads from Pergamon (Lysimachus ?), 98. “Terracotta medallion from Corinth, 100. ‘Triton, 101, Herm of Pan, 101. Girl from Tanagra, 104. Nikeso, 105. Statuette of poet, 106. “ Nio- bids,” 107. Bronze satyr from Pergamon, 112. Satyr head from Magnesia, 112,. Head from Pergamon (Attalus I ?), 113. Altar from Magnesia, 113. Head of old centaur, 113. Frieze of labours of Heracles, from Pergamon, 115. Frieze from Magnesia, 115. “Torso of god or king, 116. Male torso from Magnesia, 116. Fragments from Magnesia, 118. Frieze from Priene, 119. Queen Apollonis (?), 11g. Statues from Pergamon,119. Fragments of Zeus from Magnesia 120. Headless statue from Priene, 122. Prometheus relief, 122. 146 INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS Part of bronze female statue, 123. Statuettes from Priene, 125. Reliefs from Taranto, 132. ‘Terracotta heads from Taranto, 132. Boy from Taranto, 132. Relief from Smyrna, 132. Museum fiir V élkerkunde. Gandharan sculptures, 82, 84, pls. 109b, 110. Metopes from Troy, 116. BOLOGNA. Civic Museum. ‘Verracottas from Sassoferrato, 59, 126, pl. 94b. Satyr with boy Dionysus, ror. BOSTON. Museum of Fine Arts. ‘Terracottas from Eretria, 9, 111, pl. 1. Terracotta idiot, 9, pl. 3c. Head from Chios, 12, 94, pl. 6. Head of Arsinoe, 21, 67, 113, pl. 36. Head of Aphrodite, 45, 126, pl. 77. Relief from Ceglie, 54, 131, pl. gob. Head of a goddess, 94. Heads of (Capitoline) Aphrodite, 95. Aphrodite on bird, 97. Female torso, 106. Head of Ptolemy IV, 113. Head of Homer, 123. Female head (No. 54), 134. BRUSSELS. Cinquantenaire Museum. Head of priest from Seleucia-on-Tigris, 69. Himyarite head, 76, pl. 107b. Head of barbarian, 113. “Torso of Aphrodite, 126. Female head, 129. ‘Terracotta female bust, 129. BUCHAREST. National Museum. Satyr of Invitation group, 110. BUDAPEST. National Museum. Female torso, 98. “Tyche of Antioch, 103. Female statuette from Thasos, 103. Dancing girl, 120. Relief of hoplites and cavalry, 132. CAIRO. Museum of Antiquities. “Terracotta satyr with skin, 112. Head of Gaul, 116. CAGLIARI. | Museum. Gravestone, 49, pl. 89. CALCUTTA. Indian Museum. Sculptures from Bharhut, 80, pl. 10oga. Railing from Buddh Gaya, 81, pl. 108c. 147 LVAVE EeRS GREE ke oeC ULE Pai Une CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND. Fitzwilliam Museum. Caryatid from Eleusis, 129. CAMBRIDGE, MASS. Fogg Museum. Head of woman, 12, 95, pl. 8. CAPUA; Museo Campano. Votive figurines, 133. CARTHAGE. Musée Lavigerie. Sculptures, 51, 52, 131, pl. goa. CARYSTUS, GREECE. Relief of athletes, 105. CHERCHEL. Museum. Female head, 97. CHICAGO. Art Institute. Chinese stela, 88, pl. 111a. Chinese head, 88, pl. 12a. Field Museum. Bone carving, 64, pl. 1oob. CLEVELAND, OHIO. Museum. Female Head, 1209. CONSTANTINOPLE. Ottoman Museum. Marsyas, 18, 110, pl. 29. Head of Alexander from Pergamon, 28, pl. 46a. Zeus, from Pergamon, 29, 119, pl. 52. Female statue from Magnesia, 29, 120, pl: 50. Head of Athena from Tralles, 29, 121, pl. 53. Caryatid from Tralles, 43, 96, pl. 70. Boy from Tralles, 44, 125, pls. 74, 75. Relief of Euripides, 46, 131, pl. 80. Alexander from Magnesia, 94. Alexander Sarcophagus, 97. Head of Alexander from Cos, 100, 135. Relief with head of Pan, 101. Stela of Diogenes from Imbros, 115. Frieze from Magnesia, 115. Female statue with Philiscus signature, 116. Metopes from Troy, 116. Head of Zeus from Troy, 116. Stela from Rhodes, 124. Relief of sacrifice, 124. Statuettesfrom Priene,125. Apollo from Tralles,125. Bronze youth from Tarsus, 126. Small female head from Athens, 126. Male portrait head from Cyme, 128. Statues of women from Magnesia, 128. Female head from Magnesia, 129. Nymph from Tralles, 129, 135. ““Niobid ” from Leptis, 129. Girl from Ak Shehir, 130. Frieze 148 INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS from Lagina, 130. Reliefs from Miletus, 130. Sculptures from Cyme, 130. COPENHAGEN. National Museum. Head of Chrysippus, 113. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Pompey, 35, pl. 62a. Stela of Baalyaton, 69, pl. 104b. Artemis and Iphigenia, 95. Relief of Artemis Bendis, etc., 96. Aeschines, 96. “Ptolemy I,” 98. Cybele, 103. Female statuette, 103. Poet, 106. Head of poet, 106. Pyrrhus (?), 106. Diademed head, 111. Basalt head of satyr, 112. Head of youth sucking, 112. Fighting giant, 114. Fighting satyrs, 114. Head like “ Dying Alexander,” 116. Porphyry head of satyr, 121. Head of Poseidon, 125. Youth from Epidaurus, 129. Hermachus, 135. Thorvaldsen Museum. Cast of male portrait head, 97. “Tyche of Antioch, 103. CORFU. Museum. Menander, 98 CORINTH. Museum. Frieze from Theatre, 134. COS. Frieze, 115. Head by sons of Praxiteles, 134. DELOS. On the site. Billienus, 122. Dioscurides and Cleopatra, 60, 122. Monument of Carystius, 104. Ofellius, 33, 119. Museum. Head of Gaul or giant, 117. Portrait heads, 121, 122. Athlete head, 122. Female portrait head, 123. Relief, 124. Cybele, 124. Poseidon, 124. Head of Gaul, 124. Draped herm, 124. Herm of young satyr, 125. Silenus statues, 125. Apollo with foot on Galatian shields, 125. Dionysus, 125. Female head, 127. Relief head of Phoebe, 127. Bust of veiled women, 127. Bronze relief, 127. DELPHI. Museum. Agias, 95. Dancing girls, 95. Head of Apollo, 96. Bearded head, 99, 135. Frieze from theatre, 115. Frieze of Aemilius Paulus, 118. Thessalian in cloak, 125. Circular altar, 128. 149 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE DRESDEN. Albertinum. ‘Terracotta of old woman, 9, pl. 3b. Head from Cyzicus, 12, 95, 134, pl. 4b. Maenad of Scopas, 12, 95, pl. 9b. Head of (Capitoline) Aphrodite, 12, 95, pl. 7 b. Pan, 16, 102, pl. 20a. Head of muse, 17, 107, pl. 24a. Head of nymph, 19, 110, pl. 31b. Head of old peasant, 41, 130, pl. 68b. Head of old woman, 41, 130, pl. 68a. Aphrodite and triton, 101. Satyr and hermaphrodite, 110, 135. Statuette of Asclepius, 125. Head of Pan, 125. Chigi Athena, 127. ELEUSIS. Museum. Relief of Lacratides, 35, 46, 124, pl. 79. Caryatid, 39, 129, pl. 65b. Relief of Demeter and Persephone, 124. EPINAL. Museum. Bronze hermaphrodite, 110. FLORENCE. Loggia det Lanzi. WMenelaus carrying Patroclus, 21, 121. Ger- mania (‘‘ Thusnelda ”’), 48. Archeological Museum. Etruscan urn, 58, pl. 96. Bronze orator, 59, pl. 97b. Satyr carrying boy Dionysus, 101. Sleeping Ariadne, 103. Seated Hermarchus (“Sophocles”), 105. Satyr turning to tail, 110. Satyr playing flute, 114. Pitti Palace. Sleeping Ariadne, 103. Uffizi. Niobids, 13, 14, 18, 97, 134, pl. 13. Knife-grinder, 18, 110, pl. 30a. Ara Pacis slab, 48, pl. 82. “Ariadne,” 97. “ Nurse of Niobids,” 108. Medici Verius, 17, 108. Wrestlers, 112. Head resembling Chrysippus, 113 “Dying Alexander,” 116. ‘Torso of satyr,\1197.5, > Narcissus, 12120 a GENEVA. Archeological Museum. Head of Alexander, 134. HAGUE. Scheurleer Museum. ‘Terracotta mould and relief of soldier, 54, Igte DO, JERUSALEM. Tombs in Valley of Jehoshaphat, 75. 150 INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS KLEITOR, GREECE. Relief of Polybius, 121. LECCE, Hypogeum, 132. Museum. Sculptures from Vaste, 132. LENINGRAD. Hermitage. Comb from Solokha, 14, pl. 16a. Head of Patroclus, OT 2: LEY DEN. Museum of Antiquities. Portrait head, 18, 109, pl. 24b. Colossal male head, 121. LONDON. British Museum. Head of Berber, 18, 109, pl. 27. Apollo from Cyrene, 45, 125. Mourning woman from Trentham Hall, 46, 123. Heads of Hiero and Philistis (?), 55. Alabaster urn, 61, pl. ror. Bronze head of Aphrodite from Armenia, 69, 120. Greco-Baby- lonian statuettes, 71, pl. 105. Amaravati Tope, 82. Nicocleia, 94. Bronze Alexander wearing aegis, 94. Artemisium of Ephesus, 94. _Alexandroid head, 99. Head of Alexander, 100. Bronze Silenus, 101. Female statuette, 103. Female statue from Macedonia, 104. Dionysus from monument of Thrasyllus, 106. Stela of Numenius, 108. Arundel Sophocles, 109. Bronze Aphrodite Pourtalés, 110. Silver boy and goose, 111. ‘Triton from Delos, 116. Frieze from Priene, 119. Boys quarrelling, 120. Herm of Lentulus Marcellinus, 122. Apotheosis of Homer, 124. Athena from Cyrene,127. Head- less girl from Priene, 127. LYCOSURA, GREECE. Museum. Fragments by Damophon, 30, 121, pl. 54a. “Terra- cottas with animal heads, 121. LYONS. Museum. Mourning female head, 118. MADRID. Prado. Fragment of sleeping Ariadne (?), 46, 126, pl. 78. Head of Alexander as Helios, 100. Satyr carrying boy Dionysus, 101. They LeAyT; BERS GtROE ERs C1 U (Rae Uekie Bearded head, 106. Muses, 107. Male portrait head, 111. Satyr with wine-skin, 112. MARSALA. Museum. Greco-Pheoenician stela, 133. MEDAIN SALIH, ARABIA. Relief of lions, 75. METZ. Museum. Female statue, 119. MUNICH. Glyptothek. Silenus carrying infant Dionysus, 16, 101, pl. 19. Girl with dove, 17, pl. 21. Bronze head of satyr-boy, 17, 110, pl. 22b. Barberini satyr, 21, 112, 135, pl. 34b. Sacrifice relief, 29, 114, pl. 41a. Basis of Ahenobarbus, 40, 130, pl. 66. Drunken old woman, 41, 118. Greco-Egyptian portrait, 67, pl. 104c. Alexander Rondanini, 94. Head of (Capitoline) Aphrodite, 95. “ Ilioneus,” 97. Alexandroid head, gg. NAPLES. National Museum. Head of Silenus, 20, 110, pl. 34a. Dancing satyr, 22, 114. “Seneca,” 28, 117, pl. 48b. Torso of satyr, 28, pl. 47. Resting Hermes, 47, 94. Bearded Dionysus (“‘ Plato”), 47. Dancing girls, 47. “ Narcissus,” 48, 131. Neo-attic relief, 49, pl. 86a. Archidamus, 94. Aeschines, 96. Demetrius Poliorcetes (?), 96. Helmeted head, 96. Bronze wrestlers, 97. Seleucus I (?), 98. ““ Alexander” on horse, 99. Bronze bust called Ptolemy or Lysi- machus, 100. Bronze Silenus,.1o1. Archimedes (?), 106. Bronze portrait-head, 106. Aphrodite “ Kallipygos,” 107. “ Niobid,” 107. Philetaerus, 108. Pyrrhus (?), 109. Diademed head, 109. Head of ‘Thespis with corkscrew hair, 109, 135. Antiochus II (?), 111. Satyr with wine-skin, 112. Drunken satyr, 112. Sleeping satyr, 112. ** Aratus,” 113. Satyr playing flute, 114. “ Berenice,” 114, 135. Diademed head, 115. Head resembling “Seneca,” 117. Farnese Bull, 120. Bronze Nike, 120. Isis, 120. Poseidonius, 122. Relief of young man and courtesans, 128. Female head, 129. Cuirass, 133. NARA. Horyuwjt. Bronze statuette of Kannon, go, pl. 112b. Frescoes, 90. ap INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS NEW YORK. Metropolitan Museum. ‘Terracotta actors, 9, pl. 2. Statuette of boxer, 11, 94, pl. 5. Female statue, 12, 95, pl. 9a. Head of boy, 12, 95, pl. 10a. Small bearded head, 15, 100, pl. 18a. Seated Heracles, 18, 109, pls. 25b, 26. Gaul from Cervetri, 22, 112, pl. 38. Head of Persephone, 30, 134, pl. 56a. Old woman, 41, 130, pl. 68c. Archaistic head, 47, pl. 81a. Neo-Attic vase, 48, 128, pl. 83. Kuanyin, 88, pl. r11b. Small head of girl, 94. Male head from Talysus, 97. Silver Pan, ror. Hermarchus (?), 106. Fighting satyr, 114. Sleeping Eros, 114. Portrait statue by Zeuxis, 1109. Female head from Rome, 120. Relief from Canosa vase, 131. “ Anstippus,” 134. Head of Chrysippus, 135. NIMES. Maison Carrée. Ganymede, 97. NIMRUD DAGH, TURKEY. Monument of Antiochus, 73, pl. 106b. OLYMPIA. Museum. Restorations of west pediment, 121, 135. OSLO. Museum. Olympiodorus, 99. OSTIA. Museum. Nereid, 95. OXFORD. Ashmolean. ‘Yerracotta negro boy, 9, pl. 3a. Head of Demosthenes, 16,105, pl.20b. Femalestatue,120. Athlete head,122. Sepulchral female statues, 128. PALAZZOLO ACREIDE, SICILY. Rock sculptures, 55, 133. High relief, 133. PALMYRA. Serat. Family group, 73, pl. 104a. PARIS. Louvre. “‘ Jason,” 12, 95, pl. 11a. Nike of Samothrace, 13, 97. Girl by Eutychides, 17, 103. Crouching Aphrodite, 17, 109, pl. 25a. Head of satyr from Vienne, 19, 110, pl. 31a. Borghese Warrior, 35, s 153 LATER GREEK SCULPTURE 124. Venusof Milo, 35,126. Base of Ahenobarbus, 40,130. Arch- aistic relief of Seasons, 43, pl. 69. Palmyrene bust, 73, pl. 107. Alexander Azara, 94. Alexander wearing aegis, 94. Relief of lion hunt, 96. “Inopus,” 100. Head of Heracles, 100. Silenus carrying infant Dionysus, 101. Female statue, 102. Votive relief, 104. Head of poet, 106. Artemis of Versailles, 106. ‘“* Niobid,” 107. Antiochus III (?), 113. Centaur, 113. Frieze from Magnesia, 115. Zeus, 119. Head of Heracles (Mithradates ?), 122. PARMA. Museum. Bronze fighting man, 113. PERGAMON. Museum. Head of girl carrying Wee 126, Fragments of female statue, 126. Female head, 129. PERUGIA. Tomb of Volumnii, 60, 133, pl. 98. PHILADELPHIA. University of Pennsylvania Museum. Menander, 15, 98, pl. 18b. PIRAEUS. Museum. Stela, 96. PROVIDENCE. Rhode Island School of Design. Statuette, 13, 97, pl. 11b. Torso of Dionysus, 95. REGGIO DI CALABRIA. Hypogeum, 133. ROME. Pasquino, 112. Villa Albani. Neo-Attic reliefs, 49, pls. 84, 85. Diogenes (?), 100. Fighting satyr, 114. Antiquarium Communale (contents in transfer to Museo Celio). Flute- players’ monument, 62, pl. 102. Head from battle-group, 108. Satyr and hermaphrodite, 110, 135. Barracco Museum. Head of old man, 106. Head of old centaur, 113. Female head, 118. Borghese Palace. Amazon, 113. 154 INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS Villa Borghese. Satyr on dolphin, 97. Satyr playing flute, 114. Amazon fighting two soldiers, 115. Capitoline Museum. Aphrodite, 12, 95, pl. 7a. Dying Gaul, 20, 111, pl. 32. Centaurs, 22, 113. Drunken old woman, 41, 118. Boy pulling out thorn, 47. Head of Alexander as Helios, 100. Head of Dionysus (“ Ariadne ”’), 108. Head of Marsyas (?), 110. Satyr holding grapes, 110. Juno Cesi, 118. “‘ Innocentia,” 120. Female head ascribed to Damophon, 121. Silenus, 125. Apollo, 125. Head of Apollo, 125. Palazzo det Conservatori. Girl by Eutychides, 17, 103, pl. 23a. Sleeping Eros, 23, 114, pl. 41b. Marsyas, 22, 109, pl. 39. Head of centaur, 28, 116, pl. 46b. Female statue, 107. Herm of bearded Heracles, 101. Satyr playing flute, 114. Fighting satyrs, 114. Sandal, 121. Colossal Heracles, 122. Corsini Palace. "Vhrone, 53, 131, pl. gt. Doria Gallery. Young centaur, 113. Villa Giulia. ead from Falerii, 58, pl. 97a. Urn from Chiusi, 61, pl. 1002. Lateran, Profane Museum. Boys quarrelling, 120. Head of Muse, 1209. Villa Medici. UHead of Meleager, 11, pl. 4a. National Museum (Terme). Boy from Subiaco, 14, 48, 97, 134, pista.) Girl from Anzio, 17, 104. Bronze boxer, 18, 108, pl. 28. Head of Dying Asiatic, 20, 111, pl. 33. Ludovisi Fury, 21, 112, pl. 35. Sleeping hermaphrodite, 23, 114, pl. 40. “‘Seneca,” 28, 117, 135, pl. 48a. Bronze statue of Demetrius I, 29, 34, 119, pl. 51. Aphrodite from Cyrene, 45, 126, pl. 76. Head of Sleeping Ariadne, 48, 131, pl. 81b. Stucco ceiling, 49, pls. 86b, 87b. Head of foreigner (?), 99. Ludovisi Muse, 107. Head resembling supposed Pyrrhus, 109. Ludovisi Gaul, 109. Rape, 115, Head of Antiochus IV (?), 122. Torlonia Museum. Head of Euthydemus, 21, 79, 113, pl. 37a. Vatican. ‘Yyche of Antioch, 16, 17, 102. Sleeping Ariadne, 17, Posmesviuses, 17, 107, pl. 23b. “ Menander,” 35, 122, pl. 61. Laocoon, 40, 130, pl. 67. Statuette of Demeter (?), 49, 128, pl. 88. Apoxyomenus, 95. Selene, 98. Alexandroid head (Lysimachus or Demetrius Poliorcetes ?), 99. Silenus carrying infant Dionysus, 101. ih) LAVTLE R GRIESE Ss: CoUsL Pou Ree ? Satyr with boy Dionysus on shoulder, ro1. ‘“‘ Euterpe,” 102. Torso of river-god, 103. Poseidippus, 105. Silenus, 110. Satyr holding grapes, 110. Head of Menelaus, 112. Head of sea-centaur, 117. Belvedere torso, 117. Triton, 117. “ Urania,” 118. Porphyry head of satyr, 121. Head of Pan, 125. Pyrrhic dancers, 128. Sea- centaur carrying woman, 130. SAMOS. Museum. Small head of Aphrodite, 126. SANCHI. Gates of stupa, 82. SARNATH. Museum. Capital with lions, 77, pl. 108a. Capital with horseman, 79, pl. 108b. SMYRNA. Evangelical School. Sleeping Eros, 114. Female head from Tralles, 118, 135. Female torso from Philadelphia, 127. SPLIT (SPALATO). Museum. Female head, 97. SUSA, ITALY. Arch of Augustus, 53, 131. SYRACUSE. Museum. WHead of Zeus, 55, 117, 133. | Draped Aphrodite (““ Nymph ”’), 103, 135. Lower part of Demeter, 120. Sculptures, probably Imperial, 133 ; Hellenistic, 134. TAORMINA. Museum. Female head (“ Apollo”), 129. TARANTO. Museum. Bearded head, 132. Head of Artemis and other sculptures, 134. TAXILA. Museum. ‘Terracottas, 84. Harpocrates, 85. TEGEA. Museum. Female statue, 29, 120, pl. 48c. Female statue, 120. TEOS. Frieze, 115. 156 INDEX OF PLACES AND MUSEUMS THERA. Rock-cut head of Artemidorus, 109. Museum. Head of Agrippina, 38. Head of Ptolemy i, 99. Female statues, 120, 123. Male portrait head, 122. Small head of youth, 123. Head of young man, 123. ‘Terracottas, 123. TIBERIAS. Relief of lions, 75. SURIESTE. Civic Museum. ‘Yerracotta reliefs from Taranto, 132. meee), LIBYA. Museum. Dionysus leaning on a satyr, 125. TUNIS. Alaom Museum. Cuirass, 52, 133. Herm by Boethus, 119. Objects from Mahdia wreck, 130. TURIN. Museum. Male head, go. VALETTA. Museum. Male head, 121. VENICE. Archaological Museum. Dedication of Attalus, wounded Greek, 22, 113, pl. 37b. Odysseus, 101. VICENZA. Museum. Female statue, 102. VIENNA. Este Collection. Bearded head, 109. Kunsthistorische Sammlung. _Amazonomachia sarcophagus, 96. Head of Poseidon, 101. Relief of nymphs dancing in cave of Pan, 105. Statues from Samothrace, 106. Nike from Samothrace, 108. Bronze hermaphrodite, 110. Stela of Parmeniscus, 114. Red head of satyr, 121. “Kore” head from Tralles, 126. Museum fiir Kunst und Industrie. "Terracotta Niobids, 132. VIENNE. Boys quarrelling (now destroyed), 120. VOLO. Museum. Votive relief, 104. bys) LAC TVE Re GaRe bas BS CU sb Pau Rae VOLTERRA. Guarnacct Museum. Urn, 61, pl. 99. WASHINGTON. Freer Museum. Roman statuettes from China, 89. ZAGREB. National Museum. Marsyas, 109. Relief of drunken Silenus and nymph, 118. PRIVATE COLLECTIONS. Arndt : Terracotta reliefs from Taranto, 132. At Berlin : Satyr heads from Persia, 70. Blanchet : Bronze hermaphrodite, 110. Dubois : Bronze hermaphrodite, 110. Goldman : Female bust, 95. Hiller von Gaertringen : Frieze of Hieronymus, 118. At Houghton Hall : Head of Dioscurus, 95. Lysimachus (?), 99. Head of Alexander as Helios, 100. Leconfield : Head of Menelaus, 112. Rockefeller : Altoviti Venus, 108. At Rossie Priory : Head of Alexander, 100. Edm. de Rothschild : Bronze Alexander, 94. Shear : Female head from Rhodes, 1209. At Spongano: Sculptures from Vaste, 132. Vlasto : Alabaster (Medeci) Venus, 108. Warocqué : Head of Goddess, 96. Head of Perseus, 122. At Wilton House : Group, 116. At Woburn Abbey : Head of philosopher, 119. OBJECTS OF WHICH THE PROVENANCE ALONE CAN BE QUOTED. Athens: Relief of seated poet, 114. Avlona, Pojani near: Stela, 114. Chios: Stela, 115, 118. Egypt: Alexander as Helios (from Ptolemais), 100; Bust of Alexander, 100; Statuette of poet, 106 ; Statuette of fighting man, 113. Italy: Borghese Daphne, 108. Lesbos: Cybele relief, 124. Magnesia on Maeander: Stele of Olym- pias, 124. Mantinea: Female head, 127. 158 tr d =< Ro ce z . oa ‘ a we ¥ : 7 A) y “GETTY CENTER LIBRARY “TI me 3125 0 00641 26