Tài liệu CORINTH RESULTS OF EXCAVATIONS ppt

Its position is nearly that of the "Apollo on the Omphalos": the weight rests on the right leg, so that the right hip projects somewhat, but not so much as in Polyclitan statues; the le

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

1931

BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE AMERICAN SCHOOL

OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED AT THE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS

by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens is in charge of the Publication Committee of the School The general editor is Professor Harold North Fowler Opinions expressed are those of the individual contributors

GEORGE H CHASE HAROLD N FOWLER DAVID M ROBINSON

Publication Committee

WHILE a member of the American School in 1922 and 1923, I made a catalogue of the sculptures in the museum at Old Corinth In November, 1924, Professor Fowler asked me

to prepare, on the basis of that catalogue, the volume dealing with sculpture in the general publication of the excavations at Corinth He observed that the material could not well be published until the excavation should be at an end, since I was expected to include the sculptures found in the later campaigns as well as those that I had catalogued In Feb- ruary, 1927, he asked me to proceed with the publication of the sculptures found before

1923, the rest to be dealt with otherwise In August, 1926, I had sent to the School a request for photographs, and after various developments the first and principal batch arrived in the autumn of 1928 With the aid of these photographs, the revised and expanded version was prepared in the summer of 1929, and has undergone little alteration since then Through the kindness of Professor Leroy Waterman of the University of Michigan, I had

an unexpected opportunity for a very brief visit to Greece in the latter part of that sum- mer, and spent about twenty-four hours at Corinth

The original catalogue embraced many sculptures that were not found in the excava- tions Of course they have no proper place here, but a few of them have been retained for one reason or another It was sometimes impossible to ascertain whether sculptures that were not in the inventory had come from the excavated area or not Presumably none of them was found in the regular course of a campaign, but new fragments are likely to become visible in the trenches after any rain

The inventory number is placed in parentheses after each title Where no such num- ber appears, the piece had not been entered in the inventory before 1923 In the text,

"No 100" means the sculpture so numbered in this volume; "100" means the sculpture numbered 100 in the inventory; but where any confusion seemed possible, the inventory numbers are preceded by "Inv."

In the original catalogue there was usually no indication of the places in which the sculptures were found It would be a difficult task to find such indications in the note- books and to state them in terms which would be clear as applying to the excavated area

as it is at present In the official publication, however, the lack of information on this point is a grave defect I have had no opportunity to mend it except during my day at Corinth in the summer of 1929 At that time I copied from the inventory the notes to be found there in regard to the places of discovery of the more important pieces These notes now appear almost word for word as in the inventory In some instances it has been possi- ble to reproduce statements that appeared in previous publications A "Martyr" is of course a column of earth left standing to show the original surface of the ground " Simadi" has the same meaning

Some of the photographs were printed from plates made years ago as the sculptures were found, but the great majority are newly made The heavy task of finding the sculptures and supervising the photography was performed by Dr F J DeWaele Ade- quate illustrations are the really essential part of such a publication as this; and since

Dr DeWaele's name does not appear on the title-page, I wish to make it clear that he deserves credit for a great portion of the work It is regrettable that additional views of some of the more important statues could not be presented Some of them are so placed in the museum that they can be photographed from only one angle

In two sections of the excavated area, the theatre and the "Julian Basilica," the frag- ments belong to a relatively small number of figures, joins are found frequently, and future excavations will unquestionably go far to complete many sculptures that now are frag- mentary In most of the area, however, fragments that belong together - even fragments that can possibly belong together - are comparatively few

It is planned that all the sculptures found at any time in the theatre will be published eventually by Edward Capps, Jr In general, however, those that were included in my cata- logue are included here also; but two series of reliefs, a Gigantomachia and an Amazono- machia, have been omitted Both have been greatly increased by the recent campaigns, and it seemed useless to publish a study based on only a part of the known material Pausanias found in Corinth few works of art belonging to the period before Mummius, and the excavators have not been more fortunate Not a single piece of sculpture in any sort of preservation remains from the great Greek period There are, however, valuable copies from several noteworthy originals: Nos 4-11, 13, 53, 96, 83 (the last a tantalizingly small fragment which, we may hope, will be completed by continued work in the theatre) The portraits from the "Julian Basilica" present interesting problems in iconography, but others, as Nos 168, 169, and 182, have greater intrinsic value The "Miscellaneous Re- liefs" include a number of puzzles that I have not solved

The great majority of the sculptures belong to the first three centuries after Christ, with

a sprinkling of fragments from the classical Greek period; but the really remarkable things are earlier or later The Mycenaean face, No 2, whose character was discerned by Blegen,

is a unique monument The magnificent portrait of the fourth century after Christ, No 321,

is very poorly illustrated, but will not be forgotten by anyone who has seen it In figure sculpture of the fifth and sixth centuries after Christ, the little building at Old Corinth has

an assured place among the world's great museums

In conclusion I wish to express my gratitude to the General Editor and to the other members of the Publication Committee They have chosen the illustrations to be included and determined the size of the cuts Furthermore they have all read the proofs and made many suggestions of great value I cannot evade responsibility, however, for anything

in the text except the spelling of proper names and similar formal details

FRANKLIN P JOHNSON

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO,

January 22, 1931

SCULPTURE

THE CLASSICAL PERIOD, Nos 4-320

Other Decorative Sculptures, in the Round and in High Relief, Nos 227-237 107 Sarcophagi, Nos 238-244 .111

TABLES 157 INDEX 159

A J A American Journal of Archaeology

Amelung, Fuhrer durch Florenz Amelung, Walther: Fuhrer durch die Antiken in Florenz

Munich, 1897

Amelung, Skulpt d Vat Mus Amelung, Walther: Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen

Museums Berlin, 1903-1908

Ann Scuol It At Annuario della Regia Scuola Archeologica di Atene

Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung zum sechzigsten Geburts-

tag Berlin and Leipzig, 1928

Arndt-Bruckmann Griechische und rcmische Portrats, nach Auswahl und Anord-

nung von Heinrich Brunn und Paul Arndt Munich, 1891-

Art Bull Art Bulletin

Ath Mitt Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts, Athen-

ische Abteilung

B C H Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique

B Corn Rom Bulletino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di

Roma

Boll Arte Bollettino d'Arte

Brunn-Bruckmann Denkmaler der griechischen und romischen Skulptur, heraus-

gegeben von H Brunn, fortgesetzt von P Arndt Munich, 1888-

B S A Annual of the British School at Athens

Carpenter, Guide Carpenter, Rhys: Ancient Corinth: A Guide to the Excava-

tions and Museum 1928

C I L Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum

Cumont, Musees Royaux Cumont, Franz: Musees Royaux: Catalogue des sculptures

et inscriptions antiques Brussels, 1913

Daremberg-Saglio Daremberg, Saglio, Pottier: Dictionnaire des antiquites

grecques et romaines Paris, 1877-1918

Diitschke Dutschke, H.: Antike Bildwerke in Oberitalien Leipzig,

1874-1882

Einzelaufnahmen Arndt, Paul, and Amelung, Walther: Photographische Ein-

zelaufnahmen antiker Skulpturen Munich, 1893- Esperandieu, Recueil General Esperandieu: Recueil general des bas-reliefs, statues et

bustes de la Gaule romaine Paris, 1907-1929

Hekler, Romische weibliche Gewand- This is contained in: Minchener archdologische Studien

1909

Helbig, Fuhrer Helbig, Wolfgang: Fuhrer durch die offentlichen Samm-

lungen klassischer Altertumer in Rom 3rd edition, Leipzig, 1912-1913

Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner Imhoof-Blumer, F., and Gardner, P.: Numismatic Com-

mentary on Pausanias Reprinted from J H S VI- VIII London, 1885-1887

Jb Arch I Jahrbuch des kaiserlich deuttschen archaeologischen Instituts

Jh Oest Arch I Jahreshefte des oesterreichischen archaeologischen Institutes

in Wien

J H S Journal of Hellenic Studies

J Int Arch Num Journal international d'archeologie numismatique

Lippold, Antike Skulpturen Lippold, Georg: Antike Skulpturen der Glyptothek Ny

Not Scav Notizie degli Scavi di Antichitd comunicate alla Reale

Accademia dei Lincei

Pauly-Wissowa Pauly's Real-Encyclopadie der klassischen Altertumswis-

senschaft Neue Bearbeitung Unter Mitwirkung zahl- reicher Fachgenossen herausgegeben von Georg Wissowa und Wilhelm Kroll Stuttgart, 1894-

Poulsen, Portratstudien Poulsen, Frederik: Portratstudien in Norditalienischen Pro-

vinzmuseen (Historisk-Filologiske Meddelelser udgivne

af det Kgl Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, XV, 4) Copenhagen, 1928

R Arch Revue archeologique

Reinach, Recueil Reinach, Salomon: Recueil de tetes antiques ideales ou

idealisees Paris, 1903

Reinach, Repertoire Reinach, Salomon: Repertoire de la statuaire grecque et

romaine Paris, 1897-1924

R Et Anc Revue des etudes anciennes

Rev de 1'hist des religions Revue de l'histoire des religions

Robert Robert, Carl: Die antiken Sarcophagreliefs Berlin, 1890-

1904

Rom Mitt Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts, Rom-

ische Abteilung

Roscher, Lexikon Roscher, W H.: Ausfilhrliches Lexikon der griechischen und

romischen Mythologie Leipzig, 1884-

Ruesch, Guida Guida Illustrata del Museo Nazionale di Napoli, compilata

per cura di A Ruesch 2nd edition Naples, no date Springer-Wolters Springer, Anton: Die Kunst des Altertums 12th edition,

revised by Paul Wolters Leipzig, 1923

Statuenkopien Furtwangler, Adolf: Ueber Statuenkopien im Alterthum

(Abhandlungen der bayerischen Akademie der Wissen- schaften zu Miinchen, XX, 1896)

Tod and Wace, Catalogue Tod T , Tod M N., and N, and Wace, A J B.: A Catalogue of the Sparta Wace,

Musetnum Oxford, 1906

CLASSICAL PERIOD

1 Female figurine (786)

Found 1 m southwest of Martyr VI, 0.40 m above virgin soil; May 1, 1907

Height, 0.121 m.; width, 0.055 m The arm is represented by a rounded projection; the foot is not represented at all, though the flat bottom of the left leg is original Grooves in- dicate the knee and ankle A huge scratched triangle represents the pudenda The breasts and buttocks are shown in approximately their natural proportions; otherwise the figure is virtually unmodelled The head, the stump of the left arm, and most of the right leg are lost The material is a white stone not marble; the surface is slightly polished

Close parallels are not known to me; a certain similarity, however, to Thessalian fig-

urines of the third period is discernible A figure found at Sesklo (Tsundas, AL lIpoiaroptKatl

shows arm-stumps similar to those of our figure, the breasts in approximately natural pro- portions, and a great triangle for the pudenda; on the other hand it is markedly steatopy- gous and ends in a round, flaring base In a figurine from Dimini (Tsundas, op cit., pl 35, 8; Wace-Thompson, op cit., p 83) the hips are treated more as in our figure, and the lower part is lost Tsundas, op cit., pl 36, 7 is a pair of legs ending much as in our figure; cf for this feature also Wace-Thompson, p 147, fig 91b, though in other respects that figure, of the second Thessalian period, shows little likeness to ours Numerous other figurines which resemble this in their roughly normal proportions and in the arm-stumps may be found in the two works cited; but in no case is the resemblance so close as in the figurines mentioned All of these figures are of terracotta: the contemporary stone figures are different and more primitive in form (Tsundas, op cit., pls 37-38)

Among finds from other regions, the only one known to me that suggests a comparison with our figure was found at Tchukurkend in southwestern Asia Minor (Ormerod in B S A XIX, 1912-13, pp 48 ff., and fig la; Reinach, Repertoire, V, 173, 10) Here the legs end in surfaces flat or nearly so, the knees are indicated by grooves, and the pudenda by a large triangle The proportions also, as seen from the side, are quite suggestive of our figure On the other hand, the hips are very broad across the front and the arms are shown, though very rudely, crossing the chest; while the breasts apparently are not shown at all This figurine does not fit into any known class, and its relations are not determined Ormerod

1 c mentions " a figurine of almost similar form except that it is not steatopygous, and shows differences of the head " in the Liverpool Public Museum This figure, which was bought in

Athens, should be closer to ours than the one from Tchukurkend; but still by no means of identical type

Pottery related to Thessalian ware of the second period has been found at Corinth, where it is accompanied and succeeded by Early Helladic wares Pottery of the third Thessalian period is not found in the Corinthia Thessalian figurines of the second period are, in general, different from those of the third period and from our figure, and Early Helladic figurines are equally dissimilar I am told that no pottery was found in close asso- ciation with the figurine, and it is difficult to assign to it a place in the prehistoric period

:'!:? x .'

No 1

But unless it is an importation from outside Greece, it seems best to regard it as a product

of Thessalian culture with influence from some other quarter This influence might come from the Cyclades; the use of stone for such figures was usual in the islands and not in Thessaly, though in general the Cycladic figurines are of wholly different type

A figurine resembling this to some extent is said to have been found by Miss Walker (now Mrs Kosmopoulou) in her excavation on the temple hill; I have not seen it

2 Mycenaean face (343)

Apparently found in 1901

Soft brown stone Height of fragment, 0.30m.; width, 0.28m.; thickness, 0.03m.; height of face, 0.23 m.; relief height, 0.04 m Back roughly shaped The top edge is original, the edge at the spectator's left is broken; the other two are doubtful because of the rough- ness of the work The end of the nose is broken, and the mouth, chin, and lower part of the left cheek are lost

Two arched grooves, containing traces of black pigment, represent the eyebrows Small

holes indicate the pupils of the eyes, and dark circles for the irises around them are per-

ceptible There was also a mustache represented by grooves containing dark color; such

a groove remains at the right end of the mustache and below the left side of the nose, but is

broken away elsewhere All the grooves are partly filled with a white substance in the nature

of plaster, which also covers much of the surface of the face and presumably covered it all

originally Where this plaster remains in the grooves it conceals the black pigment Since

lg} } t - .8 * -

No 2

time over the original painted surface Probably the new white surface was painted also,

a few traces of red color,buttheseareappat.ea , origin

The character of this piece was It pointed out to me by Mr Blegen, who wrote: is

exactly thews sort stone mould on which gold masks, like those from Mycenae, were shaped

But it is more than a mould; it was intended as a piece of sculpture for exhibition I do

not hesitate at all to ascribe it to early Mycenaean date (L H I or so):: Pernier considered

it Mycenaean - a mould."

Large sculpture of the Mycenaean period is rare The obvious analogy is offered by the

familiar head in painted plaster which Tsundas found at Mycenae Compare also a terra-

cotta head, about six inches high, found at Asine (Ill London News, Sept 25, 1926, p 548)

"'~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&:

th~_B_i3iJe':

time over the original painted also,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2S : ' surface Probably painted was the new surface white

a f e w t r a c e s of red clor u externa oign heeaeapaetyo

Th caace o hi ieewa oitd lee, whowrot' u t e yMr " I t i

notheitae t al o acrbe t o erl Myenea da-te (L,.H Ioo Prircniee

Both of these heads are painted but not incised Incision would be familiar from work in metal and ivory; it is used for details in the stelae from the grave-circle at Mycenae and in the gold masks In four of the masks the brows are marked by rows of parallel incisions, and in the two that have mustaches these are similarly treated In our head there is a single groove, approximately horizontal, for each eyebrow, and apparently a similar one for each side of the mustache The treatment is analogous in the fifth mask from Mycenae (No 253

in the museum), which is poorer than the others and possibly somewhat earlier, although two of the other masks were found in the same grave A painted stele found at Mycenae affords a parallel for the redecoration of the head: the stele was at first ornamented with engraved designs, then these were covered by a layer of lime on which new decorations

were painted (Stais, Collection Mycenienne, p 187, No 3256; 'E+ 'ApX 1896, pls I-II)

_ _ - iE

Ne 3

3 Head (342)

Apparently found in 1901

Brown stone, but not exactly the same as in No 2 Height, 0.20 m The nose and mouth

are indicated by incisions Although the surface is battered, it seems improbable that the eyes were ever represented The back is rounded I have thought it as well to keep this

piece together with No 2, though there is little reason for assigning it to one period rather

than to another In so far as it is sculpture at all, it is in the round, and that is evidence against a Mycenaean origin Probably it was not seriously intended as sculpture

SCULPTURES OTHER THAN PORTRAITS

4 Head of youth (425)

Found May 20, 1902, in the Theatre

Almost all the neck is preserved Height, 0.27 m.; width, 0.18 m.; depth, 0.22 m The nose is mostly lost, also a little above the right eye; otherwise the preservation is excellent Howard and Amelung recognized in a statue in Cleveland a copy from the same original The statue (Bull Cleveland Museum of Art, Nov., 1924; Jb Arch I XLI, 1926, pls VI-VII)

is almost perfectly preserved, lacking only the right hand Its position is nearly that of the

"Apollo on the Omphalos": the weight rests on the right leg, so that the right hip projects somewhat, but not so much as in Polyclitan statues; the left foot is equally advanced and the head is turned to the right; but the left arm hangs and the right forearm is raised and extended to the front, while in the Apollo this is reversed In this point our type agrees with the Polyclitan bronze in the Louvre (Furtwangler, Masterpieces, pl XIII; Hyde, Olympic Victor Monuments, p 139) and related works (see Anti, in Mon Ant XXVI, 1920, pp

561 ff.); the Idolino also is similar, though freer Another copy, considerably better in quality but not so well preserved, was identified by Amelung: it is a statue formerly owned by the sculptor Monteverde and now in the Museo Nazionale in Rome (Boll Arte, III, 1923-24, p 549, good illustration; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos 135-137; Jb Arch

I XLI, 1926, figs 20-26 on pp 263-265; cast of statue in Rome with Corinth head, ibid., figs 34-35 on p 271) The copy to which our head belonged was much the best of the three Amelung has pointed out the resemblance in posture, proportion, and the rendering of bodily structure between our type and the "Apollo on the Omphalos." There are, however, differences of some significance: the torso is more strongly modelled, the structure made more conspicuous, in the Monteverde statue than in the Apollo, and there is a much clearer horizontal groove at the level of the navel In these points the Monteverde statue suggests the Conservatori charioteer (Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, p 211, No 4, pl LXXX; Beazley has called attention to the virtually nude charioteer on the Euphronius cylix, Hoppin, Red-Figured Vases, I, p 389, and to the completely nude figure mounting a chariot,

J H S XLVII, 1927, pl XIII; here, however, the real charioteer is evidently the man wearing the long chiton) This statue has always been recognized as closely related to the Apollo, but is earlier, suggesting comparison even with such works as the torso in the Louvre from Miletus (Bulle, Der schone Mensch,2 pl CIII; Brunn-Bruckmann, text to pls 601-604, fig 15), while the Monteverde statue is evidently later than the Apollo If the sculptor of the Apollo was Calamis, a nd others following Furtwangler think probable, it is not likely that he had a style original with or peculiar to himself in the treatment of the

body, because Calamis was not primarily a sculptor of athletes In any case it is out of the question to assign our type to the artist of the Apollo, or to any one strongly influenced by him, because, as Amelung observed (p 270), the heads are totally different

The well-known head from Perinthus, now in Dresden (Hyde, Olympic Victor Monu- ments, p 179, with references) closely resembles our head in the shape of the face and of the skull "It has the same long face and the same high round cranium, the line over the top from front to rear being almost an unbroken curve" (Richardson) The Perinthus head is

of course considerably earlier The hair of our head is in some degree Polyclitan, suggesting the Diadumenus, but the locks are less regularly curved; and over the forehead they are treated in a distinctive way, being comparatively long and separate from one another

No 4

In regard to the hair the best parallel, as was shown by Mahler, is a head in the Louvre (R Arch IV, 1904, pp 106-108; Reinach, Recueil, pls XXVII-XXVIII); Mahler indeed

suggested that the two heads were derived from one original, but Amelung (Jb Arch I

XLI, 1926, pp 269 f., figs 37-38) more reasonably regards them as derived from two works

Einzelaufnhmen, Nos 505506) Here the locks curl somewhat as in the Perinthus head

It may be noted that some of the hair above the centre of the forehead in the Perinthus head has been chiseled away at some time, so that the manner of its treatment is not accurately known (Herrmann, in Ath Mitt XVI, 1891, pp 314 f.) There must have been an interval

of thirty years at least between the originals of the Naples head and of ours, and in this interval comes the Perinthus head A cast in Copenhagen from a lost original may belong here, but the illustration is inadequate (Arndt, Glyptothque Ny Carlsberg, p 61)

The Naples and Perinthus heads have been associated with Myron, the latter also with Pythagoras With the Perinthus head certainly belongs a bearded head in Leningrad; in-

deed Curtius has asserted that both are from the same original and that the copyist merely

left the beard off in one instance (Brunn-Bruckmann, text to pls 601-604, p 8, figs 8-10), while Sieveking and Lippold (Rom Mitt XXXII, 1917, p 103) think that the original was

beardless and that one copyist added the beard Neither of these hypotheses is easily credible Whether these two and others with them are to be removed from the circle of Myron, and whether, if so, they can be assigned to Pythagoras, are very doubtful questions

A parallel for the Monteverde statue in regard to bodily structure, better than the

"Apollo on the Omphalos," is found in the Myronic athlete brilliantly recovered by Ame-

lung in his last days (Jb Arch I XLII, 1927, pp 152-157) The head does not permit the ascription of our type to the author of that statue, who was almost certainly Myron him- self However, it may be concluded that the original, made about 440, was the work of a sculptor who, while acquainted with the style of Polyclitus, was influenced primarily by Myron or somebody very like Myron

Ath Mitt XXVIII, 1903, pp 451-460 and pl VI, with comparative illustrations of this

and the Perinthus heads (Richardson); Lechat, Pythagoras de Rhegion, p 114; Jb Arch I XLI, 1926, pp 264-268 (Amelung); Carpenter, Guide, pp 72 f., No 8

5 Female figure (67)

Found May 17, 1899, "back of the north apse of Peirene." Lacks head and left hand, which were inserted, and most of the right arm Height, 1.92 m The figure wears an Ionic chiton with buttoned sleeves and a heavy himation that reaches the ankles The weight rests on the left leg; the right foot is drawn back slightly The left arm is bent at a right angle at the elbow, and the forearm extends straight forward; the right arm apparently

hung straight down The himation covers the left shoulder and passes behind the back; the

top of it crosses the body in a heavy fold just below the breasts and falls over the left arm The difference in texture between the two garments is not successfully indicated On the feet are sandals

There is another copy from the same original, with its head, in the Palazzo dei Con- servatori (Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, p 108, No 56, pl XXXVIII; Reinach, Reper- toire, IV, 408, 9; Bocconi, Musei Capitolini, fig 6; Mariani, B Corn Rom XXXII, 1904,

pp 299-316; Lehmann-Hartleben, Die Antike, V, 1929, pls VII-XII and pp 85-97, good

illustrations) This figure was put together from a large number of fragments with some restoration; because of this the fold of the chiton that appears outside of the himation on

the right side in our copy, and undoubtedly in the original, is lacking in the example at

Rome The figure at Corinth was made by a workman of individuality and considerable ability, but the Conservatori copy apparently follows the original more closely Jones mentions also "a statuette-replica in the possession of Sig Bassanti." As freer imitations may be mentioned a statue in Naples (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 207, 1), another at Delphi

(Repertoire, III, 200, 9 and IV, 417, 1), and a third in Leyden (Repertoire, II, 675, 10) A

statue found at Cyrene (Repertoire, V, 103, 5 and 389, 3) is perhaps remotely related; still more remotely, the "Artemisia" of the Mausoleum and its descendants (Lippold, Kopien,

p 213; cf Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung, p 50) There is a good copy of the head in Boston (Caskey, Catalogue, pp 129-131, No 62; Die Antike, V, 1929, p 93, fig 6; A J A XXI, 1917, pp 102 f.), and an exceedingly poor one in Venice (B Com Rom XXXII,

1904, pls XI-XII; Einzelaufnahmen, No 2485; Guida Pellegrini, No 17, pl IX; Die Antike,

V, 1929, p 92, fig 4) Another copy of the head, on the Palatine, is mentioned by Anti

(Ann Scuol It At IV-V, 1921-22, p 75) A Greek relief in Eleusis (Buschor, Die Skulpturen des Zeus- tempels, text, fig 27; Kjellberg, Studien zu den attischen Reliefs, p 35) is regarded by Anti (article cited, pp 82-84 and pl III) and apparently by Leh- mann-Hartleben as a fairly accurate copy of a statue earlier than the original of our type; but the relief

is probably a free imitation of that original itself, though the head apparently is quite different There

is certainly no intimate connection between the relief, the type represented by the following entry, and the bronze in Vienna (Jh Oest Arch I XIV,

1911, p 46, fig 51; Roscher, Lexikon, article Kora, col 1355, fig 6; Schmidt, in Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung, p 225), all of which Anti would derive from a single prototype

Any statue the garments of which are arranged somewhat as these are will show folds more or less similar: so the Albani "Core," the Dresden Zeus, the Athena of Velletri A genuine and close analogy

is found in the "Nemesis" (No 6) A comparison between the two figures at Corinth is risky, since the copyist was certainly the same in both instances; but in comparing the Torlonia copy of the "Nemesis" with the Conservatori statue of this type, one finds the same broad, shallow folds with sharp edges in almost the same places in the himation; the character of the drapery in the lower part of the two figures is identical

so far as the himation is concerned, and there is similarity also in the chiton at the ankles

A statue in Venice (see under No 6) shows equal similarity in the himation and more in the bottom of the chiton; and in the heavy cross-fold of the himation at the waist there are folds of the same sort, divided by narrow grooves, that occur in our type, more clearly in the Conservatori copy The statue in Venice is a Greek variant of a type more or less ac- curately represented by several Roman statues (Lippold, Kopien, pp 10 f.) One of these,

/F I

No 5

in the Lateran (Hekler, Romische weibliche Gewandstatuen, fig 12; Helbig, Fiihrer,3 II, p 14,

No 1168) is more severe in style than the others and probably closer to the original, and it resembles the Conservatori statue in the folds of the chiton not only at the ankles, but also

on the chest; the likeness in the himation is not so close The examples of this type that have heads are portraits The "Nemesis" has the same position of the feet as our type, while the Lateran statue and its fellows have the right foot drawn back; in the figure in Venice it is drawn back only slightly, but more than in this type The " Nemesis " is on the whole more archaic, while the others might well be contemporary with this type, and either might be derived from the same sculptor, so far as the treatment of the body is concerned The three copies of the head that have been illustrated differ considerably from one an- other In the Conservatori copy many observers have seen a resemblance to heads of the style called "Calamidian" by Furtwangler and others (Mrs Strong, in Strena Helbigiana,

pp 293-298) This resemblance is genuine; it is discernible in the treatment of the hair and

in the type of features; compare particularly the "Aspasia," the Spinario, and the delightful Ward head But with none of them is the relationship close enough to justify the assump- tion of common authorship Although the wavy hair above the forehead suggests the

"Aspasia," a still closer analogy is found in the Demeter of Cherchell (illustrations in Schrader, Pheidias, pp 48 f.); and the Boston copy of the head, which in itself is better than the Conservatori copy, resembles the Demeter in general character rather than the

"Calamidian" works Yet here again the analogy is far from complete: the proportionate height of the head above the eyes is decidedly greater in the Boston head than in the Demeter It is difficult to decide which of the two heads is closer to the original The pre- sumption is in favor of the Conservatori copy, since reason has been found for considering

it trustworthy in the body On the other hand, the curls in the Boston head may be re- garded as reflecting more clearly the bronze technique of the original; bronze curls are not necessarily like them, but no marble curl would naturally assume such a form Further- more the Boston head is loftier in expression than the other, and this quality is not likely

to be contributed by the copyist The miserable head in Venice throws little light on the question: it agrees with the Conservatori copy in showing less fullness in the lower part of the face, while in the hair on the head the treatment is broader, as in the Boston head The head more or less certainly connected with the statue in Venice bears no sort of resemblance

to any of the heads of this type, and we know nothing of the head that belonged to the original of the Lateran statue

Mariani suggested an attribution to Calamis, Lehmann-Hartleben to Polyclitus, Caskey to Phidias; Buschor considers the original Argive (Die Skulpturen des Zeustempels, text, p 35) There is very little to be said for the attribution to Polyclitus; against it there

is the relief in Eleusis, probably indicating that the original was in Attica, and the right foot flat on the ground and virtually as far advanced as the left, which some scholars seem

to regard as a strong indication of Attic origin (Lippold, Kopien, pp 10 f.) As for Calamis,

there is less xapis and more loftiness, even in the head of the Conservatori copy, than in any of the heads called Calamidian; and the figure as a whole possesses an imposing majesty that is vastly different from the modest dignity of the Hestia Giustiniani

The grandeur of Phidian style, as known from the sculptures of the Parthenon and from descriptions of the Zeus and Athena Parthenos, may be resolved into three qualities: state- liness and ease and opulence It is the third that was most distinctly an innovation, and it

is scarcely present in this type There is no other example of the severe style, however, which so effectively combines stateliness and ease in posture; and even the drapery, when compared with the "Nemesis," the "Aspasia," and many others, is seen to look forward toward the new style An attribution to the young Phidias is altogether reasonable His teacher Hegias, suggested by Anti as the author of the imaginary predecessor of this type, would also be a possibility

There is nothing that justifies an attempt to date the original work closely The Lateran type, which ought to be contemporary with it, seems to be earlier than the Albani "Core," which is surely earlier than the Parthenon; 460-55 is about the right period The copy probably belongs to the first century after Christ Since the head was inserted, it probably was a portrait

In the absence of attributes it is uncertain who was represented by the original The figure in the relief at Eleusis is probably Core, since the garment slipping from the shoulder

is surely more suitable to her than to Demeter; and Anti has shown that the two goddesses were not always clearly distinguished in art On the other hand the matronly figure is more suitable to Demeter If this type and No 7 were originally a pair, this was certainly Demeter and the other Persephone; see under No 7

A J A VI, 1902, pp 430-431 and pl XV (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire, III, 192, 10 (not 8); Carpenter, Guide, p 73, No 9; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos 2485-2487 (cited byBuschor)

6 Nemesis or Tyche (427)

Found May 28, 1902, in trench dug to find west end of South Stoa

From waist down The plinth, of irregular shape, is complete; height, 0.06 m.; width, 0.70 m.; depth, 0.47 m Height of figure, 0.97 m The Ionic chiton and himation are worn The weight rests on the right leg; the left is set slightly forward and turned to the side On the plinth beside the right foot is part of a wheel, and above it are traces of an attachment

on the figure, doubtless for the upper part of the wheel Traces of the end of the himation, which hung from the left shoulder, are perceptible at the top of the fragment

The wheel is usually an attribute of Nemesis in art, though in literature the wheel of Tyche-Fortuna is familiar (Cook, Zeus, I, pp 268 ff.; Perdrizet, in B C H XXXVIII,

1914, pp 89-100) Pausanias mentions no Nemesis in Corinth, while the statue of Tyche

in a temple was erect and made of Parian marble (ii, 2, 8) It is just possible that our frag- ment belongs to that statue; (the marble does not appear to be Parian, but Pausanias

might easily be mistaken about that); but in the absence of satisfactory parallels it is better called Nemesis

There is another copy from the same original in the Museo Torlonia (Reinach, Reper- toire, II, 658, 10; Museo Torlonia, No 495, pl CXXVII; Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung,

p 222, fig 1), a second was seen at Hierapytna in Crete (ibid., pp 223 f., figs 3-4), and a third is in the Antiquarium Comunale in Rome (ibid., p 223, fig 2) The drapery of the last is much elaborated, and no attributes are preserved; the copy in Crete shows changes

in the character of the folds and has a quiver-strap, which indicates that it represented

No 6

Artemis The Torlonia and Corinth copies correspond closely, so far as the latter is pre- served, except that the Torlonia example has no wheel and, so far as I know, no traces of attachments The head that it now wears does not belong to it, and neither of the others has its head

There is a relief in Athens, from Megara (ibid., p 224, fig 5; Svoronos, 'EOv'cKV MovO.e.ov,

pl CXXII, p 440; museum No 1442), a work of the fifth century, in which the original of

this type may be reflected The figure in the relief holds a bird and is probably Aphrodite

The profile of the face is markedly similar to that of the head of a Greek statue in Venice (Furtwhngler, Griechische Originalstatuen in Venedig, Abh Bayer Akad XXI, pls I-II; Hekler, R6mische weibliche Gewandstatuen, fig 11; Ruesch, Guida,2 p 67, fig.24), which in

the lower part of the body distinctly resembles this type It has been questioned whether

the head belongs to the statue (Lippold, Kopien, pp 10 f.; Einzelaufnahmen, IX, p 48), but Furtwangler felt sure of it As he pointed out, the head has Peloponnesian connections:

it resembles the heads of certain figurines used as mirror-handles, of the kind said to have

been found in the vicinity of Corinth, and looks forward to the Doryphorus

The relief suggests that the original of the type may have represented Aphrodite In our copy it became a Nemesis or a Tyche, and in the Cretan copy an Artemis; the other two examples have nothing to aid in identification The original resembled in costume the Albani "Core," but does not appear to be in any definite sense a precursor of it

This fragment and the statue described under No 5 were unquestionably made by the same copyist: this is evident particularly from the curious wide, flat folds of the chiton

A consideration of the other examples of both types shows that there was a close relation also between the two originals They could hardly proceed from one artist; but the "Nem- esis " could well be the work of a sculptor in whose studio the artist of the "Demeter" began his career

7 Female figure (68)

Found May 18, 1899, "back of the north apse of Peirene," about six feet from No 5 Lacks head, which was inserted, and arms below elbows, which were dowelled on Height, 2.025 m The left forearm extended straight forward from the elbow; the right apparently hung down, a little forward and to the side The weight rests on the right leg; the left foot

is equally advanced, but turned out The figure wears an Ionic chiton with buttoned sleeves, which reaches the ground in the back, but not quite in the front, and a Doric peplus with overfold, which passes under the left arm and across the left breast and is clasped on the right shoulder The overfold ends somewhat above the knees, and the lower fold halfway between the knees and the ankles The peplus is girt with a doubled cord higher than the natural waist-line; no kolpos is formed On the feet are sandals

There is another copy from the same original, preserved only from the shoulders to the waist, in the Giardino della Pigna of the Vatican (Amelung, Sculpt d Vat Mus I, p 825,

No 28, pl XCI; Reinach, Repertoire, III, 284, 5) There are no significant differences be- tween the two copies Jones (Palazzo dei Conservatori, p 109) mentions a statuette of this type "in the possession of Sig Sangiorgi in Rome," which has by the right foot the head of

a horse springing from a calyx of acanthus The preservation is not stated; I suppose that the head at least is lacking

The Doric peplus is usually clasped on both shoulders, reaches the ankles and has many vertical folds in its lower part For the costume as it appears here there seems to be no satisfactory parallel in sculpture The peplus is clasped on only one shoulder in a statue at Eleusis (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 426, 5; Furtwangler, Statuenkopien, pp 12 f.), which is somewhat similar to ours in other respects; and it is obviously archaistic, a work of the fourth century Somewhat similar also is the Caryatid of the Tralles type (Lawrence, Later Greek Sculpture, pp 43 and 96, pl LXX; Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, II,

p 257, No 541; cf Fowler, in The Erechtheum, pp 233 f.), which seems unquestionably to

be archaistic Amelung regarded our type also as archaistic, and Buschor (Die Skulpturen des Zeustempels, p 31) says that it "gibt kaum ein strenges Werk getreu wieder."

However, the garment is entirely reasonable and practical, and analogies, except for the girdle, may be found on Greek vases (amphora in Boston: A J A XXVI, 1922, p 416; compare also the relief on the Acropolis: Dickins, Acropolis Museum, p 117, No 577; good illustration in Melanges Perrot, p 261; Ann Scuol It At IV-V, 1921-22, pp 86 f.) Archaistic style is usually not hard to recognize, and

it does not strike the eye here For the flat surface of

the lower part of the peplus compare, e g., the Atlas

metope at Olympia In attitude and general effect the

figure is similar to peplus-statues of normal type; and

the drapery, both the heavy peplus with its simple

folds and the chitoh with its fine folds, finds an analogy

in the "Aspasia." It seems on the whole probable that

the statue is a copy, accurate in essentials, from an

original of about 460

Neither our statue nor the Vatican copy has any

attribute to aid in identification, but Amelung and

Jones have pointed out that the horse's head with the

Sangiorgi statuette indicates that the figure is Demeter

or Core: more probably Demeter, so far as this evidence

is concerned (Roscher, Lexikon, article Kora, 1299 f.;

Pauly-Wissowa, article Demeter, 2733 f.) The some-

what similar archaistic figure at Eleusis, though itself

a canephorus, may suggest that the original of this type

stood there Now this statue and No 5 were found

together; and although both were probably portraits

and there is no definite indication that they were set

up as a pair, it may be that the originals belonged to-

gether; No 5 also appears to be Demeter or Persephone, and probably its original stood in

Eleusis If this is so, No 5 is certainly Demeter and this type Persephone, since it is dis- tinctly the more youthful of the two

The two originals were surely not made by the same sculptor, but they belonged to about the same time, whether associated or not To judge from the best discoverable analo- gies, the original of this type was Attic

A J A VI, 1902, pp 431-436 and pl XVI (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire, III, 281, 12; Art and Archaeology, XIV, 1922, p 199 (Fowler); Carpenter, Guide, pp 73 f., No 10

820 from shoulders to knees, 812 the rest of the figure and plinth; the two pieces join by contact Lacking: head, left arm, almost all of the right arm, part of the plinth, and all the toes of the left foot except part of the first The right shoulder, broken off when found, has

been replaced Height of plinth, 0.08 m.; width, 0.53 m.; depth, 0.45 m.; height of figure,

1.49 m On the back of the left shoulder, over an area ca 0.40 m X 0.20 m., the surface is lost to a depth of ca 0.04 m

The goddess wears the Doric peplus, clasped on both shoulders and sewn on the right side The kolpos and overfall are of almost equal length, reaching nearly to the waist in front and lower on the sides From the right shoulder a quiver-strap crosses the body, dis- appearing under a fold of the garment just below the left breast Behind the right shoulder the quiver-strap leads to the top of a diagonal break, obviously resulting from the breaking away of the quiver; apparently the bottom of the quiver was in the bottom of the large break on the back of the left shoulder The weight rests on the right leg; the left foot is drawn back A marble support on the front of the right shoulder indicates that the right arm was bent at the elbow and turned upward, the hand approaching the quiver; it could not have reached the quiver, because the arm is not sufficiently raised The left arm must have been bent at a right angle; a triangular scar on the fold that covers the quiver-strap shows where the forearm, just below the elbow, touched; below the shoulder is a trace to indicate that the upper arm extended backward slightly The hand, apparently supported

by a piece of which there is a remnant just below the point at which the quiver-strap dis- appears under the garment, held some object of which a trace remains, 0.15 m long and 0.015 m wide,: on the left side of the overfall near the bottom This trace, if continued upward, would pass about 0.15 m in front of the support below the strap Probably a Scythian bow was held by the middle For the position of the arms compare Reinach, Repertoire, II, 319, 3, and many other statues of Artemis

Buschor (Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung, pp 54 f.) has pointed out that a statue in the Uffizi (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 241, 4; Diitschke, III, p 107, No 187; Einzelaufnahmen,

No 91) is derived from the same original A third copy was included in the sale of the Lans- downe marbles in 1930 (catalogue of the auction, p 69, No 106, with illustration; Michaelis, Ancient Marbles, p 445, No 33; Reinach, Repertoire, I, 224, 7) Here the left hand holds a cornucopia, which is in large part antique and justifies the name Fortuna It may have been

a Roman lady as Fortuna, though the Trajanic portrait head that the statue now wears does not belong to it, according to Poulsen (text to Einzelaufnahmen, No 3056, which illus- trates the head) The position of the left arm is not very different from that indicated for our statue; but the right arm, preserved to the wrist, comes straight down; the rudder that the hand now holds may well be correctly restored The copy in the Uffizi, restored as Hera and usually supposed to represent Hera or Demeter, has no attributes preserved The head and both arms are modern; I do not know whether there were traces to indicate the posi- tions of the arms

The garment of this figure is larger and the drapery richer than in the Artemis In both respects the Fortuna is 6loser to the Artemis than to the Hera In some details, notably in the long folds between the legs that are drawn toward the " Spielbein," the Artemis and the Hera stand together against the Fortuna One of the Grimani figures in Venice (Furtwangler, Griechische Originalstatuen, p 299, pl VI, 2; text to Einzelaufnahmen, Nos 2594-2595, which

is the head; Reinach, Repertoire, III, 185, 6 and I, 292, 8; Lippold, Kopien, p 11, where the note wrongly refers to Furtwaiingler's plate VI, 5; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, fig 324) resembles this type enough to suggest that it was influenced by the original The upper part of the right arm is antique and starts down close to the body;

on the right shoulder there is a hole for a bronze peg Here the

garment is full, but in several points, particularly the folds just

below the kolpos, it resembles the Corinth and Lansdowne copies

rather than that in the Uffizi I am inclined to believe also that

a Greek relief in Athens (No 1597; Svoronos, To 'EOvtKcov MovaeZov,

pl 129) is directly influenced by the original The specific like-

nesses are in the upper part; compare with the other two copies

rather than with the Artemis The right arm is about as in the

Lansdowne copy; the left hand is raised and holds a long sceptre

Since there is no trace of a quiver-strap in any of the related

sculptures, it was evidently added by the copyist of our figure

Because of this addition the character of the original in this part

is obscured in the Artemis; it is to be seen rather in the Fortuna,

though it is poor, than in the elaborated Hera The right arm of

the original came down, close to the body; it is probable that the

left arm was bent at the elbow, somewhat as in the Artemis and

the Fortuna, though it may have held a long sceptre There is little basis for conjecture as regards the attributes of the original

The style of the type, broadly considered, is that of a great many statues of the later fifth century Among its smaller features may be noted: the folds that radiate from the right breast and form one triangle with its long side parallel to the strap and another with its long upper side about horizontal; the transverse folds descending from the left breast; the place near the right side where the edge of the overfall turns up; and in general the ir- regularity and ridge-like character of the folds of the overfall In the lower part the left leg

is clearly modelled beneath the garment, but folds occur in the garment everywhere except near the knee; the columnar folds of the right side are in some cases divided by shallow vertical furrows; more distinct bifurcations are visible just below the kolpos; the last of the heavy folds toward the left begins at the knee and grows wider downward, being drawn toward the left leg without other change This last is the most unusual feature

For the lower part of the figure excellent analogies may be found in the "Ceres" of the

No 8

Vatican (Helbig,3 I, p 192, No 291; Furtwangler, Masterpieces, pp 85-88, fig 35; Springer- Wolters,'2 p 287, fig 535) and in a Greek statue at Eleusis (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 242, 4; Brunn-Bruckmann, pl 536; Jb Arch I XLII, 1927, p 69; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, fig 325) Both have the widening fold, and the drapery of the "Spielbein" is almost ex- actly like that of the Artemis The Eleusis statue also has furrowed folds; such folds are common, but the "Ceres" apparently does not have them The figures of the relief in Stockholm (Kjellberg, Studien zu den attischen Reliefs, fig 24), which seems to be imitated from the base of the Nemesis of Agoracritus, resemble our type a good deal in both upper and lower parts, but are somewhat more severe The draped deities on the east frieze of the temple of Athena Nike may also be compared No strong resemblance is discernible in any

of the existing sculptures of the Parthenon

For the treatment of the overfall the Maidens of the Erechtheum offer a good anal- ogy Compare the figure in the British Museum (Paton and others, The Erechtheum, pl XXXVIII), with the folds descending from the left breast, and the one at the southwest corner (Schrader, Phidias, p 190, fig 168; Paton and others, The Erechtheum, fig 145A,

pl XXXIV, 1), with the edge of the overfall turned up In both figures many of the folds are mere ridges, comparatively irregular in arrangement The Caryatids resemble our type somewhat in the lower part also, but not so closely as the figures previously mentioned The Eurydice in the Orpheus relief also, in the upper part, suggests our type The drapery

in the relief is richer than in the Artemis, and a further increase in opulence is seen in the Caryatids It may be noted that the copyist's elaboration of the Hera in the Uffizi does not really bring it closer to these works

The "Ceres" and the statue at Eleusis have girdles outside the overfall and because of this are not directly comparable with the other figures, as regards that part It is clear, however, that they are severe in comparison with the Maidens of the Erechtheum, in the upper as well as the lower part of the garment The style of our type is between these two limits The Maidens are known to have been in place before 409, and the usual assumption that dates them about 415 is no doubt correct Hekler considers that the statue at Eleusis

is imitated in the Athena of a relief, also at Eleusis, which is dated by the accompanying inscription to 421-420 (Jb Arch 1 XLII, 1927, p 71 and Beilage 2) Whether or not so definite a relation is demonstrable, the resemblance in style is sure; such statues must have been made in the twenties of the fifth century B.C or slightly earlier The frieze of the Nike temple is usually referred to this period, and Kjellberg plausibly places the Nemesis shortly before 432 (op cit., p 124)

It is probable that the original of our type and the original of the " Ceres " were made by the same sculptor I should regard the statue at Eleusis as a third product from the same studio, though it scarcely has the excellence that would be expected from the master him- self This figure and the " Ceres " might be dated about 430, our type 425-420 Of course we cannot assume a continuous and regular development in style from the "Ceres" to the

Caryatids; but if our type is placed between 430 and 410, the possibility of error is very slight

Because of the resemblance of the " Ceres" to the sculptures on the base of the Nemesis

of Rhamnus, Furtwangler assigned it to Agoracritus and suggested that it might be a copy

of the Nemesis Lippold denies this possibility (Kopien, p 249, note 62) A decision must depend on a comparison of the " Ceres " with the fragment of the head of the Nemesis in the British Museum (No 460; Cook, Zeus, I, pp 275, 281, pl XXIII; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, fig 633) Whether it is the Nemesis or not, the attribution to Agoracritus is very reasonable

In addition to pointing out the relation between Uffizi Hera and the Artemis, the Buschor suggested that the Cepparelli "Demeter" in the Museo Archeologico at Florence (Reinach, Repertoire, V, 163, 2; J H S XXXVIII, 1918, pp 5 f.,

fig 2) was a derivative, modified in the direction of greater severity,

from the same original It does not seem that any connection is

quite certain; if there is one, perhaps there was a Greek imitation

between the original and the Cepparelli statue

A J A XIII, 1909, pp 321-324 (Gardiner); Reinach, Re-

pertoire, IV, 190, 7; Guide, p 80, No 23

9 Female figure (55, 1180)

Found May 26, 1898, near Peirene

Lacks head, which was inserted, and most of right arm, which

was attached by cement; the left hand, which was dowelled on, is

preserved separately (1180) Height, 1.49 m This is an ordinary

Roman copy of one of the commonest of all types, best known by

the "Petite Herculanaise" in Dresden The only variation in the

figure is that the fold held in the right hand does not fall to the

knee, as ordinarily, but ends at the left arm The original probably

represented Persephone, being grouped with the original of the

"Grande Herculanaise," a Demeter The two have often been

ascribed to Praxiteles, but this is almost certainly wrong; an attribution to Lysippus is much more probable, but cannot be considered certain Our figure itself was doubtless a portrait,

as most of the copies were

The type is discussed and copies are listed in my Lysippos, pp 158-163 No 24 in the list does not belong to the type; cf Collignon, Statues Funeraires, p 162, fig 93 As free imitations in relief may be mentioned a sarcophagus in Tebessa (Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 4, 2; Gsell, Muse'e de Tebessa, pl VIII, No 2, pp 24-26) and numerous small grave-stelae (Reinach, op cit., II, 532, 4 and III, 530, 4; two in the museum at Thebes; Nos 1149, 1155, 1162, 1229, 1232, 1241, 1249, 1271, 1300, and 1325 in the National Museum

No 9

at Athens) The statue mentioned in Lysippos, p 157, as having been found at Athens be- longs to the "Grande" type: 'Apx AeXr IX, 1924-25, ~rapaprT71a, p 72

A J A VI, 1902, pp 424-427 (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire, III, 192, 11 (not 7);

No 26 in the list in Lysippos

10 Female figure (813)

Found June 22, 1907; west end of Roman Shops, 2 m below track level

Lacks head, hands, and legs below calves Height 1.40 m The head was inserted A part of the inserted piece remains; it does not fit closely, but leaves considerable interstices

to be filled with cement The hands were attached by dowels A chiton and himation are worn The latter covers both shoulders, falling straight in front from the left, but from the right the top

of the himation passes down for some distance and then crosses the body, being caught between the left arm and the body and then falling vertically over the forearm Both arms are extended forward, the right at a higher level than the left The weight rests on the left leg

There are five statues that clearly represent a common orig- inal: one in the Louvre (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 166, 7), another, from Herculaneum, in Naples (op cit., I, 258, 7; Ruesch, Guida,2

No 51), another in the Hermitage (museum No 305; Reinach, Repertoire, II, 305, 4), another at Olympia (op cit., II, 670, 10), and a fifth found at Brindisi and now in Naples (Not Scav.,

1910, p 148, fig 1) Although the various copies differ some- what, especially in the position of the hands, they agree as closely as could be expected The statue in Corinth is derived from this original also, but the right hand projected forward and up more than in the more accurate copies, where it rests against the chest As two derivatives still further removed from the original may be mentioned a statue in Parma (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 667, 7; Poulsen, Portratstudien, p 51, figs 120-121) and another found at Sparta (B S A XXVIII, 1926-1927, pp 30 f.); in both, the right hand is covered

Our statue, with both hands extended, suggests the attitude of prayer A type of pray- ing woman known in two examples (Naples bronze: Ruesch, Guida,2 No 785, Reinach, Repertoire, I, 460, 6 and II, 654, 3; statue in Louvre: Reinach, op cit., I, 133, 4, Lippold, Kopien, p 208) is somewhat similar, but a distinct type The earlier praying woman, ascribed with great probability to Euphranor (cf my Lysippos, pp 46 f.; Lippold, Kopien,

pp 207 f.), appears to be a predecessor of our type Euphranor's woman probably belongs

to about 350 B.C., the other praying woman and the original of our type to the end of the fourth century The characteristic triangle, made when the cross-fold is caught under the

IF

?I? :

%r:

:-:?? r , i

)?'?.Y * :r" :':8ii.rii ':i

left arm, appears in the Themis of Chaerestratus (Lawrence, Later Greek Sculpture, p 102;

Reinach, Repertoire, II, 244, 4), apparently taken over from our type Since the Themis belongs to the beginning of the third century, our original is not later than the end of the fourth

The statue at Corinth was undoubtedly a portrait, and so were the other copies It is probable that the original was a portrait also

Found April 8, 1908; from wall in area south of "simadi" B

A seated figure, lacking head, left breast, left arm, right elbow, right foot; the left knee

is broken, the left leg below the knee is not fully modelled, but appears on the surface of the rock Height of base, 0.08 m.; above base, 0.99 m The head and left arm were attached

by dowels The figure sits on a rock, but appears to be on the point of leaping up to her right

On the side of the rock, at her right, there are in relief a helmet, a cuirass, a shield, a spear- point, and two things probably intended as a greave and the hilt of a sword The right hand rests on the shield and holds a sword-hilt; the blade extended forward and down The action

rests on the shield and holds a sword-hilt; the blade extended forward and down The action

of the left hand cannot be determined, but apparently it extended forward A thin chiton is girded at the waist and leaves bare the right breast and the legs below the knees; there is also

a mantle, which passes from the left shoulder down across the back, around the right side and

across the lap in front The hair, partly at least loose, is visible on the back of the neck The top of an elaborate shoe remains on the right leg The back and left side are sketchily treated and evidently were not intended to be visible

This is probably Nike or Enyo The latter is more likely, since the figure seems to express warlike ardor rather than triumph; besides, we know many types of Nike, and none like this Recognizable representations of Enyo are rare (see Pauly-Wissowa s v.) It is recorded that there was in Athens a statue of Enyo by Cephisodotus and Timarchus, the sons of Praxiteles (Pausanias, i, 8, 5) The sculptures in Cos, which are validly assigned to these artists (Bieber in Jb Arch I XXXVIII-XXXIX, 1913-24, pp 242-251) show no

discernible resemblance to this figure, but there are no fragments such that a strong re-

semblance could be expected It is probable, however, that our figure is copied from an original of a later period

Assignment to the "Timotheus" school of the early fourth century has been suggested

The most obvious characteristic of the Timothean style is the use of transparent, clinging

drapery; and where it does not cling it is likely to appear in long flourishes or in wadded bunches Our figure has none of these traits It is doubtful whether so alert a posture is to

be found before Lysippus

Guide, p 75, No 14 On the Enyo of Cephisodotus and Timarchus see Mirone in R Arch XVI, 1922, pp 316 f (standing figure on a coin perhaps derived from it)

12 Apollo Citharoedus (814)

Found June 21, 1907; 1 m north of Byzantine foundation wall of St John's, 1.50 m

below track level

Lacks head, both arms and part of lyre Height of plinth, 0.06 m.; width, 0.37 m.; depth, 0.35 m.; height of figure, 0.70 m The plinth is nearly rectangular The god strides forward with his left foot His left arm was bent sharply at the elbow, as remaining traces show, and the hand held the lyre against the left shoulder; the right was doubtless bent at

a right angle, the hand touching the lyre; there is a trace of a rectangular support on the

middle of the chest just above the belt, for the right forearm Locks of hair appear on the shoulders The costume consists of a thin garment, visible only on the arms, a long robe reaching the feet and girded on the chest, a heavy cloak, falling behind and clasped on the shoulders, and sandals

This is a copy from an original that is represented also by the Apollo of the Sala delle

Muse in the Vatican (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 255, 6; Helbig, Fiihrer,3 No 263; Ausonia, II,

pi VIII, 2; Reinach, Recueil, pl 225) There is another copy in Stockholm (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 255, 8; Brising, L'Art antique au Musee National de Stockholm, pl XVII) and

another in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (No 72; Arndt, Glyptothuque, pl CVIII; Reinach, Repertoire, II, 105, 9); another was found near Rome, and another, as it seems, at Lepcis Magna (Not Scav., 1926, p 280) The Apollo in Geneva (Deonna, Catalogue, No 61; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos 1911-1913; Reinach, Repertoire, II, 105, 10) is a variant A head in the British Museum, No 1795, is declared an example of the type by Furtwangler (Masterpieces, p 305, note 6), but is catalogued as female

The type used to be identified with the Palatine Apollo of Scopas It now seems fairly sure that that statue was quite different (Amelung, Rom Mitt XV, 1900, pp 198-204; cf

Ausonia, III, 1908, p 94; Lippold, Kopien, p 227; in opposition, Svoronos, in J Int Arch Num XVI, 1914, pp 153-210) The original was probably created around the end of the fourth century This copy is poor See the following figure

.Carpenter, 75 Gutde, No 13

13 Melpomene (842)

Found April 11, 1908 in same vicinity as No 12

Ausonia, III, 1908, p 94; Lippold, Kopien, p 227; in opposition, Svoronos, in J Int Arch

The plinth is roughly dressed and somewhat irregular in shape Height of plinth,

0.07 m.; width, 0.20 m.; depth, 0.34 m The figure lacks head and nearly all the right arm:

height, 0.55 m She wears an Ionic chiton, discernible only by the sleeves; over it a Doric

peplus, with broad girdle just below the breasts; and a cloak which passes from the left arm behind the back to the right knee The right foot is set forward, the left back The left hand rests on a tragic mask on the left knee; the right hand rested on the right knee On the feet are shoes At the top of the back is a broad mass of hair, consisting of several braids The figure is seated on a rough stone Poor work

A figure in Zagreb, known to me only through Reinach's drawing (Repertoire, IV, 179, 3), seems to be derived from the same original Our figure was found a short distance from the

Apollo (No 12) and shows the same style and scale; without doubt the two were set up to-

gether The Apollo in the Vatican was found with a group of Muses, including a Mel- pomene wholly different from this Our figures tend to show that the Apollo was not in-

cluded in the original group from which the Vatican Muses were copied; since in that case

Muses, when set up with it, would naturally be chosen from its original companions How-

ever, there are several known instances in which Muses from different groups were brought

together by the copyists The original of this Melpomene should belong to the later part of the fourth century

Carpenter, Guide, p 80, No 22 On various groups of Muses see Lippold, in Rom Mitt XXXIII, 1918, pp 98 ff., and Kopien, pp 169-171, with references

14 Melpomene? (311)

Found west of the Sacred Spring

Shoulders to slightly above waist; right arm entirely lacking, left partly; left breast and

adjoining parts are broken away Height, 0.25 m The figure wears a thin chiton; a heavier garment falls back over the left shoulder There is a broad, flat girdle below the breasts

A similar strap extends diagonally across the front of the body from the right shoulder; at

the back it disappears under the heavy garment At the left side is a sword, which doubt- less is supposed to be attached to this second strap The left arm comes straight down and presses against the sword

A figure found at Pergamon (Pergamon, VII, pp 76-80, No 47, pls XIV-XV; Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 180, 5), headless but nearly complete in other ways, has a sword and straps very like those in this fragment; the figure is somewhat similar otherwise, but not a replica Winter regards the Pergamene figure as Melpomene; and in fact there is a Melpo- mene with a sword on a coin, though there are apparently no certain examples in sculpture

It is altogether probable that the Pergamene figure and ours represent the same subject Copy from a Hellenistic original

Michaelis, Ancient Marbles, p 505, 10); Vatican, Sala a Croce Greca (Reinach, op cit., I,

265, 1); Worlitz (ibid., II, 304, 6); Abamelach (ibid., V, 129, 7); Stockholm (ibid., I, 266, 3);

Ny Carlsberg, No 396 (ibid., III, 119,8); Delos (ibid., III, 178, 7); formerly Villa Madama (ibid., II, 399, 6); Antiquarium Comunale in Rome, known to me only through Amelung's mention Eight of these resemble one another closely and may be derived from a single original, though this is questioned The figure in Delos differs from the others considerably; but there is no reasonable doubt that all nine have the same subject

A skin could be worn by Artemis or a Maenad The absence of other attributes virtu- ally excludes Artemis, and the quiet demeanor makes a Maenad improbable There are

various indications that the subject is the Muse of comedy, Thalia It was once stated (B C H XXXI, 1907, p 406) that in the Stockholm figure the mask was original, which would make the identification certain for that copy; but later examination is said to have shown that the mask is partly restored and that the antique part does not belong to the figure (Amelung, text to Einzelaufnahmen, No 1993) However, several of the statues were found with other Muses or in circumstances that suggest the identification

Our fragment does not correspond to any of the nine closely enough to indicate immedi- ate derivation from a common original, but without doubt the subject is the same It is not improbable that this figure and the "Melpomene" (No 14) belonged together: they are

alike in material, scale, and workmanship I did not ascertain where the Thalia was found Chief discussion by Amelung, cited above; Lippold, Kopien, p 169

16 Apollo (774)

Found May 17, 1907; circuit-boundary wall of St John's, northeast corner

Height, 1.21 m.; width, 0.74 m.; thickness, 0.29 m The figure stands with the left thigh against a pillar with mouldings at the top, around which a serpent is coiled The body is

preserved, in front, from the waist to the ankles, and in the back considerably higher; but

most of the left leg and other projecting parts are knocked off From front to back the statue, and especially the pillar, is very thin The costume is not altogether clear The upper parts of the legs appear to be nude, but there are traces of a thin garment near by The

~, :~,:~,i-~j~:;::, ::-,~-~:: :~:~::~ii -

,

_

, _

back is covered by another garment which also covers the lower part of the right leg and obviously covered the left also Another edge of a garment, descending from behind the right shoulder, crosses the body near the genitals Upon the pillar are remains of an object, doubtless a lyre I have observed no close analogies for the drapery Figures somewhat similar: Reinach, Repertoire, III, 27, 9; III, 234, 5; IV, 57, 6; V, 35, 1 If there was an earlier original, it was Hellenistic

17 Bust of Apollo (751)

Found in 1905

Bottom and left side, with part of neck; head entirely gone Height, 0.37 m.; width, 0.213 m.; depth, 0.288 m On the side is a cutting for the insertion of an arm-piece The hair falls straight down in the back in a thick mass; two curls are visible on the shoulder

In spite of its imperfect preservation, the fragment is recognizable as an example of a type sometimes called Ariadne, but now generally agreed to represent Apollo Examples were

listed and the type was studied by Savignoni (Anusonia, II, 1907, pp 41 ff.), Amelung (Rdrm

Mitt XXXVIII-XXXIX, 1923-24, pp 44 f.) and Lippold (Kopien, pp 159, 160, 224-228) Three double-headed herms were found in the stadium at Athens, each consisting of an example of this type united with the Hermes of Alcamenes; one is now in the National Museum (Amelung, 1 c.; Stais, Marbres et Bronzes, No 1693), while the other two have been set up again in the stadium (Savignoni's fig 16; Jb Arch I XXXII, 1917, p 84, fig.52; Weller, Athens and its Monuments, p 177, fig 96) There is a similar double herm in Geneva

(Deonna, Catalogue, p 31, No 52, with illustration; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos 1872-1873), and

a copy in the Lateran (f in Savignoni's list; Benndorf-Sch6ne, p 255, No 378; Einzelaufiah-

men, Nos 2167-2168) apparently had for pendant a herm of Dionysus that resembles the Hermes of Alcamenes Influenced by these facts, Savignoni tentatively ascribed the Apollo to Alcamenes Amelung and Lippold both attribute it to Cephisodotus, by comparison with the head of the Eirene (good illustration: Savignoni's figs 11-12) Lippold reaches the further

conclusion that the original was a complete statue, from which the Apollo found at Gortyna

and a torso in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Galleria 69) were copied; the Barberini Apollo

in Munich, whose head somewhat resembles the " Ariadne," would be a copyist's variant,

influenced by the Palatine Apollo of Scopas

The various examples of the " Ariadne " differ from one another so much that it is diffi- cult to reach a confident conclusioni about the original, but it is on the whole probable th:at Savignoni is right at least in regard to its period No in-

ferences can safely be drawn from a comparison with either

the Eirene or the Barbarini Apollo

18 Head of Apollo? (451)

Found April 28, 1903

Lacks all the face except right cheek and part of right

eye Height, 0.18 m The hair is confined by a band, out-

side of which it ends in a series of rich locks; in the back a

flat mass apparently fell on the shoulder Probably a head

of Apollo after an original of the late fifth or the fourth

century Coarse work

19 Apollo (795, 796, 807)

Found June 13 and 18, 1907; northeast corner of St John's

Head to genitals; lacks face and nearly all of both arms Height, 0.943 m There is a garment slung over the left shoulder and covering most of the back, and a lyre-strap de-

scending across the body from the right shoulder The small fragment 796, which does not appear in the photograph, belongs to the front of the figure It joins by contact, and has part

of the lyre-strap The weight rested on the right leg The right arm was raised to a position

?::.:y; ; i,, **V^ S^ ^ ^ f ti ;::'^

No

18ai

almost vertical; the head is sufficiently preserved to show that the hand did not rest on it The left arm started down from the shoulder and doubtless held the lyre; there are re- mains of an attachment on the front of the body There is a long lock of hair on each

shoulder, coarsely worked in a manner suggestive of shavings The head was turned to his left and appar- ently the gaze was directed upward A few leaves of a wreath remain in the hair There is no pubes

A wreath is most commonly worn in sculpture by Dionysus, but sometimes by Apollo (cf Overbeck, Kunst- mythologie, III, 5, pp 123-127) Dionysus should not wear a lyre-strap or any other strap The action of the right hand is uncertain; in figures of Dionysus the hand sometimes holds a bunch of grapes high in the air No exact replicas are known to me; for a fairly close analogy see a statue in Vienne (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 100, 4; Esp6randieu, Recueil General, III, p 397), where the arms are differently placed The original, if any was closely imitated, belonged to the fourth century or later, though the poor workmanship of the copy gives some appearance of early style

20 Head of Helios? (889)

Found April 21, 1908

Only the top of the head is preserved Height, 0.19 m.; width, 0.24 m.; depth, 0.17 m Curling hair There is a fillet with two holes, probably for metal pieces representing rays Coarse work

21 Hermes Criophorus (686)

Found May 16, 1904

Shoulders to genitals; the right arm is mostly lost Height, 0.40 m The hands hold against the chest the legs of a ram, the left hand grasping the hind legs A garment falls from the shoulders in archaic folds This is closely related to the Criophorus of Wilton

House (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 363, 6; Michaelis, Ancient Marbles, p 702, No 144), even to

the flat pillar at the back; though in that example the garment is hung over the pillar, the figure itself being nude It is clear that the two are derived from one original The head, preserved in the Wilton House copy, is bearded The bodily structure is poorly rendered in the copy at Corinth; the Wilton House copy is known to me only from Clarac's inadequate

We have record of two statues of Hermes carrying a ram which were made in the second

quarter of the fifth century: one by Calamis, one by the Aeginetan Onatas In the latter

work the ram was carried under the arm, while the figure by Calamis was nude and beard-

less, and the ram's head was probably above the left shoulder of the god Svoronos sug-

gested that the original of our type was one of a group of three statues represented on a

Sicyonian coin of Julia Domna However, the two feminine figures are in the style of the

late fifth or fourth century, and the chlamys worn by the male figure is freer in style than

No 21

in our figure On examining the coin in the Numismatic Museum in Athens, by the cour- tesy of Mr Konstantopoulos, I was unable to discern the hands or the ram's head against the chest It is probably right to assume from the position of the arms that the figure was a Criophorus, but it certainly is impossible to tell on which side the ram's head was

No connection between the coin and our type is apparent (So Lippold in Pauly-Wissowa, article Sikyon, col 2546.)

It is probable that the original was itself a late archaistic work This is suggested by the drapery, which if genuinely archaic could hardly be later than 480 B.C., and by the head of the copy in Wilton House Compare a relief in Athens (Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II,

353, 1)

A J A VIII, 1904, pp 439 f and pl XVIII (Heermance); Reinach, Repertoire, IV,

97, 2; Carpenter, Guide, p 71, No 7 For various Criophori see Svoronos, in J Int Arch Num XVI, 1914, pp 71-80 and 166 f

22 Criophorus (718)

Found June 15, 1904; south of St John's, high level

The front of the left shoulder is preserved, with a little of the neck Height of fragment,

0.22 m.; width, 0.16 m.; depth, 0.186 m The hind legs of the ram are visible, and part of a

chlamys This is evidently a copy from a Greek work of free style, i e not earlier than

about 440 B.C.; how much later cannot be estimated, because the fragment is so small No evidence previously known has indicated the existence of a sculptural type of Criophorus

at this later period, though there are some bronze and terracotta figurines that have the same motive, as well as the Sicyonian coin mentioned under No 21 None of these appears

to reproduce the type of our fragment It is just possible that the original of it is imitated

in a coin of Aegina (Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner, pl L, No 5); the figure there represented

does not look archaic, the ram's head is above the right shoulder, and it can scarcely be

certain, in the present condition of the coin, that there is no chlamys

Found May 15, 1908; at the bridge, 1 m below track level

Height of plinth, 0.09 m.; width, 0.925 m.; depth, 0.84 m The figure is preserved to the

lap, the upper part being much battered; height 0.79 m He sits on a throne and the feet rest on a flat footstool On the feet are sandals; the only garment is a himation On the sides of the throne are wheat-stalks in relief, and at the figure's right are the hind legs and

tail of an animal on the plinth Part of the body of the animal is visible on the side of the throne, in relief So far as can be discerned, the figure corresponds closely to the usual type

of Serapis, which is justly ascribed to Bryaxis (Amelung, in R Arch XI, 1903, pp 117 ff and Ausonia, III, pp 115-121) The animal is Cerberus and indicates that in this copy

Serapis was identified with Pluto, as frequently (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 19 and V, 9, 1-3;

here No 3 is particularly close to our copy; Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, p 231, No 8) Usually the fore feet of Cerberus are placed on the plinth, but in this case they apparently

rested on the arm of the throne; the lion with Cybele frequently has this position The wheat is not preserved in other representations of Serapis, so far as I know; but, like the cornucopia that is found occasionally, it is appropriate to a god of the underworld and hence of the earth It is very probable that this figure had a cornucopia; cf No 214 The figure was found just south of the west end of the northwest stoa, which would probably not be very far from the two precincts of Serapis mentioned by Pausanias (ii, 4, 6)

On Pluto-Serapis see Roeder in Pauly-Wissowa, article Sarapis; Cook, Zeus, I,

pp 188-190

24 Hephaestus? (1139)

Smaller than life-size The front part of the head is preserved, from near the top of the pilos to the eyes Height, 0.16 m.; width, 0.125 m.; depth, 0.085 m This is apparently a copy from an original of the fifth century The hair is simpler than in the head in the Vati-

can (Amelung, Skulpt des Vat Mus I, p 584, No 420, pl 61), which is plausibly ascribed

No 24

to Alcamenes (Furtwangler, Masterpieces, p 89; Helbig, Fiihrer,3 I, p 52, No 86); but the

general arrangement is the same, and a reduction in size might cause such simplification;

it is possible that both heads are derived from a common original The pilos could be worn also by Odysseus Good work

25 Head of Dionysus (194)

Found in the Agora, southwest of the west end of the Propylaea; Parian marble, ac-

cording to Richardson There is a little of the neck preserved; on top of the head is the right hand and wrist Height, 0.35 m The surface is almost perfectly preserved The head is encircled by a fillet and an ivy garland Both appear only in front, and the back of the head is very roughly finished The hair is gathered into a knot at the back, and curls fall from behind the ears The work is poor and belongs to the second century As a detail of workmanship may be noted that the upper eyelids have a distinct ridge parallel with the edge

The statue represented Dionysus leaning languidly on a support, probably a vine-clad tree-trunk, with his left arm, while the right arm was raised and the hand rested on the

head Statues similar in general features are not rare: compare Reinach, Repertoire, I, 137, 6-

7; I, 139, 1; II, 123; II, 787; II, 786, 6; III, 236, 7; V, 48, 2 But no two of these can be re- garded as accurately copied from a common original The same type is used for Dionysus

in groups: Reinach, Repertoire, III, 35, 7, 9; Brunn-Bruckmann, 620, figs 3-5 in text; Levi,

in Ausonia, IX, 1919, pp 52-64 Apparently there was no single famous original repre- senting Dionysus in this scheme, but it became customary to borrow for this god a type created for Apollo, the "Lyceus."

This Apollo was imitated very freely in some instances, but the original can be recon- structed with reasonable certainty except in regard to the object held in the left hand The statue that Lucian describes as in the Lyceum at Athens (Anacharsis, 7) had a bow, and so

?

* _ || *- ,, '.' n:::'.'::'? : :::' f if - -

No 25

do some of the copies But in view of the freedom with which adaptations were made, it

cannot be considered certain that Lucian's statue was the original A greater number of the copies have a lyre in the hand This is much more satisfactory; instead of a tired archer we

have the musician in moody revery So understood the conception is original and profound; and this Apollo, as it appears in good copies (e g that in the Louvre: Reinach, Repertoire, I,

135, 2; Warrack, Greek Sculpture, No 79) is the only nude Apollo of later origin that does not seem contemptible when compared with the splendid creations of the middle of the fifth century

The original is often ascribed to Praxiteles, but this attribution appears to have very little in its favor In spite of the support, the figure has not the relaxation of Praxiteles, and the position of the feet is not known to have been used by him The head has no clear