LEEK SCULPTURE ■■H ■ This book is DUE on the last date stamped below tftf 1 - ^4*4 m i . ¥*■ SOUTHERN BRANCH 7ERSITY c 'Nl/ lib; "^S ang 1 .: GREEK SERIFS FOR COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS EDITED i NDER THE SUPERVISION OF HERBERT WEIR SMYTH, Ph.D. ELIOT PKOFBSSOK < >K GREEK LITERATI RE 1\ 11 VKVARD UNIVERSITY VOLUMES OF THE SERIES GREEK GRAMMAR. By the Editor. BEGINNER'S GREEK BOOK. Prof. Allen R. Benner, Phillips Academy, An- dover; and the Editor. $1.25. BRIEF GREEK SYNTAX. Prof. Louis Bevier, Jr., Rutgers College. $0.90. GREEK PROSE READER. Prof. F. E. Woodruff, Bowdoin College, and Prof. J. W. Hewitt, Wesleyan University. GREEK PROSE COMPOSITION FOR SCHOOLS. Clarence W. Gleason, Volkmann School, Boston. $0.80. GREEK PROSE COMPOSITION FOR COLLEGES. Prof. Edward H. Spieker, Johns Hopkins University. $1.30. AESCHYLUS. AGAMEMNON. Prof. Paul Shorey, University of Chicago. AESCHYLUS. PROMETHEUS. Prof. J. E. Harry, University of Cincinnati. $1.50. ARISTOPHANES. CLOUDS. Dr. L. L. Forman, Cornell University. DEMOSTHENES. ON THE CROWN. Prof. Milton W. Humphreys, University of Virginia. EURIPIDES. IPHIGENIA IN TAURIS. Prof. William N. Bates, University of Pennsylvania. $1.25. EURIPIDES. MEDEA. Prof. Mortimer Lamson Earle, Columbia University. $1.23. HERODOTUS. Books VII -VIII. Prof. Charles Forster Smith and Prof. Arthur Gordon Laird, University of Wisconsin. $1.75. HOMER. ILIAD. Prof. J. R. S. Sterrett, Cornell University. Books I.-III. and Selections. $1.60. Books I.— III. $1.20. HOMER. ODYSSEY. Prof. Charles B. Gulick, Harvard University. LYSIAS. Prof. Charles D. Adams, Dartmouth College. $1.50. PLATO. APOLOGY AND CRITO. Prof. Isaac Flagg, University of California. $1.40. PLATO. EUTHYPHRO. Prof. William A. Heidel, Wesleyan University. $1.00. THEOCRITUS. Prof. Henry R. Fairclough and Prof. Augustus T. Murray, Leland Stanford, Jr., University. THUCYDIDES. Books II.-III. Prof. W. A. Lamberton, University of Penn- sylvania. $1.75. THUCYDIDES. Books VI.-VII. Prof. E. D. Perry, Columbia University. XENOPHON. ANABASIS. Books I.-IV. Dr. M. W. Mather, late Instructor in Harvard University, and Prof. J. W. Hewitt, Wesleyan University. XENOPHON. HELLENICA (Selections). Prof. Carleton L. Brownson, College of the City of New York. $1.65. XENOPHON. MEMORABILIA. Prof. W. W. Baker, Haverford College. GREEK ARCHAEOLOGY. Prof. Harold N. Fowler, Western Reserve University, and Prof. James R. Wheeler, Columbia University. $2.00. GREEK LITERATURE. Dr. Wilmer Cave Wright, Bryn Mawr College. $1.50. GREEK PUBLIC LIFE. Prof. Henry A. Sill, Cornell University. GREEK RELIGION. Arthur Fairbanks, Ph.D., Litt D., Director of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. GREEK SCULFrURE. Prof. Rufus B. Richardson, formerly Director of the Ameri- can School of Classical Studies, Athens. INTRODUCTION TO THE GREEK DRAMA. William Fenwick Harris, late Assistant Professor in Harvard University. BEGINNER'S NEW TESTAMENT GREEK BOOK. Prof. William H. P. Hatch, General Theological Seminary, New York. Others to be announced later. NIKE OF SAMOTHRAKE (Louvre) A HISTORY 01 GREEK SCULPTURE BY RUFUS B. RICHARDSON KORMERLY DIRECTOR OK THE AMERICAN SCHOOL UK CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS ■:*»:< M \v V< »RK ■ : ■ < INCINNAT1 ■:■ CHICAGO A M ERICA N Hook Co M PANY 81068 Copyright, 1911, by AMERICAN BOOK COMPANY. Entered at Stationers' Hall, London. RICHARDSON. GREEK SCULPTURE. W. P. I * • * • ^ » • ■* « . i «» • 1 * ° • • * • • fc * " *. * j • * ••••.♦*'* « • • ••» • , • . « ■•••••; . . * » •»»»» * ' • • t ° ".'•«'" v V" « NJ I TO A FRIEND WHO WAS A FRIEND INDEED 3o\m f>enrg lUriobt J PREFACE In this work I have been materially assisted by the editor, Professor Herbert Weir Smyth, to whose judgement I have often referred. Professor George II. Chase and <+\. Professor Harold N. Fowler have read all the proof sheets, and given me many valuable suggestions. Professor Arthur Sherburne Hardy has placed me under lasting obligation for his valuable assistance. K 111 S B. RICHARDSON. J TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE iMKiiDUCTION 15 CHAPTER I Oldest or Mycenaean Period 30 CHAPTER II The Aki h uc Pi biod - doD A. 776-54O B.C 38 tii.n li, 34O-480 B.l "I (II. \ll ER III The 1 11 1 11 < 1 ntory Period of Transition, 480-450 B.C 117 l ireal Masters, 450-400 b.c 147 CHAPTER IV . The Fourth Century 212 CH \ri IK V I ill. Hi . 323-I46 B.l 247 [OGRAFHT 2S1 < 28a LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 21. 22. 23- 24. 2 5> 27. 28. 29. 30- 3 1 - 32- Nike of Samothrake. Louvre 1. Gate, with Lionesses, at Mycenae . 2. Vaphio Cups. Athens, National Museum 3. From a Bull-baiting Scene. Candia, Crete 4. A Harvest Home Procession. Candia, Crete 5. Apollo of Thera. Athens, National Museum 6. Apollo of Melos. Athens, National Museum 7. Apollo of Tenea. Munich, Glyptothek . 8. Apollo of Orchomenos. Athens, National Museum Torso from the Ptoion. Athens, National Museum Youth from the Ptoion. Athens, National Museum Statue dedicated by Nikandre. Athens, National Museum Head from the Ptoion. Athens, National Museum Seated Statue from Branchidae. British Museum , Reliefs from Assos. Louvre Winged Nike. Athens, National Museum Archaic Drum of Column at Ephesos. British Museum Samian Hera. Louvre ....... Samian Maiden. Athens, Akropolis Museum The Dermys and Kitylos Relief. Athens, National Museum 9- 10. 11. 12. 13- 14. 15- 16. 17. 18. 19- PAGE Frontispiece 31 32 35 37 39 39 40 40 4i 42 43 44 45 48 51 53 54 54 55 57 59 61 62 64 20. Typhon from the Athenian Akropolis. Athens, Akropolis Museum Calf-bearer. Athens, Akropolis Museum .... Archaic Head of Hera. Olympia Archaic Metope from Selinus. Palermo Museum . Europa on a Bull, from Selinus. Palermo Museum 26. Reliefs from the Monteleone Chariot. New York, Metropolitan Museum .......... Reliefs from an Archaic Bronze Tripod. In the possession of James Loeb ........... Harpy Monument, West Side. British Museum Archaic Figure. Athens, Acropolis Museum .... Most Elaborate Archaic Figure. Athens, Akropolis Museum Pathetic Archaic Figure. Athens, Akropolis Museum . Finest Type of Archaic Figure. Athens, Akropolis Museum . 67 69 72 75 75 76 77 10 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 1 1 FIG. It toward Simplicity. Athens, Akropolis Museum 54. Archaic Youth with Yellow Hair. Athens, Akropolis Museum K. FlgUD 1 ulptured by Antenor. Athens, Akropolis Museum 36. A Youth en the Athenian Akropolis .... 37. The Rampin Heal at Paris ...... 38. Archaic Horse. Athens, Akropolis Museum . 39. Seated Athena. Athens, Akropolis Museum . 40. Warrior Athena. Athens, Akropolis Museum 41. Athena accepting Offerings. Athens, Akropolis Museum 42. Athena striking down a Youthful < iiant. Athens, Akropolis Museum 43. Aristion's Stele. Athens, National Museum . 44. Archaic Discus-thrower. Athens, National Museum 4v A Boeotian playing with His Dog. Athens, National Museum 46. Archaic Relief of Warriors. Delphi .... 47. Quadriga. Delphi ....... 48. Battle Scene. Delphi 49. Archaic Bronze Head. Athens, Akropolis Museu:n 50. Death of Aegisthos. C penhagen Muse, mi 51. Hron/e Statuette from Piombino. 1 ouvre 52. Archaic Bronze Head from Kythera. Berlin Museum . 53. West Gable of the Temple at Aegina. Munich, Glyptothek 54. Central (iroup of West < lable at Aegina (Furtwfingler's Restoration 55. Dying Trojan from Aegina. Munich, Glyptothek . 56. Bronze Head. Athens, Akropolis Museum 57. Bronze Heal from Herculaneuni. Naples Museum 58. Archaic Bronze Head of Zeus from Olympia . 59. Harmodios and Aristogeiton. Napl< s Mus am 60. Delphic Charioteer. Delphi ...... 61. East and West Gable Groups a) Olympia 1 62. Figure from I asl Gable. Olympia .... 63. Apollo, Central Figure of West Gable. Olympia Vthena supporting Herakles. Olympia .... 65. Zeus and Hera on Metope oi remple E at Selinus. Pa urn ......... 66. Aphrodite rising fr>'in the Sea Rome, Museo delle \- 67. Head of Goddess. Rome, Museo delli rerme 68. So-called Penelope. Rome, Vati .... 69. Spinario. Rome, Capitoline Museum 70. " Apollo " of the Omphalos. tthen«, National Museum 71. Myron's Diskobolos. Romi >tti Pals 7" ga 83 84 85 86 87 89 91 93 95 97 98 98 101 102 104 105 107 no 1 1 2 114 •15 no 119 1 .'i 125 '-7 129 1 |6 137 1 |9 1 |0 142 1 1 1 'Is I |o I2 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIG. PAGE 72. Head of Idolino. Florence, Archaeological Museum . . . 152 73. Polykleitos' Doryphoros. Naples Museum . . . . 155 74. Polykleitos' Diadumenos. British Museum 1 57 75. Polykleitos' Amazon. Berlin Museum 159 76. Lemnian Athena. Dresden and Bologna 163 77. Athena Parthenos. Athens, National Museum .... 165 78. Lapith and Centaur fighting. Athens, Akropolis Museum . -174 79. So-called Theseus. British Museum 178 80. Group of so-called Three Sisters. British Museum . . 179 81. Horse's Head from East Gable of the Parthenon. British Museum 181 82. West Gable of the Parthenon (sketch made in 1674) . . . 182 83. Parthenon Frieze, West End. {In situ) 185 84. Horse and Man on West Frieze of the Parthenon. {In situ) . 186 85. Poseidon, Apollo, and Artemis from the Parthenon. Athens, Akropolis Museum ......... 189 86. Sandal-binder from Balustrade of the Temple of Nike. Athens, Akropolis Museum ......... 193 87. Karyatid from the Erechtheion. British Museum . . .197 88. Amazon Relief from Phigaleia. British Museum .... 200 89. Battle between Greeks and Amazons. British Museum . . 201 90. Triptolemos between Demeter and Kore. Athens, National Museum 203 91. So-called Mourning Athena. Athens, Akropolis Museum . . 204 92. Perikles. British Museum ........ 205 93. Nike of Paionios. Olympia . 206 94. Dexileos, Grave Relief. Athens, Dipylon ..... 208 95. Hegeso, Grave Relief. Athens, Dipylon ..... 209 96. Funereal Relief of Father and Son. Athens, National Museum . 210 97. Two Skopasian Heads from Tegea. Athens, National Museum . 214 98. Goddess from South Slope of Akropolis. Athens, National Museum 216 99. Piece of Frieze of the Mausoleum. British Museum 100. Sculptured Drum of a Column from Temple at Ephesos. British Museum . 101. Marble Faun. Rome, Capitoline Museum 102. Aphrodite of Knidos. Rome, Vatican . 103. Hermes of Praxiteles. Olympia 104. .Apollo contending with Marsyas in Music Museum ...... 105. Eubuleus. Athens, National Museum . 106. Demeter of Knidos. British Museum . 107. Head of Asklepios from Melos. Athens, National Museum . Athens, National 217 218 220 221 223 224 226 227 228 LIST OF ll.l.l> l' RATIONS *3 FIG. i J, v Rome, Vatican ...... 109. Delphi ;io. Henn of Alexander. Louvre ...... 11. Hermes resting From lii-< Labours. Naples Museum 12. Bronze Stal . I a Boy in Prayer. Berlin Museum 13. Choragic Monument of Lysikrates. Athens 14. Eirene and l'lut>». Munich, Glyptothek .... lie. Sarcophagus of the Weeping Women. Constantinople Museum in. Alexander Sarcophagus. Constantinople Museum 17. Nicliv- protecting her Voungest Daughter. Florence, Uffizi Gallery 18. Themis from Rhamnus. Athens, National Museum 19. Aphrodite ol Melos. Louvre ...... I20. Head from Pergam n Berlin Museum .... [21. Wounded and Dying Gaul. Rome, Capitoline Museum [22. l'art of the Frieze of the Altar at Pergamon. Berlin Museum 123. Laocodn. Rome, Vatican ....... 124. Farnese Bull Group. Naples Museum ..... 12;. \ Ivedere. Rome, Vatican ..... 126. Artemis of Versailles. Louvre ...... 127. Poseidon Athens, National Museum Inytos from Lykosura, Athens, National Museum 1 2fl Bronze Youth found in the Sea near Antikythera. Athens, Nation! Museum .......... 130. Ludovisi Hera. Rom.-, Museo delle rerme .... 131. So-called Orestes and Electra. Naples Museum . PAGB 22') 23O 232 235 236 2 3 8 239 241 242 248 249 251 253 255 259 263 266 268 269 272 274 *75 278 279 INTRODUCTION Unquestionably one of the chief claims of the ancient Greeks upon the attention of the modern world is their sculpture. Schiller well selects this feature as their principal contribution to civilization, .saving : — I ■• I in edlea Volk hat einst gelebt k nnte die Geschichte davon Bcbweigen, Taosend Steine wfirden redend ceugen, Die man aus dem Schooss der Erde gr.il >t." This art had. however, its beginnings in attempts which often produced only the grotesque. It is interesting to trace the suc- cessive steps by which it slowly proceeded from these first attempts to the glorious creations of Pheidias, and then, with the fading bloom of the national life, moved slowly down from these high ideals to realism, portraiture, and still more common themes. This constitutes the history of Greek Sculpture. In this history the period just before and some time after the Age of Pheidias is by many, perhaps by the majority of those in- terested in art, considered or at least felt to be more interesting than that glorious age itself, which in its august altitude may be com- pared to a snow-covered mountain peak, while the periods before and after are like the pleasant slopes where one loves to dwell. The rude beginnings also ami the ever more and more successful struggle for correct expression are filll Of interest; and since to . historian there is nothing more interesting and important than origins, this field of archaic sculpture forms a large part of ever) handbook oi sculpture. The last pan of the course- is also waste. On the contrary, it is sometimes paradox thai "the mosl interesting sculpture comes after the best period"; and in very truth some of the most ad* ble works ( orae alter the il a ulptors, and even in whal is sometimes loosely spoken of as the age "I dei idem e. Thus »5 1 6 GREEK SCULPTURE the history of Greek sculpture arouses unflagging interest from the beginning to the end. This history has not been easily compiled, and, after all the patient and brilliant work which has been devoted to it, is still as incomplete as some of the torsos that furnish its subject-mat- ter. It is true that from year to year gaps have been filled, and each new handbook or each new edition of existing handbooks marks an advance on its predecessors. This is largely the result of modern excavations, which have in the last three decades pro- duced new material so rapidly that every handbook needs re- editing with each decade. But after all, the history must ever remain incomplete from the nature of the material with which it deals, viz. (a) the sculptured remains and (b) the literary sources of our knowledge. (a) The destruction of ancient statues has been almost com- plete, and has spared neither quantity nor quality. There were once, if we can trust our records, in 60-70 a.d., after Roman plundering had long been going on, three thousand statues at Rhodes, and at least as many at Athens, Delphi, and Olympia. These have practically all disappeared. Not only Pheidias, but the other great masters, were untiring producers. Lysippos, for instance, is said to have made fifteen hundred statues, every one of them excellent enough to have made him famous ; but not one of them survives. There is a probable connection of Pheidias with the Parthenon sculptures, and of Skopas with the gable figures from the temple at Tegea. But we have only the Hermes of Praxiteles which we can with absolute certainty regard as an original work of any of the six great masters. Bases remain in tantalizing profusion with the names of the great masters in- scribed on them. 1 1 Lowy, Inschriften griechischer Bildhauer, has collected these as far as was possible at the time of the publication of his work. Every important excavation, however, brings more and more to light. The excavations at Corinth, for example, brought out, in 1901, two bases inscribed with the name of Lysippos. But many, perhaps the greater part of such bases, bear names of sculptors who are not mentioned in the literary records. INTRODUCTION 17 Practi< illy then, original Greek sculpture no longer exists. But before the masterpieces perished they had in mam cases, by their Hence, incited rich Romans to procure copies of them, made by more or less skilful workmen. From a careful study of these copies there has been evolved in modern times a series of groups, which with more or less positiveness have been assigned to this or that master. Thus we have"the art of Polykleitos," "the art of Myron," and so on. 1 < !oins also have proved valuable in conveying an idea of a vanished masterpiece by reproducing a famous temple image wholly or in part.-' Gems also have rendered a like service in a less degree. (fi) The so-called literary sources of our knowledge of Greek sculpture are for the most part highly unsatisfactory. The Elder Pliny, in his chapters touching on the History of Art, gives quite full and somewhat systematic information about Greek sculptors, with some characterization of their works. But a close examina- tion of this history reveals its untrustworthiness. 8 That he is a borrower four or five times removed without formally acknowledg- ing his indebtedness is somewhat excusable when one takes into account the old custom of literary stealing and the fact that he compose 1 these chapters as a sort of addendum to his great Natural History, attaching it to the body of the work by a rather artificial bond, — bronze statuary, for example, being brought in as com- pleting the discussion of metals. While we find interesting state- ments as to the development of the art and as to the contributions ' Never hai this pro< . u I" en 1 arriol farther or with greater acumen than in Furtwlngler'i Ma Urpieces. head <>f Zeus on ■ coin ol Flis, Numismatu Commentary, Plate /'. xxii; coin* 1 Miletoa with ■ statu.- of Apollo, Collignon, Histoirt >f Aphrodite of Knidoi is in like manner revealed t>> us. For a ireful judgement ••( this strange and interesting compilation Blake and Seller*, Tht Eldet Plin/i Ckapttrs on Ha- II. Art. Still later appeared Kalkmann, IHe QutUen dtr Km ■ PliniuS. Sec a] hen, 26 f. 18 GREEK SCULPTURE made by the several great sculptors, these are like a few grains of wheat among bushels of chaff. A strong bias in favour of Lysippos and Xenokrates of Sikyon pervades the whole. In Pliny's chro- nology there is confusion worse confounded. He puts Pythagoras after Myron and both after Polykleitos, and brings the period of the bloom of Hagelaidas, whom he makes teacher of Myron and Polykleitos, down to the beginning of the Peloponnesian War. He knows so little of the great field of archaic sculpture that one might think that for him the art of sculpture began with Pheidias. And yet so readable, and sometimes so racy, is his story, that we can forgive him for yielding to the desire to tell in his opus magnum something which all polite Romans wished to hear. The labour of several distinguished scholars of recent times has made it possible to use the art section of the work intelligently, and now much more than formerly it has become the chief ancient literary authority on the subject. Pausanias, who mentions more statues than any other ancient writer, as far as he has any special interest in the subject, is con- cerned with statues distinguished for their antiquity or sanctity. He is satisfied if he can make them serve as the basis for the relation of religious or mythological yarns. It is useless to seek for any art criticism or history from him. He usually fails us just where we wish for information ; and yet we owe him an immense debt of gratitude for his short descriptions of the Athena Par- thenos at Athens and of the Zeus at Olympia. Lucian, undoubt- edly the best art critic of all the ancient writers who have spoken of sculpture and sculptors, unfortunately touches the subject only casually. He could undoubtedly have written a fine history of sculpture ; but he never thought of doing so. The other so-called literary sources afford only such casual and fragmentary information that they are hardly worth taking into this summary account. Dion Chrysostom, Quintilian, and Plu- tarch might be mentioned ; but when one begins with these, one hardly knows where to stop. All the gleanings of scraps of information or misinformation given in ancient writers may be INTRODU* HON 19 seen in Overberk, .-//.///(•<•• SchrifiqueUen tur Geschichk der bilden- used and of the processes employed in Greek sculpture may seem in place here for the sake of completeness, even it it is nothing more than a repetition of what has already been said in other handbooks.' Wood may have been for a long period almost exclusively the material of (Ireek sculpture; and long after bronze and marble had supplanted it in general use, it still continued to be employed in certain cases. The wooden statues- which Pausanias saw at Corinth, gilded all over except on the face, which was smeared with red paint, were doubtless made in recent times in continuance of an old custom. The climate of (Ireece, unlike that of Egypt, which by its dryni ss his preserved to the present clay many choice specimens of wooden sculpture of far greater antiquity, early de- stroyed those produced in dreece. That wooden sculpture did not die with the introduction of marble and bronze is proved by the fact that in an inscription troin Delos of 2-(> u.c . mention is made of a wooden statue of Dionysos which was fabricated every year for his festival/' The prevalence of sculpture in wood in the earliest times is thought to be proved by the fact that when sculpture in stone came into ie in the seventh century B.C., it not only often showed forms appropriate to wood carving, but also betrayed everywhere the habits and the use of tools such as belonged to workers in wood/ That wood found application even in c .irved relief is seen from the description of the Chest <>t Kypselos. Moreover, since inser- ' I ^r a liricf treatment <>( the - Gardner 1 ! Handbook of C><-fk S(ulptutf, 15 f For Fuller information one may consult Blumner, Teekn trminologii :■> 1 twerbt und KUnstt bti Griechtn und Jfdmern, iii and iv, passim, 1 .r the ate "f the- word {6aeoc in Pauaaniai as al«.i\^ meaning a ■•n ttatut . •■ ■ Frazet on Paus. 1 . ;. 5. •B.C.//. 14 '' 4 I ot \ili' na, see 1 k. 17 (1891), 304 f, and later, tu bin * ■■" ■ PAthhus, 13 f. 6 1'auN. 5. 17. 5 f 20 GREEK SCULPTURE tion of gold and ivory was practised, we have here the beginning of chryselephantine statuary. Wooden sculpture was doubtless somewhat roughly hewn, since the paint was laid on thickly. In the case of the statue from Delos above referred to, the painter was paid as much as the carver. Since, however, we have no re- mains whatever of this wooden sculpture, we may turn to sculpture in stone and bronze. The mention of Greek sculpture calls up in the minds of most people a picture of white marble, whose effect is due only to form, and which leaves on the beholder an impression of coldness. But bronze was in the great days of art much the most common material. Pliny, after giving a list of five great sculptors, includ- ing Pythagoras, 1 brings in Praxiteles by way of supplement, re- marking that he worked mostly in marble. Praxiteles did work somewhat in bronze. Pheidias and Skopas divided their attention between the two materials, working less in bronze toward the end of their careers. But Lysippos, Polykleitos, and Myron worked almost exclusively in bronze. Not only athletic statues but most of the other figures which thronged the great centres of athletics and religion, standing out in the open air, were of bronze. This composition, made of copper and tin, mixed in varying pro- portions, with, it is said, occasional additions of the more pre- cious metals, gold and silver, had many varieties, which were named from the places where they were manufactured, rather than from the mines whence their constituents were obtained. Corin- thian bronze was the general favourite ; and according to Pausanias got its peculiar quality from being dipped when red-hot into the fountain Peirene. 2 Delian and Aeginetan were said to be the favourites of Myron and Polykleitos respectively. Argive and Corinthian reliefs, so frequent in the archaic period, were pre- sumably of Corinthian bronze. But no analysis has been able to establish local distinctions. Chalkis, which is said to have got its name from its great copper industries, is strangely omitted in the reports concerning localities where bronze was produced; 1 Pliny, 34. 69. 2 Paus. 2. 3. 3. INTRODUCTION 21 and copper mines in its neighbourhood do not seem to be well authenticated. 1 Cyprus was always the great copper-producing region most accessible to the Greeks. Besides the archaic re- liefs just mentioned, very primitive bronze statuettes have been found in many parts of Greece, and notably at Olympia, which go back to a very early period. Towards the end of the seventh century there was a great advance in the skill of bronze workers. Out of this fact probably came the story that the Simians, Theodoros and Rhoikos, who may be put in the beginning of the next century, invented bronze-casting. Since, however, bronze-casting was known in Egypt many cen- turies before this time, the story may be interpreted to mean that these Samians learned casting from Egypt, perhaps through the Samian colony at Naukratis," and transmitted it to Samos. At any rate, at about this time bronze statuary in the true sense appeared all over Greece. A statue of Zeus, which was put to- gether by hammering plates of bronze into shape and then rivet- ing them, was long shown at Sparta, purporting to have been made by Klearchos of Rhegion, who was probably a contemporary of the two Simians. If this was not an anachronism to start with, it must at least soon have become a curiosity. Bronze statues, which now came into vogue, were sometimes, though rarely, cast solid. Hut as this consumed a great amount ol metal, which, on account of the difficulty of obtaining it, was always of considerable value, it was the custom to make the statue hollow and as thin as was consistent with durability. Of the vari- ous methods adopted, the simplest was the cire perdue. Over a fireproof core large enough nearly to till the completed statue a Coating of wax, as thick as the intended casting, was carefully laid. This was modelled in detail (which because of its pliable surface was easy), and had th( C of the statue that was to be; f.r over it was laid another fireproof coating which we may 1 all the mould, the first layers being ■>! very tine clay laid on with a 1 1 1 named up in Blfimner, iv. 38. ■ Nauk rt it 59. 22 GREEK SCULPTURE brush ; and then followed coarser clay. When the molten metal was poured in between these fireproof walls, it melted out the wax and took its place ; and the statue was done. Sometimes, perhaps, as at the present time, the core itself was carefully wrought, and a mould was made upon it of the thickness of the intended statue. The mould was then taken off in pieces and a thin coating of wax pressed into its hollows. Then a new core was made ; the hollow pieces of the mould, with the wax inside, being laid upon it. The wax was then driven out by the molten bronze which came in between the core and the mould. 1 The mould, being in two or more pieces, could be used repeatedly. The core in each case could be broken up, and as many statues as were required could be made from the same mould. But in the best days of Greece statues were probably seldom duplicated. That statues were cast in parts is evident from a vase of the fifth century, 2 which shows a bronze statue with the head missing and hand and foot hanging on the wall. Eye sockets were left hollow and filled in with glass, metal, etc., the colour of different parts being imitated. 3 Whatever the difference in processes, it is certain that the moderns have never equalled the perfect finish of Greek bronzes. Their beauty, however, did not save them from destruc- tion. The material being valuable to barbarians, especially for weapons, bronzes speedily found their way by the wholesale into crucibles. Side by side with bronze, stone was employed for statues. The natural successor of wood, if wood was really exclusively used in the earliest times, was soft stone ; and, in Attika at least, that material was used before marble. Peiraeus stone, called by the 1 Bliimner, iv. 325 f. That the latter process was the one employed by Polykleitos may be inferred from his well-known saying, XaXewwrarov t6 epyov Srav iv 6wx<- irrj\6s. Of the cire perdzie process he would have said KrjpSs and not 7tt/X6s. 2 Baumeister, Denkm'dler des klassischen Altertums, i. 506, Fig. 547. 3 This is seen in the Charioteer from Delphi (p. 121) and the large bronze from Antikythera (p. 275). INTRODUCTION 23 ancients ruptyos At'#os\ was at hand in abundance, and was gen- erally employed in the architectural sculpture of Athens until well 00 into the sixth century. On this, colour was laid with an unspar- ing hand. The gables of temples erected on the Akropolis before the time of PeisistratOS are the most notable examples of this practice. But when with improved tools it was once found possible to carve marble, this easily and quickly supplanted all other kinds of stone. Long before Athens had taken this step the islanders, making a virtue of necessity, had made use of the harder material. But because marble statues are now more abundant than others, one must not forget that this was not the case from the beginning. Marble statues have survived in much larger quantity than those made of bronze, because marble was less valuable to the barbarians, who melted up masterpieces in bronze to make weapons and other implements. Hence many a famous original of bronze is repre- sented to us only by some 1 opy or series of copies in marble ; for example, the Diadumenos of Polykleitos. But many good marble statues found their way into lime-kilns simply because they lay conveniently near at hand. N xos and Paros, lying side by side in the middle of the in, had excellent kinds of marble. Paros had one quarry running deep into the heart of Mt. Marpessa, from which came the marble which most sculptors preferred. It was called fychnites because, it is said, it was quarried by the light of lamps (Au^os). The other quarries of ParOS yielded marble much like that of other islands, notably Naxos. Hence, the non-committal name of island marble is much in vogue. N ixian marble shaped by Naxian sculptors is found not only in Naxos, but in regions as remote rnoSj Boeotia, and Akarnania. 1 Naxian Bculptora were active m Delos, makii issal statues in Naxian marble in the early part of the sixth 1 entury. In this century the < Ihian artists brought Parian marble to honour ovei a «ride area. The large numbei oi female statues set up on the Vkropolis at Athens at this tune were 1 M.uiiM.ri.uiist, in Atk. Mitt 1 1892), 37 £ 24 GREEK SCULPTURE of Parian marble. Reliefs, however, of the same time were usu- ally made of Pentelic marble. In the Calf-bearer, Hymettos marble was used. This was poor bluish marble, and never gained much favour. In Attika during the fifth century Pentelic marble became the general favourite. The Parthenon sculptures, as well as the building itself, were made of it. But in the next century came a return to Parian ; Praxiteles would use no other. Although it was coarser grained than Pentelic, it had a warm semi-transparent surface. But even one who has a good acquaintance with marbles cannot always readily distinguish between these two. The only marble quarries known in the Peloponnesos are those at Doliana, near Tegea. Doliana marble was poor and dull com- pared with Pentelic and Parian ; but sculptors in that part of Greece often preferred to put up with this poorer marble rather than trans- port their material over a long distance. The figures from the gable of the great temple at Tegea are made of it, although created by Skopas, who preferred Parian. The Romans in Greece showed a strong preference for Parian marble, most of the sculpture found in the excavations at Corinth from the later city, for example, being Parian. The Romans were also very fond of various red and green marbles, found in different parts of Greece ; green (cipollino), notably but not exclusively in Thessaly and Euboea, and red (rosso antico) in Mt. Tainaron to the south of Sparta. The processes and tools of the sculptor in marble were not unlike those in vogue to-day. A pointed chisel for the first rough work ; then edged chisels, toothed chisels, and rasps. 1 It is often noticed as a sign of the lack of perfect finish that traces of the toothed chisel have not been entirely obliterated. The use of the drill is said by Pausanias to have been introduced by Kallimachos ; but this is as far from the truth as possible, inasmuch as traces of the use of the drill go back at least to the pediment sculptures at Olympia and even to those of Aegina. There are unfinished statues in various stages of incompleteness. 1 For the forms in use among modern marble workers, see Blumner, iii. 194, Fig. 24. INTRODUCTION 25 ( me of these, 1 from the island of Naxos, is a good example of pro- cesses. It has hardly gone beyond the stage where the pointed chisel or punch was the only instrument required. It appears that the workman drove his punch with great freedom by blows of the hammer, unless it was perhaps a pointed hammer that did most of the work. He seems to have first sketched out on a rectangular block the breadth and thickness of his figure by drawing hues on the front and one of the sides, and to have started from these lines to cut straight into the block. But for some reason he stopped when he had got just far enough to produce some semblance to a human figure. There was found at the new English quarries near Ikaria a block like the one from Naxos, except that the forming process had not proceeded quite so fir. It had gone just far enough to allow us to recognize a figure of the "archaic Apollo" type, a male figure with the left foot advanced ami arms pressed close to the hips. The use of a (lay model in making such early statues is hardly supposable; but there have been observed on some unfinished statues of a later date, usually copies, puntelli* which imply working from such a model. There is, for example, one on the Massimi I liskobolos in the hair just above the forehead. • it i> probable that in the fifth century there were sculptors with methods like those of Michelangelo, who attacked his block with mallet and chisel, making the chips tlv as if he felt that there am- imprisoned in it and that he musl set it free Perhaps this was the common practice. The sculptor had more opportu- nity then to be "nil- perfectly familiar with living models than the sculptor of to-day. Hence the confidence and inspiration of the (ireek. 1 Gardner, Creek Sculpture, p. 21. ihould striitly designate tin- nails which were employed to transfer Hunts from the clay model to the marble statue. Hut tin- word is lo *ely used to d< also the knob thai is left around irfa ■• is chiselled clown, These kin. lis remain, <>( C"ur-.< , ' ni. have ti"t received the finishing tout b. 26 GREEK SCULPTURE PAINTING APPLIED TO SCULPTURE The question that was seriously discussed less than half a cen- tury ago, whether Greek statues were painted, has now been re- placed by another form of the question, viz. how they were painted. In the case of wooden statues ($6ava) there could never be any doubt. The sculptures in soft limestone (poros) found on the Akropolis at Athens, dating back to the seventh century, are seen to be as thoroughly painted as any wooden statues could be. The gable groups, including the famous " Blue- beard " group from the oldest Athena temple, by no means the oldest of the series, have the paint laid on, as it were, with a trowel. The original base material was entirely hidden by the coating. The favourite colours were red and blue. Since the back- ground of the gables was, certainly in the case of the Hydra gable, and probably in the others also, of a neutral tint, the groups stood out in strong relief, like figures on black-figured vases. In the course of the sixth century came, with the introduction of red- figured vases, an inversion of this principle. Not only on vases did light figures appear on a dark background, but gable figures also stood out in the same manner. In the great period of art inaugurated by Peisistratos and his sons, when Parian and other island marble succeeded poros, paint was still applied on the figures, but with considerable reserve and discretion. Some regard was given to the better material. In the great gable of the enlarged Athena temple, in which a battle of gods and giants was represented, the bodies had none of the old bizarre colouring. It is only the accessories, the borders of garments, the hair, eyes, lips, that are so accentuated. This is true also of the large series of female votive statues. The ex- cavations on the Athenian Akropolis in 1 886-1 890 put a stop to all questioning of the principle of painting marble statues in the archaic period, down even to the Persian War. Here some were inclined to throw up breastworks and say, " Thus far and no farther." The idea of Pheidias painting his statues was repug- INTRODUCTION 27 nam ; and if colouring was to be applied, why should one choose the finest kinds of Pentelic and even the transparent Parian marble? Bat strong battalions of evidence have carried the whole line of resistance before them. No one can read a summing up of the evidence without surrendering to it absolutely and com- pleted}-. 1 Even the nude parts were not left white and cold. Praxiteles said that his best statues were those that were touched up by the painter Nikias. This can hardly be taken to mean anything else than that the whole surface was covered by some sort of unobtrusive colouring ; and the investigation of the statues themselves shows abundant corroboration of the fact. The ancients seem to have felt that pure white marble was too bril- liant, and needed toning down. This toning was doubtless that referred to in several ancient writers as ganosis. The application of stronger and weaker shades of colour continued down into late Roman tim But after having ai repted the fai t. one may still feel less respect for Greek taste than he had before this knowledge was thrust upon him. The horrible cheapness of a waxwork collection will rise before one's vision. But in this matter we must trust to the taste of a people that has given such abundant proof of correct feeling. We must also remember that the great gold and ivory statues of Pheidias, the perfect flower of Creek statuary, afforded the • p.wning example of the application of colour. If, however, one should reply. " I low do I know that we should have approved of these statues?" we can refer him to the Alexander sarcophagus, which silences every suspicion of bad taste. 1 he history of Greek sculpture is so long a story that it must be divided into chapters. These chapters are naturally limited by chronological lines. It will, however, be well understood that in this constantly flowing stream no hard and fast dividing lines can tablished. Perhaps no better division < an be made than the foUowin not aim al fine distin< tion llignon, I.a poh'chromie dan rue 2 It must t>c frankly I thai we have nothing ol importance t" iill 28 GREEK SCULPTURE 1. Oldest Period. From the earliest undatable beginnings to 776 B.C. (First Olympiad.) 2. Archaic Period. From 776 to 480 B.C. (Persian War.) (a) 776-540 B.C. (6) 540-480 B.C. 3. Blooming Period. Fifth Century. (a) Period of Transition, 480-450 B.C. (£) Bloom, 450-400 B.C. 4. Second Bloom. Fourth Century. 5. Hellenistic Period. From the death of Alexander to the Destruction of Corinth, 323-146 B.C. Classified as to its purposes sculpture maybe divided as follows : — 1. Architectural Sculpture. The most imposing use is in gables. Metopes and friezes were also important decorations. Single figures and even groups were placed oh the apex of the gable, on the corners of the building, or on both. 2. Cultus Statues. Every temple naturally contained one such statue. At Mantineia there was a group of Leto and her children. From the temple of Despoina, at Lykosura, we have considerable remains of such a group preserved. 3. Votive Offerings, anathemata. The archaic statues from the Athenian Akropolis, mostly female, the vast quantity of athletic statues at Olympia, Delphi, and other athletic centres, are cases in point. The donor sometimes wished to represent himself as ever standing in the presence of the divinity. He would therefore set up a figure of the divinity, that the god or goddess might take delight in it. This was called an ayaX/jLa. Votive reliefs form a large part of this class. 4. Grave Monuments. These in early times were composed of a single figure, usually in relief, e.g. the Aristion stele. After the sixth century, groups became more and more common in the reliefs. In the fifth and fourth centuries there were at Athens the great void between the Mycenaean civilization, which came to an end about 1 100 B.C., and that of the rugged Greeks who climbed by slow degrees to power and culture. INTRODUCTION 29 very fine monuments of this class. It is sometimes difficult to distinguish sepulchral from votive reliefs. The relief from Chrys- apha ne.tr Spirt. 1, for example, might be assigned to either class. 5. Honorary Statins. Examples of these occur from Har- moilios and Aristogeiton to Demetrios of Phaleron, who is said to have had over three hundred statues erected to him in his short ne of about a year at Athens. The Diadochoi and the Caesars took tip this custom with enthusiasm. 6. Simply Ornamental Sculpture. This class was especially popular in the Hellenistic period. See Schreiber, HettenisHsche ReUefbilder. CHAPTER I OLDEST OR MYCENAEAN PERIOD Histories of Greek art written a generation ago now look obsolete, mainly, but not entirely, because of the accumulation of new material for this period. One had always read, in the Homeric poems, of wonderful pieces of art, — the Shield of Achilles, for ex- ample, and the palaces of Menelaos and Alkinoos. But since one heard also of gold and silver dogs that guarded the palace of Alkinoos and golden boys holding candlesticks before the palace, it was, naturally enough, customary to regard these objects as existing only in the fancy of the poet. The wonder-working Daidalos went into the same category. One substantial memorial of the oldest period, however, survived : two rampant lionesses 1 over the main gate of the citadel of My- cenae (Fig. i). But they led to nothing; they were solitary. In 1876 Schliemann passed through the gate, and discovered in an ancient cemetery traces of an imposing civilization which scien- tific archaeologists are still studying. He fondly thought that he had discovered the body of Agamemnon, and was at first derided by scholars for supposing that he had found anything so old as that. But it has been proved that this cemetery is much older than the time of Agamemnon, and that the greatness and brilliancy of this period was only inadequately set forth in the Homeric poems. Although immediately after the excavation of this ceme- tery traces of the same civilization kept coming to light all over the Aegean basin, nowhere else in that area was such a quantity of objects of art in gold of the period unearthed. Substantial masks beaten into such shape as to represent roughly the features of the dead whose faces they covered, diadems, bracelets, goblets, 1 They may be lionesses. The heads are gone. 3° 01 I'l -I OR MM EN MAN PERIOD 31 make only a small part of the inventory. The contents of the six pit graves mike it quite certain that considerable intervals of time m M Sv ^jfl ■J. • ^EBflife ?» Fie. 1 1 laie, « nil I ai Mj 1 cnae. ■ evened between su< 1 essivi • . and also between su< 1 essive ils in any our of the K r ' lw '^- The whole period of interments could hardly be less than hall a century, and was probably much 32 GREEK SCULPTURE longer. No tradition of these buried dead has come down to us. The great beehive tombs, later than these pit graves, and the stateliest buildings of the period, would doubtless have afforded a higher estimate of the art of Mycenae had they not long ago been rifled of their contents. In them we should probably have found the bodies of the Pelopid monarchs, with treasures of art appro- priate to the mightiest dynasty of Mycenae. Fig. 2. — Vaphio Cups. (Athens, National Museum.) From the place where the first great discovery of objects of art of this period was made it has been customary to call them all " Mycenaean," whether found in Attika, Boeotia, or Thessaly. The choicest gold objects of the period hitherto discovered in Greece come not from Mycenae itself but from a beehive tomb at Vaphio, the ancient Amyklai, near Sparta. From a grave in the floor of this tomb came in 1889 two gold cups (Fig. 2), placed at the right and left hands of a body already decayed. These cups are ornamented in repousse^ on a band nearly three inches broad, the figures being about half an inch high. The ornament is on an outer cup, over which an inner lining is folded at the upper edge. A single handle at the top is fastened by three rivets. OLDEST OR MYCENAEAN PERIOD 33 The decoration gives two companion scenes. One is a bull-hunt in a wooded country. Two hunters, dressed in the usual loin- cloth and pointed shoes, .ire being roughly treated by a bull which has already tossed one hunter, now falling to the ground, and is in the act of goring the second to death. To the right of this group is a bull caught in a net bound to two trees, one of which he has wrenched from the groUnd by his struggles. In his contorted po- sition he seems about to perform the impossible feat of bringing his hind legs down astride of his horns. It is quite evident that he will escape. The third bull, free from all trammels, rushes off to the right through trees or what may be taken to be trees. The two trees to which the net is bound might from their relative si/e properly be called bushes ; and the bull might be supposed to uproot them easily. In fact, the trees were probably put in as space-fillers, and their si/e is regulated by this principle. A throb- bing life and energy pervades the scene. We see the fierce fight, the breaking of bonds, the delight of freedom achieved. Here the brute triumphs over man. The other cup seems to give the sequel. A solitary man is in possession of the field. The beasts have sub- mitted to the long-haired Achaean. The bull at the left has been recalcitrant, and one of his hind legs is therefore tied with a rope, while he bellows out his impotent rage. In the centre, two bulls are putting their heads together, one of them lowing, as if atented, while the bull on the extreme right appears per- fectly tamed. Man's conquest of the animal is complete. Man is supreme. What life and vigour palpitates in these figures ! This it borrowed art. It is taken Straight from nature. It tells in the simplest way a clear story which cannot fail to interest. In the following year the lucky finder of the cups, Tsountas, i 1 in another beehive tomb on the western side ofTaygetos a lette 1 which show-, more clearly than smaller objects the usual M\< enaean male dn-^s, a simple k>in-< loth. .<• bronze - from the pit gi ives of My< enae are beautifully inlaid with figui old. The 1" t example is a lion- 'I M Dttt, The Mycenaeiin Ay/, PL 17. 34 GREEK SCULPTURE hunt 1 in which every shade of victory and defeat is depicted. There are also fierce scenes of warfare in intaglio on seal rings. In contrast to these splendid creations of the goldsmith's art are the works of the sculptors in stone, who wrought at Mycenae. The lionesses over the great gate, to be sure, even without their heads deserve admiration, although they are merely a heraldic decoration. The three carved slabs, however, erected over the pit graves, which are well enough preserved for us to form a judge- ment, seem to betray an absolute lack of feeling for art. They were well adapted to make Schliemann's foolish critics think that he had broken into a Gothic cemetery of 300 a d. But the stately lionesses, 2 despite the loss of their heads, perhaps from that very loss, inasmuch as imagination here holds sway, are held to be fully worthy to represent the art of the mightiest line of kings that reigned within those walls. In the museum of Candia in Crete is a chariot 3 in relief which is far superior to the rude grave-stones found at Mycenae. The chariot has about the same pattern, showing the same small box and the same four-spoked wheel. But the horses and the warriors equipped with round shields, ready to mount the master's chariot, are vastly superior to the rude designs on the slabs at Mycenae, where the chariot box seems perched on the rim of the wheel, and the single horse is a monstrosity. Here the horses and the dog under them, as well as the men, are cut in excellent relief and are full of life. Instead of a single horse such as appears on the Mycenaean slab we have a clear indication of at least two horses. The art of Mycenae probably lagged behind that of Crete by a century or more, and the difference between them is shown by the breath of life in the Cretan relief and the clumsy silhouette at Mycenae. By several " island gems," found in Crete and elsewhere, on which lions and other animals, some of them grotesque, are 1 Tsountas and Manatt, Fig. 89. 2 The material is a very hard limestone (anhydrite). 3 Von Mach, 5. OLDEST OR MYCENAEAN PERIOD a arranged in an heraldic attitude, with their fore paws on a cube hollowed out at the side, the Mycenaean group is taken out of its former isolation. 1 Lions in Phrygia grouped in the same way are not, as was once supposed,-' prototypes of the Mycenaean group, but are much later. < )n a wall of a room in the palace at Tiryns was found a paint- of a bull galloping to the Left with a man holding on to his horns and swept along, with one foot touching lightly the bull's back and the other swung aloft. The execution is poor, the result of several trials. Three attempts are clearly seen in the paining of the front legs and the tail. The painter was a bungler, but he doubtless had a good prototype in mind. The scene is no longer a puzzle. Since 1S98 excavations in Crete have shown that this bull-bait- ing scene was a favourite subject there, not only in tcoes but in sculpture. An ivory statuette eleven and one-half inches hi| from Knossos, doubtless formed a part of such a group ( Pieces :1 other similar figures were found with it. The attitude of this very slender figure suggests that it was darting through the '/.//.v. 21 1 1 . ,38, pp. 159 161. In the Mycenaean )»r{ Thera, found in now, like the greater part of the V illos, in the museum at Athens ( 1 ig. In it the characteristu s of the type are most sharply expressed. These are : — i. Long hair fallingdown over the back. 2. Shoulders broad in propor- tion to the hips. ; Armspr stiffly against the thighs. 4. Hands closed not in the form of a list, hut with the thumb facing to the front touching the tip of the in- dex finger, which ]> treated as if it hail no joint. The whole hand is thus put (jut of joint. 5. Left foot advanced. Hut in all cases where feel are preserved both soles are pressed flal against the ground. Sini e we find these five 1 hanu teristics in I jUian Statues, there serins to be little doubt that the type wis borrowed m some lion: Kg) pi. < M \l\. eii.ie in infliiciH e there is not .1 trace. The numerous mem ■ .1 this < lass tall mto two groups accord I i< ;. ,. — Apollo 1 il 1 (Athens, National Museum.) I tion.il Museum.^ 4Q GREEK SCULPTURE ing to facial expression. Those with the corners of the mouth turned up, the Apollos of Thera, Melos (Fig. 6), and Tenea (Fig. 7), for example, have been felicitously desig- nated as of the " grinning type," while those from Orchomenos and the precinct of Apollo on Mt. Ptoion, whose mouths are straight slits, have been given the name of " stolid type." There are minor differ- ences in each class. The Apollo of Or- chomenos (Fig. 8) has pecul- iarly square shoulders, while most of the others have them sloping. 1 It is interest- ing to notice the gradual im- provement of this type. The best of the older Fro. 7. — Apollo of Tenea. 1 .1 ' . , V,, , , , examples is the (Munich, Glyptothek.) x one from Tenea. But after that came an improvement amounting to a revolution. Some statues - from Aktion show the outline of the thorax. A headless statue from the Ptoion (Fig.9) has the arms nearly FlG. 8. — Apollo of Orchomenos. (Athens, National Museum.) 1 There is one case of an " Apollo " transferred to relief on a column-drum of the old Artemision at Ephesos. J. H. S. 10 (1889), PI. 3. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 76. THE ARCHAIC lTkluh 4i free. They are bent at the elbow and held only at the wrists by sup- ts two inches long, extending thence to the thighs. Here is all the " promise and p< itency " vi action. 'The revolt has already taken place, but from shyness it has been half hidden. Another Step and we have the smaller A illo from the Ptoion | 1 10) with arms separated from the body. I >wing to that au- dacity they were lost, all ex- cept the stumps. This final step was not taken until about 500 B.C. The whole series stretches over the entire sixth century, and comes down into touch with the Aegina gable groups. We ought not to be- lieve that all these figures rep- resent Apollo, although it is quite likely that some do. The last-mentioned example, found in the precinct sacred to Apollo, and dedicated to him by an inscription, un- doubtedly doe This type received a chei k in the fifth century at the hands of the Argive school, which threw back the left foot and put the weight of the body on the right. Thenceforth the terms 'firm-leg' and 'free-leg' are applil able. /'. Another important group, but with fewer examples, i-> the ling f<" ure draped. The oldest ex imple is tin- Nikan- dre nd at I >eloa in , an almost . but doubtless ii I for 1 female (Fig. n). In fact this is made Pl( ..•). 1 1 11 -,. 1 in mi the I 'i' 'i' in . (Athens, National Museum.) 4 2 GREEK SCULPTURE certain by a boustrophedon Naxian inscription of about 600 B.C. on the left side of the skirt, if we may so call it, telling that Nikan- dre of Naxos dedicated the statue to Artemis. Probably the goddess rather than the donor is here represented. This figure, slightly over life size, is appropriately cata- logued in the Museum at Athens as "No. 1." There is nothing in Greek sculpture more primitive. An ellipsoidal block of Naxian marble, origi- nally rectangular, has by very little carving been brought to a semblance of a human figure. Here, if anywhere, we catch a carver in wood turning his attention to stone, and employ- ing instead of a thick wooden plank a stone block of similar shape. 1 At the bottom, just above the projection that once fitted into a socket on a base, he has cut away a part of the skirt in order to present the feet, two formless stubs. The skirt encloses the legs like a sheath, narrowing upwards slightly until it reaches the waist, which is made by cutting out a little marble between the body and the arms. From the waist there is a broadening out again until at the breast and shoulders the original breadth and thickness of the block is resumed. Only in carving the head was any considerable amount of marble cut away, and there only at the top. The face is now badly battered and worn, prob- ably because it had long been walked upon. Only the carefully elaborated hair falling down the back has been preserved perfectly. 1 Unless, indeed, the shape of the figure is due to the shape of the stone as it came from the quarry. FIG. 10. — Youth from the Ptoion. (Athens, National Museum.) Till: ARCHAIC PERIOD 43 When the statue was first set up, it doubtless made a better impression than now. It was liberally painted. Besides some neutral tint spread over the whole surface, traces of a meander pattern on the girdle are still lc. Two or three similar bands running horizontally around the skirt were once traceable. Holes bored horizontally through the clenched hands from front to rear show that some adorn- ment or perhaps attributes were held in them. 1 Strings of beads have been suggested. I-ess probable seems th< stionofbow and arrow for the archer goddess. This figure did not stand alone at Delos. Four similar statues less well preserved are catalogued in the museum at Mykonos, one with a better preserved head. From the Ptoion comes the lower left-hand part of a figure* with an archaic inscription, ami with the corners not rounded off. From the same place comes also a statuette 1 in the shape of a thick re< tangular block with its conui- lly shaved down. The arms are abnormally long and not detached from the j ; two lock-, fall over each shoulder to the front. The breast i-i fuller than others of the period. I infortunately broken away. I • an the same pla< e « oraes the head of a statue bn f at the neck which seems to show the carver in wood trying his hand in stone (1 - 12). From Eleusis comes a head- bout a foot high, like the former, with patches ,,i ■ int still on it. but in this we have a distinct advance. Not onlv is there more human form, but more attention i^ given In ;. 11. — Statue dedicated by Ni- Icandre. i Athens, National Mu- seum.) 1 U i I ; I M ■ ii . '. . i - ■ I, l 1. -, i and i .'. 44 GREEK SCULPTURE to the garments and hair. It points forward to the "Maidens" of Delos and of the Athenian Akropolis ; but it is not one of that company. It stands ready, however, to join hands with them ; and from this point onward there are not lack- ing links in the chain that binds the formless statue dedicated by Nikandre to the radiant creatures of Pheidias and Praxiteles. c. Seated female and male type draped. The Athenian museum contains two very old ex- amples of this type. The first, 1 of Doliana marble, is headless, badly worn from having long been used as a horse-block at Frankovrysi (Asea). The statue is " all one " with its chair, so that one can hardly think of it as having the power of rising. The arms are, as it were, glued both to the body and the chair. It is sexless, unless the inscription " Agemo " or " Ageso " makes it feminine. The sec- ond figure, 2 in poros, was found on the road from Argos to Tripoli and shows an advance in this type. Instead of having the arms glued to the chair and the body, the elbows are thrown forward so as to give the impression that it is ready to rise from the chair and act. Strikingly like it is another poros figure 3 from Eleutherna in Crete. Both are extremely Egyptian in appear- 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 144. 2 B. C. II. 14 (1890), PI. ii. 3 A'evue Arch. 21 (1893), PI. 3 and 4. Fig. 12. Head from the Ptoion. National Museum.) (Athens, THE AROIAK: I'Ekloh 45 ance. Fragments of a similar figure in l'entelic marble were found near the Hipylon gate at Athens. Several of the figures which once lined the Sacred Way leading from the harbour, Panormos, to the Branchidae temple belong in this series ( l-'ig. 13). < >ne of the oldest ' is inscribed with the name Chares, who was ruler of a neighbouring city, Teichioussa. Here the man is, as it were, grown to the (hair, and both together form a three- quarter section of a cube, thus [ L, 2 The development of this type also may be traced. Two female ues, one from the Sacred Way and the other frr m Miletos it- self, take us along to rly the same stage as the seated Athena from the Athenian Akro- polis, who, however, makes a step farther than they, in that she, with her right foot drawn back, seems about to rise and act. This line if followed out would be seen to end in the seated figures on the Parthenon frieze and in the gables. This constitutes one great charm in the study of archai< Greek sculpture The 11 the old typ' on step by step, and we view the 1 Newton, . .-/ Halicarna /<>, PL 71; Brunn-Bruckmann, N •. 142 // ; Von Ma< b, v • \ nnaller figure of the Mine type wai t" be ieen, May, 1903, lying in • t)i<- bridle [>at)i leading I r« -m MiletOl to the temple. FlG. 13.- Seated Statue from Branchidae. (British Museum.) 46 GREEK SCULPTURE Apollo of Thera, the statue dedicated by Nikandre, and Chares as respected ancestors of a mighty line. Before 540 b.c. an enormous amount of sculpture had been pro- duced, a fair proportion of which has been preserved. Had we as many originals of the period of bloom, how fortunate we should be ! Our authorities tell of Dipoinos and Skyllis, sons or pupils of Dai- dalos, and of Smilis of Aegina, of Klearchos of Rhegion, of Endoios of Athens, pupils of Daidalos. While we have to treat Daidalos as mythical, it is specifically recorded of his sons, Dipoinos and Skyllis, that they had works scattered all over the Peloponnesos, at Sikyon, Argos, Kleonai, and Tiryns, and even in Epirus at Ambrakia. It is also reported that they founded a school in Sparta with Tektaios and Angelion as representatives. We hear of an Argive school represented by Eutelidas and Chrysothemis. Smilis also appears to have had a real career, though perhaps not in Aegina. In the same category fall Dontas and Dorykleidas, as well as Gitiadas, at Sparta. Even more real seem Telekles, Theodoros, and Rhoi- kos of Samos as well as Glaukos of Chios. But it is only when we come to the famous sculptor-family of Chios, of which Archermos is the most important, that we seem to touch firm ground and to find a work of art that we can ascribe to a sculptor of this time. It seems a waste of words to discuss sculptors who have left no works ; but there were two examples of the art of this period, both vanished, which can hardly be passed over in any history. These are the Chest of Kypselos and the Throne of Apollo, falling under the head of decorative art. The former was seen by Pausanias 1 in the opisthodomos of the temple of Hera at Olympia. It -need not be supposed that this was the veritable chest hi which Kypselos, the father of Periander, was concealed to save his life. It is not unlikely that Periander himself, Corinth's most powerful sovereign, had this token set up as an offering not long before his death, in 585 B.C. It was no ordinary chest, but a gift fit for the gods, and as such, it was given a place in the temple. It was of cedar, and the figures on it were carved partly out of the wood, partly in ivory set 1 Paus. 5. 17. 5 ff. Tin: ARCHAIC PERIOD 47 into the wood, and partly in gold. It was an early case of chrys- elephantine work. The arrangement of the figures was like that Been on the old Corinthian vases contemporary with it. They were deployed in a series of hands. The very scenes, too, are some- times paralleled on the vases. Out of thirty-three all hut two or three are mythological. Some old Argive or Corinthian bronze reliefs 1 may aid us in representing to ourselves their appearance. Inasmuch as the chest was *et up against a wall it is supposed that the abundant decoration was confined to the front side or to that and the two ends The other work, the Throne of Apollo at Amyklai, also enjoyed great renown ; and Pausanias' devotes to it also a detailed descrip- tion. Apollo was not sitting on the throne, but was standing on it, and probably enclosed by it on three sides. A coin of Sparta 4 represents the statue. The body is enclosed in a sheath, and for this reason the god was hardly able to sit down on his throne. He held a bow in his left hand and a spear in his right. The statue, forty-five feet high, was probably much older than the throne, which built for it by Bathykles of Magnesia on the Maeander, a sculp- tor of great repute at that time. As long as Croesus held sway on the coast of Asia Minor life tolerable to Creek artists; but when Cyrus broke the Lydian vet, about 546 i:.t ., the storm burst upon the Asiatic Creeks. :hen no more call for artists. Bathykles' migration to Sparta probably took place at that time, although it is possible that the art-loving < IroeSUS may have sent him earlier to Sparta, to te with which he was on friendly terms. The restoration of the throne built by him is, even in imagination, much more Hi^rvin. ( Sardner, 63. - I be beat representation "i the order "f n enei is that of H. Stuarl Jonea, /.//. 14(1894 7. Fuxtwangler, Afeisferwerke, 723 f., put* tli.- work s'-vi-ral decades later snd denies all connection with the Pi ... ;. . - ■, (f. 110. 4 8 GREEK SCULPTURE difficult than the restoration of the Chest of Kypselos. 1 A thorough excavation of a mound, at the edge of which a part of a half ellip- tical base was uncovered, about 1900, has afforded valuable infor- mation. The throne was placed on the grave of Hyakinthos, which dates back to remote antiquity. Mycenaean objects were found all about the mound. It is likely that bronze plates pre- served the wooden structure down to the time of Pausanias. Assos. — It is a relief to turn to works which have actually sur- vived. At Assos, which from a commanding position looks south- Fig. 14. — Reliefs from Assos. (Louvre.) ward towards Lesbos, considerable sculptured remains of an early temple were discovered, the greater part of which was brought to the Louvre in 1838. Some important additions were made by the American excavations conducted by J. T. Clarke in 1881. 2 Two 1 It has been attempted by Furtwangler, Meisterwerke, 689 ff., Fig. 135, but the result is not particularly impressive or convincing. Furtwangler's claim that Bathykles belonged to the Samian school may be allowed. This work was a greater undertaking than the Kypselos chest. 2 J. T. Clarke, Report on the Investigations at Assos, i, Boston, 1882; ii, New York, 1898. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 49 sphinxes faring each other were probably placed over the main entrance of the temple. Several metopes may be passed over as of minor importance. But the band of figures (Fig. 14), which singularly enough was carved on the architrave, affords great in- terest. Among the remains still preserved Herakles is conspicuous, combating a Centaur and a Triton. There is also a large banquet scene. These figures carved on blocks of very dark trachyte must have appeared very sombre. 1 The sculpture appears very archaic, especially the Centaur slab, where the long slender animal body is a mere appendage to the human body which seems embarrassed by it. In the Triton scene and in the banquet scene the principle of isokephaly is emphasized. The figures standing upright are as pygmies compared to the reclin- ing feasters and the struggling Herakles. This does not, however, seem out of place in the case of Herakles, since it lifts him above mere human beings. But it may be doubted whether the banquet- ers are more than ordinary mortals. Here, certainly, is a robust art,— the Herakles reminding us of the same intensity of struggle in the similar group from the oldest Athena temple at Athens. The carving of reliefs on the architrave may be a suggestion of the time when the architrave was really a wooden beam, which was then cased with bronze relief. We doubtless have here Ionic art, and although this is a case of provincial art lagging behind that of the great centres, we cannot reasonably put it later than 540 B.C. Miletos. — But Miletos, the great Ionian metropolis, has some- what more to show from her wreck. Besides the survivors of the line of statues, male and female, along the Sacred Way to the ichidae temple two male heads somewhat worn were found ■ the site of the temple itself, one of which is DOW in the llritish Museum," the other in the museum at Constantinople. 3 Their ably applied on a thin coat "f itua 0. - 1 ;„-■/, Hi Part dam PantiquUi, viii. 281, Fig. 113. • PerroW bipiez, t.'iJ., Fig. 11.}. This bead may come from Branchidae, Sec /.'. C.H.I 1884), 331 ff. 5<> GREEK SCULPTURE coiffure differs slightly, that of the Constantinople head being more elaborate ; but the features are strikingly alike. Samothrake. — Of the islands of the Aegean, Samothrake affords a relief 1 representing Agamemnon seated on a stool and behind him Talthybios and Epeios, the maker of the wooden horse, each identi- fied by an inscription ; Talthybios also by his herald's staff. To the right, considerably mutilated, is a dragon with wide-open mouth. The great coil is a "sort of horn attached to the back of his head. The lower border of the relief is a guilloche pattern, while the upper border appears to consist of alternate forms of the lotus as seen in profile and from above. 2 The relief is very flat. The gar- ment of Agamemnon is not noted on his formless body ; on the others it is indicated, as on the statue of Chares (p. 45), by a few incised lines. We seem to have a scene in painting transferred to relief. Samothrake being a colony of Samos, we have here Ionic art. The plaque appears to be one of a series belonging, perhaps, to a throne or to a statue base. Naxos. — Naxian sculptors at this time seem to have devoted themselves to making " Apollo " statues, mostly colossi, for the neighbouring Delos. Of two such colossal statues 3 in Naxian mar- ble, one lies broken in the sanctuary, and of the other we have only the inscribed base. Two similar colossi 4 probably destined for Delos are in Naxos itself. When the tyrant Lygdamis was overthrown, the artistic activity of Naxos seems to have been checked. Chios. — A statue which has made as much stir as any work of this period, though found in Delos, is probably a specimen of Chian art. Delos was a common centre for votive offerings of all the Greeks, but never had a school. Literary tradition assures us that Chios had besides Glaukos, the worker in bronze, a family of 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 231 a. 2 Analogous forms appear on the base from Lambrika (Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 66 b) . 3 B. C. H. 17 (1893), PI. 5 ; ibid., 12 (1888), PI. 13. 4 Ross, Reisen auf den griechischen Inseln, i. 39 ff. Tin; ARCHAIC PKKIOH 51 Bculptors of uh Birds, 573. I hc/i. '/nt, 40 I i Ss -' , ;.'i Fig. 15. — Winged Nike. (Athens, National Museum.) 5 2 GREEK SCULPTURE right arm (restored) extended in the direction of her flight, the left (also restored) pressed against her left hip. She is completely clothed, although signs of clothing from the waist upward are lacking, except that the pattern of the painted garment has left its traces in the better preservation of the surface. The skirt, which is wrought out in marble, extended downward between the feet and formed the actual connection with the base. 1 Down to the girdle, which bore a meander pattern, everything is calculated for a front view ; but with no mediation, all below that is arranged for a side view, a common practice in archaic art. The figure, with all its paint still fresh upon it, its diadem adorned with metallic rosettes, its necklace and ear-rings shimmering, and set up on the painted Ionic capital of a short column, or serving as an akro- terion of some building, thus appearing to fly through space, must have been a striking one. It was the beginning of a series which had for its culmination the Nike of Samothrake. If the connection of the figure with the base were certain, it would have to be placed near the beginning of the sixth century B.C., at the same time with the statue dedicated by Nikandre which at once conveys the impression of greater antiquity. In the present case, however, we are dealing with a bold innovation which might have been made within a few decades of Nikandre's statue or the Apollo of Thera. Some authorities see in its features a striking resemblance to the latter. Half a century might be supposed to elapse between it and the "Maidens" of the Akropolis. The connection of the statue with the base has been disputed by B. Sauer, 2 who maintains : (a) That the breadth of the socket on the top of the base is too great for such a figure as the Nike. The garment would have to spread out abnormally to fill the socket, and no sculptor would have chosen for a thin figure like this a block of valuable Parian marble so thick as 1 This is made certain by archaic bronzes representing similar archaic Nikes. Cp. De Ridder, Catalogue des bronzes trouves sur VAcropole d'Athenes, Nos. 799-814. a Ath. Mitt. 16 (1891), 182. THE ARCHAIC PKRIoh 53 to require the cutting away of two thirds of it as waste. (6) That the shape of the socket is appropriate only to a squatting animal, which in this case was probably a sphinx. 15ut so strong has become the conviction that we have here the art of Chios, that even if the connection of this statue with the base be rejected, many, perhaps most, authorities still cleave to the opinion that this is An hermos' Nike. We should simply stand on the same ground that was held before the base was dis- covered. Ephesos. — The reliefs from the drum or drums of the columns of the old Arte- mision at Kphesos have a peculiar value because a fairly definite date can be assigned to them. According to He- rodotos (i. 92) most of the columns of this temple were gifts of Croesus, who reigned from 5 Co to 546 B.C. The male, of the Apollo type (Fig. l6), whose body is fairly well preserved, wears .i ( hiton with the same shal- low folds as those on the Nike of An hermos. I lis mouth ih so large that the "archaic smile" here becomes a monstrosity. The head of the female, 1 however, which is fairly well preserved, is a tre if an bait Ionic art, and shows what an advance that art had made Bince the production of the 1 PeiTOt « hipiez, viii. }22- ]2 ;, lij,'. 1 Fig. 16. — Archaic Drum of Column al Ephesos. (British Museum.) 54 GREEK SCULPTURE Nike. An interval of some forty years would hardly seem too great. Samos. — A figure found in Samos near the Heraion (Fig. 17), and from a dedicatory inscription justly supposed to fall near the end of this period, carries with it several related figures found on the Athenian Akropolis (Fig. 18). It may, therefore, ' ■ 1 Ml ■ HI 1 1 H B "lie- ■ J •• Ik fib; I B MBS* B 8» a 1 '/jJjjJAfl Fig. 17. — Samian Hera. (Louvre.) FIG. 18. — Samian Maiden. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) seem proper to treat this statue in connection with that group, even if most of its members fall into the next period (p. 76). Boeotia. — Passing to Greece, we find in the Athenian mu- seum numerous examples from Boeotia of the Apollo type, both in marble and in bronze statuettes, mostly from the Ptoion. These are examples of the "stolid type." The face of the Apollo of mi-; AkriiAk' pkriod 55 r v* Orchomenos is somewhat battered ; a perfectly preserved head of a similar figure 1 from the l'toion lias insipid features. More interesting is a head without a body, also from the l'toion (Fig. i 2 . which seems an imitation of wood carv- ing, the nose being slashed out in a series of planes and the mouth being a simple slit. Anything more primitive could hardly be found; and vet it may be no older than the figures just described. A remarkable duplication of the Apollo type in a single stone comes from Tanagra (Fig. 19). It is doubtless funereal in char- acter. Two persons, presumably brothers or intimate friends, are represented in an affectionate attitude. The arm of each figure, which is supposed to be thrown around the neck of the other, really comes down out of the coping which projects from the back- ground over the loving pair. In only one respect is there a deviation from the Apollo type ; the right leg of the right-hand figure is thrust forward ; thus two feet at the centre project There is some attempt at making knees, but it has resulted in grotesque look- ing pads instead Of real knee-pans. That there might be no confusion of identity, the stonecutter — we can hardly call him an artist — has conscientiously carved at tin- right and left of the figures " Kitylos" and * D ' The dedicator, Amphalkes, 1 in an inscription al the bottom that p< ted this work to Kitylos and I >ermys. The mutilation of the faces may be attributed to the early Christi • r.r .tin Bruckmann, N -"- 1 -'■•''■ ; \ "ii Mach, 1 and Kityloa Relief. (Ailii-ns, National Mil.) 5 6 GREEK SCULPTURE Attika. — When in 480-479 B.C. the Persians, besides destroying the temples on the Akropolis, mutilated the numerous statues, the Greeks regarded them as of no value, and subsequently used them with other blocks as filling for converting the Akropolis, which had been a long ridge, into a plateau. These, exhumed in the excavations of 1 886-1 890, have become of immeasurable value in the history of art. Several gable groups in poros have been put together out of many fragments with striking results. 1 The oldest of these groups is the Hydra gable, 2 in which Herakles at the centre appears in the act of knocking off severally the nine heads of the Lernaean Hydra, which fills the entire right half of the gable, its coils diminishing in size down to the corner. Herakles, thrown back into the left half is delivering a blow as he strides to the right. To the left of Herakles, Iolaos, facing to the left, is mounting a chariot, one foot being in it and the other on the ground. His head is turned to the rear as on a swivel. In front of the horses is a gigantic crab, the helper of the Hydra. The gable, made of six pieces, is small, only about eighteen feet long and three feet high at the centre. The material in which the figures are cut is soft poros full of shells, and the relief is very low, only about an inch and a half at the highest. The grouping shows considerable skill. The Hydra, of course, natu- rally fills its half of the gable. On the left the descending line falls from the head of Iolaos down over the descending necks of the horses, which are made to bend down their heads and sniff at the frightful, monstrous crab in the corner. The figures were painted with heavy colours — black, green (probably originally blue), and red — against a lighter background. The Hydra was black with green (blue) heads, and open, red mouths ; the crab was red. It is to be noted that there are only two human figures in the gable. 1 This was a long process ; and longer still has been the attainment of the scientific explanation of them, which, after many errors, seems to have reached almost definitive form in Wiegand's Die archaische Poros- Architektur der Akropolis zu Aiken. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 16; Von Mach, 40 a. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 57 A gable of about the same size as this, but in very high relief, Contains Herakles, dark red, grappling with a Triton. 1 On account of the difference in the relief it can hardly be assigned to the same building. The important groups, however, are those now shown to haw- belonged to the gables of the old pred'eisistratean Athena temple. Here Herakles appears wrestling with a larger Triton, the group fill- ing the left half of the gable. The struggle culminates at the centre, the Triton's tail reaching, with its sinuosities, clear into the corner. The mighty Herakles is at the utmost tension. As if there were not toil and trouble enough for Herakles, out of the right half of the gable comes flying through the air a triple-bodied Typhon Fig. 20. — Typhon from the Athenian Akropolis. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) (Fig. 20), surrounded with serpents and holding fire in his hands. This is the so-called Bluebeard group, made into a single being by the two wings on the outside shoulders. Thus the west gable filled. The east gable has been only partially reconstructed. A head, formerly supposed from its diadem to belong to Zeus en- 1 in a combat with Typhon, in the west -able, was found to belong to a brilliantly painted figure long known, and seated on an elaborate throne Zeus was now taken out of the Typhon battle and pi u ed m the e isl gable. I [e was seated turned to the ri^'ht, siik e 011 his l'-ft side J 1 i -, beard was not worked out. Cross ing his foot was another foot at right angles to his. Another figure, whi< h was supposed to have been Athena, wi> pla< ed in the centre of the field. 1 lei throne tou< hed the foot of Zeus. A third figure. 1 Bra nn I \i m km. urn, No. 58 GREEK SCULPTURE all traces of which are lost, was posited to make a triad. To the right and left the remaining space was filled by two serpents. The contrast between such a gable and that of Aegina is at least startling. The world was taken by surprise to find such products of art on the Athenian Akropolis. Here was no Attic grace, but a robust, fleshy life. On the red Typhon three heads were seen with great bulging eyeballs and blue beards. In the rear, the triple bodies ended in a coil like entwined serpents with colours of red, white, and blue. The Triton had equally variegated colours. Force and brilliancy are here but no grace. On this stem was soon to be grafted Ionic art with its ever graceful forms. But the old Attic force, after appropriating what it needed in the way of gracefulness, went on its way. 1 One other poros group, 2 not belonging to a gable but contem- porary with the groups, is worthy of praise. It represents a bull overcome by two lions. He is pressed down flat to the earth, while the lions tear him with their claws. The bull is considerably restored ; and only the claws and parts of legs of the lions are preserved ; but one may get a very good idea of the whole. It has much more life and vigour than the similar group on the Assos frieze. The bull is blue. Over his side flow streaks of blood from the places where the lions' claws tear his flesh. Besides the groups already mentioned there are several figures in poros which have not yet been assigned to any groups. There are two heads in the Akropolis Museum so formless that they seem the first essays in stone by one long used to carve in wood with 1 The scholars who have most closely and successfully studied the poros groups on the Akropolis are Theodor Wiegand and Hans Schrader. The description given above is derived from Wiegand's book mentioned on p. 56. Furtwangler, Sitzungsberichte d. Munchener Akad., 1905,111, 433 ff. (A. J. A. 10 (1905), 189), argued that the so-called Typhon was not one person but three (wind-spirits), and that the western pediment was filled by Herakles and Triton on one side and a great serpent on the other, while the seated Zeus, the seated Athena, and a standing Hermes were in the eastern pediment. 2 llrunn-Bruckmann, No. 456; Von Mach, 41. THE ARCHAIC l'KRiol) 59 tools appropriate to wood. These look more antique than any- thing in the gable groups. The Calf-bearer, or Moschophoros, made of Hymettos marble, found on the Akropolis in 1864 (Fig. 21). Twenty-three years later, in the great excava- tions, a base was found to which the- figure evidently belonged. ( )n this was .m inscription stating that Kombos, the son of Pales, dedicated the statue. The in- scription confirmed the impression made by the Style of the figure, that it belonged to the early part of the sixth century. The art of Athens, having run its course through the softest kinds of poros to the harder kinds in the Typhon- Triton groups, was now ready to attempt the more difficult task of carving marble. In the Calf- bearer we see this attempt. The sculptor appears still to have used the old tools, especially the gouge, traces of which are seen above and below the eyes ; and between the furrows a ridge extends out- ward from the outer corners of the l ■ ■ t many features are explained by the supposition that we have the work of a sculptor in poros who trah ferred his work to marble. The Calf-bearer Stands like the old Apollo figures with the left foot advanced. But it has broken with the Apollo series in one respect. It is clothed, although the 1 lothing is not obtrusive. It was once doubt- helped out by paint. The eye sockets still contain a hard white substance into whi< h pupil and ins weie probably inserted. Fie. 21.- Calf-bearer, (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) 60 GREEK SCULPTURE On the whole, the figure is much more stiff and expressionless than the Typhon. Some praise the calf as superior in execution to the man ; but what a monstrosity is the fore leg of the calf ! In an ancient graveyard not far from Keratia was found an Apollo figure which in every way shows an advance upon other members of the series, surpassing even the Apollo of Tenea in hair, muscles, and features, and carrying the series down to about 540 b.c. 1 Sparta. — Turning now to Sparta, we find its sculpture represented by several grave reliefs, the most prominent of which, now in the Berlin Museum, was found at Chrysapha, about nine miles from the city. Two figures 2 are seated on a throne, facing to the right. The male, who has his face turned to the spectator, holds in his right hand a cantharus. The female, of equal size, holds in her right a pomegranate and looks straight ahead. In front of them approach two diminutive mortals not reaching to their knees, male and female, with offerings ; the male bringing a cock and an egg, and the female a pomegranate and a flower. There can be nc doubt that the large figures are deities, or more probably heroized dead. The art is extremely rude. The drapery on the seated male figure is of the same kind as that of Chares from Branchidae (p. 45). His left arm is a monstrosity. The veil, if it really is a veil, which is being lifted by the female is very clumsily represented. Considerable attention is given to the details of the throne and one of the sandals of the male figure. A serpent, which raises its head over the top of the throne from behind and fills with the coil of its tail the whole space under it may have some reference to the underworld. The rough stump below the relief shows that the block was embedded in the soil. The ambitious attempt to represent one figure en face and the other in profile, and to give the relief a considerable depth, is worthy of note. 3 The con- 1 Kabbadias, Ephemeris Archaiologikc, 1902, PI. 3. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 227 a; Von Mach, 367 a. 3 In the museum at Sparta are several reliefs of the same kind; see Ath. Mitt. 2 (1877), 2 93- A part of a similar scene was found at Tegea (Collignon, i. 235) and is probably a product of Spartan art. THK ARCHAIC 1T.RII ID 61 tours of the arms especially have been thought to show traces of wood carving. The museum at Sparta has a block 1 of local greyish blue marble like the Chrysapha stone, with the field tapering upward, sculp- tured on both faces. On one face is a love scene and on the other a murder scene. < >n the thick edges of the slab are coiled serpents. The male figures, which alone have any anatomy, are ex- tremely stumpy and remind one of the Perseus metope from Selinus. Olympia. — Although much of the art of Olympia before 540 B.C has been destroyed, we have at least two pieces of some impor- tance. One is the colossal limestone head with a polos, posed to be the head of Hera (Fig. 22), who was probably enthroned in the old temple by the side of an illy an hai< Zeus. The other is the fragment of the gable of the Treasury of the Megarians, on which a giant, thrust back- w irds to the right by Zeus, is almost perfectly preserved. We Cannot ascribe these works to any particular school; but then- seems to be a sort of kinship shown by a certain brutal stockiness between the Spartan sculptures and those at Olympia. To these might be added a bronze head from Kythera and a marble head from Meligou/ 1 P.runn-I'.ru' Umann, \<>. 22f>. •.tnfi.i Ji, Ergtbniste, ili, PI. \ IreA. Zeit. \\ 1 ■ . 20. 4 Ath. Mm. - 1 • . 1 1 2, 1 1. -■, Petrol and < hipiez, riii. 449, Fig. 222. 1 i' '.. 22. — Archaic Head of Hera (Olympia). 62 GREEK SCULPTURE Corcyra. — We may with some probability ascribe to the art of Corinth the limestone lion ' found on the tomb of Menekrates and now kept in the governor's palace at Corfu. Its elongated form and little elaboration fits the early date of the tomb. Sicily. — We now pass to the extreme west of Hellas. Selinus, founded about 625 B.C., was doubtless not slow in rearing temples to the gods, as soon as material prosperity was achieved. A prob- able date for the earliest temples on its akropolis is 575 B.C. A century later, three great temples were built on a pla- teau about a mile to the east of the city. The earliest 2 of the akropolis temples has afforded us three metopes put together of many pieces, 3 found by Angell and Harris, two English architects, in 1822. Since the metopes diminished in breadth from the centre of the gable toward the ends, it was pos- sible to assign all three to adjacent positions under the right wing of the gable. The most interesting of all these is the middle one, which rep- resents Perseus killing Medusa, with Athena standing by (Fig. 23). This is one of the most important documents in the history of sculpture. The forms are robust and the faces expressionless. The action is supposed to be fierce; but the sculptor has not been 1 Collignon, i. Fig. 104. 2 Usually designated as C, and probably a temple of Apollo. 3 Twenty-three, forty-eight, and fifty-nine, in order, as described. The temple had ten metopes all on the east end, made of local soft stone and covered with paint. Fig. 23- -Archaic Metope from Selinus. (Palermo Museum.) THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 6;, able to represent it so. He was hampered by the usage of present- ing figures in full idrc Medusa must needs be so presented or she would not be horrible. But the attitude of Perseus sawing off her head and coolly looking to the front, gives grotesqueness to the scene. The sculptor is bound by tradition, which demanded that the head, the noble part of the person, should appear in a front view, while the feet and legs appear in profile, as was seen in the Nike of Delos ; but he was daring in representing two suc- .e events as going on at the same time. The horse, Pegasos, tlways represented as springing from the blood of the slain Medusa, but here, even while Perseus is severing the head from the trunk, P is seen below held by the Ciorgon but leaping away to the right The forms of Medusa and Perseus, especially the thighs, are over massive. The whole right leg of Medusa is monstrous. As to expression, there is none, unless the effect pro- duced by the ugly open mouth of Medusa with its protruding tongue and tusks may be called such. All the metopes of the series were certainly once much more impressive with their red, blue, and other paints. Athena's robe was doubtless brilliant. Perseus must have had a chiton and perhaps a helmet. The hair of all three figures received paint \ so also the clothing. If the paint had been pre- d, we should have known whether the coils on Perseus' calves were wings of sandals or simple leather boot-tops. Athena's eyes and eyebrows were black. Medusa's eyes red ; the back- ground was reddish brown. Thus the figures stood out dark on a light back-round. The features of this metope are repeated in the one next to the right, 1 which represents Herakles striding to the right with two mischievous creatures, called Kerkopes, slung ov<-r his shoulders, probably on a pole represented in paint ionless face in front view, tin- fret in profile, and the massive thighs of tin- Perseus metope all recur here. The third metope, 1 placed toward the icntrc from the Perseus w.i. filled with a four lior \t chariot < 0111111- out of the 1 I'.rimri-llni. l.m.inn, V,. 286 a J V"ii \l .<< Ii, 47 b. km. inn, No. 287 a 1 Von Ma h, 48a. 6 4 GREEK SCULPTURE background. While the other two metopes were in such high relief that complete heads were protruding from the ground of the relief, here we have even the fore parts of horses standing out of the relief. In spite of the grotesqueness which pervades the human figures we must admire the boldness of the sculptor who Fig. 24. — Europa on a Bull, from Selinus. (Palermo Museum.) let his figures come out from the background so freely as to give a challenge to timid contemporaries and a promise of attainments still to be achieved. This is essentially sculpture in the round. The gift of expression, however, was denied the sculptor ; and while attempting to depict a blood-curdling scene, he fell into the grotesque. The absolutely expressionless mouths contradict the attitudes of the figures. THE ARCHAN PERIOD 65 Since Selinus was a Megarian colony, it may be proper to com- pare the massive forms of these metopes with those of the (proba- bly contemporary) giant in the gable of the Megarian treasury at Olympia (p. 61), Nothing is mote natural than that Megarian sculptors should have been 1 hosen for such works. The colossal Apollo from Megara in the Athenian Museum is a proof of artistic activity in Megara at a still earlier date. It must, however, be conceded that these massive forms may be a general character- of archaic art. Witness the lbrakles in the poros gables at Athens. The next in age at Selinus are three metopes 1 found in 1S92, which arc of quite a different character. So different are they that some have thought them to be of Cretan origin, especially since one of them represents Europa riding on a bull (Fig. 24) ; another, in fragments. Herakles and the ('retail Bull ; and a third, a Sphinx,- which gives an oriental colouring. The most important of these is Europa, riding on a bull, which she holds by the right horn with her left hand, and gliding over the sea, which is repre- sented by two dolphins. The work is in some respects an advance on that of the previous group. The form of Europa is much more slender than any of the figures in the other metopes. Even the bull, with the ex< eptioa of the head, is gracefully wrought. The slashing tail and the vigorous play of legs are especially noteworthv. The downward curve in the bull's back, more befitting a horse than a bull, is perhaps occasioned by the need of getting the head of Europa down into the field. One must take into account that the bull \$ really Zeus. Two Other sets of metopes at Selinus belong to the next period. Brunn-Brui lemann, No. - Ibid., No. 288 ,/. 66 GREEK SCULPTURE " Etruscan " Chariot and Tripods 1 Etruria has become famous for treasures in archaic bronze, discovered in 1902 and later. One such treasure was long ago scattered among various museums, Munich having secured several fine pieces. The place where all these objects were found was probably in or near Perugia. Not many generations ago it was customary to classify nearly all objects of art found in Etruria as "Etruscan." To-day most persons have dropped that name, since it is well known that the splendid vases found in Etruscan tombs are of Greek workmanship. It is certain that we can call this art " Ionic." The Metropolitan Museum in New York is in possession of the famous " biga," a two-horse chariot, 2 from Monteleone in Etruria. Though the woodwork has practically vanished, the fine bronze sheathing has been carefully pieced together and mounted on a new wooden frame, so that little is wanting. The rounded front, 3 which is about twice as high as the sides, pre- sents a man and a woman, each holding a side of a notched shield and an enormous visored helmet with a high crest supported by a ram's head. Both man and woman are exceedingly archaic, the man being shorn of his mustache in accordance with the custom of the sixth century B.C. The horror vacni is exhibited by insert- ing two large hawks flying vertically downward. The shield itself presents a Gorgon's head at the top, and something resem- bling a lion's head at the bottom. A deer turned upside down fills the space at the bottom. The woman's skirt shows elaborate orna- mentation like that on the Francois vase. On one of the sides is presented a duel a Voutrance (Fig. 25). Two warriors armed from head to foot are fighting over a fallen man whose greaves 1 Though the chariot may be fifty years older than the tripods we may group them together since they come from the same place, and show a kinship in art. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 586. 3 Brunn-Bruckmann, Nos. 586, 587; A.J. A. 12 (1908), 313, Fig. 6. nil: \RCHAIC IM'.KIOI) 67 68 GREEK SCULPTURE show that although without a helmet, he had been in the fight. It is clear that his eyelids are closed in death. The warrior on the right is probably marked as the victor. His shield is of very elabo- rate shape. On it we may note that the Gorgon's head is placed at the bottom instead of the top. On the front of the chariot the Gorgon's head was naturally placed high enough to inspire terror. The warrior at the left, bearing a round shield, is a doughty cham- pion ; but he is probably marked for death, if we may judge from the fact that his brilliantly decked antagonist seems driving his spear downward into his breast just inside the rim of his shield, while the plain hoplite's spear seems to have its point bent up- wards by the impact upon the visor of his antagonist's helmet. The eagle also seems to threaten the warrior with the round shield. On the other side-piece a warrior is represented in a chariot drawn by two winged steeds (Fig. 26). He has the same shaven mustache as the warrior on the front of the biga. Below the horses a female figure in a long robe, rather awkwardly crowded into the corner of the plaque, raises one hand as if to ward off the hoofs of the horses. The subject is, perhaps, the apotheosis of a warrior, the female figure representing Ge, Mother Earth. Each side-piece has attached to it where it joins on to the front, a most archaic figure which, though diminutive, finds its counterpart in the " Apollo " of Tenea and its fellows. This is per- haps the surest point on which we can rest our conclusions as' to date ; and 600 B.C. can be regarded as a reasonable date. If we did not know that both side-pieces belong to the same chariot, we might regard the side-piece with the stiff figures and the schematic wings of Pegasos as older than the other. But these varieties of style must be accepted. The chariot reliefs, then, bring us over the waste void and set us on firm ground of Hellenic art in its earliest stages. But just at this stage the claim has been made that the art of the biga is not Greek art at all but purely Etruscan. 1 We must, 1 G. H. Chase, Three Bronze Tripods in the Possession of James Loeb, Esq., A.J.A. 12 (.1908), 287-323, PI. 8-18. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 69 FlC. 27. — from an A ! I pod. (In thi ion ol (.tun l 7 o GREEK SCULPTURE however, declare that this is improbable. It was the Greek whose art was found in Etruria ; budding, it is true, and with strange eccentricities. But from 600 B.C. to 550 b.c. that art blossomed and bloomed. Fifty years, or perhaps less, is sufficient for the transformation from the art of the biga to that of the tripods, part of one of which is represented in Fig. 27. These magnificent bronze tripods which bore bronze bowls are now much mutilated, but enough is preserved to show what an art the wandering Greek developed wherever he went. In themselves they are a handbook of mythology. Heroes and heroines, " Gorgons and Hydras and Chimeras dire," " warriors that with deeds forlorn went down scornful before many spears," are por- trayed in true heroic spirit. The delicate repousse" can never be surpassed, or even equalled. The figures stand out clear in contour and in strenuous action. These stands with reliefs are of precious value ; but the bowls which they bore are practically destroyed. The largest is 4 ft. d\ in., another 4 ft. \ in. The third is much smaller, — less than 3 ft. not reckoning the missing bowl. There seems to be valid reason for allowing a generation or more to intervene between the chariot reliefs and the tripod reliefs. It is at least very doubtful whether we can class the chariot re- liefs as Etruscan with any better right than that by which our forefathers classified the Greek vases found in Etruria as Etruscan. Besides this, Furtvvangler refused to consider the art of the tripods and the art of the chariot reliefs in any other relationship than that of less and greater development. He has declared with the authority of a master that the chariot reliefs showed a well-meant honesty which in due time came to honour in the tripod reliefs. It seems futile to regard either the art of the chariot or that of the tripods, which is surely akin to it, as of Etruscan origin. The reliefs on the chariot are doubtless much earlier. They show an art which has not " arrived," that has not yet felt the breath of life. But let half a century, or even less, pass and the dry bones have become quickened. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 71 Archaic Period, Section B: 540-480 n.c. Lycia. — The date assumed for the beginning of this section, 540 B.C, is not entirely arbitrary. In the east the philhellenic Croesus had fallen, and art was practically suppressed in its cradle by the Persians. \ struggle for existence followed, and Ionia suc- cumbed. Ionic influence in art. however, had extended itself to the neighbouring Lycia, where a remarkable tomb was discovered at Xanthos in 1838, and its decorations transferred in a few years to the British Museum. While some of these decorations are in the purest Ionic style, this need not be regarded as proving the tonicizing of all Lycia. In fact it has been held that the tomb that of some Persian satrap decorated by Ionian sculptors. This tomb, long called the Harpy monument, was formed of a huge monolith twenty feet high. Upon this was constructed a burial chamber formed of sculptured slabs. Over this was placed a broad coping. On the wesi side to the left of the centre a rectangular opening was cut, not large enough for a person to enter except by crawling. This side seems to have been the principal facade. Every figure on it, with the possible exception of the cow and calf over the door.is intensely < ireek, resembling the" Maidens" from Delos and the Akropolis at Athens ( Fig. 28 >. Their dress is very rich, and is arranged to show the contour of the body. The two larger figures Is on elaborate chairs seem intended for divinities. Three mortal women appear to be bringing offerings of fruit and flowers to the divinity seated at the right, who is represented as already in ] .11 of both. On the opposite (east) side, 1 more . a gigant: ted male figure, probably the heroized 1 eiving off-Tin--, and adoration from male worshippers. Dire< tly before him is a diminutive boy offering him a cock. ' I 1 the n.rth and south Bides the centre of each field is filled by le one on the north side re< eh mil; a helmet, and the >n the south side on, -iing a pomegranate, a pigeon, and Borne 1 Bl Hi!; mi, Mo. I 1', 72 GREEK SCULPTURE object not easily recognizable. At the ends of these sides appear strange creatures with heads, breasts, and arms of women like those on the west front, but with bodies ending in an egg-shaped protuberance and a bird's tail. They also bear a pair of wings and claws. With claws and arms they press tightly to their full breasts diminutive female figures, and fly outward through the air with them. The tomb was named after them " the Harpy Tomb" ; but it is certain from the tender manner in which they handle their charges that they are benevolent beings. Beyond this we can Fig. 28. — Harpy Monument, West Side. (British Museum.) hardly hope to penetrate the symbolism which pervades the en- tire monument. The various animals — cow, dog, pig, and cock — may have a significance which we do not comprehend. There is something suggestively Asiatic in the prominence of the female element. In the art there is a great contrast between the figures of the main front (west) and the other sides. The former has Ionic grace ; in the latter appear heavy, clumsy forms, reminding us of those on the Spartan tombstone or on the Selinus metopes. It may be that some gifted Ionian carved the main facade and left the rest to Lycians, who followed him afar off. Thasos. — A relief found on the island of Thasos in 1864, now in the Louvre, represents, on one long slab and two shorter THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 73 ones, 1 to the left of a door sculptured in relief, Apollo with a lyre, leading a band of Nymphs, and to the right, Hermes in the midst of four similar figures usually interpreted as Graces. 1 In fact in- scription on the Lintel of the door and on one of the shorter slabs indicate that both Nymphs and Graces were here worshipped. We have here a treasure of well-developed and graceful Ionic art ; for Thasos was Ionic. Rich robes half conceal and half reveal the full female forms. Hermes alone, marked by his wand and peUisos, is both scantily draped and spare. Ionic art has here travelled far onward from the stage of the Samothrake relief. These Nymphs and Graces, as well as the figures on the facade of the Harpy Tomb, arc twin sifters to the " Maidens " of 1 )elos ami of the Athe- nian Akropolis. Here they are in full bloom on Ionic shores and where Ionic influence reached. Scattered remnants of the band arc found in museums with no record of their provenience; such are the figures on the Villa Albani relief.' 1 Then we have the stele from Pharsalos, 4 now in the Louvre, on which appear two women belonging to the most graceful figures created by Greek sculptors. ! ept for the eye seen in full while the face is in profile, one might think that we were here beyond the archaic period.' Somewhat less archaic is the tombstone of Philis 8 found at Thasos. We see a rich lady in splendid attire, showing a full form, taking some adornment from her jewel-box. She has the eye in archaic fashion in contrast to Hegeso (Fig. 95) in the Dipylon cemetery, who shows the eye in profile Ionic sculpture has now become predominant, not only on islands here is some ul>t as to the arrangement of the sialic. It was |ir>>]>,.>r.i by Mi' haelia ././../. 1889, i^t Seri< ~, 5, 1 1 7 t" assume t«" mor< >h"it slabs ami arrange them all in the firm of a court open t" the front. runn-Bruckmann, No. 61 j Von Mach, 54. Bruno Bruckmann, No. 228; Von Mach, 367 A * I'.ruiin I Von Ma li, 158, ■ Brnnn maintained the existence "i a Morth Grecian school, to which this and many other w>rks were t" be ascribed; but now tiny arc more I i . [onii influen ■ Brunn-Bru< lemann, No. 232a; Von Mai h, 355. 74 GREEK SCULPTURE and shores where Ionians dwelt, but shaping artistic life from Lycia to Thessaly. Ionia, weak in politics and war, is now about to assert a predominance in art over Athens, to envelope it. Athens. — We have seen that Athens had an art sufficiently ro- bust, which after long practice in poros stone made essays in marble. One would hardly have expected an advent of Attic grace from these beginnings. We shall never know what might have been the result if Athens had taken its own way of development for another half century. The fall of Croesus, however, and the ruin of Ionia set free and sent over to the Greek mainland a host of Ionic artists. Some of their names we know from inscriptions. Attic art was submerged as thoroughly as the Roman state was sub- merged when "the Orontes flowed into the Tiber"; but it re- appeared, and, endued with native strength and acquired sweet- ness, ran its course before an admiring world. The excavations on the Akropolis, 1 886-1 889, revealed the sub- mergence and the emergence. On a single day in February, 1886, fourteen marble statues, most of them with heads, were taken out of the ground with pomp and ceremony in the presence of the king of Greece. Their battered condition showed clearly that Persians had wreaked their vengeance on them. But even in this condition they and many similar figures, found before and after, afford an adequate picture of the art of Athens during the whole period under consideration. 1 While we have not all the statues that once decked the temple precinct of Athena, we have so much that we would willingly exchange some of it for material to fill other great gaps in the history of art. But it is an immense ad- vantage that, making all due allowance for peculiarities of individ- ual sculptors, we can trace approximately the course of the development of sculpture in Athens from 540 to 480 b.c. And now Athens becomes by far the most important field in the study of the period. In the old centres of productivity like Samos and Miletos nothing was produced, or if anything was produced, it was 1 See Lechat, An Musee de PAcropole cPAthenes ; Schrader, Die ar- chaische Marmor-Skulpturen im Akropolis- Museum zu Athen, 1909. 1111. ARCHAIC PERIOD 75 probably destroyed almost n as made. Athens, on the con- trary, enjoyed during the greater part of this period, the stable, .Mire. I- 1 .. 30. M rate Vn haic Figure. (Athens, Aki im.) (Athens, Akropoli Museum.) if not al overnment of the enlightened, art-loving t\ t nit, Peis and that <»f his sons. It has been surmised that some ol the statues of the Akropo* hs were made l>v Ionic artist-, who are known to fame, ral winged Nikes, similar to the one found in Delos, only 76 GREEK SCULPTURE much more developed, were found on the Akropolis ; and an inscription on the shaft of a column which may well have sup- ported one of them contains the name Archermos. This suggests linking the famous Chian sculptor with the art of Athens. Nothing could be more natural. More- over, near the Heraion in Samos was found a peculiar archaic statue 1 dedicated to Hera by one Cheramyes. The style of the statue is exceedingly primitive. The part below the waist resem- bles a cylinder ; and the presence of a garment or garments upon it is indicated by long, fine, perpen- dicular lines. The himation, if we may so call it, falls only on the right side down below the hips. Some have seen in this style an imitation of metal work, the surface of which might well have been made by tracing long lines upon it with a burin. One of the Akropolis figures, of which only the upper half is preserved, shows exactly the same tech- nique. 2 A third similar figure, also found on the Akropolis, sup- plements the others in some de- tails. 3 They form a unique group, appearing, except for variation in size, to be replicas of one and the same statue. The second 1 Fig- 17 (p- 54)- 2 Lechat, An Musee de VAcropole d'Athenes, 395, Fig. 44. 3 Lechat, ibid., 399, Fig. 45. Fig. 31. — Pathetic Archaic Figure. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) THE ARCH VIC PERIOD 77 figure alone has a head ; and this is so rude and expressionless, with a nose like a half pyramid, a mouth composed of a simple slit, and eyes merely marked out on the surface, that it conveys an idea of greater antiquity than the smiling sisters by which it is surrounded in the Akropolis Museum. Since one of the figures found in Samos, it was thought reasonable to regard them all .1- examples of Samian art. When an inscrip- tion was found on the Akropolis, giving the name Theodoros ill Ionic letters, the case of Samian influence in Athens seemed proved. It was a great gain to have established a probable connection between some of the Akropolis figures and the two schools of S imos and Chios. 1 There is such a va- riety in the twenty or thirty female statues from the Akropolis, that the classification of them according to time has been found difficult Figure 29, for instance, has in the form of the body a strong resemblance to the statue dedicated by Nikandre, but the face has lively expression. Typical of the great- if elaboration is Fig. 30, on which the hair, both the ^Rr ^5 ' 1 ■ . 1 ^^m mLs * m^^I T A FIG. 32. — Finest rypeol Archaic Figure. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) 1 B. Saner, Ath. Mitt, 17 (1892), 37, \\^ by a careful itudy of marble* shown that the statu' menli i . with many others, ol \ marlil- II- bringi into prominence ■> Naxian ichool, ihowing activity in tia and the westi Uuumania. 78 GREEK SCULPTURE locks on the forehead and the ringlets falling over the breast, and the garments, both chiton and himation, surpass all the others in elegance of detail. It seems to represent the flood tide of Ionic influence. Another figure (Fig. 31) has the hair undercut in such a way as to shade the face and give her a pensive and almost pa- thetic look, which was perhaps not intended. Perhaps the most typical and satisfactory representative of the whole group is one of which the head only is preserved (Fig. 32). The face shows the full forms of a matron rather than those of a maiden. The archaic smile is toned down ; the hair, while very elaborate, has not the excessive elaboration of Fig. 30. While in none of the series is there any proper eye socket, in this figure the eyeballs even pro- trude in a marked manner. At some time shortly before 480 B.C. a revolt against Ionism took place. Whether it was a revolt of the native Athenian strength or an influx of sober Dorian influence is not certain. But the woman pictured in Fig. ^^ is in some important points diametrically opposed to her sis- ters, and notably to the one just mentioned as typical of the group. The eyes are not yet, it is true, set back into the skull as nature demands, but the thick eye- lids afford a deep setting, contrasted with the protruding eyeballs hardly held in by the thin eyelids of the typical representative. The corners of the mouth not only do not turn up, but they posi- tively turn down, with a pouting expression, which has given her the popular name of la petite boudeuse. Moreover, we see here for the first time the nose continuing downward the line of the fore- FlG. 33. — A Revolt toward Simplicity. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) TH1 AR< II \If I'KKIol) 79 head, giving the so-called "Greek profile." The line of the mouth i> a Cupid's bow. On the whole, the result is an aiisto- cratic. disdainful, but not unpleasing face. mped with her is a head of a boy of the same age . 34), sa) sixteen \ears old, who has the same eyes, nose, and mouth, so that his popular name is If frere de hi petite boudeuse. These figures certainly mark a rea< lion against the per- petual smile, that mark of archaic (ireek. or mor< tally Ionic, ilpture. We know that tiie reaction came shortly before the Persian War. The two figures could not have been long exposed when the ( \\x lie. The yellow hair of the ': 1 almost freshly painted when it was taken out of ^T , , Ve „ ow the ground, and yellow is a Color Hair. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) that would soon fade when ex- ; to continuous moisture. The pupils and red lips of the maiden bear their paint well preserved. re, probably at about the middle of the situs, belongs one of the >f the "Maidens" (Fig. 35), which, after con- siderabl ction, was probablj correctly placed upon a high stal bearing the nunc of an Athenian sculptor, Antenor, who also made the group of the Tyrannicides, Harmodios and At »n, at about 510 I : • md t the finest examples of the art of the time. era! reliefs in marble, two of whi< h appear to be- long to a single composition, rued tie- \kropolis. I mosl >trikmL; of these i> a person mounting a < hariot FIG. 39. - Seated Atlieno. (Alliens, Akropolis Museum.) ami leaning forward in tl A small pie< e of an adjai <-iii slab on the right, fitting exactly to tin- main piece, shows two tails and one hind leg, all of which seem to point to a th.iriot at re^t. This figure has long been known and adnmed 1 r.ruiiii-l'.ruLkiiiaiin, No. Si./; Von M.ili, ;|./. 86 GREEK SCULPTURE for its combination of grace and vigour. 1 Several questions con- cerning it are, however, still in debate. Is it male Or female, and is it divine or human? Both these questions might be answered definitely if the head were not so badly worn away. The second slab, 2 broken off below and containing only the upper half of a figure that is clearly male, in- stead of settling the case has served to complicate it. The petasos worn by this figure has led to its being called Hermes, and the natural inter- pretation of the other figure made it also some divinity. The hair of the so-called Hermes is done up in the old Attic krobylos fashion ; and since the other figure had the same coiffure, it was natural to interpret it also as male in spite of its slender arms. The body of the supposed Hermes is equally slender. Effeminate male figures are not un- paralleled in Attic art. There is a notable case of a headless draped male 3 on the Akropolis that looks in almost every respect like one of the " Maidens." It must be conceded that the dress of the charioteer does look feminine. A long robe was the usual dress of charioteers. It was long ago seen that the pieces belonged to a single series. It was reserved for Schrader 4 to set up the hypothesis that they FIG. 40. — Warrior Athena. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 21 ; Von Mach, 56. 2 Memorie delP Institute, ii. PI. 13. 3 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 551. 4 Der Cellafries des alten Athenatempels, Ath. Mitt. 30 (1905), 305-322. Furtwangler, Sitz.-ber. der Miinchener Akad. 1905, iii. 433 ft., suggested that the series adorned the altar of Athena. THE AR( II \K" I'KRIOD 87 were all parts of .1 frieze of the " Oldest Temple,'' which l>ore the Typhon gable. When Peisistratos had enlarged this temple by adding a colonnade and putting a larger roof over the whole, Schrader supposes that the oldest temple, which still continued to form the cella of the enlarged one, was converted into the Ionic order, with two Ionic columns between two antae at each end, and that at the same time an Ionic frieze was added at the top of the old cella wall. It is interesting to note that we have, then, part of a chariot- frieze antedating similar chariot-races on the Parthenon frieze by a century. Perhaps the earlier frieze, like the later, had mortal charioteers. Ami it is not unlikely, if they were mortals, that they were males, figure with a pet- has very slender claim to divinity. If we discard the notion that he is Hermes, there is no great reason to regard the other divinity. coiffure, being that which is mure properly male non ** I ler- ." befits a youthful male charioteer in 41.— Athena accepting < ifferings. Akropolis Museum.) (Athens, The nei k also is stout to belt 1 male. The drapery of the figure is very m 1 1 1 • . til-- kind that ar< liai^ti- S< ulptOTS loved to reproduce. ■ >ti\e relief may 1>-- here notii ed, on whit h Athena, a Blim tiding her < hiton very high, appears anion- her worshippers .1 attitude, without the legis < I ig. U }. The worship >ftwo id of both sexes. A pair, probably man and 88 GREEK SCULPTURE wife, of which only the lower parts are preserved, approach with offerings. They are about two thirds as large as the goddess. With them are three diminutive figures, two males and one female, the former bringing offerings, the latter looking like an infinitesi- mal " Maiden." Along with them walks, perhaps as an offering, an enormous sow. A greater contrast could hardly be found than that between the smiling Athena in the circle of her devout worshippers and the stern, terrible goddess formed by the two plates of gilded bronze. One of the greatest triumphs in art studies of the present gen- eration has been the reconstruction in part of the main gable of the Athena temple made by Peisistratos. In 1863 a female head of Parian marble and about life-size was found on the Akropolis. It was early recognized as belonging in the circle of the " Maidens," but raised above them by an august dignity and vigour which was entirely foreign to them. It passed, it is true, for an example of Attic grace ; but it was much more than that. Its significance was gradually revealed. Up to about 1891 it remained set up on a bracket, although in 1886 Studniczka 1 had shown that several large pieces of a draped body fitted to the head. In 1896, after a long study of all the marble fragments on the Akropolis which had dark veins similar to those in the fragments already identified, Hans Schrader 1 was able not only to set up in a hall of the Akropolis Museum the glorious figure of the goddess delighting in battle, but to put at her feet a falling youthful giant whom she was piercing with her spear as she strode onward to the right scatter- ing death (Fig. 42). Two other and much larger giants, almost wholly restored, were shown by their sloping position to be adapt- ing themselves to the ascending cornice of a gable, and to belong in the two corners. Four other figures have entirely disappeared with the exception of insignificant fragments. Between the cen- tral group of Athena with the young giant and the two out- stretched giants, filling the corners, there was room on each side for another giant bending forward for the fray and confronted by 1 Ath. Mitt. 11 (1886), 185 ff. 2 Ath. Mitt. 22 (1897), 59'ff. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 8 9 an erect divine antagonist. The giants in the corners are ready to take part; but the real combat is shared only by three gods and three giants, and is resolved into three duels. The divine antag- onists helping Athena were probably Zeus and llerakles, who fought with their backs turned to the central group. PtO, 42. — Athena striking down .1 Youtl I Athens, Akropolis Museum.) All three of the giants are nude, < >f the two in the comers one has a head in a separate pie< e 1 leverly adjusted to the body ; the otlx-r once had a head of the same pie< e as the body, bul it is now mostly broken away. The youthful gianl in the centre I u lea a head. Bul although nude, like the otl ints, he wore a helmet, on the upper side of the lefl hand of Athena a trans- 9 o GREEK SCULPTURE verse cut shows traces of bronze on the thumb and forefinger, which proves that she was grasping the socket of the fallen giant's helmet plume with her left hand, while with her right she drove the spear clear through him. She needed no shield. At her touch he must sink to the ground. So is it in the like scene on the Pergamon frieze. Her onward rush is death to her enemy. The date of the gable is usually fixed at shortly after 540 b.c. Peisistratos was then in possession of the sovereign power to hold it during his life. Since he came to his victory through the help of Athena, his protector, he would not be slow to show his gratitude by some conspicuous memorial. Her enemies were his. They were both champions of law and order. Such may be the sense of this gable group. The giants taken singly are not very admirable. The anatomy is bad. The contorted antagonist of Athena has no proper medi- ation between his breast and the lower part of the body. The drawn-up leg, however, is admirable. In general, it is flesh rather than muscle that makes an impression. All is calculated for a view from below. The Aeginetan gable figures, on the contrary, are wrought out as if all the anatomical details were to be inspected at close range. In the grouping there is also a contrast to the Aegina gables with their studied symmetry of many figures. The Athens group was composed of only eight figures, which were, of course, much larger than the twelve or perhaps fourteen figures on the west garle of Aegina. But when we consider that the gable was far larger than the Aeginetan, it must be conceded that there were more empty spaces in the Athenian gable. The greatest contrast between the two gables is this : the Aeginetan figures, with all their careful anatomical details, are lack- ing in the appearance of life. They are as if spellbound, without the power to awake and act, while the Athenian figures make the rush and struggle apparent. It is only in the dress that Athena is like the " Maidens." She is unlike them in what is essential. One sees in her face pitiless wrath flashing forth as she strikes down her foe. She moves in mi: archaic l'Kkion 91 glory a< ross the si ene. What a contrast to the Aeginetan Athenas, \vh«> occupied in solemn, death-like gravity a similar place in their gables ! Taint was judiciously applied. The gar- ments of Athena were painted much as were those of the " Maiden-.'' But she wore a helmet painted blue, with gilt rosettes along it- lower border. Her hair was red. The aegis had red, blue, and green scales and a border <<\ snakes whose heads pro- truded here and there from its edge. Most of the sculptures of this period in Attika outside of the Akropolis are funereal monument-, generally in relief. It is worthy of note that neatly all of them, as well as .<• reliefs on the Akropolis, are of Pentelic marble. The stele of Aristion (Fig. 43), found in 1 - (8 at Yelanide/a, near the eastern shore of Attika, about ten miles south of Marathon, _ : t burial mound, is practically intact. Although now deprived of its isola- tion by subsequent discoveries, it is still the irtant monument of its class and of th( isures of the National 1 11 Athens. < m the -tele, which taper> slightly towards the top, we have in very low rein-! an Attic hoplite of about ., in what we may < ill a '\r<-^ parade attitude. I ead warrior is seen here as h<- lived, at his 1 l\ i >r b ittle, with all his armour on. It is, however, the traces • paint which give the stele Ms 1 hief importance. The bai kground ted red, the figure in various colours. The helmet m dark blur, the h.ur reddish brown, the « uirass probably dark brown, FIG. .) j. Aristion's Si : Athens, National Mu- seum.) 9 2 GREEK SCULPTURE in imitation of leather. This shows three horizontal bands of meanders and zigzags in blue. On the right shoulder piece, representing, perhaps, metal, are a star and a lion's head. The double flaps of the cuirass, the fine folds of the linen garment coming out from under them, and the metallic greaves through which appear the form of the knees and calves, the hair carefully arranged in curls, the fine lines of the beard given in detail, all show the scrupulous care bestowed on this relief. With the top part, now broken off, went the warrior's plume, which once came down over his shoulder, as is shown by the dowel-hole just above it. Had Athens left no other work of the sixth century, we should still have a vivid picture of the citizen soldier of that time, whose character inspires respect. There are faults in the drawing. The right hand recalls those of the old Apollos in the position of the thumb ; the right leg and buttock are exaggerated ; the whole figure is crowded against the rear border of the stele ; although the figure is in profile, the eye is in archaic fashion, as if seen from in front. Haifa century ago, when this figure was practically the sole rep- resentative of archaic Attic art, Brunn used it as an example of what Attic art was in contrast to Aeginetan, declaring that the former was characterized by dignity and grace of the whole effect, the latter by the finer study of nature in details. Although this generalization was made on insufficient material, it stands to-day abundantly corroborated. Although the stele has lost some of its unique importance by the discovery of a duplicate stele at Ikaria, 1 it is still the most perfect of all the old Attic grave reliefs. A good many other Attic reliefs more or less resembling it have come to light. 2 Shortly after its discovery, when the history of sculpture lacked perspective, it was customary to call this figure the " Soldier of Marathon." But when the history of Greek sculpture got its proper perspective, the warrior resumed the name that was given him on his monument. On the band below his feet the name of 1 A.J.A. 5 (1889), 9. 2 Conze, Attische Grabreliefs, early numbers. THK ARCHAIC PERK >1> 93 the sculptor, Aristokles, is cut The slab ended in a sort of stump which fitted into a base on which the name of the dead was in- scribed. His real name is Aristion. He might have been a grand- father to one of the " men of Marathon." ' A stele 1 ' iouiul a year later at the same place as the Aristion stele, when cleared from incrustation about forty years later, showed the noble figure of a man of the same age as Aristion officiating as a priest. In this .is in several others, the figure was in paint only, upon smooth marble. The figure was painted, as in the case of the Aristion stele, of lighter colours; while the background on which it was projected was dark red. The colours early disap- peared and left the surface exposed to corrosion ; but the strong colour protected the marble longer. Ac- cordingly, the figure is now dark, while the background is light. The top part of a stele containing a head, found in i S73 in an old wall near the I )i pylon gate, is too important to be passed over | Fig. 44). Here a youthful athlete holds a discus in his left hand, so poised that his head is projected upon it in relief as on a nimbus. The top of the head is broken away; but we have all the very archait features, the almond-shaped eye in full, the prominent with great knobs, the thick lips making an archaic smile. 1 chin and neck, however, are both strong and graceful. The thumb outlined against the diS4 US is slender. The lobe of the ear is monstrous. The tightly twisted braid of the hair, truly athletic, 1 I h>- lacV of the dem< name which was usually appended to names aft'-r Kl< ) ;m I..' . is enough t" show thai A r ist i. .11 is ol earlier date. liefi, l'l. 1. Fig. 44. Archaic I •iscus-thrower. National M useum.) (Atl 94 GREEK SCULPTURE conceals the transition from the head to the discus, which is poised in the attitude of " parade rest." Since the stele is seen to broaden considerably downward, the breadth of about a foot and two inches at the top would be increased at the bottom to about two feet and a half. This suggests that the figure was represented with feet apart, as if in the act of hurling the discus. Philios has recognized in a relief found at Eleusis 1 a hoplite who is a real Marathonomachos ; and there is much that speaks in his favour. The hoplite is nude, but carries his shield and spear, and wears an enormous helmet. He is full of strenuous action. In fact, he might be supposed to be the fabled runner who spent his last breath in bringing the news of victory from Marathon, and sank in death as he breathed out the glorious cry, " ^lkw/jlev." The attitude of an absolutely spent runner is marked by the manner in which he clutches at his breast for breath. The style, too, accords better with that of 490 B.C. than with that of Aristion, which is a quarter of a century earlier. It was perfectly natural that figures like the Akropolis " Maidens " should be found at Eleusis, since Eleusis in the sixth century was a part of Athens, and Peisistratos extended his activities thither. He built an enlarged hall for the mysteries. We have, by good fortune, one of the architectural adornments, a splendid ram's head, 2 perhaps the finest example of animal sculpture preserved from the archaic period. Boeotia. — Other influences were operative where there was ap- parently never a local school. The stele of Orchomenos (Fig. 45), now in the National Museum, was made by a Naxian sculptor, who was so proud of his work that he inscribed on its lower border, " Alxenor of Naxos made me, just look at me." A man perhaps somewhat older than Aristion is before us, admirably adjusted to the field of the relief. His head is bent forward ; his left hand is slipped down his long staff, which forces itself up into the folds of his long cloak. He looks kindly down upon a dog of the grey- 1 Ephem. Arch. 1903, 43-56. 2 A.J. A. 2 (1898), PI. 8. THE ARCHAIC l'KRIOl) 95 hound type, with a long, sharp nose, and holds out to him a lo- cust What a difference between him and Aristion ! There we had the stiffness of dress parade, here is the bent head and the hand supported bj a si iff that seems to be driven into his cloak. The feet partake so much of the neglige attitude that one can hardly tell which is the right and which the left. In fact this seemingly easy position is abso- lutely impossible. The dog, too, in his efforts to reach the locust is contorted out of nature, his head being turned as on a swivel, outdoing the contortions of the Nike of 1 >elos. lie also rests his fore paws on the raised border of the relief. But it is the breath of life that interest us ; and here is real life, though awkwardly ex- pressed. We have a Boeotian landowner walking over his fields with his faithful dog. — We miss the paint which doubtless once existed. The head probably once- had hair above the fillet, painted. I ess likely is a metallic cap, which has been A relief in the Naples Museum has the same subject with variations. The g, of the same type, has his hind feet planted on the ground ; but his head is turned around and upward, as on the Orchom tele. The locust, however, which gave the reason for the contorted :ion, is la less drapery and more anatomy. The legs, shown almost entire, .ire better both m form and in pla< 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, N0.416; Von Macb, 349a, 45- — A ng with (Athi seum.) I '.' leotian his l log. National Mu- 96 GREEK SCULPTURE The same is true of the arms and breast. As for the head, it seems a generation later than the Orchomenos head, and might even make the Naples stele fall out of the period under discussion. By good fortune there has been discovered at Apollonia on the west shore of the Black Sea, and brought to the Bulgarian Museum at Sophia, another replica of the same scene, with this variation, that the man holds out to the dog a large bone. This copy, though more battered than the others, is in point of art greatly superior to them. 1 It may be that it was the proto- type, which the Naples example certainly cannot be. The wide distribution of the three examples makes the place of the origin of the type doubtful. The Naples copy is thought to be from one of the Aegean islands; and thus the Ionic origin can hardly be doubted. Neither can it be doubted that the prototype en- joyed great celebrity. Thessaly. — In this period Thessaly enjoyed the presence of such poets as Anakreon and Simonides. Of its artists we know little, but the relief 2 found at Pharsalos half a century ago, and long called " the elevation of the flower," is probably a grave monument, and is one of the most charming relics of archaic art. Beauty and solemnity pervade the scene. Two women are holding up to each other fruit and flowers, the latter looking like toad- stools. One is reminded of similar scenes on the Harpy Monu- ment; but here is great advance. Head, body, arms, and hands show beautiful forms. The elaborate head-dress marks the women as high-bred. That the relief is earlier than 500 b.c. is rendered probable by the severity of expression, especially in the eyes, which are shown in full, the stiff attitudes, and the schematic folds of the garments. Delphi. — That both Olympia and Delphi were important centres of artistic activity from 540 to 480 B.C. is undoubted. Olympia, however, had little to show, while Delphi had much. Besides maidens of the Akropolis type, there were male figures of the 1 Jahrbuch (Anzeiger} 1896, 137. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 58; Von Mach, 358. THK ARCHAIC l'KKlOD 97 lo type which may represent Kleobis and Biton of Argos. 1 There are also metopes of an elongated shape from the Treasury of the Sikyonians. One'-' of these rej)resents Europa on a bull, in which she shows much more activity than in the Selinus metope, where, in order to get her into the field, the sculptor bent the : oi Warriors from the ["reasurj >>i ih<- Sikyonians at Delphi. bull's back down into an unnatural curve. The bull is a splendid animal compared with that of the Selinus metope. The drapery Of Euro] 18 also superior. The second metope shows three hei turning from a cattle- liftiii edition (Fig. 46). These heroes, whose heads arc 1 Hdt 1. |x; Homolle, />'. < .11. 24 (iyoo), 450. (tlUi Je Delphei iv. l'l. J, 9 8 GREEK SCULPTURE THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 99 badly battered, carry two spears each. Their long braids of hair falling over their shoulders look so archaic as to make it proper to place them into the first archaic period. The ho. ids of the nigh oxen, below the other heads in profile, appear in front view between the human bodies in an extremely stiff and almost comical manner; while the attempt to show the full number of legs of the cattle results in a multiplicity of parallel lines The metopes of the Sikyonian Treasury properly belong to the fir>t archaic period ; but for the sake of comparison with the Knidian frieze we may treat them together. This magnificent frieze probably falls in the period between 500 and 485 b.C. Two "Maidens" serve as supports for its porch. The frieze is practically intact, and its figures form the most impressive series of archaic art. Here come into play both action and grace. Fine carving ami judicious application of polychromy are wedded. For the convenience of beholders the names of the chief actors are inscribed on the borders below. We have a battle between Homeric warriors, with seated divinities watching the fray; a battle of the gods and giants; the carrying oil" of the daughters of LeukippOS; and a fourth subject which cannot be surely identi- fied. Figure .17 represents the horses of a quadriga and two horses with riders, rivalling the similar scenes On the Parthenon frieze. Figure 48 reproduces a part of the battle between the and the giants. Everywhere the details, such as the garments and hair of the figures and the mains and tails of the horses, show tin- mosl exquisite archaic art. 'I hoc figures show that the Parthenon frieze was not without its forerunners. Undoubtedly this frieze, and perhaps many more like it, were familiar to Attic- artists of the time of I'heidias. Selinus. We turn again to tin- extreme west, where we find that, siii' tesque metopes of temple C were made, ait had ed in Selinus. The < ity having spread until it filled its ■kropolis, 1 temple designated as temple /•', to be flanked later bj tem] : '/. built upon a plateau about a mile to the too GREEK SCULPTURE east of the city. It had ten metopes on its eastern front. Of only two of these are there fragments worth mentioning ; these are two lower halves. Each contains a god or goddess overthrow- ing a giant. In one case 1 the giant is halting upon his right knee, the other being bent as he is pressed violently downward by a divine antagonist, who is possibly male, and wears a garment reach- ing only to the knee. The second fragment 2 is still more impres- sive. Here a goddess, probably Athena, has completely overthrown her antagonist, and is planting her foot remorselessly upon his thigh as she transfixes him with a spear, probably represented in paint. Somewhat so appeared Athena in the Akropolis gable. The drapery, as far as we have it, is not unlike hers. The giant is still struggling with his left hand to keep his head from the ground. But it is falling backward over his left shoulder, while his mouth, with both rows of teeth displayed, is emitting his death rattle ; meanwhile his beard remains carefully arranged in three parallel bands on cheek and chin. In general there is little profit in discussing sculptors who have left no works by which we may judge them. There are, however, two schools of sculpture that were active in the period under consideration, to which we can assign extant works only by con- jecture, but which on account of their historical importance can- not be passed over without discussion. One of these is the Argive school, which was devoted mainly to sculpture of athletes. Work- ing as it did in bronze, it has left hardly any examples by which it may be judged. Had we ten out of the thousands of bronze statues which filled Olympia and Delphi, to say nothing of Argos itself, we should know something of Argive art ; whereas we now guess and grope almost blindly. Old Argive School. — One great name confronts us at the outset, Hagelaidas, whom tradition made to be the teacher of Myron, Poly- kleitos, and Pheidias. We have no trace of the works which he is said to have made, but the single bronze statuette from Ligourio, 3 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 289/'. 2 Ibid., No. 289 a. 8 Furtwangler, jo/at Berliner Winckelmannsprogram (1890), 125-153, PI. I. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 101 near Epidauros, without doubt an Argive work, has generally been taken to represent his style. The figure is very stocky ; the head has heavy jaws and chin, a straight mouth, and strongly worked eyelids ; in fa< t just what we should expect from a forerunner of PolykleitOS. This figure has been made a pivotal point in art history. We must concede that this pivotal point rr>N on an unproved assumption. If, however, we make a bold use of the mption, certain important results fall into line. The Ligourio bronze has a very serious coun- tenance. We have seen that ><^ just at the end of the archaic period in Athens a reaction took place against the smiling s, both male and female, and, as often happens in revo- lutions, the pendulum swung to the opposite extreme. Now we have seen Athens to be a ready borrower, ever reaching out for what was best ; and nothing is more probable than that, dissatisfied with her own work, she should turn to Argos, where sculpture was cradled, for new lessons, — perhaps for new teachers. On the Athenian Akropolifl there came to light a bronze head, about two thirds life-size, which seems at variance with the Smiling creatures found near it, showing a serious if not a sad face (Fig. 49). exquisite that it (an only be regarded as the work of a ma-t<-r «>f a finished bron/e style. One would hardly ■ 1 Athens in the archaic period for a master of bronze style. must have been as scarce there as they were plentiful in \f It IS not Overbold neSS to infer that we have here a product of the Argive school and that this figure, or similar lit about a revolution in the art ol Athens JUSl before FIG. 49. —Archaic Bronze Head. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) 102 GREEK SCULPTURE the Persian War. This head has not only a serious mouth, but a strong chin and heavy upper eyelids, combined with extraordi- narily fine treatment of the hair, and even delicate eyelashes of fine bronze wire. It is extremely doubtful whether an Athenian artist ever produced such a bronze head. It would be a greater anomaly than the production of a most elaborate Athenian " Maiden " at Argos. A strong bond connects this head also with the Apollo of the west gable at Olympia. But of that we shall speak later. A striking relief in Copenhagen presents Orestes taking ven- geance on Aegisthos for the slaughter of Agamemnon (Fig. 50). Fig. 50. — Death of Aegisthos. (Copenhagen Museum.) Orestes here appears as an ai/a£ av8pwv with a righteous cause for bloodshed. The vile Aegisthos is falling to the ground from the thrust of the two-edged sword. His bowels protrude. Klytem- nestra, the mother, lays her hand on her son's shoulder as if to stay his wrath. But Electra's sarcastic look at her mother indi- cates that no mercy even for her is to be expected. The servants on the ends give vent to their grief by expressive attitudes. Naught THE ARCHAIC PERIOD .03 will avail to save the murderess. This relief is probably Argive, ami is one of the most splendid remains of antiquity. The magnificent archaic figures are full of the wrath that was kindled in the house of the son of Atreus. Sikyon. — The other early Peloponnesian school of note is that of Sikyon. This school was closely affiliated with that of Argos, and, like it, worked almost exclusively in bronze, so that it might almost be set down as a branch of the same school ; and it is not orange that, a generation later, we find Polvkleitos mentioned as belonging to both Argos and Sikyon. Early in the first archaic period the Cretans, Dipoinos and Skvllis, had worked in Sikyon, and a generation later another Cretan. Aristokles, became the head of the Sikyonian school, and his family was active there for eight generations. His two grand- sons, Aristokles and Kanachos, doubtless fall into the second ar- chaic period. It is Kanachos whom we need to dwell upon. He seems to have been a prolific sculptor. Hut he is best known as the maker of the cultus statue of the Branchidae temple, the Apollo Philesii s, of Aeginetas bronze. So famous was it that Dareios carried it off to Kkbatana, where it remained nearly two centuries, when it was returned in 306 B.c. by Seleukos Nikator. Coins of Miletos, l>oth in early and in late times, reproduce this Apollo. In all cases he stands holding the fawn in his right hand and a bow m his left. < >ne late coin of C.ordianus III shows him in this attitude inside the temple. A bronze statuette in the British Museum,' the Payne Knight bronze, represents an archaic Apollo in the same attitude. In this case the bow is gone from the left hand, but it is . lear that the fingers on, e 1 lasped it. The bronze statu- once in the S< iarra Palace in Rome, also archaic, .^ to have held a fawn in his right hand, while the whole left arm, whi< h is new, holds a horn of plenty ' An an hue st ituette from N ttitude of the hands, but in the right we find an aryballos. but sin- e nothing < Ollld be more absurd than an 1 I ,wlir and Wl |ii Fig. -S' illignon, L I ig. 161, id, i. 1 ig. 1 io4 GREEK SCULPTURE oil flask in one hand and a bow in the other, it may be suspected that the maker of the statuette converted the Apollo into an ath- lete by supplying the oil flask. It needs no violence to class this statuette with the others. The famous bronze statuette found at Piombino in Tuscany, now in the Louvre, a gem of art in true . archaic style, probably bore the fawn on the outstretched right palm and the bow in the clasped left (Fig. 51). This, with the other statuettes, may give us some idea of what the Apollo of Kanachos was like. 1 Kanachos made also at Thebes a statue of the Ismenian Apollo, in cedar wood, so like the Milesian figure that Pausanias says that no one who had seen it could doubt that Kanachos made the Theban statue also. Kanachos' activity in Boeotia as a maker of one Apollo statue has suggested that another statue 2 in marble found at the Ptoion, of a considerably later date than the Boeotian figures of the stolid type, might be a replica of his Theban statue. But the Ptoion Apollo has such evident affinities with the Aeginetan gable figures that it may with more propriety be assigned to that school. We are now approaching the crossing of the ways. The schools have various affiliations one with another. Authorities begin to differ widely as to the assignment of certain statues. Such is the case with the bronze head from Kythera, 3 where the heavy chin of the Argive school is combined with a smile (Fig. 52). 1 On this question see Kekule von Stradonitz, Sitz.-ber. d. Berl. Akad. 1904, 786-801. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 12 a; Von Mach, 15^. 8 Many are inclined to put this head into the first archaic period. It FlG. 51. — Bionze Statu ette from Piombino (Louvre.) THE ARCHAIC PERIOD 105 Aegina. Aegina, an island about ten miles distant from IVi- raeus, formed a state, and a notable one, though at the battle of Salamis it furnished only thirty triremes, while Athens furnished one hundred and eighty. When the Athenians took possession oi the island in 456 b.( ., they cap- tured seventy triremes, and still others escaped. Aegina - doubtless to be reck- oned with as 1 naval power at the time of the Persian Wars ; but its great days, reaching back almost to the Mycenaean period, were al- ready in the p 1st. Between 490 and 480 b.( . Themis- tokles had broken its power and Athens had eclipsed it. But with only twenty- four r> more to live as a free state Aegina added at imis a glorious page to her hi-' intributing so much to the defeat of the Persians that the states participating in the battle awarded her the prize for valour. Probably jealousy of Athens played a part in this award ; so that more than ever Aegina was felt by Athens to be an "eyesore to Peiraeus," and her "inevitable hour " can Of her art we should probably have known nothing worth tell- • had not a 1. 1 temple in the northeast corner of the island, remote from die 1 ity, early shed its gable sculptures, to be covered up by accumulated rubbish and soil. In 181 1 an international party of English and < Germans spent a I thought t" be Aphrodite, chiefly perhapi !»•> auie it wai found FlG, 52. Vrchaii Bronze I [ead from Kythera. (Berlin Museum.) 106 GREEK SCULPTURE few weeks in clearing away this debris in order to secure a plan and elevation of the temple. At the very outset they came upon sculpture. At the end of their work they had secured, besides small fragments, substantial remains of fifteen figures, ten of which were assigned to the west gable and five to the east gable, with parts of two figures forming an akroterion surmounting one of the gables. The statues did not at first make a deep impression ; and after some wandering about, they were sold for $30,000 to the Crown Prince of Bavaria, afterwards Ludwig I. ; and in 1828 found their way into the Glyptothek at Munich. Before that, how- ever, the famous Danish sculptor, Thorwaldsen, had been given the task of " restoring " them in Italy. When he had finished his task, he declared that he could not tell the parts that he had added from the original parts. He had not scrupled to add here and there a head of his own making. 1 He also set the statues up on independent bases. Of course, it was a pity that this treasure did not lie in the ground fifty years longer, until the age of scientific excavation had arrived. But in spite of all this mal- practice these sculptures form one of the most important docu- ments in the history of Greek art. Without them we should have had a great gap. As the figures are set up in the Glyptothek the two gable groups seem similar, each representing a combat between two bands of warriors rushing forward from the right and the left, while in the middle a helmeted goddess, marked by the aegis as Athena, stands stiffly, facing to the front, as if calling a halt to the hostile bands. A fallen warrior lies nearly in front of her. Two spear- men and an archer are pressing toward the central group on either side. In each gable corner lies a man mortally wounded. Thorwaldsen's restoration, which rested largely on data furnished by Cockerell, the fortunate discoverer, placed only ten figures in the restored west gable ; while no attempt was made at com- pleting the other group. But since a figure of the east gable was clearly leaning forward to seize the fallen warrior next to 1 E.g. that of the first spearman on the left in the west gable. THE ARCHAIC l'KRlOl) IOJ Athena, it was at once felt that the west gable demanded a similar re. This was accordingly supplied by Cockerell in a restora- tion which he published in 1S19, 1 and this restoration with eleven figures became the current representation in casts and cuts. Bat .1 study of the numerous fragments revealed the fact that there were Other figures bending forward ; and to complete the symmetry of the group, the fallen warrior was placed directly in front of the goddess, so that they two formed a centrepiece, while to the right and left was a youth bending forward to seize the fallen warrior, and thus there was perfect responsion, figure for figure.- The next step was the positing of another spearman on each side behind the foremost, making a group of fourteen figures in each gable/ 1 I- urther fragments of these sculptures were brought to light by excavations carried on by Furtwangler in 1901 for the Bavarian government. The study of all existing statues and frag- ments led furtwangler to the conviction that there were two fallen warriors in the western pediment, symmetrically arranged between pairs of ( ombatants on each side of the figure of Athena. Between these groups and each corner are an archer, a spearman, and a fallen warrior 1 big. 53 ). The western pediment then contains thirteen fig- : ■ femple at Aegina, (Munich, Glyptotbek.) 1 In the Journal of Scienci int./ thr Arts, vi, pi, T. For a well illustrated int of the various restorations proposed by Cockerell and othei Furtwangler, ■■/ der Aphaia, 180 ff. - \ l \nnalx deir In • 15 1 . I 1 Konrad Lao n Itsehafi det /.' . 1 ff. 108 GREEK SCULPTURE ures, twelve besides Athena. In the eastern pediment the style is somewhat more advanced and the figures were probably less closely grouped than in the western pediment. Athena stands in the centre here also, but her attitude is less stiff; at each side is a group of three combatants, the middle one of whom is falling, but not fallen ; there follows a kneeling archer, and a fallen warrior lies in each corner. Thus there are ten figures besides Athena. 1 There has never been any serious doubt that these gable groups represent Homeric battles. Now since one of the archers of the west gable wears a pointed cap and close-fitting trousers, he must be an Asiatic. This half of the gable, then, must contain Trojans. The foremost Trojan spearman, who has pressed forward into the other half of the gable, may be Hector, and the foremost of his foes may be Ajax, of Aeginetan lineage. If this supposition is correct, one of the dying warriors would be Patroklos. The east gable is supposed to present the older invasion of Troy, in which Herakles took the leading part. But as he is represented as an archer, although he is one of the finest of all the figures, he is relegated to a secondary place. Another participant in this earlier invasion was Telamon, the father of Ajax ; and it can hardly be doubted that he appeared in as conspicuous a place as that occupied by Ajax in the west gable. Thus the temple was a monument to the prowess of Aegina ; but it was not the Greek way to represent the deeds of the present generation. As Pindar in his odes would not enlarge on the prowess of an Aeginetan who had just won a victory at Olympia, but would rather dwell on the glory of the great past of Aegina, so also did the sculptor. The two figures bending forward to aid the falling warriors in the eastern gable are entirely nude and unarmed ; so, also, are the wounded men in the corners of the western gable. The rest have implements of attack and defence. The spearmen have shields and helmets. The fallen warriors have in some cases shields and swords. 1 See Furtwiingler, Aegina, das Heiligtum der Aphaia, 1906, and in the pamphlet Die Aegineten, 1 906. nil. ARCHAIC PERIOD 109 The archers, who. of course, cannot carry shields, have leathern cuirasses. They are the only participants in the fray who are clothed. That men actually fought naked, but with shield and helmet, is not to be thought of. The Sculptor, however, demanded a tree field for his art. The custom of that period was to repre- sent the male as an athlete, whether contending for the prize at . mpia or fighting for the fatherland. Nowhere before the Per- sian Wars. ,>r even for some time after, was su< h attention paid to anatomical detail as in these Aeginetan groups. Anatomy rather than action is here the one object, " the be-all and the end-all " of the sculptor's art. It lias often been said that there is no real action, that a spell seems thrown over the combatants, as if they must keep these poses indefinitely. The goddess in each gable shows so little action that it was once proposed to regard both of them as images of Athena. What a contrast there is between them and Athena in the old gable group at Athens smiting down her foes! d'hey are also, in contrast to her, slightly under life-size. The fighting men are still smaller. In comparison with the giants in the Athenian gable they are pygmies. In grouping also, these gables are surpassed by the old Athenian gable. Here the small groups of men an- arranged in mechanical symmetry. The significance of the dying men in the corners is dubious. Who killed them? In the Athenian gable burly giants rush from the corners of the gables ; and everybody is engaged to the utmost of his powers. It is certain that the Aegina figures n- not placed strictly in single file. The weathering is said to show also that some of them were in three-quarter view. 1 There must have been variety of position. The men Leaning forward to aid the falling warrior were dowelled close up against the wall oi the tympanum, and the fallen warriors in the western pediment re probably more in the foreground than the struggling spear- ,o looks well at Furtwan rouping ( Fig. 5 1 1 will abandon the idea that the ii ;ures lo< Iced like manikins. lolf Furtwftngler, Kata '< nerGlyptothtk,va.&DitAtgituttn. no GREEK SCULPTURE Besides the elaborate work on every inch of surface, every accessory known to archaic sculpture was here brought into requi- sition. Paint was liberally applied. The figures stood out against a blue tympanum. Shields were blue on the outside and reddish on the inside, representing respectively metal and leather. Of the two archers in a gable, one had a red quiver and the other a blue one. The cuirass of Herakles was not only carefully wrought out, but was painted in detail. The goddesses were painted in almost exactly the same style as the "Maidens of the Akropolis"; and Fig. 54. — Central Group of West Gable at Aegina. (Furtwangler's Restoration.) herein, especially, is seen the influence of Ionic art. In general it may be said that what we have of the gable groups is the rough core without the adornments. Little holes everywhere show insertions. The addition of leaden locks of hair was a prevailing practice. It was early remarked that the figures of the east gable are much superior to those of the west gable. This has been accounted for in two ways. The west gable may have been made first, and was improved upon in the cast gable by a later and more gifted sculptor ; or a master designer may have wrought out his figures in the east gable and left the work in the west gable to an assistant. There is no case extant where two gables are practically replicas one ot the other, and yet are so different in their excellence. THE ARCHAIC PERIOD i i i It would be a Lire. a mistake to suppose that these gable groups were made by sculptors who, after working all their lives in bronze, had been induced to abandon it to make experiments in Parian marble. On the contrary, they appear to have known every trick of the most experienced workers in marble. They wrought the hair of the head, both the long wavy strands and the snail-shell curls at the ends, with great finesse. They wrought the pubes hair in the form of a spherical triangle, with utmost elaboration. They undercut the marble with absolute confidence, especially in the s of the Athena of the east gable. They made the figures stand in various attitudes with a minimum of dowelling and with slight attachment to their plinths. And yet for the most part the figures lack pulsating life. The date of the Aegina gables has long been debated. For some time it was customary to assign them to the sixth centurv. Hut they were gradually brought down until it became the custom to regard them as a sort of trophy of the battle of Salamis. This conclusion is certainly wrong, unless we can suppose that Aegina, only fifteen miles distant from Athens, went on making archaic sculptures with broad shoulders and narrow hips, anatomi- cal manikins, while Athens was producing figures that throbbed with life. Even if the pre-Persian gigantomachy gable was made as late as the expulsion of the Peisistratidae, 510 B.C., it is difficult ■ count for such an anachronism, but it is more probable that that gable goes back to Peisistratos himself. Could the Aegine- have held to their antiquated types for half a century after the Athenian group had been displayed? Could they have done so when the metopes of tin- Treasury of the Athenians at Delphi and the frieze of the C ury of the Knidians were already known to tin- whole < w 1 k world ? Probably the late date assigned to the ia gables would never have been ai 1 epted had we not had the wounded and dying Trojan in the left corner of the east gable 1 Fig. 55). II have the actual thi f death. The nervous grasp of t: on with the- right hand, the tension of the right leg (mOStl) 1, but in this ( . the relaxed fingers ot ii2 GREEK SCULPTURE the left hand, and above all the open mouth, and the eye and cheek which show the death agony, make this one figure step out of its surroundings and seem like a forerunner to the " Dying Gaul " of the second century B.C. Even veins are here portrayed, long before the time of Pythagoras, who is credited by Pliny l with in- troducing this feature into sculpture. The eyelids are as clearly cut as they are on statues at the middle of the fifth century. A recent French writer 2 claims that the west gable was made by a sculptor deeply imbued with Ionic traditions, who produced anti- quated figures and faces, while the eastern or main gable was FIG. 55. — Dying Trojan from Aegina. (Munich, Glyptothek.) intrusted to a representative of the new generation which had broken with old traditions. The difference is evident to any careful observer, but it is not so great as to lead to the conviction that two opposite tendencies here clashed. But for the dying Trojan the theory would lose most of its plausibility. While the figures of the east gable are all better than the corresponding figures of the west gable, there is, with the exception of the dying Trojan, no other that suggests contrast so much as simple im- provement. All the excellences of this one figure are not enough to upset the obvious judgement that the Delphic sculptures cannot be earlier than the Aeginetan, and that the latter can hardly be 1 Pliny, 34. 59. ' 2 Joubin, La sculpture grecque, 215. THE ARCHAIC I'KRIOI* 113 later than 500 v..c. We know too little of the history of Aegina to find an occasion for the erection of this temple, which, after :ng under two other names, seems now to have been fixed as a temple of Aphaia in spite of the fact that Athena appears as the central figure in both gables. In treating of the schools of Argos and Sikyon we had great names and sought to find works to attach to them. Here we have tangible works, and have to guess the makers. And this is not easy, because practically all the great names of Aeginetan sculptors are those of workers in bronze. Kallon, the first of Aeginetan sculptors, wa^ called a pupil of Tektaios and Angelion, who were pupils of Dipoinos and Skyllis. Thus he was at most only two generations removed from the origins, i.g. from the A polios of Tenea and Thera. The greatest name of the Aeginetan school, however, was Onatas, who was a very prolific sculptor and received commissions not only from all parts of the Pelopon- nesos, but from Syracuse, Magna Graecia, Asia Minor, and the islands. The Thasians set up at Olympia his colossal bronze Herakles, fifteen feet high ; and a colossal Apollo at Pergamon brought him great renown. Perhaps his most famous statue was his bronze black Demeter at Phigaleia, made to replace an older image, a task in which he is said to have been guided by a dream. But what interests us still more is that he made groups of statues. One at Olympia presented nine Creek heroes standing on a curved base, while before them on a separate base stood tor, holding a helmet which contained the lots by which the champion to fight Hector should be selected. Another group of his at Delphi presented the victory of the Tarentines over the barbarian Iapy-ians, and the fall of their kin- Opis. He made for Hiero of Syracuse a chariot and charioteer to commemorate his victory in the chariot-race at Olympia in 468 h.c. Thus it is known that Onatas was a maker of groups, and that he was a. live at a time when the Aeginetan -able -roups were supposed to have •1 made. It was on< e thought not unreason ible to try to < "li- ne- t oil name with them ; and since there was a marked different 6 H4 GREEK SCULPTURE between the two gables, it was natural to surmise that Kallon, the older artist, made the poorer, or at least more archaic, group, while Onatas made the finer, east gable, group. But it is evident that this is largely guesswork. Kallon would probably have been too old to share any work of Onatas. The new discovery of inscriptions containing their names on the Athenian Akropolis would not make them contemporaries, but only show that they were both active there before the Persian campaign of 479 b.c. It is unlikely that either of them would turn aside from bronze monuments to do decorative work on these gables. There were other sculp- tors who shed lustre on Aegina, the foremost of whom was Glaukias, who made a bronze chariot for Gelon on the occasion of his victory at Olympia in 488 B.C., before he became tyrant of Syracuse, and who was much sought for in various parts of the Greek world. We find no hint that any of these artists worked in any other mate- rial than bronze. This bronze school has probably left some trace of itself in its favourite material. The head found at Athens on the Akropolis (Fig. 56) seems to show in every detail the very kind of excellence that we should expect of that school. The delicate execution of the beard and mustache, where every hair is brought out by the finest of lines, the locks over the forehead coming out from under the helmet now lost, FlG. 56. — Bronze Head. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) rill". ARCHAIC PERIOD "5 the lij)s, the lower one bearing a deep depression, the thick eyelids and the plastic eyebrows, while they are incomparably superior to anything in the gable groups, nevertheless show ;i kinship to them. We feel the character of this man. When the eye sockets still held the white substance with which they arc now partially filled, and the inserted crystal, the face must have been exceedingly lite- like and very noble. The pro- file also is extremely delicate. There is no Attic head that closely resembles it. This may he Onatas* own work. At any rate, it is not unworthy of the •. sculptor of the time. And he may have felt a pride in setting up at Athens one of his best works on a base which bore his name. ( me can imagine the •ie to have represented an A - .'tan sent to Athens on a delicate mission. There are other works in hronze that may with some plausibility be assigned to the Aeginetan school. Such is a 1 from I [en ulaneum | I 57 ), torn probably from a full- length statue when it was taken from ( . nd < irried to the villa of the Pisos, where it was : .1 in i;;'-. The head is beardless, and more youthful than just d< 1, hut it with it in features, especially in the eyebrows and the lips. The hair is different, hut is arranged like that of the v ■ • ible figure leaning forward. In in t this st\: i i fringe of bronze curls in front of the long braid Burrounding the head, and the smooth I lead from I [ercula- ii'-um. ( Naples Mus< urn. i n6 GREEK SCULPTURE hair of the crown, seems to have been just what the marble cutter had before him as a model, of which he made a faithful copy. The bronze youth is a civilian, and is in some points to be con- trasted with the older man. The braids of hair around his head are much like those of the yellow-haired Ephebos of the Akropolis, in which most authorities have seen Peloponnesian influence. The face is strong. Studniczka once proposed to regard the head as a copy of Onatas' Apollo at Pergamon. 1 It has also been pro- posed to make the much- discussed Tux bronze statu- ette at Tubingen a product of Aeginetan art. 2 It is worthy of that high honour, having marvellous energy. But its claim is not so clear as that of the two already mentioned. Mere excel- lence is not a credential of Aeginetan origin. Much clearer is the case of the Strangford Apollo, 3 as also that of the small Apollo from the Ptoion. The latter with its Aeginetan mouth helps to bind the former more firmly into the group to which it might even without that link be assigned on the strength of its coiffure. A bronze statue of about the size of the Aegina statues, found in 1898 in the sea near ancient Kreusis, on the north shore of the Corinthian Gulf, has some characteristics that would lead us to assign it to the Aeginetan art. The hair, both of head and pubes, the latter in the form of a spherical triangle, like coarsely woven 1 Horn. Mitt. 2 (1887), 105, Note 47. 2 Collignon, i. 306. 8 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 51; Von Mach, 16. Fig. 58. — Archaic Bronze Head of Zeus Irom Olympia. THE FIFTH CENTURY 117 cloth, accords with that supposition. The bronze of the figure is so thin that some parts of it were badly worn away. But skilful restoration has left nothing but the arms missing. On the base is the inscription dedicating it to Poseidon. 1 It would hardly be temerity to assign a head of Zeus ' ( Fig. 58) found at Olympia to the Aeginetan workshop which contributed so much to Olympia. Here also we have the double row of snail- shell locks over the forehead. Three tresses fall over each shoulder. The mass of back hair is kept from spreading by a horizontal band, after which it is done up in the form of krobylos. CHAPTER III THE FIFTH CENTURY Period of Transition, 4S0-450 b.c. The somewhat common designation here adopted refers to a period which is a sort of bridge from the intense activity in sculp- ture before the Persian War to the great age of Perikles, The rule of the Peisistratidae had been beneficial to the stability and growth of Athens. It was on account of a private grudge that Aristogeiton and tiarmodios, a man and a youth, assassinated Hipparchos in 514 i:.c. No popular movement was behind the act. lint when Hippias had the two friends put to death, a senti- ment against the tyranny grew ; ami four years later it was over- thrown by intrigues of the oligan hy. At the end of another four tin- demon racy was established under Kleisthenes. Then it m 506 B.C., in all probability, that the bronze statues of the popular heroe-,, made by Anterior, were set up. but this group -•(I away to Susa by Xerxi -. after being held in reverence for a whole generation, while the heroes were made a theme for song and story. 1 I- plum. /;/;. I S.jO. 57, Pk '-,, 6, 1 Ptutwingter, />!<• Bromtn von <>/\w/>i,i, PI. I. n 8 GREEK SCULPTURE When the city rose again from its ruins, these statues, which were invested with a sort of sacred character, were sorely missed, and two sculptors, Kritios and Nesiotes, the former famous, and the latter little known, were commissioned to replace them. In 477 B.C. the new group was completed and set up in a place called " the orchestra." But many years later Alexander the Great, or one of the Seleucid kings, brought back to Athens the original group of Antenor ; and the two groups had stood side by side for about five hundred years when Pausanias saw them. Both these groups in bronze long ago disappeared. But in the Naples Museum is a copy of one or the other in marble, which, in spite of mutilation and subsequent restoration, gives an excellent idea of the original. This is supplemented by parts of inferior copies, by coins, by a relief on the arm of a marble chair in Broom Hall in Fifeshire, and by a fragment of a vase in the Boston Mu- seum. 1 Thus we have the means of securing a fair idea of the famous group. But until a few years ago it was regarded as very doubtful which of the original groups was represented by the copies. Some indeed supposed that the second group was a mere reproduction of the other. Botho Graef, 2 however, by a thorough study of the female statue in the Akropolis Museum which bears the name of Antenor, has made it clear that that statue was so unlike the Naples copy of Harmodios in the structure of the head and in the style of the hair that the latter could not be regarded as reproducing a work of Antenor. This may be accepted as the prevailing view. It seems strange now that it was ever doubted. In the thirty years which separated the two groups there was tremendous progress in sculp- ture. Athens had got all that it wanted in the way of instruction from Ionia, and had declared independence. We may never know exactly how the older group of Antenor looked ; but the relation between the groups was almost certainly one of contrast. Kritios is not likely to have archaized. Currents were at that time too 1 Also by the Panathenaic amphora on the Skaramanga vase in Vienna. 2 Ath. Mitt. 15 (1S90), 1. THE 111 Ml CEN II RV 119 strong for .1 - ulptor to stand still. Neither is it probable that An- terior, who made the Female figure which is a typical example of the Akropolis " Maidens," and who Mill stood chin deep in the Ionic flood, would or could have made figures like these. It is the group of Kritios and ■to that the Naples group presents (I We have a human head of heavy pro portions, especially in the chin, and not a mere block, which the female head of the Antcnor statue might, without great in- justice, he called. We find an ■ into the skull instead of renting on the smi fai e, ears instead of mere flaps. But the Naples figures have been restored, and there has been considerable question as to the attitude of the figures. They have been variouslj constructed in different < asts. 1 [armodios has two new arms, a new right leg almost entire, anil a new left leg from the knee downward. Aristogeiton has fared even W< >rse, in having •f Lysippean style put in the place of one probably some- thing like that of Harmodios, hut representing an older man. this, he was damaged by having his left arm with drapery from it knocked off and put on again at a different angle, giving a downward slant. On the fragment of a vase in B ' m ! both men are making a fierce onset against 1 Boston .'•.' • A '"'"- u '- • 59- im.) 120 GREEK SCULPTURE the tyrant, who was probably not represented. Harmodios, the youth, smarting under the affront to his family, is in front, rush- ing forward with his sword thrown far back to strike ; Aristogei- ton, bearded, is more in a position of guard, ready to make a thrust from behind his himation, which hangs from his uplifted left arm. 1 It is probable that the two actually charged side by side. But the painter could not easily represent it so. The clumsy restoration did great injustice to the young Harmodios, who is here presented in the attitude of guard, while he was really straining himself to the utmost to deliver his slashing blow. The style of the Harmodios head is a proof that the copyist was conscientious. The long heavy chin, the low forehead, and the cranium covered with snail-shell locks show this. In both bodies we have typical athletes of the time. 2 Lucian says of Hegias, Kritios, and Nesiotes that their works are " concise, sinewy, hard, and exact, and strained in their lines." 3 In this remark he not only shows his superiority to soi-disant critics like Pliny, but seems to have made his observations in the presence of the Tyrannicide group itself. Here is no superfluous flesh, but abundant straining. These figures of heroic mould seem able to brush away the whole line of Aeginetan warriors, pygmies by nature, from their shelf. But it is not to be supposed that all the figures of Kritios and Nesiotes were in strenuous action. The Somz£e athlete 4 might be regarded as of the same school, but is an example of quiet and reserve. The left leg is gently bent. 1 A vase of Duris (Hartwig, Aleisterschalen, PI. 21) shows an Athenian warrior much like Aristogeiton, but charging more fiercely. - J. Lange in his Darstellung des Menschen in der Alt-Griechischen Kunst (p. xi) applied his " law of frontality," taking the young Athlete on the Akrop- olis as an example. This law followed the rule " that an imaginary line passing through the skull, nose, backbone and navel, dividing the body into two symmetrical halves is invariably straight, never bending to either side." The Tyrannicides have broken the shackles. 3 Rhetor, praecep., 9, direa(piyp.ii>a /ecu vevpwdt] nal cnckrfpa /col aKpifiios diroTeTafjL^va reus ypap./j.a.'is. 4 P'urtwangler. Sammlung Somzee, Pis. 3-5. THi: I'll' I II CEN 11 KV i j i The last touch of archaic stiffness is eliminated, ami yet it is still to be classified as archaic by its archaic gra< e, such as Lucian ascribes to Kalamis. The attitude is very much like that of Pelops iu the east gable at Olympia. Iu fa 1 1. as we proceed from this point we find occasional suggestions of the gable figures of Olympia. The Tyrannicide group is preserved /• to us only in a copy ; but in the excavations at Delphi a bronze chari- oteer 1 (Fig. 60) was dis- covered, a work of about the same date as the group of KritioN. The charioteer was probably in the chariot along with his master, holdin the reins of the four horses,* while two boys were on either side. The whole rested on a stone base, on which is cut a metrical inscription in two lines, only the ends of which are preserved. The end of the first line, IloAiu.Aos //' &vi6rjK€v, gives us an approximate date; 1 Gelon died in 478 1 .( .. the very year of his victory in a chariot- r 1- '■ at I Delphi. I lis brother, Poly- zalos, as the next oldest member of the family, made the dedication, prob- ably not later than the following year. I . 19 we f Poly- , is write the original inscription, which Ins left, however, some i22 GREEK SCULPTURE very year to which we have assigned the Tyrannicide group of Kritios. While there is resemblance in the features, the contrast in attitude is what strikes us at first. Harmodios is in a life-and-death struggle ; the charioteer is wrapt in his mantle as in a sheath. He is calm, one might almost say cold. One would hardly call Har- modios beautiful, except as manly vigour is an element of beauty. But the charioteer is one of the most beautiful statues of antiquity. Had the head been lacking, there would still have been much to admire. It is true that the sheath in which the figure is enclosed from the waist downwards gives only the slightest suggestion of a human form beneath it. But the feet and the right arm (the left is lost) are beautifully moulded. The single garment, a long woollen chiton with short sleeves, covers also the upper part of the body, but in a graceful way. A cord passing under the armpits and over the shoulders, crossing behind and attached to the girdle, had the function of preventing the garment from catching too much wind. At the same time a series of simple and effective, because natural, folds is produced over the breast. The form of the body is felt and partly seen under the drapery. But there is no sweep of the garment in the breeze, as on the charioteer frieze of the Mausoleum, because here the figure stood with his master in the chariot at parade rest after the race was run. Of course the spirit of the age also was different. But it is the head, after all, that interests us most. It has a cold, impassive calm. It has the heavy chin of Harmodios, but a high oranium utterly different from his. The flat locks which traces. From these traces, O. M.Washburn, A. J. A. 10 (1906), 151-153, makes out the name Arkesilas. He believes that the group was originally dedicated by Arkesilas II, of Kyrene, in which case the artist was a certain Amphion of Crete (cp. Paus. 10, 15, 6). F. v. Duhn, Ath. Mitt. 31 (1906), 421-429, regards Anaxilas of Rhegion as the original dedicator and Pythag- oras of Rhegion as the probable artist. A. D. Keramopoullos, Ath. Mitt. 34 (1909), 33-60, thinks Gelon dedicated the group himself and his name was erased by Polyzalos. If that is correct, the group must have been dedi- cated in 478 B.C. Keramopoullos suggests Glaukias of Aegina as the possible artist. THE FIFTH CEN 11 KY 123 cover it are very different from Harmodios' snail-shell locks, and remind one of Myron. They arc bound by a diadem with a meander pattern representing a diadem of metal, probably gold, from under which curling locks stray over the temples and bark of the ears, while in front of the ears a streak of the down of youth falls over the cheeks very much as on a youth by the vase-painter Euphronios. 1 The eyes, fringed with metallic lashes, do not speak of the heat o\ the race nor of the satisfaction of triumph. The eye- balls are set in enamel. The eyelashes arc inserted in thick lids. The half-opened lips add to the expression. bine as this chariot- eer is, we must remember that he was simply a chariotei youth doing his work for his master. The impassive (mc of Harmodios is a usual case of the lack of play of features to correspond with the heated action of the Even twenty years later the figures at ( Mympia show for the most part no excitement, even in the fierce battle with the itaurs. Thus the charioteer is in keeping with his age. Whether he should be assigned to the Attic workshop, as Joubin 1 proposes, it is not possible to affirm. It may be put down as not improbable. Olympia. — The excavation of Olympia, [877-1881, threw great light on the development of sculpture. The results were not ecli] en by the subsequent excavations at Athens and Delphi. In the eighteenth century Winckelmann had emphasized the im- portance of < nng the site. In the French made trial vations, bringing to light the Cretan Bull metope and put of another. It was, however, reserved for Ernsl Curtius to secure, through tin- ( rown Prim e of Prussia, afterwards Emperor Frederic, had been his pupil, the funds for a systematic excavation of the whole site. I he work wis a model for all su< ( eeding excava- roup of tip • •< haeologists of < Germany hen- b< their rs under ti id direction of Curtius and \dler. publication of the results reflects great honour on German ,' irship. Had the \- net n sculptures been treated in like Hartwig, .:.' t > lip. - Joubin, 15a. 1 124 GREEK SCULPTURE manner we should have much more light on the composition of those pediment groups than we now possess. While not so many masterpieces of sculpture were found as was anticipated, the Hermes of Praxiteles alone, found during the first campaign, would, if put up at auction among the museums of the world, go far towards paying the expenses of the enormous labour. All the sculpture in marble or other stone was described by Georg Treu. 1 The large volume of text accompanying the superb plates is a monument to German insight, as well as patience. The bronzes were treated with the same thoroughness by Furt- wangler. 2 These works are intended to be definitive; after long waiting and weighing of mint, anise, and cummin, as well as weightier matters, the workers have said their last word. The sculptures adorning the great temple of Olympian Zeus fall in the period now under discussion. The date of the temple is fortunately fixed. Made with funds resulting from the sack in 468 B.C. of Pisa, a city near at hand, which had become prosperous from managing for a long period the affairs of the sacred place, it was completed in 457 B.C., the year in which Sparta defeated Athens and Argos at Tanagra, and put the seal on her predomi- nance at Olympia, which had really begun with the destruction of Pisa and the elevation of Elis to the nominal guardianship of the temple. In that eventful year the Spartans set up on the akro- terion over the east gable a golden shield with an inscription on it, boasting of their victory. 3 The next year, 456 B.C., was the year for celebrating the 81st Olympiad. How the humbled Athenians and Argives must have enjoyed that festival ! The temple, by far the largest in Greece, already bore its 1 Olympia III, Bildwerke in Stein und Thon. 2 Olympia IV, Die Br omen voji Olympia. These works supersede not only # the five provisional annual publications under the title Olympia, but also the numerous articles in various periodicals, which are interesting mainly as showing how the truth was threshed out and sifted. 8 A part of this inscription, which was copied by Pausanias, was discovered. Arch. Zeit. 40 (1882), 179. Cp. Olympia V, No. 253. mi: I'll I II CEN I l K\ "5 r 3 /.^ r i»j c "'^ ?: 128 GREEK SCULPTURE of the chariots there are on the right a maiden supposed to be an attendant of Sterope, and on the left a youth, naked like the boy in front of Pelops' horses, half kneeling and half squatting like Sterope's maid. Lastly, in the corner, are two reclining male figures, with heads raised to follow the ascending line of the cornice. These figures were called by Pausanias Alpheios, at the south end, and Kladeos, at the north. The grouping of the figures is adapted to the space. Zeus, colossal, about eight feet high under the apex of the gable, dominated the group. Pelops and Oinomaos are, as befits heroes, somewhat over life-size. Sterope and Hippodameia are about the proper size for mortal women. Thus the descending line of the cornice seemed a natural border of the group as it ran close over the heads of the central group, then over the bodies of the horses, and finally over kneeling and reclining figures to the cor- ners. The scene is quiet, preparatory to action. The west gable (Fig. 61) is in this respect diametrically oppo- site. We have here a fierce fight between Lapiths and Centaurs, a favourite theme in Greek art. In the centre stands Apollo (Fig. 63), with his body facing to the front. His head, however, is turned to his right, so that his face is in almost three quarters view. He held a bow in his left hand, which is extended down- ward, and grandly stretches out his right to quell the tumult. On the right of Apollo, as we face the gable, stands Theseus, and to the left Peirithoos, the Lapith king, whose bride is being attacked. The heroes strike with battle-axes the monsters who hold the struggling women in their grasp. On Peirithoos' side, the left, is the bride, Deidameia, marked as such by her richer garments. Theseus is next to Apollo the finest figure in the gable. 1 The huge bulk of the Centaurs makes the contest seem unequal but for the fact that the god is there. The heroes also are no mean support. 1 The fine head, after being assigned first to Deidameia and then to Peirithoos, has been correctly claimed for Theseus. This is perhaps the first case of the division of the forehead by a horizontal depression, which is not seen at all on female heads. THK FIFTH CENTURY 1 29 -Apollo, Ca ■ V. : 1 . 130 GREEK SCULPTURE The women, who have beautiful forms, tear with all their might the hair and beard of the Centaurs, at the same time trying to protect their persons from the brutes' insulting grasp. To the right and left of this central group of seven figures 1 are two groups of two figures each, a Centaur and a youth, the youth in the left half being a tender boy. Both struggle with all their might, the one in the right half trying to throttle the Centaur with his abnormally long arm which the Centaur is biting, causing him to express pain. 2 Then follows a group of three on each side. On the left a Centaur is pulling down by the hair a kneeling woman, at the same time putting his hoof into her lap ; while a naked Lapith, taking a grip with both hands, pulls his head down toward the corner of the gable. The corresponding group on the right represents a Centaur tearing the clothing off a woman, while a youth farther down in the gable thrusts a sword into the mon- ster's breast. In the extreme corners are two pairs of women looking on, perhaps because it was impossible to find room for a Centaur group here. The foremost one of each pair shows a lively interest in the scene. 3 They rest on slanting blocks which raise their heads up to the ascending line of the gable. The very last ones need no such raising. 1 It appears reasonable to regard the god and the two heroes facing outward from him as a group. This would leave for the other figures the following numerical grouping from left to right; 232232232. But if we consider the god, as we perhaps ought, as a figure by himself, we should have the responsion 2323I3232. 2 The only such case in the sculptures of the temple. 3 At some unknown date these two pair suffered practical annihilation. The whole western gable group was doubtless, like the eastern, originally of Parian marble; but now the two reclining figures at the left end (north) are of Pentelic. So, also, is the foremost of the pair in the right corner, although the slanting block on which she reclines is Parian. The figure behind her is Parian with the exception of the outstretched right arm. The original figures were probably destroyed or damaged at an early date by an earthquake. The restored figures are in entire keeping with the rest except that the figure to the extreme left has the upper eyelid projecting over the lower at the outer corner, a trait not seen elsewhere in the gables. THE I II I II (1 \ II RY i $1 As in the east gable so here the figures arc adapted to the S| to be filled. Apollo, the ^h\, in the centre i* taller than the heroes on his right and left. Then follow erect Centaur*, women, Centaurs kneeling, Centaurs dragged down to pound, and finally reclining women a* spe< tators of the fight. The limita- tions of spate are regarded from the centre to the comers. The east gable is somewhat open, or at least less < rowded than the west gable. The former has but thirteen human figures. It has, it is true, two quadrigas each of which might be regarded as the equivalent of three human figures. But the huge Centaurs and the Lapiths in strained action are a partial equivalent for the quadrigas. Twenty-one such figures as the west gable holds did not let much of the background show. Both group* are, in the main, treated in relief style, for front view only. The backs are everywhere slighted, somewhat more in the west gable than in the other. The woman in the last Cen- taur group to the right ha* no body at all below her breast, only a *kirt attached to the Centaur. In the quadrigas of the gable only the outermost horse i* wrought out ; and the b.n k side is *haved down a good deal. The other three were simply a rough block with three heads appearing in echelon in front of the outermost horse. Such neglect, somewhat unusual both earlier and later, is singular. What a contrast to the principles of the Aegina groups ! The Olympia gables were in *omr cases roughly finished even in parts that were visible. Paint must have been applied to the d of Theseus, to that of " Kladeos," and many others. - from fifty or Bixty feet below, and from the requisite lateral distant e of two or three time* that amount of space, ill tin* slighting dis- appeared, and the effect was doubtless immensel) sal ry, in keeping with the architecture of s] n which Bl heavily painted i i material of which the temple made. This was no Parthenon, where ev< rything was wrought out in the finest detail There are in the m ible three heads that have a value in the 1 32 GREEK SCULPTURE history of art. Above all is the cold but noble head of Apollo. His gaze following the direction of his extended right arm prom- ises victory. " All that the gods work is effortless and calm." The contortions of the bestial Centaurs are all in vain. We read their doom in that strong and pitiless face. Second only to the head of Apollo are the mortal heads of Theseus and of the suffering Deidameia. Next to these in interest are the heads of the reclining figures in the left corner of the west gable, and next to those the head of Kladeos in the right corner of the east gable. The head of the Lapith whose arm is being bitten by a Centaur has a strong resemblance to the head of Harmodios, both in its shape and in the hair, although the locks are not so tightly curled as those of Harmodios. On the whole we are fortunate in the preservation of so many heads. The question to what school the Olympia gables belong has been much debated ; and it is not too much to say of it quot homines tot sententiae. They have been assigned to every known school from Ionia to Sicily. Some critics have even assigned them to a local school. The Argive school was for a long time in favour. In more recent times an Attic origin has gained some sup- port. 1 Sicilian origin, although proposed by Kekul£, 2 found little favour. Sicilians may have had their orders filled largely in the mother country. The similarity observed between the Olympia sculptures and the metopes of Temple E at Selirius might better be accounted for by supposing the latter made by sculptors from Greece. But one may say, " Have we not the clear testimony of the vera- cious Pausanias that Paionios of Mende made the east gable figures and Alkamenes the other? " It took some time to get free from this supposed binding statement. But how much it has now become discredited is seen from the variety of schools to which authorities have assigned the gables. Pausanias, when he visited Olympia at about the middle of the second century a.d., did not come to impart information but to get it. The ciceroni of the place 1 Joubin, 243. 2 Arch. Zeit. 41 (1883), 241. THE FIFTH CENTURY 133 were his soun e of information. That guild is very much alike in all places and at all times. How unlikely it was that they would tell sanias that some strolling or local sculptors now unknown to fame made those gable figures I No, they must light on some name of note. They knew that Paionios had worked at < Hympia at some time, because his name was cut on the base of his famous Nike close to the east front of the temple. In the inscription on th.it base he mentioned that he had made akroteria for the temple. 1 It is possible that the ciceroni of the second century a.i>. thought that " akroterion" meant a gable, and so started the error. This is, how- ever, uncertain. But it is certain that Paionios, who made his Nikeas late as 4J4 B.C., can hardly have been more than a youth in 457 B.< ., when the gables were already completed. It may also be put down as certain that the same sculptor could not have made such different sculptures as the Nike and the east gable group. What probably happened was this : the ciceroni, not being satisfied with an anony- mous sculptor, and seeing the name of l'aionioscut in big letter^ on this base so near to the east front of the temple, told the story off- ban 1 that he had made the sculptures of the east gable. What did they know of style? The case against Alkamenea i^ equally clear. He w.is at work in 40; B.C. when, after the expulsion of the Thirty Tyrants, he made two statues for Thrasybulos. Could he have been famous enough to have th ition of a gable of this great temp!' ned to him as far back as 4 70 1 .. .? The ( Ireeks did not usually have a longer career than that ofSophoklesl The idea t >r some time current that there was another and older Alkamenes seemed strengthened by an ins< ription on a statue re cently found at Pergamon. 1 But statue ami ins< ription have been nt authority ; to go no farther back than the well-known A Ik amen But what seems to make it < ertam that one or the other of the claimants must drop out is the well-known fact that not only are both gables of the tyle(a result impossible in the case of 1 Pans, v ." ■ 1 - /•■•' 1 1904, ;''. 8 Winter, Alk. Mitt. SQ. (1904 III. i 3 4 GREEK SCULPTURE two masters of pronounced style) but the metopes also. Finally it is difficult to put implicit confidence in the report of Pausanias, who took the Apollo of the west gable, that commanding figure, to be Peirithoos. Pausanias is thus convicted of at least a lack of observation, perhaps one might say of extreme gullibility. It is also not unlikely that having imbibed Roman notions, he deceived himself in naming the end figures in the east gable Alpheios and Kladeos. The notion that rivers were represented in early Greek art by human figures has been stoutly combated by Walz. 1 Later Furtwangler 2 took upon him the defence of Walz and main- tained that in the fifth century B.C. the personification of streams in art was unknown, and that the notion rests solely on this state- ment of Pausanias. Note. — The arrangement in Fig. 6 1 is that of Treu. It is, of course, possible that this arrangement is not always correct. Curtius' arrangement, which is followed in the museum at Olympia, is impressive, but it is in many cases demonstrably wrong. Treu's final adjustment was based upon infinite shift- ing and proving. It has given the coup de grace to many other proposed arrangements. He had two guiding principles: («) To bring to front view what was worked to be shown. (b) To group the figures so that all except the two inserted in front of the horses should have their heads close against the descending cornice of the gable, thus avoiding the large open spaces of other arrangements. Nearly twenty years passed before the definitive work of Treu was given to the public. In the meantime a large body of literature on the gables had come into being. So voluminous is it that it is hardly practicable to cite here all these articles. Treu overlooked none which had been published when he wrote. Wernicke {Jahrbuch, 12 (1897), ! ^9) ma de some weighty suggestions on the east gable group which deserve special men- tion. He made Oinomaos and Sterope change places with Felops and Hip- podameia. He put an altar in front and a little to the right of Zeus with the two men advancing obliquely towards it, and the women following. He maintained that the dowel holes in the backs of the figures show that they 1 Eckjiguren ant Ostgiebel des Olympischen Zeus/empels und am Westgiebel des Parthenons ; a work of great merit but very inaccessible, in Program des Evang. Theol. Seminars ztl Maulbronn, 1887. This was the first attack on a long-cherished error. 2 Masterpieces, 457; Jahrbuch 6 (1891), 87, and in various other passages. THE FIFTH CENTURY 135 were placed obliquely to the background. The i an altar is an old one which had been discarded on what Beemed sufficient grounds. The sui tion has great interest as bringing the principal persons into an action ><( great significance instead of letting them stand otiose. Tl to it is that the story makes Oinomaos sacrifice before the departure of Pelops, While the exact spot where each fragment of gables OJ metop and was noted, very little light was thus obtained a^ to their exact placing. The fragments were widely scattered by the earthquake which threw them down. It is, however, worth noting that not a single fragment belonging on one end of the temple was found lying at the other end. The Metopes. — The metopes on the outside of the temple were left without sculptural decoration. The cella, however, had them at each end. At each end of the cella was a portico with two columns, which gave six metopes. These represented the twelve labours of Herakles, who was held in especial honour at Olympia. The fragments of the east porch were never mixed with thos the west, and thus it was easy to assign them to their places. The order was as follows, beginning on the south end and pro- ceeding to the right : — On the West fr. >tm North to Smith, < )n the But, proceeding to the Ri , iC Ki( . hl i. Erymantbian Boar. 1. Vim an 1 ion. fDiomedea. 2. Lernean Hydra. 3. Geryon. . Stymphalian Bit 4. A:' 4. ( nt.m BulL 5. Kerberos. 1 5. Arcadian Stag. 6. .'■ rlippolyta. ( )f the metopes the two finest are the Atlas metope on the ■ and the Bull metope on the west, partly Put not altogether they are best preserved. Fate has doubtless been kind here. The next best are the Vugean Stables on the east and the Stymphalian birds on the west. The rest are, for the most part, aentary and no1 impressive as works of art. I e Atlas met- . perhaps without design, i well with the Btationarj 1 har- .-.ual order "f subjects made 1 last, but the Augean metope irk ./, which shows that it was the inst in the lit what we call the lait. 136 GREEK SCULPTURE acter of the east gable above it, while the Bull metope agrees equally well with the strenuous action and contorted lines of the west gable. But the parallel goes no farther. Since, however, they are as near as possible to the centre, one is tempted to see design here. But the order is more probably a lucky accident. There are other metopes in which the action is nearly as strenuous as in the Cretan Bull metope, e.g. the Augean Stables metope. The Atlis metope (Fig. 64) deserves more than a passing look. There is delightful naivete in Atlas' holding out the coveted apples for Herakles to take them when his whole strength is required to support the heavens. The woman who stands behind Herakles and eases his load with her hand is not one of the Hesperids, but his sympathetic goddess Athena, a splendid draped figure well con- trasted with the two nude males. There are indications that she bore a spear. 1 It was long thought that the double cushion which Herakles held was all that he visibly bore ; but it has been ascertained that something now missing rested upon the roughened upper surface of the cushion, something that represented the weighty heavens, — the sky that would fall unless somebody held it up. Atlas will presently go back to his eternal task and Herakles to other labours. The Cretan Bull is in the Louvre, with the exception of a few 1 A hole is bored perpendicularly through her closed right hand. Fig. 64. — Athena supporting Herakles. (Olympia.) THF. Firm CEN ruRY 1 I " 1 .1 , parts found in the German excavations. The Athena of the Stymphahan F.irtU metope, sitting negligent!) on a rock, is also in the Louvre, from the excavations of i8:m, and is represented in the Olympia Museum by a < ast. The style of the metopes is very much like that of the gables. There is the same slighting, only to a higher d< , of the hair, which implies paint As on the gables, the chisel left much to the brush. The relief is quite high. A striking example is that of Herakles thrown out in front of the bull. The sculptors were not bent on finesse, but on effc< ts, and they got them, as did the sculptors of the gable groups. Sterope wears the same long woollen chiton with diploidion which is seen on Athena in the Atlas metope and in the Augean Stables metope. The straight folds remind one of a fluted column. With these figures from Olympia there may be grouped several female figures, some of which are probably copies made in Roman times ; .is. for example, the 1 [estia ( iiustiniani, 1 and a female statue in < lopenh igen. I mtemporary or nearly contemporary with the Olympia gables is Temple / . at Selinus, judged from a single metope to be a temple of Hera. This ipe ( Fig. 65 » is the mi ng and expressive of tour that 1 l'.runii-l'.ru. kmaiin. ' . Von Mach, 7; - An, : \ Gtypt • ■ l ' 1 ' " ; J oubin « '' '■ ' has recently been (band f"r it. '.-. — Zeus and Hera on M ■ >pl«- /• at Selinus. (Palermo Museum.) 138 GREEK SCULPTURE are preserved. It represents Hera presenting herself in all her overpowering charms to Zeus on Mount Ida. 1 The sculptor who put this beautiful idyllic scene from the Iliad into sculpture was a master. Zeus in his eagerness, as Hera unveils herself, seizes her by her left wrist, overpowered by her loveliness. But there is no ignoble suggestion in the scene. It is noteworthy that all the fe- male figures in this series have the nude parts made of marble. Heads and arms are inserted in the limestone body. The males are entirely of limestone. The other three metopes — Herakles overpowering an Amazon, Aktaion and Artemis, Athena striking down Enkeladas — are much inferior to that of Zeus and Hera. Of a somewhat earlier date, but still in the period under discussion, are two metopes from Temple F, at Selinus, with the lower part only preserved. Both represent a gigantomachy. In one, Athena, marked by her aegis, is striking down the giant, who opens his mouth in the death agony. The other goddess is not marked with any certain sign. She is perhaps Artemis. At this point we must take cognizance of the fact that the Olympia sculptures stand on the verge between the old and the new, and we must now take note of several pieces which serve as a transition to a freer style of art. We have in Fig. 66, from the Museo delle Terme, a relief, found in 1887 in the grounds of the Villa Ludovisi, one of the gentlest and sweetest representations of the great goddess Aphrodite rising from the sea, assisted on the right and left by two attendants, probably Horae. Helbig finds in the relief an accouchement scene. In that case we cannot place it in the first period of transition from the archaic. It can, however, hardly be doubted that it is a solemn presentation of the birth of Aphrodite. The goddess rises from the watery element, the seashore being indicated underneath the feet of the attendant Nymphs. Her wet, clinging drapery is to be covered by a thick, woollen robe, which is drawn up from the right and left. It has already been drawn up high enough to accord with the solemnity of the great occasion. It is proper 1 II. 14. 152-352. THE FIFTH I ENT1 RY 139 that, being in relief, the goddess should have her head in profile, while the breast should expand. In her gentleness she looks for attendants to help her. We have unfortunately lost the head-, of these beings ; but their attitude suggests in every motion the wish to assist. We can more readily accept the loss of these heads, since in the central figure the head is absolutely | \ sweeter Aphrodite than this could hardly be portrayed. Had we only this figure we might put it much later, perhaps in the Periklean age ; but the accessories forbid it. The lines of the K$i*^^^ 4 1 ns^ /y 1 1 k * J* I FlC. 66.— Aphrod \ from the Sea. (Rome, M !•■ skirts fall stiffly in parallels. The hair above the band i-> very carefully adjusted, as are the long tresses which fall over the left shoulder. ( >n the whole the watery element is miffi< iently In* ; but to make sun- that the seashore is heir r ,• have pebbles under the feel of the attendant Nymphs. A touch that marks the relief the awkward ment bj which the six arms appear in two m a ft*t- The fed are ungainly and awkwardly pla< ed. 140 GREEK SCULPTURE The relief has at some time been roughly chipped off at the top, so that the heads of the attendants are lost ; the ornaments at the bottom have also been cut away (possibly to be replaced with bronze ornaments), though the feet are almost intact. The whole plaque is about five feet long and three feet high. Attached to the main relief are two shorter arms or wings, forming three sides of what has been called a throne. 1 On each of these short arms a woman is portrayed. Both rest on cushions ; but, apart from that fact, the two are ap- parently sculptured to point a contrast. One is a young woman ab- solutely nude and play- ing on. a double flute, as she leans back on a thick cushion in the abandon of naitre avec le printemps, mourir avec la rose. She is content to be happy and to die. On the other arm is a woman much older, draped from the top of her head to the sandals. Her attitude is stiff as can be. She Fig. 67.- Head of Goddess. (Rome, Museo delle Ternie.) 1 In the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston is a three-sided relief (not yet published) so similar in shape, size, and style that it must be considered in connection with the one discussed in the text. Were not the front about three inches shorter, the two might almost be regarded as parts of one monument. The scene on the front represents a winged figure weighing two nude "souls" in the presence of two seated women; on one end a nude cithara player cor- TIN FIFTH i I A II RY ,.,, throws incense, which she draws out of a flat box. into a cup on .1 high standard. She is sad if not severe. It seems as if the sculptor had before him the parable of the Wise and Foolish Virgins, or something like it. The Foolish Virgin, if so we may call her, is one of the sweetest creations of the group. She may not have chosen "the better part." but her sweetness allures. Perchance the great Anadyomene may take her to belong to her chosen circle. Were it not for their association with Aphrodite we might take the reliefs as picturing " summer and winter." But bound up as they are with her, we are safer with the interpre- tation here proposed. 1 Mr-. I gi trie Strong* comes to the con- clusion that this relief belongs to Kalamis. This may be right ; but our knowledge of Kalamis is so slight that we ire still groping in the night. It is natural to feel that this is like his work. A colossal head in the Museo delle Terme (Fig. 67) belongs to the same period as these reliefs, and shows some similarity to them in style, in spite of its lack of life, which may be due in part to its size and in part to the fact that it belonged to a cultus statue. There are other survivals either in originals or copies which may with considerable certainty be assigned to the period of tran- sition even if we cannot give them a more definite date. The five bronze dan< ing women from Henul aneuni in the Naples Museum fall in this ( la>s. :I The stiff folds of the 1 )oric chiton with diplois ally them with figures in the east gable and metopes of the ( Hympi a temple. The immobile features are entirely out of accord with the action in which the women are supposed to b d. responds to the nude flute ^irl <>f the Ludovisi reli< fj and on tin- other end is a curiously r in su KK ,st what i> misting frnm the 1 >< ■ 1 1 • • 1 1 1 "i the Ludovisi n I 1 Antike Denkm8ier t ii. | i S »i l - i), 1 id 7. -J. U.S. 14 1894), 204 ff. Petenen ROm. MitL J l ha* attempted to j >r< .% «- with thi al female head H^. '>7),an, probably a funereal figure, preserved in several copies, one of which is in relief, is most pleasing. The head is bent forward, resting on the right hand. 1 The left with the palm pressed flat against her seat supports the body ei ictly as in a sepulchral relief from Thespiae in the Athe- nian Museum. 1 A dia- dem is pushed low- down on the forehead. and over the head is thrown a thick veil that somewhat shades her face, which is very calm. It is only in the attitude that grief is expressed. This copy has been mui h restored. The rock should be replaced by a chair with a work- basket under it, as in other repli< The garment, a < hi ton with sleeves, lias much more elaborate folds than the drapery of the res from Olympia, and the assignment to this period must be regarded as doubtful. There is, of course, no support for the current name "Penelope." But under whatever name it passes it has a certain (harm that ever) one must feel. I" this period almo linly belongs the so-called Spinario (I boy engaged in pulling a thorn from his foot. This 1 The Vatican copy, here giv« Another bead, in ihe Berlin Museum No b may b« ■a original, i ht hand, which held the v< ■ Kabba . I Kvwri tov 'E$piko 17. Fig. 69. — Spinario. (k>>nr Museum.) i 4 4 GREEK SCULPTURE also exists in several copies, the best of which is a bronze statue in the Capitoline Museum. The theme seems at first sight trivial and out of place in serious sculpture of the early part of the fifth cen- tury. But a view of the boy's face corrects this impression. That face is immobile and serious ; but shows no expression of pain. His thought is concentrated on the act of pulling out the thorn. There can be little doubt that the figure belongs in the sphere of athletics. The boy has run his race and won, in spite of stepping on a thorn which has cruelly wounded him. In his first moment of victory he pulls it out. Athletics being to the Greeks an important part of life, the statue stood as a memorial of the boy who conquered not only his antagonists, but also his pain. The lean, spare form shows him to be a youth of about fifteen years. This figure shows an asymmetry greater than any that sculpture had shown up to this time, but it is not unpleasing. We do not think of his attitude but of his concentration of thought and action in pulling out the thorn, as a moment before he had been intent on winning the race. Archaic features are the thick eyelids, which once held enamel (like the bronze head on the Akropolis, illustrated on page 101), and the deep parallel grooves in the hair. Of course, with the head held in this position the hair. would naturally fall down and cover the cheeks ; but the sculptor took no note of that. This statue is, perhaps, not a copy but an original. It is no wonder that such a bold stroke found imitations. But every one has variations that are inevitably deteriorations. One 1 represents the boy pulling out the thorn in a rage. This variation is at least half a century later than the original, perhaps more. Several of the replicas are in marble. One of the best of these is a marble head in the Louvre, which has hair much like the original, but none of its life. It is not unlikely that this original with which we started is a product of the Argive school, which appears for a long time to have held sway at Olympia, and to have produced especially 1 A bronze found at Sparta, and now in the possession of Edmund Rothschild. Till. Ill III CEN 11 KV •45 athletic statues. It is. of course, also possible that it is from the workshop o( l'yth . but here we arc in the realm of pure conjecture. The statue of a victorious girl racer ' falls in this transition period. She might well be the twin sifter of the Spinario. This young girl with Amazonian traits might, without the "restorations" o( a new nose ami both arms, have equalled the Spinario. Even as it is, she is no mean figure of a girl athlete. Her simple tunic and her intent lo.>k give her an appearance such as would make a Spartan mother proud. Her face — in the copy — is immobile. She is at the service of Sparta and fears not to run in the stadion for her city before the crowd. Kalamis. — We turn now to two gnat names, Kalamis and Pythagoras, to whom we may also add Hegias, of whom we know little. The work of Kalamis probably falls entirely within the period of transition, while Pythagoras was also busy after : .'-' ami was practically contemporary with Myron. The 1 i in which Lucian held Kalamis, espei ially his Aphrodite, called indra, has led t'> attempts to assign to him the original of some of our ( opies. It was, hours .-r. a mistake to try I his name to the athletic type represented by the ( Ihoiseul ( louffiei " Vpollo" and "Apollo" of the Omphalos (Fig. 70). To b an artist of that tun but the * nameless grace," fol which kmano, No. 11. belt, fftrmts, 35 (1900). ' I 1 i.i. I ig, 2 I >l the 1 »m| ira.) 146 GREEK SCULPTURE Kalamis was distinguished, would lead us to something very dif- ferent from the athletic type. Moreover, in the list of his works the athlete is conspicuously absent. In fact, Kalamis is credited with nearly everything except athletes. He was very prolific, working over a wide area, and in bronze, marble, and gold and ivory. The loss of every trace of his work is one of the greatest losses in the history of sculpture. It is small gain that Cicero 1 tells us " Kalamis' works are hard, but yet softer than those of Kanachos " ; and Quintilian 2 speaks to the same effect. 3 Pythagoras. — The attempt to ascribe something tangible to Pythagoras, of whom we know painfully little, is in recent times somewhat persistent. Waldstein has made a good case against Conze, 4 Winter, 5 and Furtwangler fi in making the " Apollo of the Omphalos " at Athens an athlete. Certainly the statue never had any connection with the Omphalos. It seems hardly possible that one could look on that muscular form with the hair bound up in the fashion of athletes without recognizing in it an athlete. That he belongs in our period is shown by the form of the pubes hair. When Waldstein r goes farther and attempts to prove that the orig- inal statue of this type was a work of Pythagoras his case is not so clear. Pythagoras was a celebrated sculptor of athletes, and there ends our certainty. The appearance of veins and sinews on the arms of the replicas is not sufficient to prove their Pythagorean origin, 8 inasmuch as these are already strongly marked on the fallen warrior from the east gable of Aegina. Some day we may have a genuine Pythagorean statue ; but that is doubtful, now that no more light can come from Olympia and Delphi. This is another of 1 Brutus, 10. 70 : Calamidis dura ilia quidem, sed tamen molliora quam Canachi. 2 Inst. Orat. 12. IO. 7: Jam minus rigida Calamis \fecii\. 3 It has been suggested that there were two sculptors named Kalamis, one of the fifth century, the other of the fourth. See Reisch, Jahresh. d. oesterr. Arch. Inst. 9 (1906), 199-268; Studniczka, Kalamis, Leipzig, 1907. 4 Beitrage, 19. 6 Jahrb. 2 (1887), 234. 6 Roscher, Lex. i. 456. 7 J.H.S. 2 ( 1881), 332 and Essays on the Art of Pheidias, 323. 8 Pliny, 34. 59 : Hie primus nervos et venas expressit. THE FIFTH I EN ll'KY 147 the greatest gaps in our knowledge, inasmuch as this Samian who migrated to Rhegion was probably the equal of Myron. The attempt to find the style of Pythagoras in the youth from Perinthos ' and in other athletes has not met with convincing success, although Furtwangler has provisionally established a Pythagoras group/ to which, however, the Perinthos head is not admitted. Hegias. — Of Hegias, ail Athenian, who has the honour of being called the first teacher of Pheidias, we know next !■ > nothing, cm ept that his style was stiff and archaic. 4 What he taught Pheidias is not known. What little credence the storj imes from the fa< t that Hegias was not famous enough to have legends of greatness attached to him. Age of the Gri \i Masters Myron. — It is a relief to turn from a series of artists who, de- spite the efforts made to fasten on them this or that statue in museums, still remain mere names, to the great masters of the fifth century. We begin with Myron as the oldest of the group, whose dibut falls in the period of transition, Iii^ birth may be put .•> early as the close of the sixth century, since his son Lykios had in 446 b.c. acquired sufficient celebrity as a sculptor to be < hosen to make two groups of horse and rider, set up on either side of the approach to the Propylaea at Athen Myron probably bad only a slight priority in age over the other two stars of the first magnitude, Polykleitos and Pheidias, who with him illumined the skv of Gri That they were .ill at work in 4501..'. ii made certain by the recently discovered Oxyrhynchoe >nt uning a list of Olympic vi< 1 Ath. Mitt. [6 (1891), 313. • ' • Tip most • labi rate d "i Pyth : ■. . ilt I 105. 1 Quiotilian, In t. Orat 12. i". 7 : Dm "\- ■ Lolling, Delh » 1 - ■ . . 1 • Robert, Hern . ■ 141 ff. Krom this papyrus it appears that 148 GREEK SCULPTURE The statement that Myron was a pupil of the Argive master, Hagelaidas, is thoroughly credible on chronological grounds. Furt- wangler, 1 however, prefers to insert Hegias as a step from the Ar- give master to Myron, in whom he sees Argive traits. There is little doubt that Myron was a Boeotian, 2 and became an Athenian by the annexation to Athens of a considerable strip of Boeotian ter- ritory on the south side of Kithairon, including Eleutherae, Myron's birthplace, but it is doubtful whether any of Myron's character- istics can be ascribed to his Boeotian origin. Pausanias constantly calls him 'A^vatos. 3 He is best known by his Diskobolos and his Marsyas, in both of which he has thrown archaic stiffness to the winds and far outrun in freedom the makers of the Tyrannicide group. He worked in bronze, by preference in Delian bronze ; but if we have no original from his hand we have unmistakable copies in marble of two of his works. The best copy of the Diskobolos is that now practically inacces- sible in the Lancelotti Palace in Rome. 4 It may, in fact, be called a superb copy. It agrees exactly with Lucian's description 5 of the original. " The discus-thrower," he says, " is bent down into the position for the throw, turning his head toward the hand that holds the disk ; and, all but kneeling on one knee, he seems ready to straighten himself up at the throw." We have before us in Fig. 71a lithe, vigorous youth in a mo- mentary attitude, but showing in every line the youthful victor Myron was still working in 448 B.C., and Polykleitos in 452 B.C. That Pheidias was at that time at the acme of his powers has never been in doubt. Thus Pliny was not in error in calling Myron and Polykleitos aequales et con- discipuli. 1 Masterpieces, 53. 2 A later sculptor, perhaps of the same family, bore the name, Mvpwv Qrjfiaios, Loewy, Inschriften griechischer Bildhauer, 154. 8 Paus. 6. 2. 2; 6. 8. 4. 4 Found in 1781 on the Esquiline. Other copies exist in the British Museum, in the Lansdowne Collection, in the Museo delle Terme, and in the Vatican. 6 Pkilopstudes, 18. THE FIFTH i EN 11 RY 149 who must in the next moment unfold his beauty of body, limbs, and face, while he receives the plaudits of thousands who Bee his disk speeding beyond the marks of the other competitors. No- where else do we see so well the spirit of the great games in bodily form. "This one thing I do." The running and the wrestling were long drawn out ; but the throw of the disk was over in one supreme effort. This right leg will not sustain the ter- rible strain for more than a moment. rit of (ireek sculp- ture inclined so much to re- pose and calm that it is no wonder that Quintilian should b iy Quid fii/n distortum tt elaboratum n the trunk, which detracts much from the Not the e points of superiority of the original must have q its poising, l '•>) the poorly photographed at that, ■hows the sinews of the right hand Btrongly marked. The ex be due in part to the copyist; but it may doubted whether Myron attempted to portraj emotions. Tin- head, though la< kii '1 expression, is ol a high-bred type with. 71. — M • lotti I'. 1 me.) i ! ..mi 150 GREEK SCULPTURE a high crown. 1 The hair-.is somewhat slighted, as was probably the case with the original. 2 J Another athletic statue representing Ladas, a runner falling in death just as he crosses the line, had much more celebrity than this nameless discus-thrower, and portrayed probably an even higher degree of tension. A. Mahler 3 believes that Ladas is represented in the Naples " wrestler " to the left. 4 Both these so- called wrestlers at Naples are doubtless runners. Another work of Myron which exists in copies is the Satyr, 5 Marsyas, who was about to pick up the flutes which Athena had thrown away in disgust on seeing her distorted face reflected in the water as she tried to play on them. He is represented as he appeared the moment after Athena had charged him to let the vile things alone. The muscular action, which in the Diskobolos was pending, has here already taken place. The ten- sion has passed over into another rather constrained position. Either by chance or because of the celebrity of the original we have several replicas of this scene. 6 The statue in the Lateran Museum best represents the muscular strain in the Satyr as he recoils from the stern goddess. But perhaps never has the fever for restoration shown itself so ridiculously as in this statue. Be- sides some other restorations of little importance, Marsyas has received two new arms; and, of all things in the world, he is 1 Furtwangler has discovered in the Louvre a cast of the head of the Diskobolos which brings out the fine features far better than any photograph that had ever been secured. 2 Pliny, 34. 58 : Capillum et pubem non emendatius fecisse quam rudis antiquitas instituisset. 3 Poly k let, 17. 4 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 354 ; Von Mach, 289. 5 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 208; Von Mach, 65 a. 6 A coin of Athens, a sculptured relief on a marble vase from the Finlay Collection, now in the National Museum at Athens, and a red-figured vase in Berlin, reproduce the whole scene. Besides these there is a bronze statuette of Marsyas from Patras, now in the British Museum, and a marble statue in the Lateran Museum at Rome. THE FIFTH CENTURY i 5 i restored playing the castanets to his own. pas seul. Undoubtedly he was really shrinking back in terror. The attitude of the l'atras bronze is probably not quite correct, but it escapes being ridiculous. Myron by no means confined himself to statues of athletes and figures in strained attitudes. 1 lis versatility was marked. Pliny says of him Primus hie multiplicasse veritatem videtur} (He made gods and heroes in great numbers. Zeus, Apollo, and Asklepios seem to be his favourites among the gods, and I [eraklesand Perseus among the heroes. 1 He appears to have made few statues of goddesses, and ,h to the appearance of these we have practically no cluey If Myron had never carved a human figure, he would have been distinguished as a sculptor of animals. A bronze heifer on the Akropolis at Athens would alone have conferred fame on him. In the almost innumerable epigrams composed in her praise, she is represented as so lifedike that shepherds tried to drive her off with their herd, calves came to draw milk from her udders, and much more of the same sort, enough to prove the great esteem in which this cow wis held. 3 It is not unusual to see Myron classed as a "realist" in op- position to Polykleitos, who wrought out his figures according to a scheme, and is (ailed a " theorist." Pheidias is known as the " idealist" Thus we should have three great pupils of Hagelaidas branching out in three different lines. but it is extremely doubt- ful whether Myron ought to be classed as a realist. He was pro- lific as a sculptor of gods, as the records show; and as to his much-di- tissed pristae* who have been thought to be two men working with a i p>>,-i ut saw, which would be realistic in the ex- treme, a probable emendation has made them boxers, pyctae? ■ I1.,r.. - I ortwangler, .)/./ terpietes, 165, devote* some tiit\ pages to presumable ■ th< k lost riginals. Hut her m ill'' realm of controversy. * In •'■. I luvre Cabinet des Medaillea there i-. a small bronze figure "f .t 1 which Collignon iciate with Myron. It is a worthy ition "f 1 tic maaterpii 1 Pliny, 34. 57. ! m Dorpat (1SS0), 9. 152 GREEK SCULPTURE Several other statues have with more or less probability been assigned to Myron. The one that has perhaps the best claim is a bronze statue (upper half) from Tarsos, now in Constantinople. 1 The head resembles that of the Diskobolos, especially in the curly locks of hair. The Riccardi bust of a hero in Florence, as well as the Ince-Blundell head, is also ascribed by Furtwangler 2 to Myron. An athlete, 3 in the Munich Glyptothek, pouring oil into his hand may also have some claim to be Myronian. But the famous Idolino (Fig. 72), in Flor- ence, one of the most beau- tiful bronze statues in the world, though put in the Myronian group by Kekule\ must be denied a place there. In fact, it has been with- drawn from the group by Kekule" himself in a later article, in which he speaks of it as Attic without asserting that it is Myronian (p. 161). The Diskobolos is strained to the utmost ; but his face is as cold as the marble of which it is made. Myron Fig. 72. — Idolino. (Florence, Archaeological never attempted to express Museum - ) feelings. In this he agrees with his time. The day was still far off when Skopas should express the intense workings of the soul. And yet Myron's figures as seen in the head of a hero, 4 calm but forceful, remind^ us somewhat of Michelangelo's work, which is full of strength. A Myronian head found at Catajo 5 is perhaps a more exact copy. No one can extrude the Berlin head. 6 There is more question as to the 1 Joubin, 133. 2 Masterpieces, 167, 172. 8 Brunn-Bruckmann, Nos. 132, 135. 1 Masterpieces, 167. 6 Ibid., 169. 6 Ibid., 170. THE FIFTH CEN ll RY 153 Myronian high-crowned heads which form a group, the Ince- Blundell head, the Perinthos head, and best of all the high- crowned head frojn Copenhagen. Polykleitos. -^ Polykleitos, though known as the great master of the Argive school in the next generation after I [agelai'das, was prob- ably a Sikyonian by birth. 1 He belonged to a family of sculptors, some of whom worked at Sikyon and others at Argos) The Argive and Sikyonian schools had been affiliated since the times of Dipoi- nos and Skyllis : and this close association covers the sixth, filth, and fourth centuries. In this Argive-Sikyonian family the names Polykleitos, Patrokles, and Naukydes appear twice. Some of these sculptors recorded themselves as " Argives" and others as " Siky- onians." This duplication has given rise to some confusion. Works of Polykleitos, the grandson or grand-nephew, have been ascribed to the older and greater sculptor, who thus appeared as a wonderful example of longevity. 'Phis contemporary of Pheidias, 1 in 460 B.C a >' lllptor of renown. 1 has been represented as working after 404 n.c. on the trophy set up at Amyklai to commemorate the overthrow of the Athenians at Aigospotamoi. Happily) it is now made quite certain that Polykleitos, the younger, is responsible for all works bearing the name Polykleitos after the completion of the great gold and ivory statue in the new Argive Heraion. probably shortly after 420 b.C. It was doubtless he who was engaged on the trophy at Amyklai. 4 The fact that he was architect of the famous Tholos at BpidaUTOS and of the theatre at the same place, assigns him mainly to the fourth century B.C The migration of the great Polykleitos from Sikyon to Argos was a natural and easy step. The distance was a day's walk; the 1 Pliny, 34. 55! Polyclitut Suyonius Ageladae discipuius, • Plato, ;2S c, 31 1 * I*hc Oxyrhynchos Papyrus, with list of Olympian victors, data the Kyniskos statue at 4'x; b.c. See p, 161, note 3. Cp. Robert, ffermes, 35 . 1 11. 4 Polykleitos, the younger, probably took n<> paini t" distinguish himiell by Inscription! on his works from tbe greater artist ..1 the family, bearing the name na: 154 GREEK SCULPTURE two cities were Dorian and their schools of sculpture affiliated. It may be that Polykleitos felt that he had something to learn from the veteran Hagelaidas before his death. Their collaboration, per- haps brief, is made possible by supposing Polykleitos to have gone to Argos immediately after the dedication of his Kyniskos statue in 460 B.C., when he may well have been over twenty years of age, and may already have executed some other commissions. There is no good reason for the persistent attempt to make a wide gap between Hagelaidas and Polykleitos, such as would preclude the relation of master and pupil. Why distrust the statement that Hagelaidas made a bronze statue of Zeus Ithomatas for the Mes- senians to set up in Naupaktos, to which they removed in 455 B.C. ? Four or five years of collaboration at least are possible. There can be very little doubt that Hagelaidas, with sons for pupils, was a commanding figure at Argos. While the Ligourio statuette may not adequately represent his style, its stocky proportions seem to foreshadow the style of the Doryphoros. The bronze head from the Athenian Akropolis (Fig. 49), the forerunner of the Apollo of the Olympia gable, in which Peloponnesian influence has long been recognized, is not improbably a work of Hagelaidas ; and it would do no discredit to his high reputation. Polykleitos' fame was enlarged at Argos while Pheidias was working at Athens. Plato would hardly have spoken of them as contemporaries and of equal renown if Polykleitos had come upon the stage shortly before Pheidias was leaving it. Both probably closed their careers with their great chryselephantine statues, Poly- kleitos outliving Pheidias by about fifteen years. While Pheidias tasted the bitterness of envy, hate, and unjust accusation, dying in prison, Polykleitos probably lived on in serene tranquillity to the end, controlling with his personality and talent the Argive school, of which he was the undisputed head. His chryselephantine Hera was by many preferred to Pheidias' Athena Parthenos. 1 The resurrection of Polykleitos began in 1 789, when, in a building at Pompeii, recognized as a palaestra, a marble statue of an ath- 1 Strabo, 8. 372; Martial, 10. 89; Plutarch, Perikles, 2. THI. Ill 111 ( T.NTURY «55 lete now in the Naples Museum was brought to light. In 1865 this statue was identified by Karl Friederichs as a copy of the Doryphoros mentioned by Pliny. I'olykleitos himself appears to have called the original " the Canon," because it was made to exemplify his principles as to the proportions of the male body. A treatise which he wrote, setting forth these principles, was also called -'('anon." Thus l'olykleitos appears as a a ientific sculptor with definite principles. The Doryphoros g. 73) rests his weight on the right g, while the left is thrown back and rests <>n the toes and the ball. This is generally understood to be a momen- tary position. The next moment the left foot would come forward, break ing the long inward curve on that side of the body, while the protruding right side will be thrown in. producing another curve. We see the promise of walking ; and yet the shoulders hardly partake of the action, but glide along horizontally. This position is in a sense theoretical. 1 Here is none of thu energy which Myron threw into his Diskobolos. b his b< en said that in the Do- ryphoros Polykleitos puts before us ^K gj^jfl kJl ^ ■ 19 I IG. 73. — Polykleitos' Doryphoros. (Naples Museum.) Of a man. not a man, but the body The work leaves the spectator cold. Repose 1 Mahler (Pi lyklet, 2 "l rstehl in Ruhe and ist weder im Schreiten begrii I :ilt er inne im ^< liritt." Thii m<-.uis thai the u^urc is simply • -, l«ut «.ii« can hardly fail to set- the suggestion that it is ready t>> "I. a Von Mach, O-eeA Sculpture, //> Spirit and Principle!, 251. 156 GREEK SCULPTURE is here, but no freedom. The Canon, to call it by the sculptor's designation, appears to embody a scale of proportions. The finger's breadth x 4 = the palm, the breadth of the hand ; the palm x 4 = the length of the foot ; the head X 4 = the breadth of the shoulders ; and the head x 7 = the total height of the body. These are only samples. It is to be remembered that Pythagoras of Rhegion, who was Polykleitos' senior, emphasized numbers in his theory of form. In some of Polykleitos' heads, especially in that of the Doryphoros, critics have recognized a sort of rectangular structure. The nose is like a pillar cut off at the bottom, with nothing to rest on. The skull broadens out at the back, so that a horizontal section of it resembles the section through an egg laid on its side. The Doryphoros being, of course, an athlete, is marked as a pentathlete by the javelin which he holds over his left shoulder. But he is nearer "parade rest" than action. The restraint here appearing was characteristic of Polykleitos and was of incalculable benefit in steadying art in the latter half of the fifth century, and long after his death. Perhaps no sculptor contributed more to what may be called the distinctive characteristics, "order, regularity and repose." In him M^Sei/ ayav is ever present. The effect of the Doryphoros is not, however, altogether pleas- ing. It is heavy. But it must be remembered that the original was of bronze. Polykleitos worked in Delian bronze. 1 The muscles, no doubt, especially those about the abdomen, suffered exagger- ation in the translation into marble. Instead of good muscle we have fat. The Portales torso 2 in Berlin avoids this error to some extent. The marbles lately found at the Argive Heraic n, probably made under the eye of the master, are free from it. The bust of the Doryphoros from Herculaneum, 3 1. copy made by Apollonios, of the time of Augustus, is interest ng as being of bronze. While on the marble copy the locks are flat and 1 His chryselephantine Hera is, of course, an exception. 2 Rayet, Monuments de Part antique, i. PI. 29. 8 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 336. THE Firm CENTURY o/ simply sketched on the cranium, here they are raised, and prob- ably give a touch of the original. But to offset this advantage Apollonios introduced boxers' ears, a feature not befitting a young pentathlete. A relief kept for a long time in the Demarcheion at Arj represents a youth with a long spear over his left shoulder, standing beside a horse. Since this was found at Argos, it may be regarded as a fairly faithful translation of the Doryphoros into relief. The horse, of course, is an addition, makingthe scene a grave relief. The numerous copies of the Doryphoros at- its popularity. 1 The Diadumenos (Fig. 74), a youthful victor in the game-. iged in binding the fillet of victory around his brow, was little less famous than the Dory- phoros, if we may judge from the frequency of copies and the ry notices. Lucian men- tions the fact that one hundred talents were paid fir it.' 1 The attitude of the Doryphoros is tcept that the arms are otherwise employed. The Fig. 74- Polykleitos' 1 liadutm (Uritibli Museum.) 1 In 1900 the I)rinarch<-i<>n was broken ini" by thieves, who judiciously ■elected tin- luable piece in tin- building. lidei ili>- Naples i^urr, sui whole statues, seventeen -, tlnr'-. usd tin- bronze bust "I Apollonios. Many "f the hca'N ]>f toe from i>usk with whii li it was usual t.> adorn gymnasia. • Philofieu.: i- An enormotts ran* considering Greek prii 158 GREEK SCULPTURE several good copies are all of slenderer build than the Dory- phoros. 1 For a long time the best copy of the Diadumenos was that found at Vaison in southern France, now in the British Museum. But in 1894 a copy decidedly superior, and better placed on its base, was found in the French excavations at Delos. 2 This is now in the Athenian Museum. Other copies, among which the best are in Madrid, Copenhagen, and in the British Museum, attest the popularity of the original. The best of all these is that in the British Museum, called the Farnese Diadumenos. A head in Dresden surpasses all the other Diadumenos heads in beauty of detail and finish. The Diadumenos was clearly later than the Doryphoros. Not only do we see that it was an adapta- tion of the Doryphoros, but there are delicate touches which show advance in the master. 3 Pliny 4 tells of a series of four Amazons set up in the Artemision at Ephesos, purporting to have been made by four sculptors, Polykleitos, Pheidias, Kresilas, and Phradmon, in a competition in which Pheidias came off second to Polykleitos. Much ink has been wasted over the assignment of the various types to their authors. Many, perhaps most, authorities have given up the whole story as a local legend, such as local exegetes love to in- dulge in. That four Amazons were actually set up in the temple, or near it, is not improbable. That there was an actual compe- tition of the four sculptors is possible. But the story that the four sculptors themselves, as a committee of award, voted with the result that each artist received one vote for the first prize, while Polykleitos had three votes for the second, recalls the story of the 1 Pliny (34. 55) emphasizes this difference, calling the Doryphoros viriliter puerum (Lessing's " Ein Jiingling wie ein Mann ") and the Diadumenos molliter juvenem. But he confesses a monotony in Polykleitos, granting that his statues were paene ad unum exemplum. 2 This has, however, been claimed as a work of Pheidias by Furtwangler, Masterpieces, 244. 8 Masterpieces, 243. Furtwangler goes so far as to see in this change the influence of Attic sculptors in the latter part of Polykleitos' life. * Pliny, 34. 35. THE FIFTH CI \ I l RV i59 distribution of prizes after the battle of Salamis. Some declare that our Amazons all belong to a single type. Others, noticing a l'raxitelean motive in one of the types leaning on a pillar for sup- port, would ne of the Am- azons to the fourth century. 1 Fnrtwangler 1 stands for the integ- rity of the tradition of a competition. •■ I a statement," he says, " has met with undeserved contempt. It should be considered as confirmed from the fa; Von Mai h, 121. 1 Ma . 1 1 1 :• ••, :. .1 a- .in Artemis with a dog. I IG. 75. 1 '( >.\ k eitos' Amazon, Hill.) 160 GREEK SCULPTURE most closely, agrees with the fact that Phradmon was an Argive. " The fact," says Furtwangler, " that only one copy of Phrad- mon's Amazon has survived, not only bears out the judgement recorded by Pliny, according to which his name figures last in the list of competitors, but also explains the exiguity of his fame. The Berlin type has been generally attributed to Polykleitos for reasons so sound that they need not be even discussed." He also holds that it is an error of later times to have diverged from the view of Otto Jahn, who claimed the Capitol type for Kresilas. It is strange to find Furtwangler among the conservatives, where, however, he is probably right. In the Polykleitos and the Kresilas types the wound in the breast is present to mark the Amazon as a brave fighter who had suc- cumbed only after doing her best. Pheidias in the Mattei type, which had a head of Capitoline type put upon it, appears to have chosen a different motive, and to have represented his Amazon as vaulting upon her horse. There is, therefore, more pathos in the Amazons of Polykleitos and Kresilas. There is nothing mascu- line about the forms of any of them, and the spectator yields to them, because of their sex, that pity which they disdain to crave. Of the work on which Polykleitos' fame rested in great measure, his chryselephantine Hera, we know little. Reports compare it with the Athena Parthenos of Pheidias. On coins of Argos 1 and Elis 2 Hera appears as the wife of Zeus in the guise of a maiden, her locks flowing down from under her high and ornamented diadem. Since Polykleitos was not a worker in marble, it may be assumed that he had no close connection with the decorative sculptures of the temple of Hera at Argos. The fact that these are of Pentelic marble points to a connection with Athens. It is highly probable that their style had been affected by Attic relief, since Athens in the period 450 430 B.C. forged so far ahead in that branch of sculpture as to impose its principles upon Argos. A half century earlier Athens had gone to school to Argos ; but now, by the 1 Coins of the Ancients, PL 26, No. 36. 2 Ibid., PL 14, No. 30. THE FIFTH CEN I I RY 161 •rtul influence oi Pheidias, the tide had turned. The beautiful head of Parian marble found in the recent excavations at the Heraion, though claimed by Waldstein 1 as Polykleitan, has been declared by several good judges to show Attic features such as imply the presence of Attic sculptors at Argos. S veral other statues and heads belong clearly to the Polykleitan sphere. The Westmacott statue 1 ' has with considerable unanimity been declared to be a true copy of the famous Kyniskos. It varies from the Diadumenos in the attitude of the arms. The left arm hangs down, unoccupied, while the right is probably rais- i fillet t>> the head, which is bent down to receive it. The scheme, observed in the Doryphoros and Diadumenos, of throw- ing the weight of the body on the right leg, is here reversed. Knowing the date of the Kyniskos to be approximately 460 B.C., we m ime that Polykleitos had not at that time conceived his famous Canon. 3 In the attitude of the beautiful Edgar Vincent head 4 we see that it belongs to a replica of the Westmacott statue. The Dresden Boy a is surely Polykleitan, but he is not pressing on a wreath. The bronze head in the Louvre from Beneventum 6 is no doubt a Greek original. The artist, says Furtwangler, was inspired by Polykleitos, "but was open to Attic influence." It is one of the finest heads that have been preserved from the wreck of (ireek sculpture. 7 The famous Idolino in Florence (p. 152), though claimed as Myronian, is by others assigned with positi ve- to the Polykleitan cycle. kekule, who once pronounced it a work of Myron's school, has more recently called it simply Attn , a 1 Waldsti in, 7 fferaeum, frontispi< inn-Brut kmann, No. 46. ■The Kyniskos statue could be absolutely dated l>ut fur the known the immediate dedication <>f statues. * Part* !/ver two thirds of the building, i.g. of the closed part, was the abode of the goddess. In the rear of this was a square chamber which appears to have been first called the Par- thenon, 3 from the maidens who served the maiden goddess in the weaving of her robe and in other ways. ( Inly by an extension of this appellation did the whole building receive the name by which it i> now known. These two parts were separated by a wall with no doors, and each had its own portico of six columns. A nar- row band of sculpture in low relief, three feet and four inches wide, went all the way around this enclosed part at the to]), having a length of about 520 feet, and containing over 300 figures. This is the famous Parthenon frieze, a new feature in Doric temples. ind this cella, which with the addition of a roof would have made a building in itself, was placed, at an interval of about eight a line of columns, forty-six in number, eight at each end. sup- porting the entablature and the roof. 1 DOrpf Mitt. 27 i ated bis former view that this unfinished temple im begun after tin Pi rsian War, ami substantially . dated it far ba< k into the sixth century, while Dflrpfeld assigns it to about 510 B.< ., when the di mot rai \ was led by Kleisthem -I!,. tiles wei f Parian marble which, being more transparent than nthrr mar 1 light inn. tin- building. s It bamber for various relics and treasures ol riptioHum Attiearum, I, 300- ;i 1. 174 GREEK SCULPTURE Metopes. — This entablature had a Doric frieze of metopes and triglyphs about four feet high. It is a notable exception that the metopes, ninety-two in number, are all sculptured. Above this, at the ends, were the gables, which afforded the finest field for ornamentation. The frieze was in low relief, the metopes in high relief, sometimes almost detached from the background, and the gable figures in the round. No other Greek temple had all these kinds of ornamentation. The metopes were chronologically the first of the sculptures. They had to be in place before the horizontal cornice and the roof. As soon as they were carved they were slid down into the perpendicu- lar grooves in the triglyph blocks to the right and left, and the horizontal cornice was placed over them. There is great unevenness in their style ; the result, doubtless, of a various train- ing on the part of the work- men. Here, and here only, on the Parthenon do we feel the absence of one con- trolling mind. Some fig- ures are positively archaic, and seem a generation older than others. It is probable, however, that the workmen improved as the work went on. By accident the best-preserved metopes, sixteen in number, now in the British Museum, represent the hackneyed theme of a struggle between a Lapith and Centaur. The Choiseul-Gouffier metope in the Louvre is damaged by restoration. One on the north side and one on the south (well preserved) are in situ. Another is in the Akropolis Museum (Fig. 78). But considering the limitations of the theme, it is striking that so much variety has been introduced. There is FIG. 78. — Lapith and Centaur fighting. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) THE FIFTH CENTURY 175 a series, which we have to construct for ourselves, in which the Lapith is increasingly victorious, and the Centaur at last re- ceives the death thrust in his human back. 1 In another series it is the Centaur who, starting from a drawn battle, presses the Lapith harder and harder until his prostrate form is trampled by the ( entaur's hoofs. 2 There is every intermediate stage. 1 Some of the metopes show hard, dry, ami spare forms, reminding one of Kritios and Nesiotes. Others recall Myron. From these we goon to ex- amples of splendid physique outlined against flowing drapery, as in \ . 2~. Variety is also obtained by shifting the antagonists' posi- tions in the fight Women are being carried off by brutal Cen- taurs. Another Centaur has the head of a philosopher. Care is taken that no absolute ugliness should be portrayed. For ex- ample, there is no case of introducing a dead Centaur, which would be an offence to the eye. 4 Care was also taken to bring the human part of the Centaur into front view. One is occasion- ally reminded of the cause of all the trouble by the introduction of wine jars, over which one Lapith is falling backwards. To get an adequate idea of the effect of the whole, one must remember that the figures themselves were painted. Light green, perhaps originally blue, has been seen on some of the figures, while the background was red. This field, bordered right and left by dark blue triglyphs, made a striking case of polychromy on Pentelic marble. Only on the south side have the metopes been at all well pre- served. Those on the other sides appear to have been deliberately destroyed with hammers. We should hardly know what they rep- re it not for the help of the drawings long supposed to be from the hand of Carrey, but now known to be the work of 1 No. 27. The numbers here given are from Mi. lia< lis, Der Parthenon, a N a N how die pair in equilibrium. No. 7 shows the Centaur recer. in No. 2 the Centaur is being throttled, bellowing cut his ra^<-. N< i .!-•, 29 repi ns attacking 1 apith women. 4 1 'n the fri' . this was attempted. 176 GREEK SCULPTURE an unknown Flemish draftsman, who accompanied Nointel, the ambassador of Louis XIV on his expedition in 1674. This artist appears to have spent only eighteen days on the Akropolis, and to have succeeded in that short time in making twenty-one draw- ings, which are of incalculable value. 1 The front contained a gigantomachy in which several of the gods may be made out. Athena is, of course, there. But the battle with the giants does not lend itself so well to single combats as the centauromachy. The west end contains duels between an Amazon and a Greek. 2 The north side appears to have contained, among other subjects, scenes from the Trojan War. The series is interrupted by about a dozen Centaur and Lapith groups, while in the middle of the south side we see, from the anonymous draftsman, nine metopes with scenes probably from Attic legends 3 breaking the long succession of Centaur and Lapith metopes. The monotony of thirty-two such groups in one long line must have been felt to be intolerable. There is no really adequate explanation of the fact that the metopes on the south side were spared, unless it be that that side, being close to the south wall, was not much frequented, and was, therefore, not offensive to Christians or Turks. Gable Groups of the Parthenon. — The most conspicuous adorn- ments of temples were always the gable groups. On the Parthe- non the gables, over ninety feet long, had in the middle a height of eleven feet. There was room for colossal figures not only in the middle, but also at the ends, where seated and reclining persons were introduced. These have come down to us badly mutilated. Every complete head but one is lost and the face of that one has suffered abrasion. The destruction commenced on a large scale as early as the fifth century a.d., when the Parthenon was con- verted into a church with the name Agia Sophia. Then it was that the interior was reconstructed, and the main entrance, as be- 1 See H. Omont, Athenes au xvii* Siecle, Martin L. D'Ooge, The Acropolis of Athens, 341, note 219. 2 Ebersole, A.J.A. 3 (1899), 409. 3 Pernice, Jahrbtuh, 10 (1895), 93. THi: FIFTH CENTURY 177 came a church, placed at the west end. 1 The cross wall was pierced with doors. Light was introduced into the apse at the east end by making a large aperture in the middle of the gable. In this process the central group of probably eleven figures was removed more than a thousand years before the visit of the anonymous draftsman. We should have had no idea of the subject had not Pausanias mentioned that " it had to do with the birth of Athena." The west gable remained practically intact until 1687, although Poseidon's chariot had already disappeared.'-' In that year the Turkish powder magazine inside the Parthenon was exploded by a well-directed bomb from a mortar managed by a German lieu- tenant in the Venetian service. After remaining practically in- tact for over twenty-one centuries it has been a ruin for slightly over two centuries. So modern is the loss ! Directly after the cannonade, which resulted in a temporary occupation of Athens, the Venetian commander, Morosini, tried to take down and carry off the quadriga of Athena, but it fell and was broken into small bits. 3 In the time of the artist before mentioned ten heads still survived on the figures of the west gable, and several on the figures of the east gable, including two of the "Moirai." * From the beauty of the bodies we can see the irreparable loss sustained in the disappearance of the heads. East Gable. — We are not left entirely in the dark as to the cen- tral figures of the east gable. On a puteal, or well-curb, in Madrid,' there is a reproduction of the scene, which makes it quite < [ear that Athena was not represented in the act of springing from the bead of Zeus, as was the case on black-figured vases. The mo- ment after the birth was chosen. Any attempt to represent the 1 Spon n.n-1 Wheler in 1676, taking the west end for tin- original front, mao, Fig. 26. 178 GREEK SCULPTURE actual birth must have been more or less grotesque. 1 The moment before the birth would have left out the chief personage in the scene. On the puteal Zeus is seated turned towards the right. In front of him and of equal size is Athena, full armed, rushing away from him, but with her face turned to the front, while Nike, a diminutive figure, hovers aloft, in the act of placing a wreath on Athena's head. Hephaistos, behind Zeus, hold- ing a double-edged ax, is starting back at the sight of the wondrous birth. 2 Confining our- selves to the extant figures, and begin- ning with the left- hand corner, we see Helios with his four horses rising from FIG. So-called Theseus. (British Museum.) the ^ rushing upon the scene, the abode of the gods, and ushering in the great day of Athena's birth. It takes all the strength of his powerful arms to restrain his fiery steeds. Directly in front of them reclines a powerful figure (Fig. 79) in godlike ease on a rock, covered with the skin of an animal and over that a cloth. Sauer has shown that this figure was turned almost to the front, so that the left elbow touched the gable wall. It has long been called 1 Kekul£, Jahrb. 5 (1890), 186, Ueber die Darstellung der Erschaffung der Eva, shows how art instinctively shunned representing the moment of birth. 2 Sauer's study (Ath. Mitt. 16 (1891), 59, PL 3,) of the marks and bed- dings of the figures has revealed the fact that Zeus and Athena with Nike between them, fastened aloft to the background of the gable, formed the central group. Hephaistos was not, as on the puteal, behind Zeus, but to the right of Athena. Behind Zeus, matching Hephaistos, was probably Apollo. THK I'll I II (T.N 1TKV 179 ''Theseus," and since other names as Olympos, Dionysos, and Kephalos are not convincing, we may keep the time-honoured name, although it be incorrect. It is the only figure in either gable with a head, battered, indeed, but godlike. Next, to the right, are two seated female figures beautifully draped, long railed Demeter and Kore. 1 The former, seated on a rather low structure, is more matronly, and the other reclines upon her. Since at the other end of the gable we seem to be dealing with cosmic powers, it may be well to give these two fig- ures the name Horai. The younger stretches her raised left arm 00. Oroup of so-called Three Sisters. (British Museum.) in the direction of the ascending line of the gable towards a figure rushing towards her from the centre. Sim e she shows maidenly proportions, she has been thought to be Iris, the messenger who comes to convey to those more remote the news of the gnat t taking pla< e at the 1 entre. These three figures wear the len Dori< peplos, which on [ris is swept backward by her swift flight. Eleven figures .it the centre are supposed to be lost. We may me that they were the l>e>t, bd mioiig them weir the ' Hrunn-llruckmaim, No, I 180 GREEK SCULPTURE great Olympian gods. The figures on the puteal are, of course, only feeble echoes of the originals. Beyond this gap are three female figures (Fig. 80) which the world can never cease to admire. One wonders what heads could be adequate to such splendid bodies. The first of the adorable three sits upon a rather high seat and is turned slightly away from the others and toward the glories of the central scene. She seems in the act of rising to go toward it. Of the other two the one nearer the cen- tre is seated on a chair and supports the next one, who is reclining in godlike ease on a long couch. Of her it may be said that her clinging drapery of thin and almost veil-like texture is meant to reveal rather than conceal the glorious form within. The garment has slipped down from her right shoulder with telling effect. These immortal women are elevated far above the fine creations of the fourth century. It is here that we feel that Pheidias, for it is impossible to ascribe these three figures to a lesser sculptor than he, simply incorporated in marble the god- like forms that he saw in a vision. There is no certainty as to their names. From the rippling nature of the drapery it has been proposed to call the reclining figure " Thalassa, resting on the lap of Ge." But since the three figures form a group, it is bet- ter to call them the Moirai, cosmic powers. The maker of the Madrid puteal brought in the three Moirai with the regular attri- butes of Klotho, Lachesis, and Atropos. He probably adapted them from these Parthenon figures, which perhaps bore the same attributes. A draped figure in the Berlin Museum in the exquisite folds of the garment and dignity of posture is so exceedingly like this reclining Moira that we must with Kekule 1 admit that it came from the same studio as the figures of the pediment. The same nobility wraps it around. It is not improbably an Aphrodite Ourania, and an original. Continuing, beyond this group is another quadriga with a female driver, whose torso is preserved. Sauer has discovered 1 Jahrbuch (Anzeiger) (1893), 74. THE FIFTH CEN 11 K\ 1S1 traces of four horses. One of the heads is perfectly preserved .Si). It stretched outward and downward over the hori- zontal cornice with wide-open mouth. Goethe admired this head, which he called that of the Ur-Pferd. The driver of the chariot should perhaps be called Nyx, since in the fifth cen- tury H.C. Selene was usually represented on horseback. The day of Athena's birth was a day of the gods. bounded by morning and evening. In this gable, as in the western, the central re, which had such prominence at Aej and Olympia, is aban- doned. The stereo- typed responsion of figures in opposite halves of the gable is also designedly broken up. "Theseus" and the two Horai balance in a way the three Moirai. But "Theseus," a single male figure, is made really to balance the two outermost Moirai, while the other Moira is left to balance the two Horai of the left side. A new method has come in, amounting to a revolution. In surveying the gables of Olympia and Acgina the eye glides rapidly up one slope ind down the Other, without delay, feeling the sameness of both rides. But the moment one tries to do this in the Par- thenon gable one receives a check. We proceed from the corner to the centri eries of wave-like advani es. We are < ompelled top and reflect. I o, the master mind of Pheidias is felt. It i^. of course, impossible that Pheidias with his numerous other duties could have carved all the gable figures; but that he in- ■ 1 them, made the sketches perhaps, is quite likely. The bntish Museum has do choicei tr< than these sculptures FlG. 8i. — Horse's Head from E£ast (iablc of the Parthenon. (British Museum.) 182 GREEK SCULPTURE M --. 1 1 ** \nv 3 from the east gable, left from the wreck of the once glorious whole. West Gable. — The west gable (Fig. 82) according to custom presented a less exalted theme than the other ; but in the early drawings it appears to be much better preserved. It is clear that the centre was occupied by Athena and Poseidon, with their chariots, drivers, and attendants. Athena had Nike as charioteer; Poseidon had Amphitrite. Beside the chariots were Hermes, on the side of Athena, and Iris, on the side of Poseidon. The god and goddess have arrived at the same moment to take possession of Athens. Each appears to recoil slightly, perhaps not so much from enmity as in wonder at the sight of the other's token of possession. Athena brought the gift of the olive tree, which was a KTrj/Aa es da; Poseidon smote the Akropolis rock with his trident and produced a salt spring, a useless miracle. 1 He was provided with a habitation in the Erechtheion, but Athena was in control of the city. It was a case of the triumph of mind over physical force. 1 On a vase from Kertch, in the Crimea, Posei- don appears attacking the olive tree. J.H.S. 3 (1882), 245. Dionysos also rushes on the scene as if to join in a tight. Nike hovering in the boughs of an olive tree crowns Athena, which is here a distinct affront to Poseidon. On coins of Athens we seem to see the same antagonism. A group of Athena and Poseidon on the north side of the Parthenon may have been responsible for the introduction of this hostile feature. THE FIFTH CENTURY 183 The interpretation of the minor figures to the right and left varies widely. The two corner figures, being interpreted as Ilissos, on the south end, and Kephissos, on the north, on account, for- sooth, of the liquid flow o( their forms, led to the interpretation of the other figures as parts of a physical geography map of Attika. A more rational interpretation seems to be that of Furtwangler, 1 who finds on the left Kekrops and his family, closely associated with Athena, and on the right Erechtheus and his family. This is particularly clear in the case of Erechtheus, inasmuch as Erech- theus was only an epithet of Poseidon or his double. Toward the left end of the gable we have Kekrops leaning against his favourite daughter. Pandrosos, who throws her arm around him, the only group still remaining on either gable. Kekrops is iden- tified by the huge coil of a serpent not attached to him but serving as a sort of cushion. 2 On the other side behind Posei- don's 1 hariot appears a woman with two small children, who may be interpreted as Oreithvia and her sons Kalais and Zetes. It may not be possible to identify every figure with certainty. The corner figures will hardly retain their current names by virtue of their liquidity. It is reasonably certain that the powerful torso sometimes iden- tified with Hephaistos of the east gable is really Poseidon of the le.' The beautiful I.aborde head 1 may have had its place in one or the other of the gables, probably in the western, since it brought to Venice b; mini's secretary, San ( iallo. It is ibly the head of Nike, Athena's charioteer. Unfortunately the restoration of nose and chin has dulled the original charm of the 1 Masttrpu '-' I '.■ 1 .i i |i ng bore the sobriquet "f Hadrian ami Sabina. The other t w . • ilaun 11 : II !-•, 111 1 ) be identified with tome probability in irly 'Irau in^. !a'l.in^ from the breast in the British Museum has recently luuri'l in Athens and attached to the cast sent t" Athens tr..in the British 1 84 GREEK SCULPTURE The Frieze. — The famous Parthenon frieze, sculptured in low relief, had a length of about 520 feet. On this band, only 3^ feet wide, were carved 358 human figures besides masses of horses and animals for sacrifice. This was a representation of the famous Panathenaic procession in which every four years Athens made a great parade of her beauty and her chivalry, all in honour of Athena. At first sight this masterpiece seems placed where it could hardly be seen. If the spectator wished an uninterrupted view of it, he must come inside the colonnade ; then he had to look up at it from a point not more than 8 feet away from the cella wall, and 33 feet below it. If one had been obliged to view the metopes at a like angle, they would have appeared like a mass of protruding knobs. Even for this low relief, although there was not so much interference of one part with another, the more favourable view was secured from outside the colonnade, where, if one viewed the procession walking backward, it would seem to him to be moving forward. In one point the lighting was admirably adapted to low relief. The architrave came down about 5 feet below the lower edge of the frieze, which made the light come from below, powerfully reinforced by reflected light from the marble pavement. There were no shadows below the sharp edges and projections. The lower edges of the figures were care- fully modelled, while the upper contours sloped gently into the background or were cut in sharply as occasion demanded. What- ever shadows the heads cast caused no disturbance. The relief was distinct because one part of the surface did not get into another part's way. While the face of this relief generally leans gently forward toward the spectator, the relief elevation even at the top is not more than z\ inches from the background. Within this limit as to depth, six horses and riders are presented, over- lapping one another in close array in a space of perhaps 10 feet. The contour of the front horse and rider is sharply cut, but behind it the surface slopes quickly into the background, so that another figure behind has also a sharp outline ; and when we do not THE 111' II I CENTUR\ 1S5 scnitinize too closely, each member of the group of six seems to have body. The procession is represented on the Parthenon virtually in duplicate, in spite of certain variations the north frieze and the south are to be looked at as two sides of the same procession, the whole breadth of the Parthenon being eliminated. On the east front we see two similar processions coming around each corner and < onverging on a central group. On the west end a schematic arrangement was avoided. A less skilful artist might have made Fig. 83.— Parthem tl nd. (In situ.) the symmetry complete by having the procession starl from the ind proceed to the right and left ; but that would have mad - recessions. And when the actual procession, having tuched from the Propylaea, 1 lUght sight of its miniature >le dividing, it would have felt a disturbing effe< t. This w is avoided by giving up the whole west end to prepara- tion, which, ho lally took place in the city. Although the movement is in general to the left, giving the impression that the 1 de on the north side is being reinfon ed, there is still i86 GREEK SCULPTURE trouble and confusion. Near the right end a horse is rearing and trying to go around the south corner, a hint that something is hap- pening on the south side. At the very end one of the marshals who are distributed throughout the procession is adjusting his mantle. A little farther to the north there is trouble with another horse with an abnormally long neck (Fig. 83), which did not appear so when seen from below. He is restive, and two men seem to be having an altercation over him. The dismounted rider seems angry. FlG. 84. — Horse and Man on West Frieze of the Parthenon. (In situ.) A boy x behind seems, like the marshal, to be pointing to something wrong with the horse. Then come for the first time mounted men galloping by couples. Near the middle there is another stop- page. An angry old man whose garment nutters in the breeze is beating his horse (Fig. 84) ? After still another altercation there 1 This boy is one of several cases where the heads do not come up to the level of the other heads. This is one of the few exceptions to the law of iso- kephaly by which all the heads, whether of seated or standing or mounted figures, are on the same level. The principle avoids vacant spaces. 2 By exception this horse and rider fill a whole slab. The rider's head was broken off in the earthquake of 1894. He was one of the finest figures on the whole frieze. THE FIFTH CEN ITJRY 187 is alternate galloping and stopping looking backward, and ad- justing harness once present in bronze. The rider who has reached the extreme left turns to see how the procession is coining on. and is probably adjusting a wreath. A marshal, cut on the end of a block that nas its long side facing north, seems to ulatingto the serried ranks around the comer. There is endless variety in dress: here a fine plumed helmet and cuirass, here a cap with a leather (lap behind, here a broad- brimmed hat. Most riders are bareheaded, perhaps having garlands in bronze. Shoes, which two have stopped to tie, are seen along with top-boots with flaps hanging down. Old and young are min- gled together. Many motives appearing here for the first time are repeated in later sculpture, eg. the sandal-binder "Jason" 1 and the horse and man of Monte Cavallo. 2 The beauty of some of these youthful riders, especially those with faces bent downward, has a touch of pathos. The splendid horses, of which the best is the one being beaten by his master, furnished the text for Victor Cherbuliez' Le Cheval de Phidias} When the procession is fairly started, we see the Knights, of whom Athens was so proud, filling over half the long sides; and still more spa. e is taken up by chariots, carrying sometimes, be- - a driver, an apobates, who jumped off the chariot and then remounted it in its swift (light. Here, also, is grace and beauty, wherever the preservation allows it to be seen. In front of the chariots on either side is a group of old men, called thallophoroi, '• palm-bearers," winners in a contest of manliness and dignity, " general excellence," we might say. Seven of the group from the north side are fairly well \> reserved. The corresponding group on 'runn-lirm kmann, No. 67; \ '"ii Ma> h, 238*7. • Reinai h, Rlpt rtoire, i. 485, 4 and 5; Von Mai h, 1. I :• ■ b practically all that remain* on the Parthenon. A stai^a 1 the purpose "f replacing poor architrave blocki afforded, opportunity t.> itudy thi For th uist turn t.. the British Museum. The mosl complete illustrations arc l>y Michaelia, Der Parthenon^ ari'l Murray, The Sculpture* oj the 188 GREEK SCULPTURE the south side depends for its heads on our unknown draftsman, who makes some of these prize men appear like dignified Church elders and others like sots. He at least makes it sure that we are dealing with male figures. 1 From this point to the end of the long sides a slight variety is introduced. On the south are cows led and driven to the sacrifice, some of them as splendid in their way as the horses. On the north side there appear musicians, bearers of platters and heavy jars, 2 a few sheep and very few cows, supposed to be tribute from the cities of the Athenian confederacy. On turning the corners the processions become again symmet- rical. Here are the modest and beautiful maidens of Athens " pacing with downward eyelids pure." Preceding these on either side is a group of men in whom we may perhaps recognize the archons, although the number does not tally with the number nine, or more probably the eponymous heroes of the ten Attic tribes. These figures, especially the foremost one on either side, turn their backs to the group of gods, on whom the procession seems to have converged. They would hardly take such nonchalant attitudes if the great gods were not conceived of as placed on an arriere-plan, perhaps inside the temple. The gods are separated into two groups of six each, with Iris and Eros added, the former as the attendant of Hera, the latter of Aphrodite. Some of the divinities are easily recognized. There is practical if not ab- solute agreement in regard to their names. Zeus was marked by his arm-chair and Athena as the maiden goddess. 3 Perhaps the best naming is : on the right, Athena, Hephaistos, Poseidon, Apollo, Artemis, Aphrodite ; on the left, Zeus, Hera, Ares, Demeter, Dionysos, Hermes. 4 There is a striking resemblance in this group 1 All this part was nearly annihilated by the great explosion of 1687. 2 The weight of these jars, probably filled with oil, is so great that one stalwart youth has set down his jar to get a better hold. 8 There were probably many attributes now lost. 4 We can absolutely identify Zeus, Hera, and Hermes on the left, and Athena and Aphrodite on the right. The latter has unfortunately been lost. llli: FIFTH CENTURY 1S9 to the seated divinities on the frieze of the Treasury of the Knidians (p. 98) at Delphi, which was considerably older. B :tween the tsvo groups of divinities and directly over the en- trance into the temple, where we should expect the most important scene of all, is a p which is difficult to explain. A bearded man 1 to the right, behind Athena's back, is -:ng a square and apparently thick cloth to a boy who reaches up to take it. Here, if anywhere on the frieze, is the famous peplos, u ■■ (veil and em- broidered by selected maidens, being presented to Athena's priest to be transmitted to Athena herself.- If the priest is really taking it, the boy seems to be giving it an upward shove. Some have felt forced to regard the scene as showing the priest laying aside his bimation to perform the sacrifice. With her back turned to the priest's bat k is a woman, probably the priestess of Athena, who is about to take a < hair from a maiden who had it poised on her head. Another maiden bring ond chair. Arc the actors in the solemn ritual going to sit like the gods, <>r have the maid' qs ;. 85. — Poseidon, Apollo, and Artemis from the Parthenon. (Athens, Akropolis Museum.) The' 1 I (lab Fig. 85 , containing Poseidon, Apollo, and Artemis, fell early, and ws I up and protected, kmann, llv brought t" tin- ah. ienl image "i~ na in thi Ere htheion need not trouble us. The intention of Pheidias ari'l I , time-honoured image into the Pari 1 1 .' ilii-. w a-. not don 190 GREEK SCULPTURE brought chairs that turn out to be supernumerary, the gods being now all seated? Furtwangler's explanation 1 seems reasonable. This scene also, he thinks, takes place in the interior of the temple. The extra chairs brought in the procession are not needed, although they do suggest that other gods might have come. In the frieze we see none of the archaic features that appeared in the metopes. Here is absolute mastery of expression. In view of the almost total destruction of the gable figures we turn to these small figures for our knowledge of what Pheidian art could ex- press. Pheidias must have been the creator of this multitude of figures, belonging to this world, and to the joyous age of it. If we were dependent on the frieze alone for our judgement of him, we should still put him at the head of all sculptors. The effect on the spectator is not unlike that produced by a glorious symphony. A pictorial element pervading it corroborates the statement that Pheidias was a painter before he became a sculptor. Other Architectural Sculptures of the Fifth Century The diminutive temple 18 x 27 feet, officially called the Temple of Athena Nike, stood on the buttress in which the great southern wall of the Akropolis ends, until shortly before the Venetian bombardment. Wheler, who, with his companion Spon, in 1676 was allowed but a hasty visit to the Akropolis, noted in passing it, " the Architrave hath on it a basso relievo of little figures well cut. 2 " When Chandler, more than a century later, saw no such temple he impugned Wheler's veracity. But Wheler was honest. Shortly after his visit the Turks broadened a wall that already ran from the Nike bastion to the Agrippa pedestal, in order to mount cannon upon it ; and for this purpose they tore down the temple and used it with other material. After Greece had achieved its independence this wall was broken up, and in 1836 1 Alasterpieces, 427. 2 The fact that Wheler placed the figures on the architrave shows the hasty and superficial character of his observations. nil. FIFTH * EN II KV 191 the temple was rebuilt on its old place, the very few pieces lacking being supplied It is very doubtful whether the "small figures well cut " suffered or gained by this long buriaL In the meantime the busy Elgin had pulled out of the face of the wall looking towards the Propylaea four blocks of the frieze, which are n.»w in the British Museum. These were replaced on the temple i terra cotta, 1 which look very sombre in contrast to the marble. The relief band was only a foot and a half high. Not a head remains uninjured, and most head.-, are larking altogether. Vet we still observe in these figures the grand style of the fifth century. On three sides a fierce battle is raging between Greeks and Per- sians, the latter often mounted and distinguished from Greeks by trousers. Several of them are dead or dying. There is one case of a charioteer, evidently a Creek, who has clearly been fighting on the Persian side, but is in the act of fleeing with his chariot around the northwest corner to reach the west end. On this whole west end we see a fierce infantry fight of Creeks against Greeks. While the relief has been interpreted as representing the Persian War in general, here we seem to see specifically the battle of Plataea. It was at Plataea that Creek met Creek in stubborn fight. The Boeotians, whom, according to Herodotos, only the Athenian- dared to (mi\ were also more dreaded antago- than the Persians. Boeotian helmets on this end seem to i orroborate the suggestion that PI ttaea was spe< ifically in the mind of the sculptor. \< cordingly the gorgeously dressed rider on the last b!o< k to the left on the south side, who is being dragged from his horse, has been interpreted as Masistios, the Persian cavalry commander, whose death was the turning point in the battle.-' 1 Tl ■■ in all twelve blocks, four on each long aide and two on each end. re 1- ^t ; iix are now on the temple. - only the rn-l nf th<- tirst block on the north ride, which is lost. The south ride is complete but I !. r< king or replaced in terra cotta. th ride maj belong to the north si.k-. 192 GREEK SCULPTURE On the front side is an assembly of gods, in whose presence the battle is joined. It is quite clear that Athena is at the centre standing, and marked by her shield. To the right is Zeus, marked as such by his arm-chair, as on the Parthenon frieze ; to the left is Poseidon sitting on a rock. Some other figures * may be identi- fied, but not with so much certainty. 2 When the Nike temple was first restored and studied, it was maintained that it was a building of the times of Kimon, shortly after the battle on the Eurymedon, a decade or more before 450 B.C. The sculptures were forced to agree with that date. But they were subsequently put later and later, until Furtwangler as- signed them to 425 B.C., when Athens had occasion to celebrate the great victory of Demosthenes in the battle near Amphilochian Argos. 3 But in 1897 there was found on the north slope of the Akropolis an inscribed block containing an archon's name and a decree that a temple of Athena Nike should be built. 4 Kabbadias believed that the character of the letters and the name of the archon seemed to point to 450 B.C. as the date of the temple, which thus appeared to have been considerably older than the Parthenon. But the opinion that it already stood on its bastion before Mnesi- kles had conceived his plan of the Propylaea has been rejected by most scholars. To pass around this temple, perched on its high bastion, was dangerous ; and to avoid disaster a balustrade about three feet high was made, enclosing the temple. It followed the edge of the bastion on the north, west, and south sides, and probably 1 There are twenty-four in all, and a few more were cut on the end of the block on the north side, now lost. 2 B. Sauer, Gottergericht iiber Asia unci Hellas (in Aus der Anomia, 1890), presents the fanciful explanation that Greece, a woman, is here accused by Asia, and that the Greek gods are assembled to judge the case. Why should Asia bring a suit at all, and before Greek gods ? 3 Masterpieces, 443. 4 Ephem. Arch. (1897), 173; cp. A.J.A. 3 (1899), 130. THK I II 111 ( I A I'L'KV »93 returned to the front steps of the temple. There may have been a plain balustrade from the beginning; but the one of which we have sculptural remains evidently belonged to a date near the end of the fifth century. When it fell outward from its high posi- tion it was badly broken. By a slow process of collecting, enough of it has been brought together in the Akropolis Museum toconvey an idea of the exquisite beauty of the whole. It consisted for the most part of winged Nike- either setting up trophies or leading cows to the sacrifii e. 1 Perhaps the choicest figure of all, and certainly the general favourite, is the Nike, who in full flight reaches down to adjust a strap of a sandal on her foot which she raises for a brief in- stant (Fig. 86). The contortion of her body, revealed rather than con- cealed, brings to prominence the exquisite beauty of her form." An- other Nike labouring to erect a trophy is more akin in spirit to the Parthenon Moira. She is grand ; she does not invite attention, but is intent on her work. There is also a fine group of two Nikes struggling with a cow that the)' are Ling to the sacrifice. Not one of these four has its head. Hut they are the choii est part of the balustrade that is left us. The few beads that are preserved are hardly worth mentioning; but the bodies show a kinship with the Parthenon figures, with which one almost involuntarily compares them. 1 K. Kckulc, Reliefs an display i-. not much greater than in the reclining Moira of ill-- Parthetx , ill'-- latter ii so august that one hardly thinly d hei corporeal F10. 86. — Sandal-binder from Bal- ustrade of the 1 emple "I Nike. (Athens, Akropoh- Museum.) i 9 4 GREEK SCULPTURE The Theseion. Metopes and Frieze. — The custom of calling this temple the Theseion still prevails, although none of the modern authorities believe that it has any right to the name, 1 because there is no agreement as to any other name. The temple is of moderate size, and owes its excellent preservation to the fact that it was early converted into a church of St. George. Its sculptural decorations are eighteen metopes, and two bands of frieze in Parian marble and in high relief, one on each end of the cella. The ten metopes on the front (east end) present nine of the labours of Herakles. One scene, the fight with Geryon, fills two metopes, a feature that seems to occur on the east metopes of the Parthenon. The Stymphalian Birds and Augean Stables are left out, as perhaps not appealing to the fancy of the sculptor. The Cretan Bull was omitted, presum- ably because Theseus appeared struggling with the Marathonian Bull on a metope just around the corner. The Attic hero could not, of course, be slighted here, and his deeds occupy the four easternmost metopes of the north and south sides. 2 The four on the south side have suffered more from the fact that there was more room there for people to congregate. Of those on the north side the best is the. wrestling match between Theseus and Ker- kyon, in which the muscular strain of both figures is finely por- trayed. Both this metope and that of Theseus pitching Skiron into the sea have each a head preserved. But for its battered con- dition the struggle of Theseus with the Marathonian Bull on the south side would perhaps be the best of all. The bull is rearing, with his fore legs in air, but his head down between them. Theseus, wearing a fine thin mantle, grasps the bull's horn with his left hand, while with his right he is evidently pulling the bull's head backward and downward with a cord. The intense strain that appears in the similar metope from Olympia is absent, for 1 The bones of Theseus, when brought from Skyros by Kimon in 469 B.C., were probably deposited in an aedicula farther north and in the heart of the city. 2 It has been suggested that the remaining metopes may have been painted. THE FIFTH CENTURY 195 lure Theseu sily master. A convenient rock affords a sup- port for his right foot, while his left knee is pressed against the bull's hea(L The metopes of this temple show quite as wide a divergence in style as those o( the Parthenon. The frieze is in high relief, and docs not encircle the cella, like the Parthenon frieze. It consists of two bands, one at each end. The band at the eastern end, however, does not stop with the cella, but is continued to the outer colonnades. The west frieze con- tains twenty figures, and represents a battle of Centaurs and Lapiths, arranged for the most part in groups of two figures with three single figures interspersed. It is about what a group of Parthenon metopes would be if the triglyphs were eliminated. Many attitudes of the Parthenon metopes are repeated with strik- ing similarity. Near the middle, two rearing Centaurs are drop- ping a rock upon the head of Kaineus, the Lapith chief, marked by a fine 1 uirass, and sinking him into the earth. Intense a< tion, almost fury, pervades the scene. Several Lapiths have shields and helmets, which show that we are not dealing with a casual dis- turbance of a feast, but with a war to the death. The contorted attitude of a Centaur thrown over on his back near the left end, and a spear like the mast of a ship, which another wields, show this. I <:, the east frieze, which is longer and contains thirty figures (one apparently lost), where from the example of the Parthenon and the Nike temple we might expect a quiet scene, an equally fieri'- battle rages in the middle. Stones of great size are being hurled by nade men, two of whom are fallen upon the rocks. nt 1. as betits architectural propriety, a restful scene is introduced. < >n the left are probably Athena, Hera, and Zeus ; ' on the right, with lessi ertainty, Poseidon, I )e meter, and Dionj 11 the extr< ft beyond Athena one of the combatants is being bound. Balani ing this group a trophy is being de< ked out on the •. The participants here are all Greeks. No heads are pre- 1 I livinitin ii worthy of comparison with that ol the I wlnlc thej are imall they >li"« tin- gi ind ityl< ■. i 9 6 GREEK SCULPTURE served on this east frieze. How different is its composition and effect from the quiet east friezes of the Parthenon and the Nike temple ! These sculptures are our main criteria for dating the temple. From these it seems to be later, but not much later than the Par- thenon. Dorpfeld reinforces this conclusion by architectural feat- ures, 1 in which an increasing Ionicizing tendency is apparent from the Parthenon through the Theseion to the temple at Sunion. These considerations more than outweigh the fact that Parian marble in ornamental sculpture was generally discarded at Athens after the erection of the Parthenon. In recent times B. Sauer 2 has published his studies on the Theseion in a folio volume with fine plates, on which he restores the gable groups of the temple from cuttings remaining on the horizontal cornices. On this rather precarious foundation he has established his thesis that the east gable contained the birth of Erichthonios, in which Athena is the central figure, with a daughter of Kekrops on either side. On the left of this group was Ge hold- ing Erichthonios, and to the right Kekrops himself. In the west gable the central group is made to consist of Hephaistos on the left, approaching the nymphs, Thetis and Eurynome. 3 On either side, in the corners, are quadrigas of Helios on the right and Nyx on the left. Thus Hephaistos dominates the west gable in a measure ; but not quite as does Athena the east gable. On the basis of these studies Sauer names the temple the Hephaisteion ; and while the name cannot yet be regarded as universally adopted, it has achieved considerable popularity. 4 It is to be noted that Athena and Hephaistos sit side by side on the Parthenon frieze, 1 Ath. Mitt. 9 (1884), 336. 2 Das Sogenannte Theseion und sein Plastischer Schmuck, 1899. 8 Homer, //. 18. 398. 4 Dorpfeld long ago proposed this name in his open-air lectures in Athens. Reisch, Robert, Amelung, Six, and others accepted it. No other name at present enjoys so much favour. — It is on a wonderfully slender basis that Sauer assigns the lost sculptures to Amphion of Knossos, of the school of Kritios. THK FIFTH CENTl RY 197 and that they were both patrons of handicraft ; but Sauer's pro- posal gives Hephaistos a distinctly subordinate place. How does he know whether we are not dealing with another Athena temple? The Erechtheion. — ■ The Erech- theion, which comes next in chrono- logical order among the buildings at Athens adorned with sculpture, was next to the Parthenon the most im- portant of the buildings of the great age of sculpture, and seems to have usurped in Athenian religion the plat e which Perikles intended for the Par- thenon. We must pass over its ex- quisite Ionic an hitecture, surpassing in delicacy that of every either (ireek structure. Its frieze of figures in high relief pinned to a background of black I leusinian stone must also be passed over, since its small fragments h little importance as works of art. But the Porch of Maidens 1 has furnished us figures which, though they are archi- tural supports, are yet among the finest sculptures now left to us from the great period (Fig. 87). It was a Ixild step to make Use ot'a human figure as an architectural support. It had been tried before, as al Delphi in the Treasuries of the Siphnians ih 87. — Karyatid from the Erechtheion. ( British Musrum.) 1 Yitruvii.s 1 . 1. 5 1- responsible foi the itati ment thai the people of Karyai in I led with the Persians, and thai the Greeks punished them by making their women burden bearers in man) cities; and thai architects used imitations of thesi n ;is architectural supports. From tlii^ passage of Yitruvius the name " Karyatid " was 1 enturies ago applied to the maidens of the ! bthcion, although tin- only name for them .it Athens »as "tin- Maid< ni " 198 GREEK SCULPTURE and the Knidians. Compared with the Maidens of the Erech- theion those figures are very archaic. The burdens of the latter were not heavy, as was the case with the Atlantes at Akragas. The Maidens could bear the light entablature without being pressed down by it. The neck, the weakest point in the support, was strengthened by a mass of hair falling down the back. To add also to the appearance of stability the three Maidens on either side had the inner leg bent, while the outer one was stiffened. They were represented as standing still. The folds of the chiton on the bearing side have the appearance of the flutes of an Ionic column. They stand four in the front line and one each behind the end figures. They were guardians of the tomb of Kekrops, and they were worthy of their high office. Of all the figures made in imitation of them not one has kept the high spirit of the original. It was a pity that they were ever separated. Elgin carried one to the British Museum for safe-keeping, a terra-cotta substitute taking its place. Another was shattered by Turks or Greeks ; and the other four have suffered considerable abrasion. But after the destruction of so much of Greek statuary they stand out as most magnificent creations of the mind and heart of Athens. We do not know their exact date. But in 409 B.C., when work on the temple, begun long before and interrupted by the war, was taken up again, we find the Maidens already in place. It is wonderful that the Athenians in the throes of that war and afterwards, began, continued, and fin- ished the Erechtheion. If all else in Greek sculpture were de- stroyed, the Maiden in the British Museum, though separated from her sisters, would testify to the finesse, as well as to the nobility, of the ancient Greeks. The Frieze of the Temple at Bassai. — During the Peloponnesian War Attic art invaded the Peloponnesos. Attic artists were not always scrupulous as to whether their patrons were political friends or enemies. When there was trouble at home, they sought work abroad. On the occasion of a plague, either in 430 B.C. or more probably ten years later, Phigaleia, wishing to show gratitude to I 111 FIFTH CENTl KY [99 Apollo Epikourios for having spared the city, built over and around a small ancient shrine in a place called Bassai, " the Glens," about four miles distant from the town, a fine large temple that should do honour to the god. Iktinos, one of the architects of the Parthenon, supervised the work. It is not improbable that he brought with him Attic sculptors as well as builders. In fact there is in these sculptures so much similarity to the Athenian sculptures just de- scribed that it is fair to assume their Attic origin. d'he small and very ancient temple already existing wis incor- porated into the new one, which, made like it ^ predecessor of local grey stone, extended across it to the north, and faced in that direction ; an exceptional feature, for temples usually faced to the east. 1 This great addition to the north was really an open court, giving probably the first example of a hypaethral temple. But this court was virtually only an appendage to the temple proper, the ancient shrine. Over the pronaos which faced north- ward were metopes of which only fragments remain, but from these fragments they are declared to be finer than the frieze. The latter was part of the entablature, which extruded around all four sides of the open court and was supported by a series of short walls projecting inward from the cella wall and ending in half columns. The thin frie/.e slabs, which rested on the . were held in place by dowels which ran back into len beams. Holes in the slabs make this certain. From a point inside the open space the frieze could be viewed as a whole, while the usual position of a frieze makes the spe< I round all four sides of the building. Practically the whole of this frieze was found by Cockerel! and his companions in 1811, and thr< later was acquired for the British Museum. Both frieze and metopes were "i Doliana marble. < m the friezes of the fifth century nitherto described the scenes lap over more or lit and left, but hei h slab is ( om- plete m itself, a feature that baa disadvantages for the propel 1 The ground mi here 10 am ven that th< aid do! \\< 11 < i" tin- 1 200 GREEK SCULPTURE rangement of the whole. In fact this is really unattainable. Two subjects are here portrayed, an Amazon battle and the old theme of a fight between Lapiths and Centaurs. To each subject a long and a short side was given, except that the Amazons occupied one plaque of the long side which belonged to the Centaur and Lapith group. We have already seen, on the friezes of the Nike temple and the Theseion, examples of intense action, but here the intensity, both in fury and in pathos, is much greater, and points to a decline. Among those slabs that carry the fight to a fury are two belong- FlG. 88. — Amazon Relief from Phigaleia. (British Museum.) ing to the Amazonomachy, on one of which (Fig. 88) a Greek on the left, with an abnormally long left leg, is dragging away an Ama- zon by the ear, while she braces herself against him with her right arm and leg. On the same slab is another full-breasted Amazon and a Greek, each with a shield, rushing upon each other with fierce intensity. The Greek, bent forward to the attack, looks both fierce and wary, while the Amazon is only fierce. Her legs spread wide apart make curious horizontal folds in her garment from thigh to thigh. On this, as on other slabs, drapery is distributed liber- ally, but in no very rational order. On another slab (Fig. 89) an nil: FIFTH CEN rURY 201 Amazon is riding in from the left on a horse like those of the Par- thenon frieze, trampling down a man with a fc/, who is perhaps the ( ause of her apparent rebound. In the middle is an Amazon with a closely fitting helmet without a plume, attacking a man with a lion's skin, generally called Theseus. 1 Both recoil, Theseus prob- ably in order to deliver a death blow. Then to the right, on the end. i> an Am ; • mi falling dead or d\ ing from her horse, which also down. \ youthful Greek, with a look thai seems to express BiitishMuseui pity, seizes her by the shoulder and one foot; but she has passed beyond harm or pity. In the Centaur fights we see the invulnerable Kaineus with helmet and shield as on the Theseion, still defending himself, though overborne and pressed into the earth by two Centaurs ring above him in pyramidal form. Greeks standing by are poW( o extricate him. Around the oik- next to him on tile- ry is flying in strange coils. Still another scene is the !r<-me of all. In the middle is a <\ca>\ Centaur with legs, arms, and head pressed down flat to the rocky ground like the archaic Hull on the Akiopolis (p. 58), while .1 dog is biting him in the net k. A companion Centaur, leaping ovei him, gives a vicious ki< k with both hind legs to the shield which ;i Lapith on tin- Idt holds out tor protection. The living Centaur is curiously repre- \ similar figure on anotbei sl.ilj probably represents Herakli 202 GREEK SCULPTURE sented as at the same moment engaged in a fierce fight with a Lapith on the right end of the slab, and pressing his teeth deep into the shoulder of the Lapith to the left, who has found time to drive his two-edged sword nearly to the hilt into the vitals of the beast who has fought his last fight. But the Lapith's own eyes seem closed in death. On the Parthenon metopes dead Centaurs were avoided as unaesthetic, but on the Bassai temple they were displayed in their utmost ugliness. Pathos is here carried to an extreme. One woman attacked by a Centaur is holding a babe, 1 while her natural protector has been thrust down to the ground by another Centaur to the right. Most pathetic of all is the scene where two women have fled to a shrine. This being invaded, the woman to the left extends both arms in hopeless agony as she sees her companion, with her arm encir- cling the sacred image itself, laid hold of by the unholy Centaur, who tears away her garment even as she leans against the image. This figure is the most pathetic and most beautiful of the whole frieze. In the hour of need relief comes in the person of Herakles, who, having hung up his lion's skin on a tree, is making quick work with the Centaur, who in that very moment was gloating over his prey. 2 On another slab even a Centaur seems to express grief at the death of a comrade. In general, pathos has supplanted the calmness of the Parthenon frieze. Since 1900 the Greek authorities have restored the temple, setting up fallen columns and replacing other pieces, making a practical and judicious restoration. Relief from Eleusis. — The Age of Perikles, in spite of the gen- eral submergence, has not failed to leave here and there other things of beauty. Two reliefs in the museums of Athens deserve to take rank with the relief sculptures of the Parthenon : the large relief 1 The breadth of her hand is equal to the length of the babe's thigh. 2 Herakles' knee is poorly planted on the Centaur, and looks as if it would slip off. But the Centaur is doubtless doomed. On the similar Parthenon metope the knee is better placed. For these scenes, see Ancient Marbles in the British Museum, 4, PI. 1-23, and Brunn-Bruckmann, Nos. 86-91. THE FIFTH I EN HKY »©3 from Eleusis (Fig. 90), and the so-called Mourning Athena. On the relief from Eleusis, now in the National Museum, the figures are about life-size. Between two august females stands a youth, marked as su< h by his --in iller stature. A deep religious solemnity pervades tin- group, which makes the relief comparable t<> an altar- piece in a cathedral. It is quite clear that a holy office is here being performed at the holiest spot in Attika. The youth is Triptol- emos, whom "the god- vain," I )emeter and Persephone, are ordaining for the mis- sion, to give tothe world the knowledge of agri- culture which brought with it < ivic life. We know that at the most solemn moment in the Eleusinian Mysteries an ear of grain wis held up in silence before the initiated. '1 1)' to the left, resting her left hand on a sceptre, i^ putting in, one e represented in paint or in bron/e, with her right hand, into the uplifted hand of the youth. This hand i* formed to 1 an elongated object between the thumb and fingers. The a 1 igi tst fi| hind the youth is in the at tol pressing a wreath upon his head in token of his consecration to the greal mission ol 1 on- vevr ulture, the great 1 ivilizing element, into the wide world. It : n debated which of the two goddi Deraeter. 1 1 Kore. a. in I ). met. 1 .mil (Athens, Nation. il Museum.) 204 GREEK SCULPTURE One might suppose that it is she who puts the ear of grain into Triptolemos' hand. But Furtwangler declares that at this period the Doric peplos was the invariable garment for maidens when maids and matrons appeared in the same scene. 1 The contrast in hair and drapery was doubt- less of set purpose, to avoid monotony. The boy's openly displayed nudity is another ele- ment of contrast. Had we found only the right- hand figure, we should have been inclined to put it near the end of the fifth century B.C. ; but the schematic hair of the boy and the stiff folds of the peplos of the goddess, whom we may now call Perseph- one, incline us to give this glorious stele a date earlier than the Parthenon sculptures. While the kinship of this relief to the Par- thenon frieze is evident, the solemnity which befits the solemn act lifts it out of the category of displays of " beauty and chivalry " into the realm of religion. 1 The torch and sceptre would, of course, be natural attributes of either goddess. Fig. 91. So-called Mourning Athena. Akropolis Museum.) (Athens, II II. I 11 111 i I \ rURY 205 The So-called Mourning Athena. — A charming, but less important relief, generally railed the Mourning Athena (Fig. 91 ), in the Akrop- olis Museum, leaped into popularity .1- soon as it was discovered. The warrior goddess is marked as such by her spear and Corinthian helmet with a crest, although the aegis is lacking. Her Doric chiton has a diplois girt at the waist with a cord The chiton dues nut reach to the ground, and both feet are displayed, the left on tiptoe throwing back the chiton and break- ing somewhat the columnar effert seen in the left figure of the Eleusinian relief and in the Maidens of the Erechtheion. The chief interest of this figure lies in its attitude. The goddess leans forward with her head bent down, her forehead almost touch- ing the raised left hand that holds the spear. The right hand, with thumb and fingers spread out, rests upon her thigh. She seens leaning somewh it wearily 1 in an inverted spe.tr. which has ■ in'- •• reversed arms " and mourning. The block on which the goddess* gaze mthh to be testing has been 1 bj some u> tele on which Athena contemplates the names of the dead Athenian hero... From this attitude the figure been called the Mourning Athena. But the tokens ot mourning arc by no meai in. No other fifth-century work shows such oti mental attitude, and what seems conclusive is FlG. 92. — Perikles. (British Museum.) 206 GREEK SCULPTURE that the Greek gods were not supposed to be " touched by the feeling of our infirmities." Since the relief was found on the Akropolis, it can hardly be funereal. It has been suggested that since Athena is not in position to see the names cut on the supposed stele, she may be leaning over a battlement, wrapt in " maiden meditation " upon her favourite city. The feeling that there is here sorrow and mourn- ing is, however, on the whole very difficult to shake off. 1 Bust of Perikles. — Two figures in the round of the period under discussion are of some interest. By good fortune we have a fine copy of a bust of Perikles (Fig. 92) in the British Museum, which, though only a copy, carries the conviction that we see something of the linea- ments of " the great Olympian," somewhat cold and self-con- tained, who ruled Athens by the force of his character, and who, if he had lived, might have guided her to victory. The rather sensual mouth is domi- nated by the upper part of the face, which is intellectual and forceful. Nike of Paionios. — The other figure is the Nike of Paionios, at Olympia (Fig. 93). While Paionios has properly been debarred from the claim of having made the sculptures of the eastern gable of the temple of Zeus 1 For an attempted explanation of the pillar see Bennett, A.J.A. 13, C I9°9)f 431 ff - Fig. 93. — Nike of Paionios. (Olympia.) 1111. Ill 111 CENTURY 207 at Olympia, he has a valid claim to the authorship of this Nike. Not only does Pausanias assign it to him, hut Paionios took «.are that his name .should be cut on the high triangular base of the statue. This Nike was om e a magnificent figure " sailing through the azure deeps of air." Hut the loss of the face has left us only a delicate maiden body now descending gently toward the ground, still supported by an eagle which flies somewhat crosswise to her path. 1 The rapid (light throws hack her drapery and reveals her form. The statue seems later than the date which would naturally he assigned it, 424 B.C, and is a trophy of the check given to Sparta, the ancient enemy of Messenia. In it we have taken a step toward the powerful and august Nike of Samothrake. The so-called Hcstia,- in the Torlonia Museum in Rome, is akin to the figure of a woman ' in Copenhagen with a rather suspicious- . aig head. One readirj iffinities with the Olympia figures, espec iallv with Sterope and Hippodamia. The Hestia shares the columnar character of these. A fleeing woman in Copenhagen with her garment strangely spread out at the waist also belongs here. 4 She shares the Olympic features. eral other female figures to which names cannot readily he- assigned show the development of draped figures after the time of the pediment sculptures of Olympia. The figure called Hera or ieter has been terribly battered and has lost both arms ; hut the drapery and the full form betray a statue of the fifth century. Oth< ' be ini luded here, although they do not have the flavour of the fifth century. The I [era, or " Barberini Juno,"'' in the \ ati< an, when patched up, makes a very respectable appearance. The dra- 1 A line head in the collection "f Mi- II Hertz in Rome baa been recog- nized of the bead <>f this statin-. Sec Unelung, fid*. Mitt. 9 1.1 : .. • vmpia, III, [88 1 inn-P.rui km. inn. . Von Ma. I:. * Arndt, -Carisb, 1 . Mac b, 105. 208 GREEK SCULPTURE pery is superb, especially where it clings, as if moistened, to the upper part of the body. The face has suffered comparatively little in the adjusting of a new nose. In the beautiful Borghese "Juno" 1 in Copenhagen we find less of divinity. The drapery fallen from the neck, but still clinging, is a piece of virtuosity which marks a low- ering of the tone. The lowering of divinity goes on in the famous Venus Genetrix, 2 with hands restored, which Furtwangler regarded as a copy oi the " Aph- rodite in the Gardens," by Alkamenes, Phei- dias' pupil, " a statue world-renowned and superior to all other draped statues of that goddess." 3 The Athena of Vel- letri, 4 with a stern face and her helmet tipped on the back of her head, has a very di- minutive aegis, hung by a collar made of links of chains. The Athena Giustiniani 5 has acquired consider- able fame, and on the . On the whole it is Fig. 94. — Dexileos, Grave Relief. Dipylon.) (Athens, other hand has been much disparaged 1 Reinach, Repertoire, ii. 239. 8. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 473 ; Von Mach, 108. 3 Furtwangler, Roscher's Mythologie, i. 413. 4 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 68 ; Von Mach, 107. 5 Ibid., No. 200 ; 297. 1 III. FIFTH CIA 11 RV 209 probablv an archaistic figure. Neither this nor the Velletri Athena i> very stirring *>r admirable. Funeral Monuments. — A must precious relic of Athenian sculp- ture is the series of exquisitely beautiful Attic grave reliefs, which B in in the fifth anil continue through the fourth century. The I ■ iter part of these reliefs are in the Na- tional Museum, but some of the choicest still remain in the Dipylon cemetery, in the northwestern part of the ancient city. Here no heartrending scenes are represented, but the dead are seen BS when they were alive and pursuing their daily occupations. Here is the hero Dexileos, a knight on horseback, smiting down his an- :n>t (Fig. 94). I [ere I - >, IS the beauti- ful, aristocratic lady, Hegeso (Fig. ed and attiring herself with the aid of maid, who prcM-nts to her a jewel box, from which the lady draws some adornment. She is not .is Ji 212 GREEK SCULPTURE CHAPTER IV THE FOURTH CENTURY Skopas One would hardly have supposed that after the disasters of the Peloponnesian War, which shook the foundations of civic life, there would succeed another period of bloom in art almost as brilliant as the Age of Pheidias. But this marvel did come to pass ; and there are not a few who value the works of the great masters of the fourth century as highly as those that have been left to us from the great fifth century. Contemporaries assigned to Praxiteles nearly, if not quite, as high a place in sculpture as that occupied by Pheidias. His probably somewhat older contemporary, Skopas, was less lauded in antiquity ; but it is now beyond doubt that he was a genius struggling to express great ideas, and that his works did not suffer when compared with those of Praxiteles. In modern times up to 1879, in spite of Urlichs' book on Skopas, composed from literary sources and guesswork, little was known of his style. The most important fact reported of him was that when the temple of Athena Alea at Tegea was burned down in 395-394 B.C., he was commissioned to supervise the building of a much larger temple to take its place. Since he was pre-eminently a sculptor, it has been justly assumed that the sculptured decora- tions of the new temple would be controlled by him and show his style at least to the same degree that the Parthenon sculptures showed the style or the spirit of Pheidias. Just how much time elapsed between the destruction of the old temple and the building of the new we do not know. Probably the time was short, since Tegea had not suffered much from the Peloponnesian War. We do know that the new temple was built of marble from the near quarry of Doliana, and that it called forth great admiration. Pausanias, who belonged to a generation that esteemed marble highly, forgetting the temple of THK FOURTH CENTURY 213 Zeus at Olympia, called this doubtless brilliant creation " the largest temple in the Peloponnesos. " As the centuries passed, this temple vanished from the earth, and its exact situation was unknown. In 1S79 Milchhofer discovered, on or near what proved to be the site of the temple, two heads 1 of Doliana marble which a year later were identified by Treu ' as belonging to this building. They also clearly belonged to a gable, since they were cut off obliquely at the top, and must have been so treated in order to mike them fit the oblique line of a gable. To make this conjec- ture certain a considerable fragment of a boar's head was found. Pausanias had reported that the east front 1 "iitained in its gable a group representing the kalydonian Boar Hunt, in which the boar a prominent figure. Thus we have the certainty that these gments came from one or the other of the two gables. In the more recent excavations at Tegea by the French School at Athens, there was found a female figure in Parian marble which may be Atalanta herself, 1 in which case, since she was prob- ably one of the most prominent figures of the gable, Parian marble fitting. Furtwangler has advanced the view that all the fig- ures in the east gable, except the Hoar, were of Parian marble. The 'wo male heads ( Fig. >>~ ) were at on< e rei ognized as dif- ferent from any Greek heads hitherto known. The structure of IcuU is unique, and differs totally from the head of the Hermes of Praxiteles, which had been found only a (cw vears before. The faces are short; the longest diameter of the head is a horizontal line from the forehead to the back of the skull, which is fiat on the top, compared with the high dome of the skull of Hermes. The whole shape of the two heads show-, phys- ic d force. Over and above this there is intensity of action. ihort mouth and the broad nose show that. But it is the 1 ye that contributes most to this intensity. Here on cither side of the broad bridge of the nose the inner corners of the eyes are UK Witt. 1 1879 . 1 - trek, Zeii, |8 r8fi . I . . ' :ncr,y.//..S'. . Sj. 214 GREEK SCULPTURE sunken deep into the skull, while at the outer ends a thick pad of flesh comes down from the forehead, forming a projection under which the sharply rising lower lid disappears from sight. In a profile view the eye nearly disappears. The whole opening of the eye is fully half as wide as the length. This makes an expression Fig. 97. — Two Skopasian Heads from Tegea. (Athens, National Museum.) totally different from the mild, dreamy eyes of Praxiteles' Hermes, where the breadth is only a third of the length. The eye is also deeply set as well as padded. Sculpture has travelled a long dis- tance since the pre- Persian " Maidens " of the Athenian Akropolis appeared with eyes on the surface of the skull. It has suddenly been dowered with the gifts of a genius, who carved out a way of his own. Here we see fierce action for the first time portrayed in the face ; and it has come to stay. From this time onward we keep meeting the " Skopas eye." We see it on grave monu- ments of the fourth century at Athens, on the friezes of the Mausoleum ; in fact, everywhere. It is a strange commentary on our early authorities that they failed to recognize the diametrically opposite tendencies of Skopas and Praxiteles. They lacked light, because they were dealing with THE FOURTH CENTl RY 215 copies ; but in the presence of .1 few originals wc realize the blind- of the soi-disant authorities. Upon the discovery of the •an heads there followed immediately an enlargement of our knowledge as to the genuine works of Skopas. I'.. 1'. Benson 1 recognized a head in the National Museum at Athens as probably a genuine work of Skopas, perhaps an Aphrodite. Botho Graef 1 discovered in two similar heads, one found at Genzano, now in the British Museum, and another in one of the palaces on the Capitoline hill, a marked resemblance to the heads from regea, now in the National Museum at Athens. The open mouth in these heads is more marked than in the battered heads from 1 eg I. A long series of some twenty heads in various mu- seums was now pointed out as Skopasian. The two which had first attracted the attention of Graef he recognized as copies of a youth- ful Herakles wearing a poplar wreath. The abundance of replicas pointed to a famous original This wis with some probability conjectured to be the fain :ue of a youthful Herakles in the Gymnasium at Sikyon, represented on coins of that city." A firm bisis now laid, it required only the application of a care- ful test for the admission of other candidates into the group. It was not long bet in- the famous Meleager* in Rome was recog- nized, without a dissenting voii m excellent representative of Skopas. < »n this broad and firm basis several other candidates took their proper place. S >me of the older and famous claimants unable to endure the test and war shut out The Ludovisi has a debal ible claim. But that several originals are ready to be admitted is beyond all doubt. The best is the head of an august goddess, found on I th slope of the Akropolis, in the Asklepieion (I This head lacks none of the Skopasian credentials. 6 An Asklepios from the Peiraeus' may also here be 1 /.//.. v 194. •-' Rom. Mitt. 4 ( 1889), 1 * A Num. 1 ',">i>n. I'l. II \i. » ( itraef, Rdm. Mitt. \ (1889), 21 mann, N * II kiiKiim, \ M.i. I), 2] ;. llltM, Ath. Mitt. I 7 .///;. Mitt. 17 1 • , . IO. 2l6 GREEK SCULPTURE enrolled, since he also has all the Skopasian marks. The Athena in the Ufifizi also, according to Furtwangler, 1 is " from the fiery genius of Skopas." "The goddess is conceived somewhat like a Joan of Arc, in the semblance of a young, still undeveloped girl — vibrant with courage and enthusiasm, her face slightly upturned, she looks out into space." The Niobe group in Flor- ence, over which critics used to quarrel as to whether it was the work of Skopas or of Praxiteles, is now gener- ally regarded as late work or a copy in which neither had a part (see p. 248). We may be reasonably sure that Skopas, who came from Paros, and worked by preference in the marble of his beloved island, had a long life. Forty years after he had appeared at Tegea as a noted sculptor, we see him at work upon the Mausoleum of Halikarnas- sos, one of the Seven Wonders of the World. It was about the middle of the fourth century B.C. when, with several famous Athenian sculptors, he undertook the decoration, and perhaps the construction, of that famous tomb, at the request of Artemisia, the wife and sister of Mausolos, one of the kinglets who sprang up in the territory of the decaying Persian empire. Doubtless many stories arose in connection with the work. One was to the effect that the love-sick queen died of grief over the death of Mausolos 1 Masterpieces, 305. Fig. 98. — Goddess from South Slope of Akropolis. (Athens, National Museum.) THE I Ol'RTH CEN URV 217 before the tomb was completed, and that the artists finished it at their own expense, so great was their love of art. There is noth- ing improbable in the story when we take into account that the work may have at that time been already nearly completed. The building of marble, surmounted by the colossal figure i)i Mausolos, must have been above all praise. The architect was Pythios. In the adornment of this temple-tomb Skopas was probably the directing mind. There can be little doubt that Leochares and Bryaxis were comparatively young men, while Sko^is. from his FIG. 99. — Piece oi Frieze of the Mausoleum. (British Museum.) greater age and experience, was the leading spirit. Timotheos, who had seen service in adorning the temple of Asklepios at Epi- dauros with sculptures, was probably next in age and experience. Plin) 'says that these four sculptors took each one side of the build- ing. But so far as we can judge from the fragments of the two friezes that retain anything intelligible, there is no great diver- een one side and another. It 1-, certainly more probable that each sculptor controlled a whole frieze than that he collabo- rated on all the Inez Fiction was at woik, as we mav from the fact that Vitruvius 1 mention, Tiaxit- let in In-, list, appar- ently making him a substitute fur Timotheos. 1 F'l . |6 >o f. '* Vitiuvius, 5. 12. 2l8 GREEK SCULPTURE The " frieze of the order," of which enough remains to give an idea of the style, contains admirable figures of Greeks fighting with Amazons (Fig. 99). The latter are beautiful figures — too beautiful to be called viragos — who are striking out wildly at their male antagonists with no hope of victory. One of them seems ex- ecuting a tour de force, fighting backward on horseback. From the " charioteer frieze," x which was probably located at the top of the high base, we have one driver fairly well preserved. The back- ward flow of the long garment is admirable. The driver, who looks like a woman, is prob- ably a youth with a trailing Ionic garment. What strikes us par- ticularly in nearly every head on all the pre- served figures is the "Skopas eye," whether in action or in passion. The spirit of Skopas seems brooding over the whole. While sojourning on the Ionic shore Skopas may well have taken time to carve the figures on some of the drums of the new Artemision at Ephesos, near at hand, in 356-333 B.C. On the drum, fairly well preserved, in the British Museum (Fig. 100) both heads that survive, Hermes and Thanatos, have the Skopas eye. 1 British Museum, Catalogue of Sculpture, PI. 18. FlG. 100. — Sculptured Drum of a Column from Temple at Ephesos. (British Museum.) 1 Hi: FOURTH CENTl 1 \ 219 i'KWI : We now turn to a contemporary ofSkopas, a typical Athenian, a Greek sculptor, better known than any other except, perhaps, Pheidias. This was Praxiteles, of a family of Athenian sculptors. His fame rested mainly on his Eroi ami his Satyr, although lie ght many other : a hi. h at one time seemed to over- shadow the works of the great huh century. These glorious crea- tions were lost with the wreck of ancient glory, and although in the multiplicity of replicas, especially of his Aphrodites, as well as of the Satyr and tin- Eros, his style was felt, yet there was no certain original from his hand until in 1 S 7 7 , at Olympii, the Hermes was found, a minor piece, it is true, hut genuine. The significance of this find is realized when we recall the fact that it was believed that no one of the great Greek sculptors, Pheidias, Myron, Poly- kleito>. Skopas, Lysippos, and Praxiteles, had left a work of his own hand. The world hailed and beheld with wonder this one solitary original of the _'r>- it da) S of sculpture. But that this I [ermes was to Pausaniis, at least, a minor work is evidenced by the fact that he barely mentions it in pi>Mn_; through Olympia, saying- "A stone Hermes, and he bears a baby Dionysos, a work ol Praxiteles." How different is his tone when he comes to the Kros and the r! These were celebrities, and known to the garrulous trav- eller as sik h. 1 le may 0< >t have been the highest judge I »f art, ami we might disable his judgement were it not for the consensus of antiquity which passr> by the I [ermes to look at greater splendours. We almost certainly have copies of some of the most famous of Praxiteles' works. Of the Eros and the Satyr this is beyond question; but just how near the copies approach the great orig- inals we do no1 know. The ! the Vatican. 1 called from its • 0! ■! I El ■-." is the finest of all ex- tant copies, mainly because of the excellent 1 tion of the head. We therefore take it as the best representative of Praxit- eles' popular statue. The copi< I, bad, and • 37'J J V( n M.u b. 1 2 20 GREEK SCULPTURE indifferent ; and they are legion. The same is true of the Satyr. The copy in the Capitoline Museum, found in Hadrian's Villa near Tivoli, has gained world-wide celebrity in part through Hawthorne's tale of " the Marble Faun " (Fig. 101 ) . In it we have an excellent representation of a being almost but not quite human. Its almost perfect preservation puts it at the head of all the copies. A torso in the Louvre comes from what seems to have been a more excellent copy; but since in the Capitoline copy, the Marble Faun, we have the head with its curious wild but mischievous face, we naturally re- gard it as the representative of the masterpiece. It is something to have these two famous master- pieces revealed to us in a fairly satisfactory manner through copies. We know from an anecdote that Praxiteles considered these two statues to have been his best. He had promised his beloved Phryne, so the story goes, that he would give her the finest of all his statues, but he would not at once tell her which he regarded as his best. She then resorted to a ruse, mak- ing some one tell Praxiteles that his atelier was on fire. The sculptor in agony said, " If my Eros and my Satyr are lost, all is lost." Phryne had got the information which she sought. Which one she chose is immaterial. The whole story may be simply ben trovato ; but it indicates that these two stood high among his works, either with himself or with his patrons. Thus the Eros and the Satyr are stamped for all time as his greatest productions. Fig. ioi. — Marble Faun. (Rome, Capitoline Museum.) THE 1 Ol RTH CEN II k\ 221 Hut how little we can realise from the copies the beauty of the originals ! Praxiteles inclined to gentleness, exhibiting an antithesis to Skupa-, who was intense, His Hermes has the high arched skull, while Skopas' heads have their longest axis from front to rear. He inclined to the repre- sentation of female beauty, but always of an exalted character, which reached its culmination in the Aphrodite of Knidos. of which copies enough remain for to form some appreciation of the original. It is said that he made a draped Aphrodite for and a nude Aphrodite for Knidos, cities on the coast of Minor separated from each other by a narrow strait. ( >f the draped Koan Aphrodite, we have no certain adequate copy, hut in the case of the Knidian Aphrodite we are more fortunate. The Aphrodite of the Vatican ( Fig. probably the best ex- tant represent ition of her. She appears nude, riNing from her hath, or going to it, as is shown on coins of Knidos. Praxiteles probably had before him as a model the celebrated Phryne ; hut his artist soul carried him above sensual and even mundane thoughts as he saw in a vision the incarnate goddess entering her bath. The broken right arm i^ here represented as instinctively thrown forward at the thought of being surprised. There is a shrinking as o| mod< ■ its back at the " thought of her own loveliness. " 1 i'.. 102. — Aphrodite ol Knidos. (Rome, Vatican.) 222 GREEK SCULPTURE It is said that Nikomedes, King of Bithynia, so coveted the statue that to have it as his own he offered to pay the public debt of the city of Knidos. We, of course, have no statement of the amount of this debt, but it was doubtless considerable. No per- suasion, however, could induce the city to part with the choice statue, which ultimately perished in a fire at Constantinople near the end of the fifth century a.d. It is likely that Praxiteles at one time sojourned not only at Knidos, but at other places along the coast of Asia Minor. The Aphrodite of Kos, the people of which city preferred her to the Knidian, has been thought to be represented by the " Venus of Aries," 1 now in the Louvre, although this is draped only from the hips downward. The head has fully as much dignity as that of the statue in the Vatican, which nevertheless carries off the plaudits. There is a certain gradation or degradation to be observed in the line of extant Aphrodites. They seem to begin with the Capitoline copy of the Aphrodite of Knidos, where we see a proper shrinking of a glorious being, and to end with the " Venus dei Medici," who shows no shrinking as she exposes the charms of which she is fully conscious. Of the various heads of the Knidian Aphrodite that are preserved, the Kaufmann head- in Berlin is perhaps the most noteworthy. The Sauroktonos described by Pliny 3 was, by exception, a work of bronze, and shows the sportive side of the artist. The statue represents a youthful nude figure, probably a young Apollo, teas- ing a lizard. Some regard him as preparing for the slaying of the Python. Here appears conspicuously the famous Praxitelean S, 4 which reappears in several of his figures, notably in the Satyr (Marble Faun). But let us now return to our one "original." We must make the most of it, even if it is but a fragment of the glorious whole of 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 296 ; Von Mach, 203. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 161. 3 Pliny, 34. 70; Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 234; Von Mach, 186. 4 The gentle bend in the body has been not inaptly so called. I Hi: FOURTH CEN II KY «3 Praxiteles' works. "Mild Hennes," Wordsworth has fitly called the god; and here we behold him in that character (Fig. 103). Benignity beams from his features as he holds on his left arm the infant Dionysos, seeming to look past him into space, dreaming <>r half dreaming with an apparent getfulness of the child god, who seems trying to arrest hi* attention. This attitude is re- produced in several small bronzes, in one of which Hermes holds a bunch ot grapes before the infant Dionysos. In another he looks out into space past Dionysos, whom he seems to utterly ignore. The latter seem-, to be in the attitude oi our original. The infant is ex- cited, reaching out his hands ; but Hermes looks straight before him as in a dream. I appre< 1 ite the different e between an original and a copy, one needs only to look at this group, in which, however, the infant is a mere accessory. I -n without training one feels the difference. It is not in the easy attitude nor in the exquisite finish nor in the a< tion. It is the inexplicable spirit of the master shining out 'Hie head is, of course, the principal thin-. We have ioN>> enough which dme. A -" Sculptor like Praxiteles doubtless had some works bed to him with which he had nothing to do. His name was once I on one of the bases of the colossi of Monte Cavallo. This has generally been regarded as a hoax ; hut these woiks have ribed by Furtwangler to u Praxiteles the Elder" 1 and Pheidi 1 W. An it PraxittUt aui Mantintx lowy figure. 226 GREEK SCULPTURE The same author has also claimed for Praxiteles the already famous but enigmatical bust found at Eleusis in 1885 in the pre- cinct of Pluto (Fig. 105). Both he and Benndorf claimed the prior- ity of having fixed its status as a god of the nether world under the name of Eubuleus, a euphemistic name for Hades. The stout neck and the somewhat sinister face seemed to furnish corrobora- tion. The ascription of the bust to Praxiteles was shared by both. The in- scription E{i/3ouAevs Ilpa^t- Te'Aous, in letters of Roman times, on a headless herm in the Vatican seemed to close the case. Inscrip- tions with the name of Eubuleus on both a statue base and a relief in the sacred precinct seemed to be a superfluous corrobora- tion. Otto Kern 1 disturbed this consensus by main- taining that Eubuleus is Zeus. The Lakratides relief at Eleusis 2 mentions a priest 0€ov ko.1 0eas koI Ev/JovAeoj?. Since Oeov is Hades, Eubuleus is somebody else, viz. Zeus. In an inscription at Paros we read of Demeter, Kore, and Zeus Eubuleus, where Eubuleus is clearly an epithet of Zeus. Kern regards as Triptolemos the youthful figure called by Furtwangler and Benndorf Eubuleus. But it can hardly be denied that the head has something dark and sinister, a trait which may have been accentuated by the overhanging eye- brows now badly battered. At any rate the impression made by 1 Atk. Mitt. 16 (1891), 1. 2 Ephem. Arch. 1886, PI. 3, 2. Fig. 105. — Eubuleus. (Athens, National Museum.) 1 111' FOURTH CEN fURY 227 the head, now in the National Museum at Athens, is deep. If Praxiteles reallj carved it. he must have mule in this strong face a wide departure from his usually gentle faces. There are some, among them Ernest Gardner, who would place this bust in the Alexandrian period, and call it a bust of Alex- ander himself or one of the Diadochi. It is of the finest Pentelic marble a< cording to Lepsius, our chief au- thority, and not. as is Uy stated, of Parian. The bust is certainly an enigma. It is roughly chipped away at the bottom ; a sort of pre- teiK e of . lothing ap- pears ; the neck is un- commonly stout ; the hair falls down in large m.isM-> in a u ly that we see nowhere else. It is a face that haunts I 1 irdner is nearly, if not quite, alone in disparaging it, saj ing : ''The small eyes ami sensual mouth Ale xa nder with t he stronger and Letter parts of his character tted." With the light that has been shed on the style of Skopas in the last two de< : the nineteenth ( entury, we 1 an have little diffi- culty in div riminating between his works and those of Praxiteles. Skop the Michelangelo of the period, Praxiteles had more t of Raphael. Fig. 106. — 1 1 Museum. I (British 228 GREEK SCULPTURE The Skopas eye enables us to see in the Demeter of Knidos (Fig. 1 06) a work of that master, though Collignon ascribes her "to a contemporary of Praxiteles." Nowhere do we see clearer char- acteristics of Skopas. The eyes are sunken and worn with suffer- ing. The goddess sits before us as the veritable Mother of Grief mourning for her beloved daughter. The British Museum contains no statue that is more touching. The Asklepios of Melos (Fig. 107) can hardly be separated from the Demeter. But why should the gods and goddesses go mourning ? It must be the spirit of the fourth Head of Asklepios from century, with its tendency toward Melos. (Athens, National Museum.) pathos. Lysippos The sixth of the greatest Greek sculptors is Lysippos, who was probably not much, if at all, later than Praxiteles. He was a force much more akin to Skopas than to Praxiteles. He was no ideal- ist. His aim was to bring sculpture down nearer to nature. Beginning as a humble artisan at Sikyon, he took, or professed to take, nature as his models. It is said that at an early stage in his career he asked the painter Eupompos, his fellow-citizen, whom among his predecessors he had best take as his exemplar, and Eupompos replied by pointing to the passing crowd and saying : T " Imitate nature and not the work of any artist." Lysippos, taking this advice, broke with the traditions of the Argive-Sikyonian 1 Pliny, 34. 61. THE 1 (H Kill CEN l'URY 2 2 g school, and made a revolution in sculpture by taking his models from nature. He- was probably a very prolific sculptor. I't is said that, fur every statue that he made, he used to drop a drachma into a va»e, probably with a slit, and that, when the vase was broken open after his death, it was found to contain 1500 drachmas. L'ould he have made thirty bronze statues a year? The canon of 1'olykleitos had made the head one-seventh of the total height of the figure. Lysip- pos discarded this canon and made the head one-eighth. The change from the canon of Poly- kleitos to that of Lysippos has long been supposed to be visu- alized in the far-famed Apoxyo- meiios of the Vatican | Fig. 108), in which it has long been thought the result of I ysippos 1 great in- novation was to be seen. But within a I ive question arisen, whether this work is really a copy 1 if I j sippos' Apoxyo- ■ It has been asked: "What do if the original bronze of Lysippos?" We must answer ' : '• V it inn< ii more than that I ppos made an Apoxyomenos, whi< h was 1 arried to Rome, was set up by Man rippa in from of bis Thermae, and w.is there much admired, i facts do not carry us tar, foi the subjeel :i»* omni hi one, and we p 00 detailed description of the treatment of it by Lysippos Bui the marble statue m ques- 1 Tarbcll, t j Ark and Stitnett, St, Louu 1904 , tit 61 t- 1 ig. 108. — Apoxyomi Vatican.) 1 Rome, 23° GREEK SCULPTURE tion exhibits a system of bodily proportions radically different from that of Polykleitos, and agreeing with the valuable, though inade- quate, indications afforded by Pliny regarding the innovations introduced by Lysippos. On reflection we see that the agreement does not really clinch the matter. At most it only proves that the original of the Apoxyomenos of the Vatican is not earlier than Lysippos." The excellence of the Vatican Apoxyomenos led to the belief that it represented the "canon " of Lysippos, which was regarded as his ideal of proportions ; and no one doubted, or differed, until with the discovery of the statue of Agias a great light flashed from the recent excava- tions at Delphi. A marble statue, one of a group of eight, was set upon a pedestal which bore the name of Agias (Fig. 109) ; and the whole group represented a Thessalian family from Pharsalos. 1 Homolle hesitat- ingly pronounced these statues more Skopasian than Lysippean. But while some misgiving was felt, a still greater light suddenly dawned. Erich Preu- ner 2 discovered a copy of an inscrip- tion found at Pharsalos, identical with the inscription at Delphi, except that it gave in addition the sculptor's name ; and the name was Lysippos ! A revolu- tion now came. The Delphic statues were looked upon no longer as Skopasian, but as of the real style of Lysippos, and the only test to apply in treating of the works of that master. 1 B.C.//. 23 (1899), 421, Pis. 10, 11. 2 Ein Delphisches Weihgeschenk, 1900. Fig. 109. — Agias. (Delphi.) THE FOUR! H CEN 11 KV 231 It must, however, be taken into consideration th.it they were carved in marble at a (.late considerably later than the bronze originals at Pharsalos, and cannot, therefore afford the final test of style, but on the other hand we must remember that they were carved when LysippOS was still alive. They, there- fore, probablv convey a fairly correct impression of the lost originals. We can, then, in considerable measure depend upon them. Next to having the originals is a copy made in the life- time of the sculptor. 1 We here see plainly the same intensity of feeling which appears in the faces of the Skopas heads from Tegea ; but it is softened to a touch of melancholy. The head of Agias has, moreover, a shorter horizontal diameter from front to rear than the heads from Tegea. While the Agias is not a first-rate work of art, being somewhat lived and finished, we are bound to take it as affording our best available evidence as to the style of 1 ysippos. It comes to us through a translation, so to speak, while the Apoxyomenos belongs in a different sphere. Percy Gardner well says "Thus the new dis< overy amounts to something like a revolution." It is now nearly thirty years since the establishing of a real Skopas head by the studies of Treu and < rraef; and we have just come to see how much akin to Skopas is Lysippos. The Agias shows us, but not with the tremendous energy of Skopas, the deep- ing brows, and the breathing mouth. Com- 1 with the helmeted head from |._- 1 (p. 214), the Agias is ind shows a tinge of melancholy. I' rcy G rdner would break up the great Skopasian group estab lished by < -r tefand withdraw from it the Meleager, whi< h lie would n to Lysippos. 1 long known as the Apoxyo- menos of] he would classify with the " BorgheseW arrior"of , making it a product of the Hellenistic period. w • tread more firmly when we approach the types of mder. Plutarch' has put it beyond question th.u Lysippos ' 1 Iner, /.//.v. 23 (1903), 127. Plntin b, /.'• 1. 1.' • .1 232 GREEK SCULPTURE was in a sense a court sculptor to Alexander, and that he made several statues of him, allowing the somewhat distorted neck of the world-conqueror to appear in various gradations. Numerous statues and busts of Alexander may, therefore, with some confi- dence be regarded as derived in a greater or less degree from Lysippos, even if what is left to us is mere flotsam and jetsam of once much better copies. The bust in the British Museum 1 shows in a comparatively slight degree the distorted neck, the hair only slightly dishevelled, the eyes moderately deep-set, and the mouth not too deeply cut. This is probably the best starting point in the Alexander series, since every one of the well- accepted features is here toned down, as they would naturally be by a master like Lysippos. A colossal marble head in the Capitoline Museum, 2 which has long been supposed to represent Alexander, has also a distorted neck and parted lips. Perhaps the features are intended to re- semble those of Helios. The manelike hair seems to fit a being more than mortal ; but the distorted neck hints at Alexander. There is a herm in the Louvre (Fig. no) which seems to repre- sent Alexander in a calm mood. The locks that start up from the middle of the forehead, and the parted lips, speak of energy. In its restraint it conveys perhaps the best impression of the great conqueror. The face is strong and leonine. On the front of the bust is cut AAEZANAPDS IAinnDY. This bust shows no distortion of the neck. 1 Bernouilli, Die erhaltenen Darstellungen Alexanders des Grossen, PI. 6. 2 Bernouilli, ibid., PI. 7. FIG. iio. — Herm of Alexander. (Louvre.) THE FOURTH CENTURV 233 Another bust, in the Ufhzi Gallery, 1 called sometimes the " 1 >_\ ing Alexander," passes the limits of idealism. In fact it is doubtful whether this head belongs among the Alexander heads at all. It may be classed with the i in. A statue in Munich 1 represents the monarch deified but ab- surdly restored, anointing his shins from a small lekythos. Similar to this in pose is a figure in the Lateran decked out with all the paraphernalia of a Poseidon. It is a little startling to find that the trident, the prow of the ship, the dolphin, both legs below the knees, the left arm, the lower part of the right arm, parts of the hair, and beard are restored. We find, however, from various copies 4 that these restorations are in a measure justified ; and this battered hulk, has come forth in glory, and is much superior to the Poseidon of Melos in Athens. Though it is a copy it certainly has the Lysippean eyes and the bent head. It is not unlikely that ppos made the original bronze for the Isthmian precinct, Bacred to Poseidon. The attitude with a bent leg is, of course, not a creation of Lysippos. We already find it on the Parthenon frieze. But he made use of it. Another figure somewhat similar is seen in the Louvre. The face, however, is turned over the left shoulder instead of the right.' This also may be as< ribed to Lysippos. An athlete it certainly is, such as Lysippos loved to make. It also resembles Myron's figures often alluded to as " dis- torta." Except for the intense mouth one might call it Myronian ; but this feature now inclines us to Lysippos. Here we see the slender proportions of an athleto . Leaving now the clear trace of the Alexander type io s< ulpture, irn to coins showing the same leonine fa< e. Here the heads, however, are not always easily distinguished from those of hi-- sur- •r^, and mop- especially from those- of his contemporaries. II • the- type was probably set by Lysipp 1 I'.runn-I'.ru. kmann, Ma l8l Von Mil.. 2 -' Brani) Bt u kmann, No, 105 ; Von Mai b, ; * I'.runn I'.ru. Ion. 11. ' 1 \. • Reinach, Repertoi I illignon, ii. ^19. • Collignon, ii. 421, 234 GREEK SCULPTURE We now turn to the famous gigantic Farnese Herakles 1 in Naples, a wonder to the cicerone on account of its bigness. In it we seem to lose all traces of the style of Lysippos. We are told that his favourite subjects were Zeus and Herakles, and we know that Herakles was honoured at Sikyon with a statue by Lysippos. That the Herakles in the Naples Museum really represents a work of Lysippos seems established by a rather poor replica 2 in the Pitti Palace, which bears the inscription epyov AwiVtou. The Naples copy is marked on its rock base as a work of " Glykon of Athens" in an inscription not earlier than the first century b.c. One feels a certain repugnance to this great hulking brute, so different from the Herakles in the metopes of the temple of Olympian Zeus. But it is hazardous to reject the evidence of the inscription. In the first century b.c. Lysippos was not so much in vogue as Praxiteles, and was not, therefore, very likely to have his name cut on a statue base haphazard. We have, therefore, to face the fact of divergent styles in the same master. For our peace of mind this statue might well have been sunk in the sea ; but it is here with fairly good credentials of Lysippean origin. It has been remarked that the head is unduly small ; 3 but the flow- ing beard which counts as part of the head makes the head seem even larger in proportion to the body than we should expect. It is probable that the bronze statue was colossal, since we know of several such colossal statues by Lysippos, and reduced somewhat in the marble copy. But if we wish to set before our eyes a type of a bronze statue by Lysippos, we may find it in Hermes reposing after a toilsome journey, now in the Naples Museum (Fig. in). Here is a living bronze, so to speak, moulded by a master who was a maker of athletes. Many a wild guess at authors of statues has missed the mark much wider than a positing of a close relationship of this bronze with Lysippos, the master sculptor of athletes. We might 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 285; Von Mach, 236. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 284. 3 Von Mach, Handbook of Greek and Roman Sculpture, p. 247. THE 1 olkTII i I \ 1 I k\ -35 imagine that at a touch this Hermes, now wearied with toil, would straighten himself up lor another of his ceaseless errands. The potency of energy is certainly here. We can put our hand upon it and say, "l his is typical Lysippean." It may be a copy, but the spirit of the master is lure seen in every muscle and in its atti- tude. 1 hie before is the untiring mes- gerof the g< >ds, now taking breath before another journey. The spent runner is pulling himself together for another toil. In an instant the mus will tighten again, and off he will speed to some Kalyi The " heraM Mm ury " is nowhere else brought so near to us. We almost seem to re us the original bronze. Hut we must take no. rash leaps. We may at 1< that this copy, if so we must call it, might stand unashamed in the • works of Lysippos himself. Among tii<- woik> of Lysippos we mu t probably also put one "i the "w " in Naples, 1 taken from 1 1 • - r* ulanciiin. the one standing It has been remarked tint this one is so mil" h ti: , the Other that the temptation to SUSpe< t an original -t. tt comes from the same place as the bronze Hei d the kinship is patent. Why not in this i • that bears his < re it gently down to bless, must have been exceedingly pleasing. Nor must we ; a fighting Amazon from the gable group which is much like the ; on the Mausoleum frieze.'-' The hand, or at least the spirit, of Timotheos seems here apparent. Even in her mutilated 1 ondition this Amazon is seen to be raising her right hand to de il rrible blow with her battle-ax, as did Dexileos with his spear _'. 94). This figure is in marked contrast to the floating figures. She Bits easily On her wonderfully foreshortened horse. All the effect of the foreshortening, which would be beautiful whei from the ground, Uxjks out Ol proportion when seen . the level. Epidauros has furnished also two nearly square reliefs- 1 of the healing god, one of which is so fine 4 that we are 1 Kalil>a M.L. Il, * Katil>at Stuart's mag- nificent plates having by accident become misplaced in his great work, the gradual transformation is not there apparent.' These graceful figures are fine ex- amples of low relief of the time. We have before us perhaps not the most pre- tentious choragic monument. But since the others have perished, we take this as a beautiful example. The monument is dated 335— };i B.C. by an inscription: '• I.vsikrates.sonof Lysithides. ( horagos 1 vsiades of Athens trained the choros ; Euainetoswas archon." The circular top is a single piece with the gorgeous akanthos plant, on three projecting points of which the coveted bron/e tripod rested. We cannot here pass over the Eirene and Plutos in the Muni' h Museum I Fig. 1 14). I 'mil recent times this group, imilar to the 1 [ermes and ed to be a < opy of a work of Kephisodotos, the father of Praxiteles. But Furtwangler has advanced excellent -ih for regarding Kephisodotos as an elder brother of Praxit- ; drapery, especially the folds falling straight down 'lie Coo, ././.'. 8 189 . u t'"- - fir* to notice Stout's erroi and hrin^j out the true order. I i. ,. 1 1). Eirene and Plutos. 1 Munich 2 4 o GREEK SCULPTURE over the left leg, reminds one of the fifth-century figures, espe- cially of the Maidens of the Erechtheion. But the group, if such we may call it, is exceedingly similar to the Hermes and Dionysos, except that motherly tenderness here replaces the dreamy negli- gence of the older god. Man's tenderness is here set over against that of woman. 1 The Sarcophagi of Sidon In 1887, near the ancient Sidon, a burial vault was discovered by the energetic Hamdy Bey. 2 The contents of this vault were soon brought to the museum of Constantinople and exhibited to the wondering world. The vault was in fact a subterranean cemetery composed of seven chambers grouped around a cen- tral vestibule. Twenty-two sarcophagi were here found still in situ. Some appear to be of the fifth century, but most are of the fourth. Confining ourselves to the best, we follow approximately the chronological order. First in time we note the so-called Satrap's Sarcophagus, which displays in low relief scenes appropriate to the life of the oriental potentate. It has suffered from moisture, so that the features of the persons are much defaced. One side shows a seated monarch with a tiara. His left hand is supported by a sceptre ; his right rests on the arm of a chair which is supported by a griffin. In front of the potentate we see the charioteer turning to look back at his lord, and standing with his right foot on the ground, while his left is already on the chariot. Of the four horses, one is already eager to be moving. The groom who holds the horses is looking sharply to the right and presenting his back to the spec- tator. The chariot has no wheels, for the rosette under the box cannot be a wheel. The big block on which the chariot rests is a 1 The infant Plutos is largely restored. A better copy is found in Athens, and an excellent copy of the torso of Eirene is in the Metropolitan Museum in New York. 2 Hamdy Bey and Theodore Reinach, Une nccropole royale a Sidon, 396- 411. THE FOURTH ( EN I I KV 241 curious anomaly. The ^tylc indicates that this relief belongs to the middle of the fifth century b.c. The stiffness of the horses, iq fact, reminds us oi the quadriga metope of Selinus, which is, 1 4 < . turse, .1 century earlier. Next in order of time comes the " Lycian Sarcophagus." with a high ogive roof and a sphinx and a griffin cm either end. On each of the long sides two quadrigas pre- eagerly forward in a lion hunt. The lion in being strut k by the fierce rout. This more m — . 115. — S jus of the Wei nstantino] ;m.) elaborate sarcophagus i-. beyond question liter thin tin- one just nil may 1" ied to the lir->t i|u.irn-r of the fourth tury. The mouldin : the panels is exquisite. The whole ted by a fine Hellenic spirit. In all probability ppropriated this sarcoph . evidently of Greek 1 niui h earlier time than the vault in whi< h it v. id. te, prol ' ihagus of the " Wcep- [f not !:;!! of lit*- an the " I j tint of the s itrap. 242 GREEK SCULPTURE Its decoration is also more in keeping with its purpose. Eighteen women in various attitudes of grief are deployed on the four sides of a temple-like Ionic structure. The ornamentation is in exquisite taste. The women, while showing considerable variety of pose, never overstep the measure of grief that is becoming. The border at the bottom contains several hundred miniature figures on a field below the columns and above the " leaf and bud " orna- ment. This whole sarcophagus is so typically Greek in its restraint that it cannot have come from any other source than a Greek Fig. 116. — Alexander Sarcophagus. (Constantinople Museum.) master's atelier. It was probably made to order for a potentate who reigned at Sidon, 374-362 B.C., Stratos I, 1 a pompous Phil- hellene, devoted to pleasure and surrounded by courtesans and court musicians from Ionia and Peloponnesos. The mourning is continued in the two gables and in the attics, the ends being given up to grief, and the long sides to a funereal cortege. This sarcophagus is the embodiment of grief restrained. It sounds the same note that Thucydides makes Perikles to sound when Athens was sore stricken with the plague. Perhaps nowhere has the idea of bitter grief nobly borne been so exquisitely presented as on this monument. But the crowning glory of all the sarcophagi is the one now ad- mired under the name of the "Alexander Sarcophagus " (Fig. 116). 1 Theopompos, frag. 126. THE FOURTH CENTURY 243 This is about ten feet long and somewhat over six feel high. The cover is in the form of a roof with a gable at each end. Alexander appear- a- the prominent figure Oil each oi the long sides, in a battle and as the leader in a hunt. Such a sarcophagus was lit only for an Alexander ; and yet he was not buried in it. Perhaps the intention may have been that he should lie in it; but if SO, the intent was frustrated. This is the most exquisite Sarcophagus that the world has ever seen. Wherever ornament was appropriate u was applied, though not to excess. Fourteen bands encircle it. It is not. however, the abundance of ornament but the exquisite finish of each band that marks it as a marvel. Apart from the mouldings, which practically exhaust the whole stock that the Greeks employed, there was the painting, the delicate poly- chromy, at which all the world wonders. The greal scenes on the 1 battle and a hunt, beggar description. In both of these Alexander is present as the leading figure. In the battle- m ene he comes riding in from the left on a charger, completely identified by the lion's head which he wears. His javelin, here invisible, i> like the bolt of great Zeus. before him horse and rider go down. The weak and trousered Persians are no match for him. Here and there a Greek appear-, as a helper; but the demigod needs no help. It i-, however, possible to identify in the stout spearman on the right, Parmenio, the right arm of Alex- ander, wearing a low helmet with a visor. In the shock l'armenio [throws horse and rider opposed to him, and the noble Persian falls, to join the dead and dying who are scattered on the field of battle. There is a tow h of pathos in the tenderness with which a 3 in his arms the falling antagonist of Parmenio. \ Greek near the middle, with a visor like that of Parmenio, i> al ty warrior, and his antagonist at his feet i- begging m vain for life. This art over Asia Minor, Egypt, and elsewhere. Let no one dare to speak disparagingly of that art. So grand are some of its •lets that one may say in a paradox that the best sculpture comes after the best period. There are some who speak out with the 1 of their convictions and say, "I prefer the Apollo Belvedere, the Venus di Milo, the Dying Caul, the Niobe group, and even t coon -roup and the Farnese Hull group to all that has gone before." And who shall gainsay them? If in some of ti 'in- iii iv be silenced by a superior critic, what s 1 ill be said of the headless Nike of Samothrake? [fshe is not ureat, nothing in sculptui reat. The beautiful fifth-century Nike of ■iios is feeble beside her. And what shall we say of the Per- gamon s, ulptures? but let us go on in regular order, not fearing that we are dealing with second or third rate material. It is true that we are abandoning in some measure the old haunts of sculpture. V- . Athens, and Sikyon, and other cele- brated res, no longer produce ; but other art centres take their pi of sculpture arise in cities once of little fralles, and Antioch. The Seleucid Empire and Egypt produce sculpture that is not to be depised. Niobe Group. —The OUp, the origin of which is in doubt, is invested with a pathos which strikes a new chord. • 1 te hum in heart by which we live" is seen to brat. Mother, 1 -| ;. m . lude a number >■( w..rks whii l> display the Hel- I irit, ili> i latei than 1 | 248 GREEK SCULPTURE daughter, and sister show intensity of love in death. The cold marble is warm with love and pity. The old Pedagogue forgets himself in his anxiety to save the young boy in his charge. Still more touching is the agonized mother, whose only thought is to protect her daughter (Fig. 117). The keenest arrows are those that pierce her loved ones. The figures representing the Niobe group are widely scattered. That they come from various workshops is evidenced by the superior excellence of the Niobid in the Vatican over that in the Uffizi, and by that of the Pedagogue in the Uffizi over that in the Louvre. This picture of love in death makes Apollo and Artemis appear mean and spiteful. Themis of Rhamnus. — From Rhamnus, but now in the museum at Athens, we have a figure of Themis, so august that she seems gaz- ing out upon us from long past centuries (Fig. 118). She might stand beside the great works of the fifth century unabashed. That she really belongs in our period is indicated by the chiton, with finest wrinkles girt under her breast. Her himation in broad folds is dropped low enough to show the high girdle. From Epidauros comes a figure much akin to her, but the hilt of a sword in her hand and a sword-strap drawn diagonally across Fig. 117. — Niobe protecting her Youngest Daughter. (Florence, Uffizi Gallery.) VI IK 111 1 I ENIS1 [C AGE 249 her breast mark her as an armed Aphrodite. 1 Her chiton is only a pretence of a covering, letting the nuances of the sweet body appear. The himation falls from her left shoulder, envelop- ing her limbs. I.v cpt for the battered fa< e she would be itly admired. 1 It r coiffure reminds us of the Lemnian Athena. Her spear and SWOrd- belt are only for show. To put them on such creations is out of place. On the whole she i> a Hellenistic combination ol Ye: netrix and Venus Vic- trix. and not unworthy to be _ aped with the more august Themis of Rhamnus. Nike of Samothrake. — We now pass over from the main- land to some of the islands, and first to the comparatively unimportant isl md, Samothrake, in the northeast corner of the gean, noted mainly from early times for the« Lilt of the Kabeiroi. ( >n this island the gifted and trr.it i< -<>n of Antigonos, I >e metrios Poliorketes, set up a phy for a naval victory « Pto ind proclaimed him- self king. The battle was fought in 306 B.C.J but the trophy 1 some six or more years later. The selection oi m iy be explained not only by its high cone, prominent ■ndconspi maiai but by the cult of the Kabeiroi Demo 1 Brunn-Brui k«n*«n, No. 14- Fig. 118. — Themis from Rhamnus. (Athens, National Museum.) 250 GREEK SCULPTURE trios, it is true, did not long enjoy his triumph, but became a vagabond, alternately rising and falling. It is not for the man and his fate that we care so much, as for the trophy which he left behind him. This has the form of a prow of a ship of war on which stood Nike with a trumpet at her lips, sounding out to the whole world the triumph of Demetrios. Not only do we have it represented on a large silver tetradrachm, but the huge prow itself, somewhat battered, has been taken to the Louvre, and the Nike stands upon it (Frontispiece). She is without head or arms, but so grand is her attitude that we hardly miss them. The on- ward rush which she shares with the rushing trireme makes her one of the finest, one might almost say the very finest, of all Greek sculptures. It is the action, the rush, the swing, that makes the whole effect. We regret that the Nike of Paionios at Olympia has lost its face ; but we are here so absorbed in the action, that we hardly miss the head, which is usually the first thing that we think of in a statue. The best presentation is from the left side, and so it stands as one approaches it in the Louvre. It is worth a whole gallery of other statues. If we did not know that this splendid piece is a product of the period which some call the period of decadence, we might put it at the head of all Greek sculptures. The three Parthenon sisters have their glory as they tranquilly sit, leaning in easy attitudes one upon the other. They are beautiful in their repose ; but the Nike of Samothrake repre- sents glorious action. The upward heaving of the chest and right shoulder is unparalleled in any sculpture ; and the twist of the abdominal muscles and the negligent sweep of the garments would be the despair of a modern sculptor. Paionios and other sculptors of the fifth century might well hide their heads before this creation. Only on the Parthenon gables can we seek its equal, and even there, among those august gods and demigods, there is nothing surpassing this power in action. We refuse to believe that the lost head of the Nike of Samothrake could be less glorious than the superb body. The finish also is worthy of the best days of sculpture. THE HE] LENISTIC AGE 251 It is vain to try to find a name for the sculptor, but he must have been 3 Skopas. How cheap seems the Nike that Mummius set up at the Hieron of Epidauros, in comparison with thi> noble creation 1 As we read on the marble prow the proud Roman's lines, we feel an insult inflit ted on what wa> left of " the glory that was Greece Aphroditeof Melos. — There were other great nameless sculptors who carried aloiK rand style beyond the fourth century. Some may well have inherited this from a< tu.il contact with Skopa ppos. I " Venus
  • isc ussions long drawn out a-> to the < in umstani es of the ry of the statue are not yet ended, and perhaps never will end. This stan. ii',i is beyond question one of the finest . not only of the Louvre, but of the world. It has the pei fe< t head. The " grand Btyle" is putably before us. In tin-, the Nike of Samothrake and the Aphi iow their kinship. The Nike shows powerful action, the Apl repose. The Nike moves on with a trc Fig 119. Aphrodite <>i Melos. ( I lOuvre.) 252 GREEK SCULPTURE mendous swing which drives her drapery against her august form. The Aphrodite has in common with the Nike the raised shoulder; but with the Nike it is the right shoulder that is raised, probably to lift a trumpet, while in the Aphrodite this is reversed. The powerful swing of the whole body of the Nike is repeated but toned down in the quiet goddess who inclines to Eros rather than Eris. She is not, however, the shrinking goddess of Praxiteles' creation. She controls and compels by her quiet dignity. She is Virgil's Cytherea. Her drapery is wrapped about her lower limbs, her left leg gently bent at the knee, with her foot raised on a slight elevation, thus preventing her robe from falling still farther down. The magnificent body is marked by large nobility. It is Skopasian rather than Praxitelean, akin to the Athena in the Uffizi. There is a close resemblance between it and the draped torso l in Copenhagen, generally regarded as an Aphrodite. The left foot of the Copenhagen statue, however, is raised much higher from the ground. We can see at a glance that the Aphrodite of Capua 2 and the "Venus di Milo " are variations of the same type, but the difference between them is wide — immensely wide. When one's gaze is riveted on the " Venus di Milo," one cares little for the Capuan. Her sprawling arms detract from the origi- nal, and the diadem adds nothing. The restored hands give us no certain clue to their original position. Probably there have never been so many attempts at restora- tion as in the case of this broken but august statue. Perhaps they amount to more than a hundred. It has been thought that the goddess held a mirror, and this perhaps has gained most of the suffrages. Closely resembling her is a bronze statue in Brescia,"' holding a round tablet and probably inscribing on it the names of fallen heroes, which has been misinterpreted as a warrior goddess. The statue in the Louvre has, perhaps, been the subject of more controversy than any other. We are sure that at one time it rested partly on a plinth which was so broken on its left side that 1 Reinach, Repertoire, ii. 338, No. 3. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 297; Von Mach, 293. 3 Ibid., No. 299; 301. THE III. I 1 ENISTIC AGE -53 all that now remains is the end of the sculptor's name | — sandros) and his designation as from Antioch on the Maeander, a i ity founded in a8i B.C. This plinth was later lost or removed, pos- sibly "with intent to suppress." client authorities de( Lire that there was never any connection between the plinth and the Statue. This Aphrodite, seen at the end of the long gallery, matchless in attitude and in the poise of its noble head, fills one with a sense of the divine. O, dea eerie/ It is sometimes given to an artist to see, as in a vision, a form grander than mortals. Pheidias was at home with such glories, and even an artist of the Hellenistic age could commune with the greater spirits of old. A bronze head 1 in the British Museum, found at Erzindyan in Armenia, is a capital example of the Hel- lenistic spirit. Collignon has pronounced it Sko- rian, but apart from the n mouth it seems rather Pnuritelean. The bend of the neck, and the hair, ecially the two Inks falling below the part on the forehead, mark it as a pro lu< t of the I [ellenistic period. We may associate with it a female head | Fig. i 1 MIOU in Berlin, in which the whole expression of eyea and mouth is so intense as to be classed as Skopasian. Pergamon. —We now come to the sculptures of Pergaraon, 1 1 I'.rurm I I 20. ■ Tl re Die AUert& >■ and Pit I dtr . '.■;//'• tao. I lead from Pergamon. m Museum.) 254 GREEK SCULPTURE the most important of which are the remains of the frieze of the great altar, now one of the chief treasures of art in the Berlin Museum. Pergamon flourished in the third and second centuries B.C., and by careful calculation of chances pushed its way through stronger powers, the most threatening of which was the Seleucid kingdom. Attalos I (241-197 b.c.) for nearly a half century raised the kingdom to its highest pitch. He annihilated the Gauls who attempted to overrun Asia Minor, and when Antiochos III, a restless warrior, pressed him hard, he held his own by ally- ing himself with Rome. When Antiochos was crushed at Mag- nesia on the Hermos, 190 b.c, there came the great days for Pergamon. Eumenes II, successor and son of Attalos I, reigned nearly forty years, and not only somewhat enlarged his ter- ritory at the expense of the Seleucids, but completed and beautified a noted citadel. At the death of Attalos III in 133 b.c. Pergamon was bequeathed to Rome and ceased its high career. Attalos I, in memory of his victory over the Gauls and their confinement to the heart of Asia Minor, set up trophies. Since he was a Greek and devoted to Greek culture, his first thought was to make his great exploit known at Athens by tokens which took the form of art, groups of bronze statues representing Greeks victorious over barbarians. About 201 B.C. he visited Athens while his laurels were fresh upon him, and presented to the " mother of arts " his token of regard. How patronizing to Athens these Macedonians were ! Athens was kindly treated in proportion to its innocuousness. These bronze statues of small size are, as a matter of course, gone forever. One of them was blown down from the south wall of the Akropolis in a gale. Bronze was a much-coveted material and quickly disappeared, being beaten into weapons of war and other objects. But by good fortune marble copies remain to show what the originals were like. In the Naples Museum a dead Gaul lies on his ponderous shield. 1 His sword falls from his nerveless hand. His fierce eye and unkempt hair 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, Nos. 481, 482; Von Mach, 262, 263, 264. THE 111 I I ENISTIC AGE -55 mark the untamed sa\ . , What a contrast to a Greek athlete ! Much less barbaric and fierce arc other figures. One, whose trousers mark him as a Persian, is already dead. Another is ably a Gaul, holding himself up as long as his arms will sup- port him. An Amazon, one of tho> t - figures condemned to lie Itiful even in death, has let her broken spear tall by her side, the right leg drawn up convulsively. e of the most familiar figures in sculpture is the statue Formerly misnamed " Dying Gladiator," now known as the " Dying 121. — v -ma Dyi i Rome, < lapiloline Museum.) Gaul" (Fig. 121 i. The Capitoline Museum has few sculptures that can vie with it. This Gaul has fought to the 'hath, and the life blood is flowing from a ghastly wound not self-inflicted. 1 tiff 1"< ks, like a rough mane, are bowing earthward. 1 lis arms ippoit him. Mother earth will receive him. It is stra: • he was called the "Dying Gladiator" when he n identified by the torque around his nn k and his i it i thai the ( r*ul b v.n himself the •lit to th . ■ • ii ' 256 GREEK SCULPTURE long curved horn. In the Louvre 1 is another figure not brought so low as the Dying Gaul. Wounded in the left thigh, he still fights. In absence of fierce resistance we should have had mere butchery. Finally we have a scene from the same conflict in which a Gaul, 2 seeing that his consort has nothing but slavery before her, has slain her, and now holding her by her left arm he drives his stout short sword downward into his own breast with a force that makes the blood spurt out. It is possible that we have in a warrior from Delos 3 another figure connected with the Pergamene figures. The shape of the helmet by his side is like those sculptured on the trophies at Pergamon. This is probably a Greek who fights with some chance of victory, since he fights from behind a shield. Thus we have a solitary example of a victor in the fight. The most impressive feature of Pergamon was its akropolis. Going from the city at its foot to the top, one climbs nearly a thousand feet. This comparatively transient kingdom made the mountain into an akropolis such as was never seen elsewhere. Its excavation by the German Archaeological Institute conducted by Professor Dorpfeld during more than ten years, in continuation of previous excavations carried on by the Berlin Museum, is one of the greatest achievements of our time. The akropolis was flanked by the river Ketios on the east and the Selinus on the west, both of which soon flow into the Kaikos. From the summit the sight is one never to be forgotten. One sees the sea eight or ten miles dis- tant. On the south is the broad plain, with the Kaikos. On the north only is the view somewhat limited. In such a setting was Pergamon. But it is the jewel itself that interests us. Leaving the lower area where the city once stood, we wind our way up and enter the akropolis at its lowest point. We then climb up past gymnasia and enter a broad area surrounded by porticoes. This is the market-place. Another rise brings us to the great Altar of Zeus, which affords the chief interest of the place. If we go farther, we shall pass other terraces, the next being the precinct of Athena 1 B.C.//. 13 (1889), PI. 1. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 422. 8 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 9 ; Von Mach, 287. THE HELLENISTIC AGE ; 57 with its temple foundations. On the upper side of this is another porch, and beyond this was the far-famed library of I'ergamon, rivalling that of Alexandria. Still higher up were the temple of Trajan and the royal palace. To the left one looks down on a theatre, cut into the western flank of the mountain, which is extremely steep. Only a gigantic terrace wall holds it from sliding down into the Selinus. We dis- miss details as superfluous for our immediate purpose, ami con- fine ourselves to the great Altar of Zeus, which faced to the west and overlooked the gigantic terrace. Karl Hum. inn, an engineer, got possession in 1873 of some fragments of the relief*. ; and five years later the Germans began the excavations, which with interruptions continued for many \e.ir>. By the liberality of the Porte the German government allowed to take possession of the finds and transport them to Berlin. The altar was practically square, of one hundred feet to each side, with a broad si rin ase cut into the west side, which took up three fifths of its breadth. The structure was forty feet high. ulptured band of colossal figures in extreme relief, about seven feet high, encircled the building on three sides ; but when it turned the two front < orners, it ran up the stairs and ended at the top in a sharp point with a serpent and an eagle. ()n the plat- form to which the stain ase led up was the real altar. A splen- did Ionic colonnade encircled it, and the sa< red lire burned in the < >f it. A smaller frieze, on the inside of the great en- closure served as a parapet, and bore the story of Telephos, but this is -o badly broken that its artistic value is nearly gone. This enclosure <» < upies about two thirds of the -nil >.|iiare, the stair- case with the colonnade at the top occupying the rest. Th( d figures of the outside frieze have drawn the atten- tion of the world, (bants with legs ending it) serpents' tails, and • .Ms wings, doubtless gave rise among the early Christians to the belief th it here dd ils were portrayed, and for th.it reason this lertul building is probably referred to in Revelations ii. 13 as - '7 258 GREEK SCULPTURE "Satan's Seat." We see with what zeal the Christian iconoclasts hammered these figures until hardly a face is left complete. It is, therefore, an immense help in interpreting them that the names are carved on the borders, those of the gods above and those of the giants below. All the greater gods are present, and we are introduced to many more whose names are strange. We begin here with great Zeus, near the centre of what we may call the chief battle, in which the figures are in considerable measure preserved. His garment hampers him somewhat in the action ; but this displays the god. The battle is for no single instant doubtful. On each side of him is a fallen antagonist. On the left a blazing thunderbolt has scorched and annihilated an antagonist — a giant who thought to grapple with great Zeus! The fiery prongs of the forked thunderbolt have pierced him through and through. The mighty king of the celestial gods bares his chest as he draws back his raised right arm to smite down another giant, who falls before him. The giant who has dared to enter the lists against Zeus has already sunk to the earth on his knees before the second bolt has reached him. The mere sight of great Zeus has crushed his foe. But farther to the right is the real, the doughty champion of the giants, bearded and fierce. His buckler is the skin of some wild animal, which he has wound around his arm. His legs end in scaly coils. He is now troubled by the eagle, but his one object is to grapple with Zeus, who has smitten down his two comrades. He it is who dares most, since he meets the father of gods and men. Muscular strength and " courage never to submit or yield " is depicted in the giant's wild face and dishevelled hair ; but vain are all the attempts of this wild and untamed creature when Zeus is near ! All his attacks and defences are but "sound and fury." 1 Another group of four figures (Fig. 122) vies in excellence and power with the one just presented. Here we see Athena, the 1 This group shows how thoroughly the Christians had done their work. The faces had boen carefully hammered away except the giant's head, which, being in profile and not so high relief, was neglected and escaped. THE 1111 1 ENISTIC AGE 259 favourite daughter of Zeus, with her aegis on her breast, "delight- ing in battle/ 1 moving with a grand sweep to the right a< ross the field, carrying death and destruction as she passes. At this mo- ment she seizes by the hair a naked, young, and beardless giant with win--. He has already felt the terrible presence. His lin- gers clasped around the forearm of the goddess are relaxing, and j^r* 1 ^£1? s bsBSf \ *&l ^^^ u2<^ jj. : i :d Museum. 1 he fall- to his mother earth, the death agony on his fare. But on the right of Athena ris Ge, mother earth, who in agony for her child stretches out her right hand as if to reach her son's left, at tl. ne appealing to the pitiless goddess. We have path* xtremes. The central figure of Athena clothed with hei I bearing a round shield is as (rigorous as that of Zeus. Bui she n th less effort. Her Bweep is easy. On ■ right a winged Nike comes rushing upon the nd places a wreath of victory on Athena's head. The pitih ■• remorseh >ly on their nraj s the field. Ony m the feces Of mother and < lnld almost to win ■ to th.- side of the wild forces thai are arrayed ther /' 260 GREEK SCULPTURE We have here mentioned the two principal groups, in which Zeus and Athena are predominant ; but there are other groups of hardly less interest. Apollo, reduced almost to a torso, is slaying with his arrows right and left. The triple Hecate is singeing with a torch a giant whose legs end in serpents' coils, on one of which a dog has fastened his teeth. Behind her a nude warrior, armed with helmet and shield, marked as Otos, strides proudly to the right to meet Artemis, while between them is a giant of the usual form, with legs ending in serpents. Otos is a noble figure, but the goddess Ar- temis confronts him and he must fall. Even the effeminate Dionysos, supported by two Satyrs, draws back his right arm to deliver a telling blow. Amid all this mortal agony there is a deli- cate touch when Selene, riding side-saddle on a spirited horse with a lion's skin thrown over it, passes swiftly along with her cloak fallen to her hips. This splendid body, with its clinging folds girt just below the breast, is a vision of beauty in the midst of a rag- ing battle. The damage to the face, which is in profile, is a loss indeed. There are several aspects of this remarkable frieze to be taken into account. We turn back to the ancient gable figures of the treasury of the Megarians at Olympia, which were some four hun- dred years older than this altar ; and we find the same old theme of the battle between the gods and giants. But how changed ! The display of force is the same, and that is all. The pathos, of which we had touches in Skopas and Lysippos, has now gone on to excess. Relief sculpture has none of the repose of the fifth century. To a sculptor of that time the great frieze would have seemed a travesty of art. The sculpture of Attalos had some restraint, but the reliefs of the great altar are divorced from the principle of relief. The figures stand out practically inde- pendent of background. We are rapidly approaching Roman pictorial art. It is only in comparatively recent times that these sculptures have found their final lodgement. In the last years of the nine- teenth century they were lying on the floor of a storehouse of the I HI lll'.l.l 1 AIM [C AGE 261 Berlin Museum. Bui at last they have been properly placed in a new Museum. A reproduction of the altar was set up, and the fragments of the relief, as t.ir as they were preserved, adjusted. Of course much is larking, and it is only by untiring efforts that such a noble monument of a dying civilization has been brought before us. The altar is reproduced in a museum by itself, but the broad staircase is reduced to two narrow ones on each side. The whole altar is enclosed under a glass roof. ( »f the smaller frieze, which probably had its place on the inside of the colonnade which rests on the high base, there are mam frag- ments, some incomplete and others so mutilated that it is diffi- cult to gather much more than the subject, which seems to represent the story of Telephos, the legendary hero of Pergamon and son of Heraklesand Auge, the unfaithful priestess at Tegea. The story is indeed .u\ interesting one, but the sculptures are not only of in- ferior workmanship, but badly broken. A single exception may be made in the case of Herakles finding the infant Telephos on Mt. Parthenios, suckled by a hind. It is sometimes questioned whether we can properly speak of a Pergamene art rather than Asiatic art, and although Pergamon has given us the best of its kind we may perhaps enroll its art with that which began to show itself in the whole Aegean basin. It red by in who rose and fell with varying fortunes. Tm Rhodian School. Thi I mxxxjn Group Rhodes, once a leader in am ient art, especially in pottery, had already in the seventh century b.< ., and even earlier, a brilliant 1 a- reer. But if in the Hellenistic period much was 1 hanged, Rhodes no mean city in the second centurj B.C It even rose to eminence. When Demetrios Poliorketes attacked the city, the st.m< h citizens came -out of th< , not only with honour, but with glory. Then, like Pergamon, Rhodes took sides against An- and Philip V. In the war against Perseus it lost all it- Asiatic p . but by standing firm against Mithri- 262 GREEK SCULPTURE dates, in 88 B.C., it gained the favour of Rome. The short interval of forty-five following years was brilliant ; but Rome was already supreme and high art was at an end. The Rhodian school, it is true, "had a name to live," as one sees from the list of sculptors from Halikarnassos, Soloi, Chios, Antioch, and Laodicea. 1 The colossos of Rhodes, a work of Chares, was one of the Seven Wonders of the World, but it perished early and passed into the land of fable. There were no tangible remains of the Rhodian school until in 1506 a group was found near San Pietro in Vincoli at the foot of the Esquiline; representing Laocodn and his two sons strangled by serpents (Fig. 123). It was at once identified with the work of the three masters of the Rhodian school — Agesander, Polydoros, and Athenodoros — mentioned by Pliny. 2 The story so often told that such and such figures were made of a single block is here repeated for the delectation of those who en- joy the marvellous. 3 Pope Julius II got possession of the group, and it found its way into the Vatican collection, where it remains. It has been treated as one of the world's greatest wonders. It is no small matter that Winckelmann gave it enthusiastic praise, and that Lessing made it the starting point of his theory of aesthetics in his " Laokoon." But now that we have gained the proper perspective we have learned to estimate the value of the fulsome praises bestowed on the sculptures of the age of decline. If Lessing had seen the Parthenon sculptures, he would not, perhaps, have taken the La- ocoon group as his starting point of a theory of aesthetics. In fact he did not realize that it belonged to the period of decline. — Pain and agony are here paraded and carried to extremes. One revolts against the cruel god who has brought all this suffering upon a righteous man. Laocoon has no time to debate like Job. But he must feel that he who sent the terrible serpents was more a demon than a reasonable god. The whole world pities the father who tries to protect his city and then his sons, and for 3 return has had 1 Loewy, Insc. Griech. Bildh. 127, No. 159-205. 2 Pliny, 36. 37. 3 Pliny, 36. 34, accepts this story. 264 GREEK SCULPTURE inflicted upon him the most terrible of tortures. We see that the younger son, to the left, has already succumbed. The father's suffering is so great that he no longer realizes that this son is dead, crushed in the coils of the serpents, nor does he see the chances that the elder son has of escaping. He reveals in every fibre of his body the extreme of physical agony made even sharper by the thought of his sons. The real worker of the calamity is unseen. Laocoon was both upright and prudent, and yet he perished miserably with his younger son, who succumbs before the father. It is not improbable that it is intended that the elder son, on the right, should still have a chance for his life. On the face of La- ocoon, especially in the eyes, pity and terror are seen in most acute form. In unison with the suffering face, which might readily be compared to that of the crucified one on the cross, we behold every muscle in terrible strain. He is indeed forsaken. Falling backwards upon the altar on which he sacrificed, with his priestly robe fallen from him, we see him stricken down while engaged in his priestly duties. Instead of mother and son, as on the Pergamene frieze, we have the more human father and sons crushed, annihi- lated by the pitiless serpents. The pathos in both groups is alike deep. In the Laocoon group the greater gods and giants are lacking ; but just such pain and pathos as we saw in the youthful giant at Pergamon, struck down by the pitiless goddess, we here behold in increased degree. The giant finds a parallel in the Laocoon. The striking similarity of the Laocoon to the figures on the great altar at Pergamon show that the group cannot be earlier than the altar; and inscriptions 1 containing the names of Age- sander, Polydoros, and Athenodoros show that they lived in the I second half of the first century B.C. We must note here that the group has been badly treated by the " restorers." There is no doubt that it was in the form of a pyramid. Laocoon's right arm should be bent so as to rest upon his head, and the same should be said of the younger son on the 1 See A./.A. 10 (1906), 101. THE HKI.I ENISTIC AG! 165 left. Here the " restorer " appears in his most odious guise. Hut if the figure of Laocoon has been disfigured, it is far more shameful that the dramatists, and among them Sophokles, have maligned him and traduced his character. Tm Farni se Bui i Group Still remaining in the Asiatic school or schools, we pass from the Laocobn to a kindred pie< e of sculpture, and one equally pa- thetic. It is also in like manner p) ramidal in form, but is even more ostentatious than the Laocoon group. The sculptors of this group were from Tralles, and were brothers, Apollonios and Tauriskos, fully imbued with that ostentation which marks the Asiatic school. The group was originally set up at Rhodes, but was c irried off by Cassius at the pillage of that city, 43 B.i . After sixteen centuries it came in in the baths of Caracalla, sadly mutilated. It was restored and placed in the Farnese Pala< e, but was finally removed to the Naples Museum, where it is a cynosure to all who admire big and flashy sculptures. We have here represented (Fig. 1 24 1 a cruel scene. Zethos and Amphion, the Theban heroes, sons of Antiope, are taking vengeance on their stepmother, Dirke, for her 1 ruelty to their mother. ( )ur first thought is of the cruel fate of Dirke, because she is beautiful and is now about to be dragged to a merciless death at the hands of the unrelenting youths. It is a sight at which we revolt, not only because the stout brothers hive chosen a terribly cruel manner of taking their vengeance, but because it is wreaked upon a del w woman. The prancing bull is only an instrument. He will do his conscienceless work. The youths are indeed as the wild bull himself. Every muscle is brought to ■ on th- work. If anything could turn the feelinj I righteous oce into the dcepc I n, it would of Antiope 1 on the right, gloating over her rival's death-agon) tading her a to the torment. Retribution 1 Seen in Brann Brncknutnn, No. 268 GREEK SCULPTURE strike an unguarded foe who should be rash enough to take the offensive. But probably there never was a foe. It was a pose for a fight and nothing more. The sculptor has left his name on the tree trunk. He is Agasias, the son of Dositheos, the Ephesian. The letters are those of the first century b.c. The face of the warrior shows the stern joy of battle ; it is forceful, but on the whole vulgar, as we should expect from an attitude of mere show of anatomical excel- lence. We may praise the show piece because it is excellently done, but beyond that we cannot go. Not so did Harmodios and Aristogeiton pose. Collignon, following Visconti, believes that we should here recos;- nize a man actually fighting a horseman and covering himself with a shield while he looks upward, with his gaze intent upon an antagonist who is about to ride him down. The condottiere of the time is here pictured as forceful but vulgar, as is often the case with the soldier by profession. Such a man often sweeps the spectator along with him. A swift transforma- tion is now coming over the world. Rome will soon call for her gladiators, and they will be made of such stuff. Fig. 125. —Apollo Belvedere. (Rome, Vatican.) THE HELLENISTIC AGE 269 The Apollo Belvedere and the Artemis of Versailles The statue called the Apollo Belvedere (Fig. 125), because it stands in that part oi the Vatican which commanded a fine view over Rome, teas for a long time considered as the beau ideal of sculpture, nor Deed we now regard it slight- ingly, because it may be of a somewhat late period. It has been thought to have kin- ship with the Perga- mene sculptures, and even with the llorghese warrior. It has been perhaps almost as much admired as the "Venus di Milo." It is true that the god is posing. But the pose is splendid. There is no doubt that the archer god has just let fly an arrow. I'urt- wiingler, after long deliberation, declared with Winter 1 that the \ 'llo is a copy of a work by Leochares. The connoisseurs have- in l.ir 9 the true one. that the Apollo work. The ■ i was doubtless more superb than the copy, vet we admire the splendid pose when the eye follows the .v just released, speeding to the m.irk, which is probably I M.n/, >fu /ahrbuJi, 7 (1S92), \'\ Fig. 126. — Artemis <>: ' '• ivre.) 272 GREEK SCULPTURE FIG. 127. — Poseidon of Melos. (Athens, National Museum.) THE HELLENIST] tC AGE 273 The Barberini Faun 1 is a great hulk sunken in a drunken stu- por, tumbled back on a convenient rock, which suffices to show his absolute collapse and inability to sit or even stand. How his head seeks the left shoulder! The Hermes of Andros- with the Praxitelean S, a rather noble figure, is much superior to the Melian Poseidon. His downcast, thoughtful look has been sup- 1 to mark him as belonging to a funereal group. The belve- dere Hermes ' in the Vatican i-. almost a duplicate. We now deal in personifications which grew up in the times of the Diado* hi. Eutychides, a pupil oi Lysippos, carved an image of the " Fortune of Antioch."* The whole represents a city set on a rocky hill. The figure sits upon a rock and re^ts her left hand upon it. On her head is a mural crown. Her foot rests on the shoulder of a youth, representing the (lowing river. The seated goddess bears a sheaf of wheat, typifying the prosperity of the great city. Her attitude is superb. Dignity and pride are un- mistakable, as befitted Antioch. The maker of the pediment •s of the Parthenon would doubtless have called this carrying symbolism too fir. We may note in passing several nude Aphrodites, which are enough akin to fall into a group, ["here is a headless nude figure crouching in the bath, found at Vienne.' Akin to her is the famous Venus dei Medici 8 in Florence, in which all sentiment of modesty has vanished. The sweet afflatus of divinity too i^ gone, ter i^ the dancing Maenad in Berlin. 7 The upward lifting of the right shoulder shows the splendid full forms. For the rest the drapery om-h her completely down to her beautiful feet. Somewhat akin to the Vienne figure in the adjustment ot the > Brunn-Bruckmann, No is ; Von Mach, 191. 1 " • ' '~- 737- * Urunn-Brui kmann, No. 1 5 y. \rt antiqut, PL q > ; Reinach, A . ii. 370, 37«- - (; Von M.i' h, -• ttradonil h. Skulptur, 276 GREEK SCULPTURE altar in front of the temple of Neptune erected in Rome about 35-32 B.C. by Domitius Ahenobarbus. A statue in bronze, found in the sea near Antikythera in 1900, has been much discussed (Fig. 129). It was one of a whole ship- load of statues collected probably for the journey to Rome. This statue has lost some of its value from the treatment given it by Andre, the French restorer, who subjected the whole surface to a sort of restoration after the antiquated fashion. The scraping and obscuring of the joints of the ancient pieces has robbed this great treasure of much of its beauty. We are mainly interested in the attitude of the figure, several interpretations of which have been presented, e.g. an athlete holding a ball in his right hand, or Perseus holding out the Gorgon's head at arm's length. All these interpretations may be wrong. Perhaps the solution is found in the fact that we are dealing with a Hellenistic prod- uct which shows features of both Praxiteles and Lysippos. Waldstein, 1 who at first regarded it as Praxitelean, subse- quently ascribed it to Skopas. 2 Together with this statue there were certain smaller objects, especially two bronzes of small size, that are especially precious because they have not been tampered with. But the large statue is the pride of the National Museum at Athens. The Zeus of Otricoli, which was once admired beyond all pro- priety, has dropped to its proper place as Hellenistic (p. 172). There is, however, a similarity between it and the noble head of Asklepios of Melos (p. 228), but the difference is far greater than the similarity. The Asklepios comes nearer to the prototype, and is full of nobility, while the Otricoli bust is simply big. If the face were distorted by pain, it would resemble Laocodn. Furtwang- ler 3 declared that the bust from Otricoli is the Praxitelean devel- opment of a type created in the days of Myron. But the reason for this belief is difficult to see. 1 Monthly Review, June, 1 901, no. 2 Illustrated London News, June 6, 1903. 3 Masterpieces, 190. Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 130; Von Mach, 487. THE HELLENISTIC AGE 277 A group of colossal statuary called " Menelaos and Patroklos Ml in the Loggia dei Lanzi at Florence lias become famous; but a good deal oi what we now behold is restoration, the head, neck, upper part of the body, and both arms. Patroklos has lost both arms and suffered many abrasions. In spite of all this we have an impressive group. The representation shows Menelaos res- cuing the body of his friend and carrying him to the ships. Sorely pressed, he is about to drop his dear burden on the ground. The gentleness with which he lowers it is as touching as anything in sculpture. Menelaos should, however, be restored as looking up and back at the foes who are trying to surround him. The famous " Pasquino" in Rome had the proper attitude, and was an excellent statue, before it was battered almost beyond recognition. There is perhaps no other statue of the Hellenistic age that shows so much pure pathos in spite of its neglect. The Hellenistic Age is here amply acquitted of deca- dence and jejuneness. We may here mention the Nile, represented as a river god in human form.- His head partakes of the types of Zeus and Poseidon; but he is unmistakably made a god of Egypt, since he leans upon a sphinx, and has a crocodile and an ichneumon at his feet. We have already seen Antioch personified. We are now led farther into allegory by sixteen little figures, once almost entirely obliterated, representing the sixteen cubits which the river reaches in its maximum inundation. That we are in Egypl is also shown by the waves and plant life. The cornucopia too speaks of the abundant fertility. Here allegory readies its utmost bounds. The sculptor has endeavoured to tell every- thing; but by overcrowding has confused the representation. It is well that the reliefs on the base representing the daily life of the Egyptian people are relegated to the back and two ends of the base, where they do not draw attention from the main theme. The sixteen diminutive figures fill up many von! and enliven the representation of the gigantii rivei 1 Hrunn-Bru' km.mn, N'>. Mai.li, J77. '-' I'.i mm- lWuckmann, No. 196. THE HELLENISTIC AGE 279 Roman show, if we may judge from the terrible cestuses of metal. In those two interesting but horrible figures Greek sculpture comes to an end, except for a revival of the antique, harking back even to the archaic style. The colossal head called the Ludovisi Hera (Fig. 130) was formerly regarded as a work of the fourth centuiv B.C., or even as a copy of the famous Hera of Polykleitos ; but it is now evident that it is a Roman w. irk, probably a portrait of some lady of the imperial family, in which the grand style of earlier days is imitated. In Rome the so-called archaizing style became the rage. Its first representa- tive was Pasiteles, a Greek born in southern Italy. He enjoyed the citizenship of Rome, and was a friend of the famous comedian Roscius, who flourished in the first century n.c. He was a contemporary of Pompey, Cicero, and the poet Archias. Yarro took pleasure in praising an artist who was a Roman citizen by adoption, and not one of the " needy and seedy" < In-.-ks, who came to Italy to acquire a beggarly subsistence. Although we have no work of Pasiteles 1 hand we • his style, and at least have an idea of what his works were like, from his pupils, of whom on.- of the mosl prominent was Stephanos, who is represented by a statue m the Villa Albani.' I Brunn-Brucknuuin, n j Vun MulIi, pi, Fig. 131. So-c tiled ( »rrhl.-b an.: . (Naples.) 2 8o GREEK SCULPTURE We here see the very slender proportions of an athlete, who might be a gentleman, a figure of the austere style. Toned down and softened, the statue seems to give an equivocal ex- pression. Through this antique one feels a false note. There is sometimes a suggestion of Polykleitos or some other master; but it is not genuine. It is perhaps generally now admitted that Stephanos took as a model an Argive bronze of an athletic victor of the early part of the fifth century, perhaps made by some pupil of Hagelaidas. Several groups in marble show this style, which we may call late Argive. The two best representa- tives are the so-called Orestes and Electra (Fig. 131) in the Naples Museum, and the Orestes and Pylades. 1 These names, however, are untrustworthy. Another group of mother and son, 2 in the Museo delle Terme, is inscribed as the work of Menelaos, who was a pupil of Stephanos and lived under Augustus or Tibe- rius ; but the line is weakening ; the trace of the heroic is lost. 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 307; Von Mach, 323. 2 Brunn-Bruckmann, No. 309; Von Mach, 322. BIBLIOGRAPHY 281 General Works qn Gri bk So lpti i Collignon, Histoire de la sculpture grecque, Paris, Furtwaogler, Meisterwerke der griechischen Plastik, Leipzig, 1 Furtwangler, Masterpieces o( Greek Sculpture, edited bj Eugenie Sellers. London and New York, nest Gardner, Handbook of Greek Sculpture, London and New York. 1896, 2d ed., 1906. Joubin, l-i sculpti [ue entre le> guerres ra6diques et Pepoque de 1 V-ricli s. Paris, 1901. Kekule* von Stradonitz, Die griechische Skulptur, Berlin, 1907. Murray, History of Greek Sculpture, 2d ed., London, 1890. Overbeck, Geschichte der griechischen Plastik, 4th ed., Leipzig, 1893-94- Perrot and Chipiez, Histoire de Part dans Pantiquite*, \* < >1 . VII, La • de lYpopee; la Greet archafque, 1<- temple (1898); Vol. VIII, La < In ce archaique, la sculpture (1903). I'.. ABBRl \ 1 \ I IONS Arch. Zeit. = Archaologische Zeitung. Ath. Mitt. = Afitleilungen ties kaiserlich deutschen archaologischen tuts, . tthenisi he Abteilung. B.C.//. Bulletin de correspondance hellenique. >>: . A> ! 'itfnjUApis \.pjfouo\oytKTJ. Jakrb. =Jahrbuch des kaiserlich deutschen archaologischen Inst Huts. J. U.S. Journal of Hel/enu Studies. At h. Revue : de la statuaire grecque et romaine, 14. t Handbook k and Roman Sculpture to accom (ion oj ' Greek and Roman Sculpture, Bos* '9°5- INDEX Achilles, shield of, 30. Aegina, temple of Aphaia, 113; gable groups, 24, 41, 58, 90. 91, 104-116; treasure in British Museum, 37. Aeginetan art, contrasted with Attic, 92; bronze, used by Kanachos, 103; by Poly- kleitos, 20; school, 104-117; Apollo from Ptoion, 104, 116; bronze head, on Akropolis, 114-115; bronze head, from Herculaneum, 115-116; of Zeus, from Olympia, 116-117. 'AyaA/ia, 28. Agamemnon, Talthybios, Epeios, relief from Samothrake, 50, 73. Agasias, Borghese warrior, 231, 267-268. Agemo or Ageso, from Frankvrysi (Asea), 44- Agesander, Laocoon group, 262, 264. Agias, at Delphi, 230-231; at Pharsalos, by Lysippos, 230-231. Aigospotamoi trophy at Amyklai, 153. Akarnania, statues of Naxian marble in, 23, 77- Akragas, Atlantes, 198. Akropolis at Athens, Aeginetan bronze head, 114-115; Argive bronze head, 101-102, 144, 154, Athena Promachos, bronze figurines of, 85-86, Athena seated, 45, 84-85; bull and lions group, 58, 201 ; chariot-race relief, 85-87; epheboi, 82-83. l2 °'< ephebos head, yellow-haired, 79, 82-83, 116; equestrian groups, 83-84 ; female statues, 77-82; head- less draped male, 86; Hermes relief, 86-87 '• Hydra gable group, 26, 56; " Maidens," 44, 5 2 » 7 1 , 73, 77-82. 84-86, 88, 90, 91, 94, 96, 110,214; Nikes, 75-76; painting on archaic limestone statues, 26; pre-Persian sculp- tures, 56-60; replicas of Samian Hera, 76- 77- Akroteria, temple of Asklepios at Epidauros, 237; temple of Zeus at Olympia, 133. Aktion, archaic statues of Apollo, 40 Alexander, coins, 233; heads, 231-233; herm, 232; sarcophagus, 27, 242-246; statue in Munich, 233. Alkamenes, Aphrodite in the Gardens, 208; pupil of Pheidias,2o8; statues, at Pergamon, 133; statues for Thrasybulos, 133; west gable of temple of Zeus at Olympia, 132-134. Alkinoos, palace of, 30. Altar of Athena on Akropolis, frieze for, 86; at Pergamon, friezes, 90, 254, 256-261. Alxenor, stele from Orchomenos, 94-95. Amazon, dead, from Attalid groups, 255; in Artemision at Ephesos, by Kresilas, 158- 160; by Pheidias, 158-160, 164; by Phrad- mon, 158-160; by Polykleitos, 158-160. Amphalkes, dedicator of Kitylos and Dermys relief, 55. Amphion, Delphic charioteer, 122 fn.; lost gable sculptures of Theseion at Athens, 196 fn. 4. Amyklai, throne of Apollo, 47-48; Aigospo- tamoi trophy, 153. Anakreon playing his harp, 270. Anathemata, 28. Andros, Hermes of, 273. Angelion, pupil of Dipoinos and Skyllis, 46, 113; teacher of Kallon, 113. Anhydrite, 34. Antenor, " Maiden," 79, 118-119; Tyranni- cides, 29, 79, 117-119. Antikythera, bronze statue, 22, 275-276. Antioch, school, 247; see Fortune of Antioch. Aphaia, temple on Aegina of, 113; gable groups, 24, 41, 58, 90, 91, 104-116. Aphrodite, armed, from Epidauros, 248-249; of Capua, 252; in Copenhagen, 252; crouch- ing, from Vienne, 273; in the Gardens, by Alkamenes, 208; head (?) from Kythera, 104-105; head (Skopasiau) in National Museum, Athens, 215; of Knidos by Praxi- teles, 17, 221-222, 252; of Kos by Praxiteles, 221-222; of Melos, 247, 251-253, 269, 271; Ourania in Berlin Museum, 180; Sosandra by Alkamenes, 145. Apollo, statues from Aktion, 40; of Amyklai, 47; Belvedere, 247, 268-270; Choiseul Gouffier, 145; statues at Delos, 50; at Delphi, 97; Epikourios at Bassai, frieze of temple of, 175, 198-202; metopes, 199; from Keratia, 60; fay Leochares, 269: of Melos, 40; by Myron, 151; Naxian statuettes, 103- 104; of the Omphalos, 145-146; of Orcho- menos, 40, 54-55; Payne Knight, 103; at Pergamon by Onatas, 113, 116; Philesios at Branchidae by Kanachos, 17, 103-104; Piombino, 104; statues from the Ptoion, 40, 41, 104, 116; Sciarra, 103; Strangford, 116; of Tenea, 40, 60, 68, 113; of Thera, 39, 46, 52, 113; type, 39741, 59, 92; on column- drum of old Artemision at Ephesos, 48, 53; unfinished, at Ikaria, 25. Apollonia, archaic relief of man and dog from, 96. Apollonios, copy of Doryphoros, 156-157; Farnese bull group, 265-267. Apoxyomenos by Lysippos, 229; in Vatican, 229-231. 1 The author and editor are indebted for this Index to Dr. Kendall K. Smith, of Harvard University. 282 INDEX 283 Archaic smile, 40, - 18,38-117,27^; enron 38: tjfpe Archai 380. Archermos, ription on Akj NDcc . 95. - lilpturc, 28. . . 144, 154 : relit 144 . late, 280. i =;4. 228-229. 5, relief nf 1 toryphoi • ulp- ture from temple ar- chaic seated h^ure from road between Trip- M- A r i - 1 1 ■ : 1 -tele, 2S, 91 Am-i sec v. 28, 91-ij Vristokles, 103. tonument, 211. Artemis, statue to, 41 - 44. . of, from 1 if kritios, - • Hera 1 *i of V Amazon in Villa Doria P imfili I il* -\ ■■ . < 59. Artemisia, 216. mi in, 158-160, 164 nmn-drum* from old, 53- 54.1 .218. Asklepicion .<: v Myr.in, m Peiraeus, *is 116; relied from , 237-238. Imet of \thena Parti Assos, sculptures from temple , 58. rid puteal, 177-178: I temple on Akropolis, . . fne/e for, H7; pre ■ IVi-i-.tr.i- ■ e On Ak- .Me grouj 88 . 1 . 84 ; I 1' 1. liv lis. at Pellcne by I'h I , the Atri' lit. V Athr « 93, 1)4; chorapic monument of I.ysikratcs .it. I l-'.rci htheioD u ulptures, ■patiwn head of |oddesf 1 r . ■ 1 1 1 epieion, sis; Dumber of atatuea in, 16; Theaeioi ..-«>; gable groups, m e t ope* . 194 195. Athlete "I LotlVre, I .'.;,. fwHllUlll. I2o 1 --I Allan: 198. Attalo* 1. ips presented to Athens 5 Attic .irt, in Asia Minor, 11 1 : contrasted with Veginetan, ,-•; in Delphi, 1*3; in Pi - soa ; influent e, 161; origin reliefs, inllii- cm ■ 1 '• 1 : -id- ulp- tUU , Balustrade ,,f temple of Athena Nike, 192- ini Faun, 27 1; Juno, 207 Bassai, temple of Apollo Epikourioa at, 166; fric/e, 17s, 198-202; metopes, > .. Bathykles, throne of Apt Uo at Amyklai, 47- 48. \ aphio, • up- from, 32-33. \ llo, 247, 208-270; torso, 270- Beneventum, bronae head from, 161 Berlin Museum, Amazon, 150 160; draped re, 180; hi I 143. .n 1 lelphi, Bluebeard croup from pre-Peisistratean tem- ple..', tthena on Vkropolis, 96, 57— 59. from, -i ! j.tu re in, N Lzian marble from, 77, .,1 i, 208; warrior, 231, 207-268. 1 Museum of Pine trts, bead of /eus, 172; reliel similar to I, ml. mm relief, 140 141; vase-painting of tyrannicides, 118- I20. R<. 6 °- Chariot, relief in Candia Museum, 34; bronze, from Etruria, in New York Metropolitan Museum, 66-70; of Gelon by Glaukias, 114; group for Hiero by Onatas, 113. Charioteer at Delphi, 22, 121-123; frieze of Mausoleum, 122, 218. Chariot-race relief from Akropolis, 85-87. Cheramyes, dedicated Hera of Samos, 76. Cherbuliez' Le Cheval de Phidias, 187. Chest of Kypselos, 19, 20, 46-48. Chios, family of Archermos from, 5o-5r; sculptors of, using Parian marble, 23-24; school of, 50-53, 77. Choiseul Gouffier Apollo, 145. Choragic monument of Lysikrates, 238-239. Christians, mutilation of statues by, 55, 258. Chronological divisions of Greek sculpture, 28; of archaic sculpture, 38. Chronology of Cretan and Mycenaean art, 36-37- Chrysapha, relief from, 29, 60. Chryselephantine statuary, beginning of, 20 ; early examples, 36, 47 ; by Pheidias, 27, 154, 164—172 ; by Polykleitos, 154, 160. Chrysothemis, of Argive school, 46. Cicero, criticism of Kalamis and Kanachos, 146. Cipollino, 24. Cire perdue, method of casting bronze, 21—22. Cockerell, 106, 199. Coins, value of, for history of Greek sculp- ture, 17 ; of Alexander, 233 ; of Sparta, showing Apollo of Amyklai, 47 ; of Gordia- nusIII, showing Apollo of Branchidae, 103; of Miletos, showing Apollo of Branchidae, 17, 103 ; of Athens, showing Athena con- tending with Poseidon, 182 ; of Argos and Elis, showing Hera of Polykleitos, 160 ; of Sikyon, showing Herakles of Skopas, 215 ; of Athens, showing Marsyas, 150 ; showing Nike of Samothnke, 250 ; Tyran- nicide group, 118 ; of Elis, with head of Zeus, t7. Colossos of Rhodes by Chares, 262. Colour applied to sculpture, see Painting. Copenhagen, Diadumenos, 158 ; draped torso (Aphrodite), 2^2; female statues in, 117, 207 ; fleeing woman, 207 ; head of athlete, 82 ; high-crowned (Myronian) head, 153 ; relief of Orestes slaying Aegisthos, 102-103. Copies, 17. Copper, from Cyprus, si. Corcyra, 62. Corinth, art of, 62 ; gilded wooden statues at 19 ; inscribed bases of Lysippos at, 16 ; material of sculptures in later city, 24. Corinthian bronze, 20 ; reliefs, 20, 47 ; vases and chest of Kypselos, 47. Cretan art, relation to Mycenaean, 34 ; oiigin of later Selinus metopes, 65. Crimea, gold medallions showing head of Athena Parthenos, from, 165. Cultus statues, 28. Cupbearer, arm of, in relief, from Knossos, 36- Cups, gold, from Mycenae, 30 ; from Vaphio, 3 2 -33- Cyprus, copper mines, 21. Daggers, bronze inlaid, from Mycenae, 33-34. Daidalos, teacher of Dipoinos and Skyllis, 3°, 46. Damasistrate, grave relief, 210. Damophon, group from Lykosura, 28, 274- 275 : repairs Olympian Zeus of Pheidias, 171— 172. Dancers, from Herculaneum, 141. Delian bronze, 20, 156. Delos, colossal Naxian "Apollo " statues at, 50 ; Diadumenos from, 158 ; Dionysos, wooden, at, 19, 20 ; "Maidens" of, 44, 71, 73, 80 ; Nikandre from, 41-44, 46, 52, 77 ; replicas of, 43 ; Nike of Archermos, 51-53, 6 3> 75i 95 :. warrior, 256. Delphi, Agias, 230-^231 ; archaic Apollo figures, 97 ; Athenian treasury, metopes, in ; Charioteer, 22, 121-123 ; Knidian treasury, frieze, 98-99, in ; Maidens, 96, 99, 197; Miltiades and eponymi by Pheidias, 169 ; number of statues for- merly at, 16 ; Sikyonian treasury, metopes, 97, 99 ; Tarentine group by Onatas, 113 ; Thessalian group, 230-231. Demeter, black, by Onatas, at Phigaleia, 113 ; Despoina, Artemis and Anytos, group by Damophon at Lykosura, 28, 274-275 ; of Knidos, 227-228 ; see Hera. Demetria and Pamphile, grave relief, 210. Demetrios of Phaleron, statue of, 29. Dermys and Kitylos relief, 55. Despoina, temple at Lykosura of, group from, 28, 274-275. Dexileos monument, 209, 237. Diadems, gold, from Mycenae, 30. Diadochoi, statues of, 29. Diadumenos by Polykleitos, 23, 157-158, 161. Dion Chrysostom, 18. Dionysos, wooden, at Delos, 19-20. Dipoinos, pupil of Daidalos, 46, 113 ; statues in Peloponnesos, 46 ; in Sikyon, 46, 103, 153 ; teacher of Tektaios and Angelion, . IJ 3- Dipylon, discus-thrower stele, 93-94; grave reliefs, 73, 209-211, 214, 237; seated figure, archaic, 45. Diskobolos, Massimi,2s; by Myron, 148-150, 152, 155 ; stele from Dipylon, 93-94. Does, gold and silver, before palace of Alkinoos, 30. Doliana marble, 24, 44, 199, 212. INI'1 X »«5 Pontas, of Spartan school, < i influence at Athens, 78. bool, 46. . 229. 1 'rcsiicn I* ■> . 161. Athenian Maiden*, S- Duplication of Apollo type, 55; of bronze :ues, 23. -, vase of, 120. , Gaul, lis, 247, 255-256. Egypt, age of bronze-casting in, 21 ; sculpture 347. Egyptian influence, 39. Eirene .mJ Plui . 339-340. Kleusis. Eubuk tiles relief, 236; Ml Marathonoiri lief, 94: ram's head, a: -t.iuiclle, archaic, 43: Triptolen.. relief, 303-305. Elcutherna, archaic seated figure, 44 . 191, 198. 1 10s, pupilof I>aidalos, 46; seated Athena Ephcboi on Akropolis, 83-83. la o. Ephebos head, yellow-haired, on Akropolis, 79, 82-83, 11. Eph- trtemifion, reliefs on column- drums, 53: later Artemision, Amazona in, 158-160, 164; reliefs on column-drums, ai8. uiros, armed \ \ klepios reliefs, 237- 23S: temple of I sculptures by I Timotheos, 217, 337-230; Nike of Mum- mius, 251. Equestrian groups, archaic, on ' 83-84; by Lykios, before Pi 147. Erechtheion at Athens, architecture, 1,7; frieze, 197: Maidens, 1 ,7-198, 205, 240. 1 - by Praxiteles, 319-321, . lyan, bronze hc.il in British Museum from, 253. 1 Metropolitan -cum from, 66-70; tripods from, 66, 69-70. Etruscan art, 66, 68, 70. Euboca, green marble from, 24 I ileus bead from I- leusis, 226-237. 123. I ,ter. 228. ! '• 373, 377. Farnese, bull group. 247. 1 '1 idume- ■ 1 . 1 1 irberini, 273; Marble, II 1 •ury sculpture, 117 311 I . I . nt I s - woman i ■ from m ■ monuroc kiates, 238-330.; Erechtheion, 197; Mauso- leum u Halikarnasi • 218, 237; Nereid monument -it Xanthos, an; Parthenon, 45, 87, 99, . 184-190, 195 temple .11 \ 58; tcin 1 -istr.iu i tempi V .11 Akropolis, 87 Nike, 190-192, 195, 196, 200; 1 . -*oo. Front.ilitv, Law of, 120. I lest on Akropolis, 36, 5' , Parthenon, 4>, i6a, 17'' iS ; . 193, 250, 273; Peisistratid temple of Athena on •11, 164; pre-Peisistratean temple of Athena on Akropolis, t6, 49, 57-60, 65; tempi- Apl ' >, 24, 41, 5S, 90, ,1 , 11 .4 : temple of Athena Alea .11 regea, 16, 24. Ill 215, 2.'4, 231: temple .■ rmpia, 24, 102, tax, 126-13;, 141, 154. 206, 207; Tl. 1 .< 197; treasury of 1 iani .u < ' 1 y 1 1 1 1 ■ 1 . 1 , > 1 , > 5, 260. ,27. \n.ili.l groups, 354-355; ipitoline, 11.'. 247, 255-256; Staying himself with wife, 256; wounded, in I ouvre, 256. Gems, value for history of Greek sculpture, 17; showing Amazon leaning on pillar. of Aspasias, showing helmet of Ai Parthenos, 165; showing Lemnian Athena, "1. 34. 35- Genxano, Skopauan head from, 215. Gesso dure, 36. runner, of Vatican, 145. ( ritiadas, ol Spartan schoi 1 Giustiniani Athena, 208-209; Hcstia, 137, 207. Glaukiaa, Chariot for Gelon, 114; Delphi) ■ harioteer ft), 122. Glaul S°> ( ilykon, I irm 1 Herakli . ■,, 271. ^s removing sandals, Hellenistic bronze, 374- Goethe, 181, 210. Gold, Itatuea in Homeric poems, 30; ol i found at M lio, 32 33; Sf, ' ll.lllllllC. . ,1 : from 1 •■ lui, 73, 209 an, 214, B37J from llissos, ill] from Sparta, I ■ " < rrinning type " in ai pture, 4 , i\. 11 by Pliny, 1 ... 1 ■ inw I Myron, ■ Halil ■ • : 1 286 INDEX Harvest Home vase from Holy Trinity, 36. Hawthorne's Marble Faun, 220. Head (Aeginetan), bronze, from Akropolis, 114-115; (Argive) bronze from Akropolis, 101-102, 144, 154; Skopasian, of goddess, from Asklepieion at Athens, 215; bronze, from Beneventum, 161; Bologna, 163; Catajo, 152; of athlete in Copenhagen, 82; high-crowned (Myronian) in Copenhagen, 153; from Erzindyan, in British Museum, 253; from Genzano, 215; (Aeginetan) bronze, from Herculaneum, 115-116; Ince- Blundell, 152-153; archaic bronze from Kythera, 61, 104-105; Laborde, 183; from Meligou, 61; from Miletos, archaic male, in British Museum, 49; in Constantinople, 49; colossal, of goddess, in Museo delle Terme, 141; female, from Pergamon, 253; Rampin, 82-83; Vincent, 161. Heads, archaic, poros, in Akropolis Museum, 58, 59; archaic, from Ptoion, 43, 55; Sko- pasian, 215. Hegeso, grave relief in Dipylon, 73, 209. Hegias, 145 : criticism of, by Lucian, 120; teacher of Myron, 148; of Pheidias, 147, 169. Heifer, bronze, by Myron, 151. Helios and chariot by Lysippos, at Rhodes, 236. Hellenistic Sculpture, 247-280. Hera of Argos by Polykleitos, 153, 154, 156, 160, 279; marble head, from Argos, 161; Farnese, 162; Ludovisi, 279; head at Olympia, 61; from Samos, 54, 76; replicas on Akropolis, 76-77; " Barberini Juno," 207-208; or Demeter, 207. Herakles, Belvedere torso of, 270-271; Far- nese, by Glykon, 234, 271; by Lysippos at Sikyon, 234; by Lysippos at Tarentum, 236; by Myron, 151; by Onatas at Olympia, 113; by Skopas, in Gymnasium at Sikyon, 215; and Triton gable, oldest, on Akropolis, 57. 65- Herculaneum, dancers, 137, 141; bust by Apollonios of Doryphoros by Polykleitos, 156-157; head (Aeginetan), 115-116; " wrestlers " in Naples, 150, 235. Hermes, of Andros, 273; by Praxiteles, 16, 124, 213, 2r4, 219, 222-224, 2 39 _2 4o; rest- ing, in Naples Museum, 234-235; relief from Akropolis, 86-87; Apollo, Nymphs and Graces, relief from Thasos, 72-73. Heroon at Trysa, reliefs, 211. Hertz head of Nike by Paionios, 207. Hestia Giustiniani, in the Torlonia Museum, 137, 207. Holy Trinity (Crete), Harvest Home vase, 36. Homeric poems, 31. Honorary statues, 29. Horror vacui, 66. Horses, archaic, on Akropolis, 83-84. Hydra gable group on Akropolis, 26, 56. Hymettos marble, 24, 59. Idolino, 152, 161. Ikaria, stele of warrior, 92; unfinished archaic Apollo, 25. Iktinos, architect of Parthenon, 173; of temple at Bassai, 199. Ilioneus, 274. Ilissos, grave relief, 210-211. Ince-Blundell head, 152, 153. Inscription of Agasias of Ephesos, 268; Age- sander, Athenodoros, Polydoros, 264; Alex- ander, 232; Alkamenes, on statue at Pergamon, 133; Alxenor, 94; Antenor, 79; Apollo from Ptoion, 41 ; Archermos, 51, 76; Dermys and Kitylos, 55; Eubuleus in Vatican, 226; on Lakratides relief, 226; fisherman dedicating maiden to Poseidon, 81; Glykon on Farnese Herakles, 234; Kallon, 113; Kombos, on base of Calf- bearer, 59; Lysikrates, choragic monument of, 239; Lysippos on Agias base from Pharsalos, 230; ontwobasesat Corinth, 16; on replica of Farnese Herakles, 234; iater Myron, 148; Nikandre on archaic female statue, 42; Onatas, 113; Paionios, on base of Nike, 133, 207; Praxiteles on base of Colossos of Monte Cavallo, 225 ; Theodoros on the Akropolis, 77; Thrasymedes and Timotheos at Epidauros, 237; Zeus Eubu- leus at Paros, 226; on plinth of Aphrodite of Melos, 253; relating to temple of Athena Nike, 192; on base of colossus at Delos, 50; of Delphic charioteer, 121-122; on bronze statue from Kreusis, 117; Nike of Mummius at Epidauros, 251 ; fragment of archaic female figure from Ptoion, 43; relief from Thasos, 73 ; Thessalian group at Delphi, 230; temple of Zeus at Olympia, 124. Ionic art, 49, 50, 53, 58; in Aegina, 112; in Athens, 74 ff. 83, 118, 119; in Boeotia, 95- 96; in Etruria, 66; in Lycia, 71-72; in Thasos, 73; revolt against in Athens, 78; artists in Athens, 75-77; frieze on Pei- sistratid temple of Athena, 87. Island gems, 34-35; marble, 23. Isokephaly, 49, 186. Ivory statuette from bull-baiting group at Knossos, 35-36. Jason, the sandal-binder, 187. Juno, Barberini, 207-208 ; Borghese, 208. Kairos, by Lysippos at Sikyon, 237 ; by Polykleitos, 236-237. Kalamis, 121 ; Ludovisi throne, 141 ; works, 145-146 ; Aphrodite (Sosandra), 145. Kallikrates, architect of Parthenon, 173. Kallimachos, 24. Kallon, ir3-n4. Kanachos, compared with Kalamis by Cicero, 146; Apollo Philesios of Branchidae, 17, 103-104 ; Ismenian Apollo at Thebes, 104. Karyatid, 197. Kaufmann, head of Athena Parthenos, 165 ; of'Knidian Aphrodite, 222. Kephisodotos, Eireneand Plutos, 239-240. Keratia, Apollo from, 60. Kertch vase, Athena contending with Posei- don, 182. Kitylos, see Dermys. Klearchos, pupil of Daidalos, 46 ; Zeus at Sparta, 21. Kleobis of Argos, statue at Delphi, qj. 1X1 »1 \ Knidian fricre at Delphi, 98-111 ; Maiden*, 198. KlUOOt, Aphrodite Knosaos, bull ry, 35-36 ; :cr bull's I (Combos, -cr I 1 k • - , 1 •, I 1 , v 1 ■ • Kresilas, \ 160. KrniM-, -eidon Gram, ICritios and \ riticized by Ludan, isn ■ ; Parthenon metopes. 17;; Tyrannicides, 118 uj. . 36. Kyni 161. Kypselos, I :■ 1 K.ythcr.1, head 1 Aphrodite ?) from, 61, 104-105. Laborde head, 183. I Lakratidi ;^6. Lain' 1 • Iron), 50. Lancelotti Disl , 148-150. !o\* nc I 'i- ■ Lao- -'74, 376. Ituette from beehive tomb on Ml. I Lemnian Athena by Pheidias, 163-164, 169. Leaormant statuette. i< 4-166. loleum at Halikarnassos, 217. us, group by Praxiteles I Iyeul ■ - , on frieze at Itelphi, i ictte, 1 00-101, 1 54. ' . tae, 30, 34; s in srulpturc l mi, 18 ; I.ucian, 18, !-•>, 1:7, 11. is, 18, • • "77. 107. I'liny the I 20, ! 1 1 \ 27. 17. Louvre, aihk . mall 1 t , .f head of f)i 1 . , 144 I • : throne in 141. Lychnitti , marble 1 from, 71 7.' : 147 •■III of, II. 238 Lysippean bead on rVrismgeiton in Naples M useum, Lysii influence, materia . number I'liny's bias, 18; I iks, 228- tgias, \ . indei iiatues, I u\ re aih- leti . 1 and 1 hariot, ai K:. I U-r- :\V- ,1 I arentum. Hei Kairos .11 Silcyon, 237 ; Mi leager in I I iteran Po- the wrestler, Naples Museum, »35- liadumeno , 177-180. Maen 1 in Berlin, 1 ,. Maidi Aki 1 it Athi ns, 44, 53, 71, i, 84-86,8.-. I >e I . 11 sis, ur\ Siphnians and rCnidiani ai Manti p if I 'to, Apollo, and Arte- mis, l.y Praxiteles, 18, 225, .4^ Marathon, Vristion stile. ■ i in I.I111-1 Marble, sculptors working in, u-c in Ijiiurc 23, 24. -'O. Marri and Vmphitrite, relief , 275 Marsy is by Myron, 148, 150-151. "-"> 3°- M is.imi I liskobolos, 25. . i .Is used in ( In ■ k s. ulpture, ny-24. M.iitri Ain.i/011. Mausoleum ai Halikarnassos, Dieses, 122, 214, 216-218, 237. .17. lions, gold, from the Crimea, ibowing ■ Venui il Apollo from, 051 s. ulpiors from 11 rv .il < llympia of, ^ablc s. ulptun • 5<- .11 Rome, M. ii. 111 marble head from. ilo of, 4 .. Asklc J P eido of, a 171, 873. Menekrates, lion from tomb of, \1ri . ip -ii mothei ami sou by, j8o. in I . 277. Parti 174 ■ ,1 \ . 1 , . temple "i .\|„,. .11 Selinu nplc / si temple / 11 • rnplc oi Zeus al 1 >lym- 288 INDEX pia, 123, 135-137, 141. i94i z 34; Theseion at Athens, 194-195; treasury of Athe- nians at Delphi, in; treasury ofSikyonians at Delphi, 97-99. Michelangelo, 25, 152, 227. Mikkiades, father of Archermos of Chios, 5 1 - Miletos, archaic male head in British Museum from, 49; archaic male head in museum at Constantinople from, 49; archaic seated figures from, 45, 49; later archaic sculp- ture at, 74. Miltiades and eponymous heroes, group by Pheidias at Delphi, 169. Mnesikles, 192. Models, 25. Monte Cavallo, Colossi, 225. Montorsoli, restorations of Apollo Belvedere by, 270. Morosini, 177, 183. Moschophoros, see Calf-bearer. Mother and son, group by Menelaos, in Museo delle Terme, 280. Mt. Tainaron, red marble from, 24. Mt Taygetos, leaden statuette from, 53. Mourning Athena, relief on Akropolis, 167, 203-206. Murder scene, relief at Sparta, 61. Mycenae, bracelets, 30; bull's head, 36; cups, 30; daggers, 33; diadems, 30; grave reliefs, 34; lionesses relief, 30, 34; masks, 30. Mycenaean art, 30-37 ; relation to Cretan, 34 ; seal rings, 34. Myron, 17, 123, 155, 233, 276 ; date, 18, 145, 147 ; material used by, 20, 148 ; lack of originals by, 219; taught by Hagelai'das, 18, 100, 14S, 151 ; by Hegias, 148 ; works, 147-153, 161, 163, 175 ; Apollo, 151 ; Asklepios, 151 ; Catajo head, 152 ; Copen- hagen head, 153 ; Diskobolos, 148-150, 152, 156 ; heifer, 151 , Herakles, 151 ; Idolino, 155, 161 ; Ince-Blundell head, 152 ; Ladas, 150 ; Marsyas, 148, 150-151 ; Munich oil- pourer, 152 ; Parthenon metopes, 175 ; Perinthos head, 147, 153 ; Perseus, 151 ; pristae or pyctae, 151 ; Riccardi bust, 152 ; Tarsos bronze, 152 ; Zeus, 151. Myron of Thebes, later sculptor, 148. Mys, 168. Naukratis, 21. Naukydes, of Argive-Sikyonian school, 153. Naxian marble, 23, 77 ; school, 77. Naxos, Apollo statues, colossal, from, 50 ; Nikandre of, 42 ; regions of activity of sculptors from, 23, 77 ; statuette, archaic, from, 103-104 ; unfinished statue from, 2 5- Neo-Attic revival, 271. Nesiotes, see Kritios. Nestor group at Olympia by Onatas, 113. Nikandre from Delos, 41-44, 46, 52, 77. Nike, figures from Akropolis, 75-76 ; bronze figurines from Akropolis, 52 ; figures as akroteria on temple of Asklepios at Epidau- ros, 237 ; of Delos, 51-53, 63, 75, 95 ; of Mummius at Epidauros, 251 ; by Paionios at Olympia, 133, 206-207, 247, 250 ; of Samothrake, 52, 207, 247, 249-252 ; see Athena. Nikias, painter of statues by Praxiteles, 27. Nile, 277-278. Niobe group, 216, 247-248. Nointel, 176. North Grecian school, 73. " Occasion," see Kairos. Oil-pourer in Munich, 152. Olympia, Hellenistic head of boxer, 278 ; chariot group by Glaukias, 114 ; by Onatas, 113 ; Hera head, 61 ; Herakles by Onatas, 113 ; Nestor group by Onatas, 113 ; Nike by Paionios, 133, 206-207, 2 47, 2 5° '• num- ber of statues formerly at, 16 ; sculpture, archaic, at, 61-62 ; primitive bronze statuettes, 21, 38 ; temple of Zeus, akro- teria, 133 ; gable groups, 24, 102, 121, 126- 135, 141, 154, 206, 207 : metopes, 123, 135- 137, 141, 194, 234 ; treasury of Megarians, gable sculptures, 61, 65, 260 ; bronze head of Zeus, 117 ; chryselephantine Zeus by Pheidias, 18, 154, 169-172. Olympieion at Athens, 166. Omphalos, Apollo of the, 145-146. Onatas, works, 113-114, 116; Apollo at Per- gamon, 113, 116; chariot group for Hiero of Syracuse, 113; black Demeter at Phiga- leia, 113; Herakles at Olympia, 113; Nes- tor group at Olympia, 113; Tarentine group at Delphi, 113. Orchomenos, Apollo from, 40, 54-55; stele by Alxenor, 94-95; replica of, from Apol- lonia, 96; replica of, in Naples, 95-96. Orestes slaying Aegisthos, relief in Copen- hagen, 102-103; and Elektra, group, 280; and Pylades, group, 280. Ornamental sculpture, 29. Otricoli, Zeus of, 172, 274, 276. Oxyrhynchos Papyrus, 147. Painting on Aeginetan gable groups, no; bull and lions group on Akropolis, 58; Peisistratid temple of Athena on Akropolis, gable groups, 91 ; pre-Peisistratean temple of Athena, gable groups, 58, 81 ; poros gable groups on Akropolis, 56—57; rider on Akropolis, 83; Alexander sarcophagus, 243, 245-246; Aristion stele, 91-92; Calf-bearer, 59; Knidian frieze at Delphi, 99; Maidens on Akrcpolis, 80; Nikandre statue, 43; ste'.e from Orchomenos, 95; Parthenon metopes, 175; sculpture in general, 26-27; Selinus metopes, 63; Sidon sarcophagi, 245-246; Theseion metopes, 194; stele from Velanideza, 93; wooden statues, 20, 23, 26; temple of Zeus at Olympia, gable groups, 131. Paionios, akroteria of temple of Zeus at Olympia, 133; east gable of temple of Zeus at Olympia, 132-134; Nike at Olympia, 133, 206-207, 247, 25°- Palace of Alkinoos, 30; of Menelaos, 30. Panainos, 171. Panathenaic amphora, on Skaramanga vase in Vienna, 118. Parian marble, 23, 24, 196. IN hi X 2S9 Parrhasios, 168. Parthenon frieze, <;, 87,04, 161, 173, 184-100, 106, 20::, 176-18;. 194. 111 general, it), .■-190, 204. i • Marsyas, 150 ■ 153. -. 128, 13- e, 20. Payne kmcht bronze statuette, t-, 103. .•48. l'cir.. • stone •-. 23. c Jt|>|>cii in fountain Pcnel.>(>c, 143. Pentc'. . 116: 1 .rc.it ; I female >. with name of A mencs f; ish Museum, 206. .ith, 147, 153. \ualid groups, 255. Phar , 230-231: k from, 73, / : Thessalian group from, Phei 172, i&,. 371 ; CI :id I'olykleil da- honoura uv teacher .18, 24. ;. 212, Athena Pellene, an irthenon ■ •. 113: 1 3, 100, ! with influence, 280: lack of originals by, 219: material used by t so, 156 ; method of bi ting, j. ¥ : taught by Hagelaidas, is, 100, 151, iu ; works: 237, lazon at I l'-cne- ventum bead, 161; Diadunu 157- Doryphoros, 1 >4 1 ;s, 161, I if , 161: Hei 1 ,160,279; "■ '' Farnese. I lino, ;- ; Kyni Polykleitos, the younger, trophy I potamoi at Am] • 11, wall-painting of punishment of 1 'irkc, 267. irwpiroc Aiflot, 33. . 26. Port in 1 'crlin, 156. Portraitun . Poseidon, bronze statue from Krcusis tlcdi- . 11'. 117; l.atetan, I ] ;; of Mclos, 271, 273. Pi ixttelean motive in Amazon type, 159; S , 222, 223, 273. Pra»r ., ~iS; influence, 2^4, 271, 276: materials used by, 21 1, 24 ; i>l.t> e of, -'i l lation to Kepi ,'39: statues painted by Nikias, -•;; style, 227, 252, 251. works. 16, 17, 28, 124, 213, 214 127, 239-240, 245, 247-248, 252: Aphr.idr .1-222, 252: Aphrodite of Kot, 221-222 ; I ids, . . 1 11I. ulcus, 226-227: Hermes, 16, 124, 213, 214, 222-224, 2 3s» illo, Irtemis, in .11 \l .mtiiK'i.i, .■ - , .■-•(; M.iiiiineian relief, 225, 24; ; Maui ileum of Halikamat- -47 _ 24b. iroktonos, 222. Praxiteles, the elder, Athena I'romachos, 168; illo, 225. in, 236. M\ ton, 1 by marble sculptors, 24- 2S- reek, 79. 1 defilement by birds, 81. ipollo (Aeginetan) fr m, lo from, 4" 41 ; fe- male Ital male figu . . 55. I'm:: Purp . '8. Putcal in Madrid, 1 rj -. .■■>. IIS) stvlc, 10 of the 147 . Spinarii . I'y tin il 11 at H.ihkar- 117. . 94- i j 7 ■ 290 INDEX Relief, similar to Ludovisi relief, in Boston Museum of Fine Arts, 140-141 ; from Chrysapha, 29, 60; Ludovisi, 138-141; Mantineian, 225; of Penelope, 143; Villa Albani, 73. Reliefs, material of archaic Athenian, 24; of wood, 19; Argive, 20, 47; Attic, influence at Argos, 160-161; Corinthian, 20, 47; from Heroon at Trysa, 211; from Knossos, 36; from Mycenae, 34. Rhamnus, Themis from, 248-249. Rhodes, Colossos of, 262; Farnese bull group at, 247, 265-267; Helios and chariot by Lysippos, 236; number of statues formerly at, 16; school of, 261 ff. Rhoikos, traditional inventor with Theodoros of bronze-casting, 21, 46. Riccardi bust, in Florence, 152. Rings, Mycenaean seal, 34. Rivers represented by human figures, 134, 277-278. Rosso antico, 24. Rothschild bronze Spinario from Sparta, 144. Samian art from Athenian Akropolis, 77. Samos, Hera from, 54, 76; replicas on Akrop- olis, 76-77; later archaic art at, 74; statues of Naxian marble in, 23 ; school of, 48, 77- Samothrake, Agamemnon, Talthybios, Epeios relief from, 50, 73; Nike of, 52, 207, 247, 249-252. Sandal-binder, see Jason. Sarcophagi of Sidon, 27, 240-246. " Satan's Seat," 258. Satrap, sarcophagus of, 240-241, 245-246. Satyr by Myron, see Marsyas; by Praxiteles, 219—220, 224; dancing, 271. Sauroktonos by Praxiteles, 222. Schiller, 15. Schliemann's discoveries, 30-32. School, Aeginetan, 105-117; of Antioch, 247; Argive, 41, 46, ioc-103, 132, 144, t53, 154, 247; late, 280; Argive-Sikyonian, 153, 154, 228-229; Asiatic, 261, 265; Chian. 50-53, 77; Pergamene, 247, 253-26^ Rhodian, 261 ff. ; Samian, 48, 77 ; Sikyonian, 103-104. 153, 228 ff., 247; Spartan, 46, 60-61; of Tralles, 247. Schools, local, 38. Sciarra Palace, Rome, bronze statue from, 103. Seal rings, Mycenaean, 34. Seated figure, from road between Argos and Tripoli, 44; from Branchidae, 45; Dipylon, 45; Eleutherna, 44; Miletos, 45. Selinus, metopes from temple C, 61-65, 241; from later temple, 65, 97; temple E, 132, 137—138, 162; temple F, 99—100. Seven wonders of the world, Colossos of Rhodes, 262; Mausoleum at Halikarnassos, 216: Zeus at Olympia by Pheidias, 170. Shield of Achilles, 30. Sicily, archaic sculpture in, 62. Sidon, sarcophagi from, 27, 240-246. Sikyon, Herakles by Lysippos at, 234; Hera- kles by Skopas in Gymnasium at, 215; Kairos by Lysippos at, 234; school of, 103- 104, 153, 228 ff., 247. Sikyonians, treasury at Delphi of, metopes, 97-99. Silenus carrying Dionysos, 271. Silver statues, in Homeric poems, 30. Siphnians, treasury at Delphi of, Maidens, 197. Skaramanga vase in Vienna, Panathenaic amphora on, 118. Skopas, art of, 152, 221, 224, 227, 230, 246; eye, an, 214, 218, 228; influence of, 251, 275, 276; lack of originals by, 219; mate- rials used by, 20; style, 252, 253, 260; works, 16, 24, 122, 212-218, 224, 227-228, 23t, 237, 247-248, 252, 276; Ares Ludovisi, 215; Asklepios of Melos, 228, 276; Askle- pios from Peiraeus, 215-216; Athena in the Uffizi, 216, 252 ; Capitoline head (Herakles) , 215; Demeter of Knidos, 227-228; sculp- tured drums from Artemision at Ephesos, 218; Genzano head (Herakles), 215; head of goddess from Asklepieion in Athens, 2t5; Herakles of Gymnasium at Sikyon, 215; Meleager, in Rome, 215; Mausoleum at Halikarnassos, frieze, 122, 214, 216-218, 237; head in National Museum, Athens (Aphrodite), 215; Niobe group, 216, 247- 248 ; temple of Athena Alea at Tegea, gable groups, 16, 24, 212-215, 22 4. 2 3t- Skyllis, pupil of Daidalos, 46, 113 ; statues in Peloponnesos, 46 ; in Sikyon, 46, 103, 153 ; teacher of Tektaios and Angelion, 113. Smile, archaic, 40, 53, 78, 93. Smilis, pupil of Daidalos, 46. Somzee athlete, 120-121. Sosandra by Kalamis, 145. Sparta, reliefs from, 60-61 ; Rothschild bronze Spinario from, 144 ; school of, 46, 60-61 ; Zeus at, by Klearchosof Rhegion, 21. Sphinxes from Assos, 49. Spinario, 143-^5. Standing figures, archaic, male, see Apollo ; female, see Maidens. Stele from Velanideza, painted, 93. Stephanos, statue in Villa Albani, 279-280. Stolid type, in archaic sculpture, 40, 54. Stone, use of, for statues, 22, 23. Strangford Apollo, 116 ; shield of Athena Parthenos, 166. Subiaco figure, 273-274. Tanagra, Dermys and Kitylos relief from, 55. Tanteti, see Maidens. Tarentine group by Onatas at Delphi, 113. Tarentum, Herakles by Lysippos at, 236. Tarsos, bronze statue from, 152. Tauriskos, Farnese bull group, 247, 265-267. Tegea. Atalanta at, 213 ; Spartan (?) relief from, 60 ; temple of Athena Alea, gable groups, 16, 24, 212-215, 224, 231. Tektaios, pupil of Dikoinos and Skyllis, 46, ri3 ; teacher of Kallon, 113. Telekles, of Samian school, 46 Telephos frieze from Great Altar of Zeus at Pergamon, 257, 26r. Tenea, Apollo of, 40, 60, 68, 113. Thasos, relief of Hermes and Nymphs from, 72-73 ; tombstone of Philis from, 73. Themis from Rhamnus, 2^8-2^9. INDEX 291 Theodoros, traditional inventor with Rhoikos of bronze casting, II ; ins., notion on AkrO- polls, 77. rau Apol . ;a, 113. IhcH'i.ni al Athens, frieze, 194-196, 200; gable gTOups, is.0-107 ; metopes, 194-195. -piae, grave relief from, 143. Tbestaly, .it. hail sculpture in, 96 ; green marble from. Thorwaldaen, restored Aegineian gable groups, 106, 107 Thr.. relief of seated Askll 837-238 : sculptures of temple of Asklepios Kpidauros, 237-238. Throne of Apollo al Amyklai, 47 ; Ludovisi, 138-141- Timotheos, Mausoleum at Halikarna 217 : sculptures of temple at Asklepio Epidauros, 217, 2;7-238. Tiryns, painting of bull from palace at, 35. Tools of marble sculptors, 24 I Belvedere, 270-271; Medici, 168; 156. Trachyte, use for frieze of temple at Assos, 49. Tralles, school of, 247. I monal per ,'ture, 117-147. .in British Museum, 37. Treasury of the Athenians at Delphi, meto- ■ the Knidians and Siphnjant at I Delphi, M ' ti ins at Otympia, gable sculptures, '1,65,260: 1! Delphi, metopes, 97-99. Tripods, bronze, from Ktruri.i, 66, 69-70. letnos, relief from Eleusis, 202-205. t, reliefs fl al, ait. Tux 1 Ibingi d, 116. Typ" ilpture, 38 Typhon, see Bluebeard. \ntenor, 29, 79, 117- by Krri , 118-123: I '. 1 18-120: H relief of, 118; Naples group of, 82, 11S-123, 148, 268. Unfinished statues, 24-25. ■ lumenos, 158. -' "33- ■ Varrakeion statuette of Athena I'.irtl,. ,6 5-. 111 Berlin, showii g M irsj u and Athena, 1 ... Kert>h, showing Atbcn. 1 contending with ■ wing unfinished Dl itatui inthian, ai ' i, 47. Velletri, Athena of, 208. Venu ' ni\, .>o8: dci Medici, .!i Mil >. .'47. »5i 253, 171. os of, 27O. Villa Alb.1111 relief, 7;; statue by Stcph. 279-280. Vitruvius, 217. Votive offerings, 28. Warrior, B 7-268; from 1 k 256. Weeping Womi m Sidon, 241 Z4.'. nai .'it statue, I Wood, uses \\ st. ours, gildi d, it 1 lorinth, 19. Wordswortl . tiers from llcrculancum, in Naples, "5°. 2 35- Xanthos, 1 tb from. 71 71. 96,911; SCulptun nullum, ait, Xenokrati s of Sikyon foai. 1, meaning of word, 19; p unting of, 26. Youth from Perinthos, 147, 153. Youths, sec Ephi Zeus, (Aeginetan) head from Olympia, 117; bos at Span. 1, .j; by I ron, . .7.', 2-4. .•-' . By I'heidias .11 < ilympia, 18, 17a; ltbom.it. is by Hageuldas, 154; temple of, al Olympia, akt '-I. 126 135, X4Z, . metopes, »35-'37. '■»', '94, 2 34- UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. fl) FEC'D LO-URt ; APR st*S APR S» 1985 r ;i RECEIVED MAR 1 8 1986 .'>, %%x* .«!* NOV 2 3 1987 ORION BBS, JAN02» REC'D LD-URI3 JAN 1 6 1990 APR 1 » WHT 58 00827 123 4 V SOUTHS** RRA' UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY A A 000 281520 r