You are on page 1of 590

I^antiljooks

of

^rci}aeoloQ2

^^ti

^ntiquitte;s{

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

i/K

"

{y\,

"

*o^v

HANDBOOK
OF

GREEK

SCULPTUEE

BY

ERNEST
LATE

ARTHUR
OONVILLE
AND BRITISH OP

GARDNER,
CAIUS SCHOOL

M.A.
AND AT

'

FELLOW
DIRECTOR

OF

COLLEGE,
OF

CAMBRIDGE,

FORMERLY

OF

THE

ARCHAEOLOGY IN

ATHENS

YATES

PROFESSOR

ARCHAEOLOGY LONDON

UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE,

"?t.\.

ilontion
MACMILLAN
NEW YORK
:

AND
THE

CO., Limited
COMPANY

MACMILLAN

1897

AU

reserved rights

NJ3

v.!

PREFACE

Although need of

there handbook

are

several smaller

histories scale felt. and What of the


to

of of

Greek

sculpture,

the

on

somewhat is

dift'erent

scope outline

is, I
of

believe,
our

generally

is wanted Greek different show the

general

present

knowledge
as

sculpture,
schools

tinguishing disand of

as

clearly

possible
instances
not

periods,
each.

and

giving

typical
I have

development
work of made
the

Accordingly,
at
a

in

the

present
treatment

any

attempt
but
have

complete
from

or

exhaustive the
most

subject,
available I facts have

selected

great

accumulation
in

of

examples
in

only

such

as

seem

useful

illustration.
to

particular
as

attempted
already
or

to

confine with
to

myself general
rest

such

or

theories

have

met

acceptance
evidence
future

among
that

archaeologists,
cannot

such shaken

as

seem

upon
or

easily
This

be

by
has

new

discoveries the under

versy. contro-

principle problems

precluded
are

discussion

of
but

many in

interesting
case

that

still

dispute
are

;
too

the
issue

of the

questions history
to

which,
of
state

though
to

undecided,
be

of

vital I

for

sculpture
as

altogether possible
upon will fit

ignored,
different the

have

endeavoured

briefly

as

the

tenable of

views,
any

and them.

to

base In

no

further the

inferences student

acceptance
with

of

this which

way he

be the

provided knowledge
;

framework he

into

can

easily

all

that and
at

may

acquire

from

subsequent

reading

or

observation

vi the when
time

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

same

he

will not

find that
more

he has

anything
or newer

to

unlearn

he becomes AVere the

acquaintedwith
of such
a

facts
as

theories. cite all the the

writer have

book

this to

authorities who work he has

or contributed, directly

to indirectly,

produced,his prefaceand
references and

notes

would have

be

mere

patchwork of
as

quotations. I
my
own

endeavoured

far

as

to give possible

as impressionsdirectly,

derived

both

from

authorities literary have tried


as a

and

from

the
to

monuments

themselves, and

generalrule
Wherever
a

avoid

direct

quotationfrom
borrowed
an

modern

writers.

I have

consciously
not

view propounded by original


as common

and predecessor,
an

yet adopted

property, I have made


a

ment acknowledgsort

in the text

or

in

note

; but

reference
some

of this

may

have

been

omitted accidentally have been


case

in

instances and I
can

where

its

insertion would that in such also be most the the


a

justor courteous,
have
most

only trust

those who

rightto complainwill
their
own

disposed to leniency by
a

experienceof
a

difficulties of
nature

task that

must

partake to

great

extent

of

of
a

compilation.

But such

more

general acknowledgment
Professor
von

is due

at

once

to

works and

as

Brunn's

Geschichte der

griechischen
Overbeck's

Kunstler

his Griechische

Professor Kunstgeschichte, A. S.

Geschichte der Greek M.


now

Flastik,Mr. griechischen
Mitchell's
de

Murray'sHistoryof
Any
or

Mrs. Sculpture,

and Historyof Ancient Sculpture,


one

Histoire Collignon's writes


on

la

sculpture grecque.
owe

who

Greek of his

must sculpture

to

some

all of these

the foundation
to

knowledge.

If I do

not

refer constantly

and their systematic them, it is only because their accessibility of the upon

treatment

subject make
any
matter

it easy

for the student wishes


of
a

to out

sult con-

them
more

which

he

to

follow

in

detail than the

is allowed

by
museums

the

scope in

handbook. the
remains

The of

cataloguesof

various

which

PREFACE

Vli

Greek

are sculpture

now

also preserved
as reference,

oifer invaluable
as

ance assistin the all

to
"

the

student

for

well be

for

use

galleriesan
who write Wolters'

assistance upon the

which

must

by acknoAvledged
be

subject; above

all must

mentioned

edition of Friederich's

the catalogue of the Bausfeine,

collection splendid Those who


are

of casts at Berlin.

acquaintedwith
one

the results of recent


in

tion excava-

Avill notice

conspicuousomission
to

the

attempt

to

bring
Greek

this book

up

the

level of

our

present knowledge of
of the French
at

sculpture.The
not

valuable included.

discoveries The
reason

Delphi have
is

been

for this omission be

partlythat

without

illustrations it would of
so

impossibleto

give any adequate notion


and those
in

remarkable

series of the

sculptures,
be rash

partlythat, pending
by
to
a

the

of publication

coveries Delphic disto

whom handbook

they are

due, it would
The

include

them

like this. of the due

reliefs of the

th^

Treasuryof

the Athenians take their

and

Treasury of
time among

Siphnians
cardinal
case

will doubtless
monuments

placein

the

of Greek
to

sculpture ;
solved them
are

but
so

in especially difficult and be

the latter

the

problems

be about

so

complicated

that agreement have become


more

is

hardlyto
and have seemed
;

expected until they


more

widelyknown
has therefore

been

thoroughly
exclude them be

discussed.

It

wiser

to

from altogether
to

the present volume

perhaps it
work of is

may

possible

the repair

omission have and Mr.

before the whole

complete.
friends

I Finally, for their this

the

pleasantduty
at

thankingmany
made

help

advice

various Norton

stages in the writingof


has I wish of many useful thank

handbook;

Richard

criticisms of the
my

earlier

and portion, Gardner


many
or

to especially

brother.Professor

Percy

Oxford, not

only for
either

reading the proofs and


have been

making
the

which suggestions

in incorporated

text

have led

to its

modifica-

vm

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

tion,
work.

but

also

for

his

help

and

encouragement

throughout

the

The

present
of Greek

volume

contains

the

introduction

and

the

history
second

sculpture
comprise
IV.

down

to

the

time

of

Phidias.

The

part

will

the

rest

of

Chapter
Chapter

III.

(the

fifth

century),

Chapter Chapter
the

(the
VI.

fourth

century),
Roman

V.

(Hellenistic
and full

sculpture),
indices
to

(GraecoIt is

sculpture),
that

whole

work.

hoped
in the

the

rest

of

the

handbook

will

be

ready

to

appear

course

of

the

coming

year.

October

1895.

PREFACE

TO

PAET

II

In with

addition the first

to

the of

authorities this
it

quoted
one

in
other

the

preface
calls for

issued

part

handbook,

especial
Furt-

notice

here.

This,

need der

hardly
griechischen

be

said, Plastik,

is

Professor in Greek
its

wangler's
version I had

Meisterwerke Miss

or,

English

by

Eug6nie
to

Sellers, Masterpieces
this the I work
more

of

Sculpture.
in Part

occasion from
in

quote
of

than has

once

I.;
quently fre-

but,

the

nature

subject,
was

it

been

far

more

my

hands

while

writing
to

Part

II.,

and

have

to

acknowledge

my

indebtedness and
to

Professor
in

Furtwiingler's
instances in the
text

wonderful I have handbook In I have


not

knowledge
felt for able students.
with

observation
his

many

where of

embody

conclusions

dealing

the
to

later

portion
the I

of

the

history

of

sculpture,
as

endeavoured

follow

same

principles again
as

in

the from I do

earlier the
not

portion,

and

consequently
many

am

precluded
to

discussion feel

of

interesting
a

problems

which while

justified
to

in

expressing
even

dogmatic
the

opinion,
arguments

I have each

not

space

give,

in

summary,

on

side. I of

regret

that

am

unable

to

fulfil of

my

conditional French
excavators

promise
at

an

appendix
no

on

the

discoveries

the

Delphi,
It

official

publication
both
to

having

as

yet
and

been
to

issued.

is

only

fair

M.

Collignon

myself

to

state

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

that

had

not

the

advantage
grecque hands.

of

seeing
before

the

second

volume

of

his

Histoire

de

la

Sculpture
of my have

the

proof-sheets

of

this

volume

were

out

Arrangements placing
to
at

been

made

by
a

the

Teachers'

Guild

for

the

disposal
the

of

its

members

series

of

lantern-slides

illustrate

history
material

of

sculpture
that has been

these

slides

have

been

prepared
of

from

the

used

for

the

tions illustra-

this

handbook,
be
seen

and

they

are

numbered

to

correspond.
of the

They
74

may Gower

at

the

Educational

Museum

Guild,
be

Street,
to

London,
Hon. Curators.

W.C.,

where

inquiries

may

addressed

the

The

present

volume

contains

full

index,
handbook.

compiled

by

Mrs.

Ernest

Gardner,
Professor

to

both

parts

of

the

My
read the

brother.

Percy
and I have

Gardner

of

Oxfoid,
for

has

again
able valu-

proof-sheets,
and

to

thank

him

many

corrections

suggestions.

Univeksity

College,
November 1896.

Londox,

CONTENTS

PAGE

SELECT

BIBLIOGRAPHY
.

xvii

LIST

OF

COMMONEST

ABBREVIATIONS

XXI

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS
.

xxiu

NOTE

xxviu

INTKODUCTION

(a)

Sources

of

our

Knowledge
"

Literature

and

Monuments
.

1.

Literary

Sources
......

(a) (6)
2.

Direct Indirect

Literary Literary Sources

Sources
....

Sources
....

Monumental

^
.

.4
.

(1) (2) (3) (b)


Materials 1.
2. 3.

Originals
.

10
. ...

Copies
"

.11
.

Imitations
......

13 Processes Greek Sculpture


.
.

and

of

15
15

Wood.
.......

Stone Metal

or

Marble
......

18

23
.......

4.

Terra-cotta
. . .

.26
. . .

5. 6.

The The

Application Use Pointing

of

Colour

to

Sculpture'
.

28
.

of

from

Finished

Model
.

32
.

(c)

Sculpture

Decorative,
Division

Architectural,
of
the

Free
.

35
.

{d) Chronological

Subject
. .

.42

xu

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAPTER

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART
PAGE

"

1. 2.

LiMiT.s

OF

THE

Subject
...... . . .
. . .
.

45

Egypti.\x
As.SYKiA"r

Akt
Art
.......

-17
48

3.
4.

Phoenician
Minou

Aki
....... .......

50 52
of

5. Asia 6. Early

Population
of

Greece
.
. . . " .

.56

7. Civilisation
8.

Mycenae
.
.

.57 59

^t

of

Mycenae
......

9. The 10.

Island

Gems Traditions
........

and

Early
:

Bronze

Reliefs
.
.

62

Mythical
etc.

the

Cyclopes, Dactyli,

Telchines,
65

11.
12. 13. 14.

Art Other

in

Homer Decorative

and

He.siud
.....

G6

Works
.
. . . -

.73
.79

Daedalus
.
. . .

Early Changes

Temple
in

Images Greece Influence

and before

Offerings
. .

.81
:

15.

600

b.c.

Later

Means

of

Foreign
16.

......

84

Summary
........

87

CHAPTER

the

rise

of

greek

sculpture

(600-480 b.c.)
Pkuiod
:

" ir. Character


division

and

Limits
.....

of

the

18.

Inherited

and

Borrowed Draped

Types

Nondescript {(()

Type,

Standing

J{b)Draped
Nude ((")

Female Male
and

Type,

Standing

Type,
Female

Standing Seated

(d)

Male

Type,

Draped

(e) Winged
19.

Figures
.

Stories Schools

of

Inventions

and

their

Value
:

20.

of

Samos, Chios,

Crete

Literary

Evidence

CHAPTEE

III

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

(480-400
Results

B.C.)

" 29. The


30.

Persian Olympian

Wars

and

their

214 216

The

Sculptures

XIV

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
PAGE

"

31. 32. 33. 34. 35.


36.

Calamis
.

232
236 244

Myron Pythagoras

Phidias
.

248
of the

Sculpture
Other Temple

Parthenon Sculptures
"

267

Athenian
of of

Theseum,
etc.

Erechtheum 294

Wingless Phidias
"

Victory,

37.

Scholars Alcamenes

Agoraoritus,

Colotes,

Theocosmus
304

38.

Scholars
tors

of

Calamis

and

Myron,

and

other

Attic

Sculp
313

39. 40. 41. 42.


43.

Attic

Influence
.....

outside

Athens

Phigalia

321 324

polyclitus Scholars Other Summary


......

of

Polyclitus
and

337 Works
of this

Sculptors

Period

341

347

CHAPTER

IV

THE

FOURTH

CENTURY

(400-320

B.C.)

CONTENTS

XV

CHAPTEE

the

hellenistic

age

(310-100 b.c.)
PAOE

"

57. The
58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. Chief The

Influence Centres Pastoral


and and

of of

Alexander Sculpture
"

434
in the

Hellenistic Reliefs

Acie

437 438
441 442

Tendency
Children
the and

Hellenistic
in

Boethus, Chares,
eutychides Portraiture

Sculpture
of

Colossus
the

Rhodes
of

impersonation

cities

446

......

449
of the

History The The

of

the

Dedications
of of

Attalids
. . .

452 453 459

Dedications Dedications Rhodian


"

Attalus Eumexes
"

I. II.
.

67. The
68.
69.

School Faenese School


of etc. of the the

the

Laocoon
.

468

Tralles The Later


of

THE

Bull
....
"

472
475

Ephesian Ideals

Agasias
; Apollo

70.

Gods

Belvedere,

Aphrodite

Melos,
Works
.......

477
Hellenistic Age 485
490

71. Other 72. Summary

CHAPTER

VI

GRAECO-ROMAN

and

ROMAN

SCULPTURE

" 73. Historical


74. The Carrying
of of of

and

Social
off of and

Changes Masterpieces
.

492 495 496


.

7.5. Centres 76. Statues


77. Works

Art
the the

Migration
. .

of

Artists
.

Gods Neo-Attic
. .

497
501

School
. . .

78. Arcesilaus 79. Pasiteles


80. Portraiture
. . , . .

505 508
512

and

his

School

XVI

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

PAGE

" 81.
82.

Historical

Monuments
.....

516

Antinous

and

the

Hadeianic

Revival
.
.

.517

83.

Sarcophagi
.......

519

84.

Summary
........

521

INDEX

52.3

INDEX

OF

SCULPTORS

551

xviii

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK Ed.

SCULPTURE

Pausanias. 1896. Pausanias.

Graeciae. Descriptio

Hitzig and
Frazer. Blake

Bliimiier.

Part

I.

Berlin,

Graeciae. Descriptio
Bks. xxxiv. and xxxvi.

Ed.
Ed.

Pliny.
1896. LiTC'iAN.

K. Jex

and

E. Sellers,

London,

Imagines,JupiterTragoedus, etc.

Coins

reproducing Statues
Numismatic of Hellenic

F. Imhoof-Blumer

and

P.

Gardner. the Journal Coins.

Commentary

on

sanias. Pau-

from (Reprinted

Studies, 1885, 1886,1887.)

P.Gardner.

Types

of Greek

Cambridge, 1883.

Bools

dealing u-itJiportionsof the subject


der Plastik. griechischen

Furtwangler,
1893.

a.

Meisterwerke

Leipzig-Berlin,

of Masterpieces

Greek

transl. Sculpture, Art and

E. Sellers.

London,

189.'i.

Newton,
Baumeister. and OvERBECK. RoscHER.

Sir C. T.

Essays on
des and

Archaeology. London,
Altertums
;

1880.
on

Denkmaler

klassischen

Articles

Sculpture

Sculptors. Munich
Lexikon
der

1884-88. Lei^Jzig,

1871-1889. Kunstmythologie. Leipzig,


und griechischen rcimischen

Mythologie ;

Articles

on

Artistic
Britnn.

Types

of Gods.

1884. Leipzig,

Griechische

Gotterideale.

Munich,

1893.

ScHUCHHARDT.

Schliemanu's

1890. Ausgrabungen. Leipzig, Sellers. Kunst

Schlieniann's

Excavations, transl. E, MiLCHHuFER,


CcRTlus in. and Die A. Adler. Bildwerke

London,

1891. 1883. Leipzig,


"

Anfiiugeder
in Stein

in Griechenland.

publication).Berlin, 1890 Olympia (official


und JMarmor

Vol.
.

(Treu). Vol.

lY.

Die

Bronzen

(Furtwangler).
Waldstein,
Petersen. C. Kunst

Essays on

the

Art

of Pheidias.

Cambridge, 1 885.

des Phidias.

Berlin, 1873.

Collignon.
MiCHAELis. Benndorf.

Phidias.
Der Das

Paris,1886.
1871. Leipzig,

Parthenon.
Hereon
von

Gjolbaschi-Trysa.Vienna,

1889.

Paris,
Urlichs. Stark.

P.

Polyclete. Paris, 1895.


1863. Skopas. Greifswald, Niobe and und Th. die Niobiden. 1863. Leipzig,

Hamdy-Bey

Reinach.

Necropoleroyalei\Sidon.

Paris, 1896.

BIBLIOGRArHY Th. A. Die

xix

ScHREiBER,
FuiiTW

hellenistischen Relief bilder.


Dornauszieher

1889. Leipzig, niit der Gans.

ANGLER, 1876.

Der

und

der Knabe

Berlin,

Der Hauser. Robert

Satyr
Die C.

aus

Pergamon.
antiken

Berlin, 1880.
Reliefs.

neii-Attischen

Stuttgart,1889.
"

Die

Berlin, 1890 Sarcopliagreliefs.

Technical

BlItmner,

H.

Technologie
Griechische

und

Terminologie

der

Gewerbe

und

Kiinste.

1875. Leipzig,

Lepsius,

R.

Marmorstudien.

Berlin, 1890.

niustrafions, apart from


Brunx-BruC'KMANN.

Collections of particular publications der und griecbischen

or

Museums Plastik.

Denkmiiler

romischen

Munich,
Rayet,
Monuments grecs. These 0.

1888". Monuments grecs. de I'Art Publies


"

antique. Paris, 1884.


la Society pour

par

reneouragement

des

Etudes

Paris, 1872
are

all

photographic
"

useful Muller-Wieseler. Glarac. Mus^e de

for

following, having only outlines,are types only, but not for style.
der alten Kunst.

the

Denkmiiler

1854-77. GiJttingen,

Sculpture. Paris, 1841.

Catalogue
In addition
to

the

official catalogues of the and casts, antiquities

various

Mu.seums

of

Friederichs-Wolters. Plastik
;

Bausteine antiker Gipsabgiisse

zur

Geschichte

die

Bildwerke.

gi-iechisch-roniischen Berlin, 1885.

der

Periodicals Journal American Bulletin Gazette Revue Gazette of Hellenic Journal de Studies. of

London,

1880

"

Archaeology.
Paris, 1875
"

Boston

and

Baltimore,
"

1885

"

Correspondancehellenique. Athens, 1877


"

Archeologique.
des Beaux-Arts.

Archeologique. Paris,1844

Paris, 1859

"

XX

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

^Annali

Monumenti

del

Instituto

di

Corrispondenza

Archeologica.

Rome,

1829-1885.

iArchiiologischeZeitung.

Berlin,

1843-1885.

After

1885

continued

by

Jalirbuch

des

k.

deutschen

archiiologischen
k.

Instituts.

Beilin,
Instituts.

1886".

Antike
1886".

Denkmiiler

des

deutschen

archiiologischen

Berlin,

Mittheilungen

des

k.

deutschen

archiiologischen

Instituts.

Rome, Athens,

1886
"

1875",

'E^rj/xepls

'Apxat-oXoyiKT].

Athens,

1883
"

comiaionest

abbreviations

used

in

the

notp:s

/V.

Overbeck,
hildcndcn

Die

antikcn

SchriftqucUen
bci den Griechcn.

zur

Geschichte

der

Ki'mste

B.

I)

Brunii-Bruckmann,
Momische

Denkmdler

der

Griechisclien

mid

Skulptur,

Munich.

C.

I.

G.
...

Corpus Corptis
...

Inscriptimium Inscriptionnvi
Graecac

Graecarum

(Boeckli).

C.

I.

A.

Atticarum.

I.

G.

A.
...

Inscriptiones

Antiquissimac griechischer
di

(Roehl).
Bildhaucr.

Loewy
....

Loewy,
Inst.
. .

Inscliriftcn
deW Instituto

Ann.

Annali

Correspondenza

rcheologica,

Rome.

2Ion.

Insf.
. .

Monumcnti
.

Inediti

ddV

Instituto

di

Correspoiidenza

Archeologica,
A.
Z.
.
. .

Rome.

Archdologischc
.

Zeitung,
des K.

Berlin.

Jlittheil.

Ath.
.

Mittheihmgen
Athens.

deutschen

archdologiscken

InstittUs,
.

Mitthcil.

Hoiiu
.

Milthcilungen
Rome.

des

K.

deutschen

archaologischen,

Instituts,

Jahrb

Jahrhuch

des

K.

deutschen

archaologischen

Instituts,

Berlin.

B.

C.

H.
.

Bulletin
.
.

de

Correspondance
Hellenic

Hellenique,
London.

Athens.

J.

H.

S.
.

Journal
. .

of
'

Studies,
Athens.

'Ei^. '.\px" "

'Ei/)i7/tepis ApxO'i-o'KoyiKri,
"

'i\pX-

AeXrt'oi'
. .

\'i.pxai'0\oyt.Kbi" AeXrlov,

Athens.

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

FIG.

PAGE

1. 2.
3.

Gold

Cups

from

Vapbio,
relief, Triton,
of from

near

Sparta

(Athens, (Athens,

National
National

Museum)
Museum)
.

61
63

Argive
Heracles Homeric Chest

bronze and Shield of of

Olymiiia
an

on

island

gem

(British

Museum)
. .

63

4. 5. 6.

Achilles
. .
.

.71
.
.

Cypselus
, . .
. .

.-77
.

Apollo
Primitive
Statue

Amyclae,
statue
on

from

coin from

of

Sparta
. .

.81
.

7.
8.

throne,
ruler of

coin

of from

Aenus
. .

.81

of

Chares,

Tichiussa,
'

Branchidae

(British
106

Museum)
. .
.

9.

Sculptured

Column,

dedicated

by

Croesus

in

the

temple

at

Ephesus
108

(British
10. 11.
12.

Museum)
......

Harpy
Statue Statue

Monument,
dedicated found Samos

from

Xanthus
to at

in

Lycia
at

(British
Samos

Museum)
.

110

by
on

Cheramyes Acropolis Acropolis


at

Hera

(Louvre)
.

113 from 115

the

Athens, Museum)

resembling
.

that

(Athens,
dedicated
of
at

13.

Winged

figure
Archermus

Delos,

probably
National of

by

Micciades

and .118
.

Chios Delos

(Athens,

Museum)
Naxos
to

14.

Statue

dedicated

by
Museum)

Nicandra

Artemis
120

(Athens,
15. ji 16.
"

National
at

....

Apollo
to

"

found

Thera the

(Athens,

National from Thasos from

Museum)
. .

124 128
.
.

Relief Two

A})ollo

and

Nymphs,
flowers
;

(Louvre)
Pharsalus in

17.

maidens

holding
.......

relief

Thessaly
131

(Louvre)
18.

Cretan

Statue

(Museum,

Candia)
. .
.

.134
.

19.

Spartan "Apollo" Metope

Tombstone,
found of earliest
at

formerly
Tenea

in

the

Sabourofl'

Collection

(Berlin)
.

136

20.
21.

(Munich)
.

.140
. .

series,

from

Selinus

(Palermo)
. . .

143

xxiv

HAXDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
PAGE

FIG.

22. 23. 21.

Metope
"

of second
"'

from series,

Seliims in Boeotia

(Palermo) (Athens, (Athens,

1-16
. . .

Apollo

from

Orchomenus
Ptous

Katioual

Museum)

148

Apollo from

Mount

in Boeotia

National Ptous
.

Museum)
in Boeotia
.151
.

150

25.

from Apollo,showing Aeginetan influence,

Mount
.

(Athens,
26.

National with
.

Museum)
the
.

Coin

of

Athens,

Apollo
.

of

Delos
.

by
.

Tectaeus
.

and
.153

Angelion
27. Half of

pediment

in

rough

limestone, representing Typhon


160
....

(Athens, Acropolis Museum)


28.
29.

Draped Draped Draped

female female female

statue

(Athens, AcropolisMuseum) (Athens, Acroj)olis Museum)


of
.

166
. .

statue

168
. .

30.

statue,
.

primitive shape (Athens, Acroiwlis


.170
. .

Museum)
31. 32. Head Statue of

draped
man

female

statue

(Athens, AcropolisMuseum) by (?) Conbos


. .

173
.

of

carrying calf,dedicated
.
.

(Athens,
.176
.

AcropolisMuseum)
33. 34.

Stela Relief

of
on

Aristion,by
a

Aristocles throne from

(Athens,

National

Museum)

179
.

marble

Athens, representingHarmodius
.182
. . .

and 35.

(Broom Hall) Aristogiton


groi^) and of Harmodius and

Copy

after

Aristogiton,probably liy
184
....

Critius
36.

Nesiotes of

(Naples)

Co2)yafter
the

statue

Aristogiton, probablyby
a

Critius
.

and

Nesiotes
.

head

from

later statue

(Naples)
influence
.

186
.

37.

Draped

female

statue, showing Doric


.

(Athens, Acropolis
.188
. .

Museum)
88. 39. 40. 41. Head Bronze West of

Museum) Ephebus (Athens, Acrojiolis


from from
to

189
.
.

statuette

Ligourio,near

(]^"erlin) Epidaiirus
. . .

196
.

pediment

temple at Aegina (Munich)


grasp fallen
......

201
.

Figure reaching

-warrior, from

E.

])ediment at

Aegina (Munich)
42. 43. 44.

Dying
Bronze

warrior, from

corner

of E.

pediment

at

Aegina (Munich)

head, perhaps Aeginetan (Athens, AcropolisMu.seum)


of E.
.

Restoration

pediment
.

of
.

temple
.

of

Zeus
.

at

Olympia
.

(Olymjna)
45.

.219

Restoration

of

W.

pediment
.......

of

temple

of

Zeus

at

Olympia
219

(Olympia)
46.

Apollo, from Aged


seer,

centre

of W.

pediment
at

at

Olympia (Olympia)
.

224
. .

47.

from

E.

pediment

Olympia (Olympia)

226

XXVI

HAXDROOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
PAr.B

FIG.

77. 78.

Amazon,
Amazon

Capitoline type (Rome, Vatican)


Mattel

334
.

(Rome, Vatican)
near

335
....

79. Head
80. 81. 82. 83. 84.

from

Heraeum,
Paeonius

Argos (Athens,
....

National

Museum)

340 342

Victory by
Irene Hermes Head and and

(Olympia)

Plutus,after Cephisodotus (Municli)


infant

353

Dionysus, by

Praxiteles
.

(Olympia)

357
3.^j8

of Hermes,
of

by Praxiteles (Olympia)
after
....

Aphrodite

Cnidus,

Praxiteles

(Rome,

Vatican).

From 361 365

J. H. 85. 86.

S., PI. Ixxx.


Praxiteles Mantinean

Satyr,after
Relief
from

(Rome, Capitol)
basis ;
......

Apollo

and

Marsyas (Athens,
367

National
87. 88. 89. Amazon from

Museum)
at

pediment

Epidaurus (Athens,
(Rome, Vatican)

National

Museum)

373

Ganymede,
Heads from

after Leochares

375
National 379 388

pediment
After

at

Tegea by Scopas (Athens,


Antike

Museum).
90. 91.

Berlin

Denkmultrr, I.
....

35

(from east)

Portrait Slal)

of Mausolus

(BritishMuseum)
of

from

large

frieze
......

Mausoleum,

with

Amazons

(British
390

Jfuseum)
92.

Charioteer Tombstone Tombstone

from of

small

frieze of Mausoleum
.

(British Museum

391

93.
94. 95.

Hegeso (Athen.s,Ceramicus)

305 396

of Dexileos

(Athens, Ceramicus)
statue

Asclepius,from
(Athens,

Epidaurus, probably after


National and

by Thrasymedes
398

Museum)
from group

96.

Heads

of
sura

Anytus

Artemis,
National

by Damoplion

at

Lyco
401

(Athens,
group

Museum]
at

97.

Drapery

from

by Damophon
.....

Lycosura (Athens,

National 402

Museum)
98.
99.

Apoxyomenus,
Demeter,
Head Head Drum Niolte Niobid of from

after Cnidus

Lysippus (Rome, Vatican)


(Briti.sh I\Iuseuni)
Melos
.

407
415

100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105.


10*1.

Asclepius,from
S. of

(BritishMuseum)
National

417
418

from

Acropolis(Athens,
from

Museum)

of column and her

E]"hesus(BritishMuseum) daughter (Florence,Uffizi)

420
422 424 425

youngest

Chiaramonti

(Rome, Vatican)

Son
N.

of Niobe side of

(Florence,Uffizi)
Alexander and

Sarcophagus (Constantinople).
Reinach, Nicropole de Sidon, PI.

After
429

Hamdy-Bey

xxix.

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

xxvu

FIO.

PAOE

107. 108.

Head

of

Alexander

(British

Museum)
.

'

436
.

Hellenistic

relief;

Dionysus
......

visiting

dramatic

poet

(British
439

Museum)
109. 110.
111. 112.

Boy

and

goose, after Gaul

after

Boethus

(Louvre) (Rome, Vatican)


....

443

Antioch,

Eutychides

447
455

Dying
Dead

(Rome,
and

Capitol)
Giant,
after

Amazon Athens

Pergamene

group

on

Acropolis

at

(Naples)
.....

459

11-3.

Fighting

Persian,

after

Pergamene
.....

group

on

Acropolis

at

Athen 460

(Rome,
114.

Vatican)

Group
Group
Laocoon Farnese

from from

Pergamene Pergamene
Vatican)

Altar Altar

Zeus

and

Giants

(Berlin)
.

463

115. 116. 117.


118.

Athena,

Giants,

Earth

(Berlin)

465

(Rome,
Bull

471
.....

(Naples)

474
.....

Borghese

Warrior,
Belvedere of Versailles from from

by Agasias
(Rome,

(Louvre)

476

119. 120.
121. 122. 123.

Apollo
Artemis

Vatican)
....

479
481 483
....

(Louvre) (Louvre)

Aphrodite Victory
Head

Melos Samothrace

(Louvre)
known
as

486

from

Eleusis,
......

"Eubuleus"

(Athens,

National 488

ilnseum)
124.

Venus Farnese Marble

dei

Medici

(Florence, by

Uflizi)

500 503 After Bouillon III 504

125. 126.

Heracles,
Vase Vases with
H

Glycon

(Naples)
(Louvre).

relief, by Sosibius
PI.
8

Urnes,

127.
128.
129.

Venus Orestes Portrait Relief

Genetrix,
and of

probably

after

Arcesilaus

(Louvre)

506 511 514

Electra,
Julius of

Pasitelean

group

(Naples)

Caesar Antiuous

(British

Museum)
Villa Albanii

130.

portrait

(Rome,

518

NOTE

Since

have

not

accepted,

as

conclusively
Lemnian

proved,

Professor

Furtwangler's
I

identification

of

the

Athena

by

Phidias,

regret

the

more

that

have,

in my

desire

for

brevity,

made

slightly

incorrect

statement

of

the

evidence

on

which

the

identification

is

based.

On

page

265

stated

that

the

head

of

the

Athena

at

Dresden

"

is

made

in
a

separate

piece,

and

the

Bologna
socket

head

exactly
of the

fits

the

socket."

The

Bologna

head

fits

the

not

complete
the

Athena

at

Dresden,

but

of

headless

duplicate

of

same

statue,

also

at

Dresden.

My
Lemnian

scepticism

as

to

the

identification

of

the

statue

as

the

Athena

of

Phidias

has

met

with

some

criticism

both

here

and

in

Cxermany
carefully

but
;

if

it

leads
my

readers

to

weigh

the

evidence

for

more

themselves,

will my purpose

be

attained,

even

though

they

difter
may

from

me

in

their

conclusion.

INTKODUCTION

(a)

Sources

of

our

Knowledge

Literature
"

and

Monuments

The

sources

from

which

we

derive
fall be

our

knowledge
into in
two

of classes

Greek
:

sculpture
of have these been

and
is

of

its

history
and
to to

naturally sought
classical
in
extant

one

literary,

may
us

the
;

Avritings
the of
to

that

preserved
and
we

from found

times

other

is

monumental,
For An the
first

is
must

be

works the
and

sculpture.
museums.

go

to

libraries, for
of the
is

second
a

intelligent
of
their

combination

two,
a

correct

tion appreciafor And

varying study
still

relations,
of the

necessary

foundation

any each
nature

scientific class of is
the

history

of

Greek in itself
have

sculpture. by
to

further

complicated
with the

the

indirect
and

evidence

which
exact

we

deal,

the
formation inour

difficulty

of
we

ascertaining
possess
and

relation fact

between

the
it

the

ultimate

which

is

desire
1.

to

ascertain.

Literary

Sources}
"

-These

we

may

divide

into

{a) direct, and


sculpture
as

(b)

indirect.

(a)
Greece consist

Direct
may of

literary
be

sources

for three
or

the

history

of

in

divided

into

classes,

according

they

theoretical, historical,
collected
KiXnste bei aud in den
so

descriptive works.^
invaluable I
assume

These

are

Overbeck's
Griechen. do not Writers with refer
on

Schrifiquellen
this
in each to be in the

zur

GescJiichte
hands of

der

hildenden

the
See
tains con-

student
also H. the
^

throughout,
Stuart most

to

it

particular

instance. which

Jones's

Ancient passages,

Greek
a

Sculpture,
and

Selections, commentary. Robert,

important
Uehcr

translation

See

Urlichs,

griechische
Die

Kunstschriftsteller;
des Plinius to

Archaologisclie
der
hildenden

Mdrchen;

Furtwiingler,
etc. summary H. Stuart of

Quellen
in of the

fiir
the

der

Geschichte above

Kunste,
a

Jones,
results

preface

work

mentioned,

gives

clear

the

recent

investigation.
B

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

Theoretical works written

upon

the
most

principlesof sculpture were


artists distinguished been
of quity anti-

by

several
none can

of

the

; but

of these

have

preserved to

us, and

fore there-

of information. hardly rank as direct sources in this aspect ; for Yet they cannot be entirely ignored even recorded later compilers have opinions or statements, many

they

often
or a

without

acknowledgment,which

we

can

trace

with

more

less work

The first of them was to these lost treatises. certainty are told,taught the prowho, as we by Polyclitus, portions in a statue them of the body, and embodied to which, his treatise
was

as

to

also, he
a

gave

the

name

of

"

the

Canon."

well as a painter, also wrote as sculptor colouringand proportion. But in the Hellenistic age upon much such treatises became, as we moner. commight have expected, in literature, the In sculpture, of criticism as age School succeeded the age of production. The of Lysippus, with its academic tendency to the study of the methods and theoretical and works of earlier masters, would naturally require

Euphranor, who

300 B.C.) (c. appears fulfil the need. The have done to something to Pergamene of 200 School also supplied in Antigonus an B.C.) Carystus(c. These cited by Pliny as artist who wrote about art. two are authorities ; and very probably their works commonly served as

historical treatises

on

art ; and

Xenocrates

basis for the treatises of later writers. Duris of Samos

is the first writer whom we B.C.) historical treatise,conhave written know to a cerning definitely He was not art. a artists, pupil of Theophrastus,and of the personal anecdotes preserved to us through him many about artists have the been traced to Peripatetic philosophers.

(c.300

who Pasiteles, era,

lived
most

in

Kome

in

the

first in

century before
ancient the times
most

our an

and

is the

typicalexample
five volumes
; and

of

academic works
a

wrote sculptor,

about
most
was

famous

of art in the world

his work

probablyformed
valuable
to

critical and

historical treatise which

later of But

learned compilers. His contemporary, Varro, the most well as other matters. art wrote about as antiquaries, of all these
; for

authorities the

we

remains

facts which

if any, certain poss-ess little, they recorded we are dependent


in

almost his in

entirelyupon Pliny, who Natural Jlidorygivesan account


materials,
as

books

xxxiv.-xxxvi.

of

of the of

various

well

as

historyof sculpture is painting. His work

INTRODUCTION not

an

but treatise, original


earlier writers
"

various

most

professedlya compilationfrom of them those that have justbeen


to

enumerated.^
treatises Descriptive those
are

not

be

to ; in several cases just book either under a classify particular

referred

from rigidly distinguished it might be difficult to head exclusively. The lost


"

work

of

Polemo

(c. 200

B.C.)
"

also

consisted

of

of the description

dedications
as

that
a

filled all the for the


as

Greece, and
Heliodorus

probably served
wrote
a

mine

itself a store Anthology,

of information

of the description other


of writers

temples of compilersof the to works of sculpture. set offerings up in the


described the artistic

Acropolis
treasures

at

Athens, and

of
two

Delphi.

Some

the

information be

supplied by
in

these

authors

Description of

perhaps may Greece written by Pausanias, who


while
all the

also

contained

the

travelled in the shrines of Greece


treasures

reign of
The work

the

Emperor Hadrian,
almost Pausanias
is the

stillcontained of

intact their innumerable

of art. its is

guide-bookof

the

period;
to
us

and literary

critical merit
as

is but

small,yet its value

very

great
"

great
the
now

as

would
student
to

be that of of the

Murray'sor

Baedeker's

to guide-books

art

I and
the

collections

extant

all records future,were be destroyed and scattered, with


remnants

exceptionof a few damaged and isolated the even identity had to be rediscovered. taken proportion of Overbeck's SchriftqueUen
"

of which very

large up by quotations from Pausanias would alone suffice to show the importance of his work he and Pliny excluded, a scanty pamphlet indeed,were would contain all that remained of our authorities literary for the historyof sculpture. and Among others who wrote works directly intentionally of works of art must be mentioned Callistratus descriptive 160 B.C.) and the Philostrati (c. 237 and 250 A.D.), who wrote, (c. rhetorical exercises, of imaginarycollections of as descriptions of their work sculptureand painting; but from the nature they are of but little value, except to illustrate what we know
from
A other very
sources.

The

different

is

undoubtedly the Unfortunatelyhis references to works incidental. But he was brought up as


'

be assigned to Lucian, who must position most trustworthy art-critic of antiquity.


of art
a

mostly only and retained sculptor,


are

See

Pliny, bk. i.,list

of autliorities for bks. xxxiv.-xxxvi.

HANDBOOK

OF

GKEEK

SCULPTUllE

his

knowledge
to
us a

and

critical
a

literature offer the

sculptureas
safer clue

faculty,although he preferred || pursuit. His judgments therefore


the
true nature
we are as

far

to

of any

work

than
,,

compilations ignorant upon


notices other

which

usuallydependent.
are Quintilian,

also by useful,though they perhaps belong rather to the second class of literaryauthorities ; and Plutarch, Dio Chrysostom, and others,give us a good deal of information about sculptureand sculptors. of art occur and to works (b)Indirect references to sculptors

Incidental

such critics,

11

throughout classical
not

literature

from

Homer

down.

It would

these to profitable classify In the case of a show great variety. very Greeks, in whose life so important a placewas be the

which references,

naturally people like the taken by sculpture,


sure

poet, the

and historian, works of

the

were philosopher

to

speak frequentlyof
or

in

illustration

of art, whether for their own Conscious and matters. other rather Greek
to

sake direct
; but
not

criticism without
in
a a

belongs of
form
or

course

with familiarity
correct
more
"

the age of decadence should we literature, Greek

be

to position

either in detail
2. Monumental
some
"

in its

judgments as to generalaspects.
The
first division

sculpture
these
is in

Sources.

of

respects intermediate
the which inscriptions valuable
were

between
to

literature and works of

monuments

belong
are

The sculpture.^

most

of

these

the
in any
rare

artists'

which, signatures,
inscribed
statue

ever, howthe

almost

always
upon
are

earlier times

upon

separate basis, not


therefore work and the
cases

part of the
in which
we

itself; and the actual list of useful


we

very

possess

the

artists' for

names

signaturepreserved together. But the from which derive is we inscriptions


that which
we

comparison with
for the for the most

derive

from

books
our

; and
era

find that
two
a

fifth and

fourth

centuries

before
or

the

though in earlier part coincide,


of the

later times
we

large number
with

sculptors whose
unknown
art
are

names

find

in

are inscriptions

otherwise works
or

to
commoner

us.
"

Other

connected

of

inscriptions such as especially


or

record
^

the purpose
have and The to been later

circumstances
by

of the dedication

erection

These

collected
more

torumque,
Bildkauer.
as

and

completely by
of this last their book

Hirschfeld, Tituli Statuariorum SadiiLoewy, Inschriften griechisckei


sliould be consulteil cannot for be mation infor-

introducLion

these

and inscriiitions

character, whicli

treated

here.

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

notice briefly
were

some

of the

more

common

methods

scattered

and

destroyed.

Pausanias left in Ever

indication, by mentioning the gaps


of depredations Roman

they ah-eady gives one placesby the many


since the for sack
of
to statues

by which

Emperors.
been but

Corinth, in
decorate
it
was

146

the

had B.C., Greece of Rome, buildings before this

ransacked such
were

its riches

that

long

difference ; at the alike and Greece The

make appreciable any process could foundation of Constantinople, again, Rome

were

plundered
a

to

decorate

the

new

capital.
and their this is

of the gatheringtogether

finest
to

in Rome masterpieces

Constantinople was
destruction
has

danger
be

their

existence, but
credit
the

still to

explained. The
invaders
; but

of

commonly given to barbarian of the degenerate natives was


more

ignorant greed for even probably responsible

wanton
or

Greece and
art

whether in the scattered shrines of destruction, of civilisation. When bronze in the great centres had become found
in
more

marble that

precious in
the
means

themselves of

than

the

had

them

its perpetuating

sealed. the fate of sculpturewas Bronze, not ideals, melted to speak of more metals, was ruthlessly down; precious the burnt to produce mortar marble Avas and even Ijme-kilns noblest
"

upon

every

classical site record Under how these


most

the

fate of the statues

that

once

peopled
but how

it.
not

circumstances of

what

we

have

to

explain is

any

survived.

and ground and visible, circumstance exceptional before use new religious

"

sculpture were destroyed, Some few have always remained above their preservation have owed to some probably to their dedication to some
the of sanctity the old had failed
to

works

protect them
decoration

thus the Parthenon

long preserved its sculptural


afterwards fate.
as a

mosque; too, that many their existence bronze


statue

by serving first as a church, and have had a similar and other buildings
statues
as now

It appears,

venerated
a

as

Christian

saints

began
owe

deities of

different

the religion.So, again,


is said
to

of Marcus
a

Aurelius

in Rome

its

to preservation to

fortunate Christian this


are

mistake, having been


saint and
emperor been

supposed
statues

represent the
such
cases as museums or or

Constantine. all the

But

Almost exceptional.
at
some

that fillour

have
set

time

buried, whether
the Venus of

by

accident

of

purpose, been

and

brought to lightagain either


Thus
a

by chance
Melos

by systematic excavation.
to

is said

have

found

in

subterranean

grotto

INTRODUCTION

where
to
save

she must
her
were

have

been

hidden

by
For

some

ancient
most

worshipper buildings
to

from

destruction.

the
the

part, however,
of the
us

statues

buried
once

by
had

chance stood

amidst
; it

ruins

in Avhich the
extent

they
to

is difficult for
as

realise soil of

which

this took

so place,

to

fill the

Italy with statues and other works of art. The burial of antiquities, by gradual neglectas well as by violent doubtedly destruction, is always a puzzle to the excavator, but it unis soil of every ancient site now took place. The feet higher than in earlytimes ; and in the accumulated many
Greece and debris the valuable
This
as

well

as

the useless has


a

often been

buried. Delta of

in fact appears most clearly Egypt, where every old inhabited

dead

flat like the

site is marked

varying
which
it

in
was

height according to the length of occupied. Sometimes, too, the


treasures
once

the
sea

by a mound periodduring
or

rivers

have

yielded up
the Tiber

cast

into

their beds.

In

particular,

some magnificentbronzes, and it given up lately is stiljbelieved to contain not only the golden candlestick of and Roman of Greek masterpieces Jerusalem, but also many sculpture.

"has

So
statues

far
came

we

have
to

been

concerned
or

with

the

way

in
how

which

be

lost

to

be

and preserved, found.


so

reached

the

places in
to

subsequent
our

their

they were discoveryis not of


If the rule
now are antiquities

which

much

they history importance to


Their
in

present purpose.
where
in

enforced
to

almost

all
had

countries
been
more

Greek
earlier

be

discovered
have been

observed
to

times, there would

little

is now either exportation of antiquities allowed or only within strict limits and in entirely prohibited, that all statues the case of articles of secondary importance,^ so either remain in the placewhere they were discovered recently say.

The

at farthest, to the central found, or have been carried,

museum

of the

country ; and
These

in all

cases

it is easy

to

ascertain

their

provenance.

regulations are, however, of comparatively recent growth ; and the sculpturewhich we have to study is be to found, not only in Greece and Italy,but scattered of Europe. throughoutthe museums Stuart's di'awings of Until the end of the last century, when that remained in the sculpture Attic monuments were published,
^

lu
more

the

case

of

sculpturethis

law

cau

far

diflBcult to

prevent the clandestine

usually be export of

enforced. smaller

obviously antiquities.

It

is

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

Greece

itself was

but that

little known
any

; and

it

was

not

until the

present century
came

considerable Greece. works of

series Before

of this

monuments

exported from great majorityof the extant


to

be

period
been

the

had sculpture

found

upon

Italian

for the soil,

most

part under
to

circumstances

which

yieldedbut little external Many of them are either


were

evidence
Avorks

help
to

their identification.
as

of

inferior interest,such

turned

out

in

great numbers

demand, or copies of works, well known to recognise.Even times, but difficult for us now
of originals in ancient
up
; and

satisfya commercial perhaps in ancient


such
as are

Greek

times

workmanship had probably been transported from the placewhere set they were originally
almost all
to
cases we are

thus
in any

in

reduced

to

internal such

evidence

attempt

however identification, of ancient


a

In most them. identify rise beyond cannot ingenious,


the
exact

cases

unless probable conjectvire,

region descriptionof an
on reproduction

the

writer,or
or us

the close resemblance

of the
us was

coin

other small work

have

before

enables of ai-t, the original from which it


with

to

be

sure

that

we

derived. Greek soil.


The
exact to

It is otherwise notices in ancient

the works

found

upon

writers,and, above
made
which
we

the completeand all,


it in possible
have

of Pausanias, have description works identifyAvith certainty


excavator
on

many

cases

been
to

found have

by
stood

the
in

the

spot Avhere
is most
at

knoAv

them
case

ancient that the

times.
a

This

often the

Avith the and

adorned
statues

temple,as
stood

Olympia,Athens,
it, like the

group like the Hermes but dedications, Damophon Lycosura ; single ha\^e been identified in the same of Praxiteles, way, and some
at

that

Avithin

sculpture Aegina ; or made by

Avith their bases statues, preserved


are

like the

identified

by

the

yet

more

Victory of Paeonius, evidence of an satisfactory


vicissitudes
;

inscription.
The
statues

foTuid in

have undergone many Italy


one

they have
them
museums

passed from
found
a

collection to

another,until many

of

have

museum. permanent home in some possess also great series of Avorks which are

Several

paramount
the British

in the

particular period the Elgin marbles from Athens, the Phigalian jjossesses the sculptures from Ephesus,and from the Mausoleum frieze, ; Berlin the sculpture Munich has the Aegina pediments, and from the great altar at Pergamus ; Naples shoAvs an uiuiAalled
a

study

of

or

school.

Thus

Museum

INTRODUCTION

collection of bronzes from

Pompeii and Hercnlancum; and Athens, tion. Olympia,and Delphi contain the rich productsof recent excavamaterial for our Site after site is still yielding new study,
adds a new fication identithe progress of artistic criticism sometimes known. But the great series which what is already among

and

are

alreadyin
which

our

museums

must

upon

the

history of Greek
the
course

We

have
the

followed
vast

always form the foundation is based. sculpture of events some by which


once

portionof
shrines
museums

wealth of statuary, which

filled all the

of ancient of modern

Greece, has
We

come are

to

be

Europe. the for rightlyappreciating of sculpture in Greece history


bronze it is

thus in of

preserved in the better position a


Avorks
to

relation
;

extant

the
a

it is

for instance, that clear, of the material work


to

work

is,from

the intrinsic value


than likely have
a

of which the

composed, far
for the

less

marble

survive

vicissitudes which

all alike

which

we

very find in all modern there


was a

undergone. Thus we are prepared in marble of preponderance sculpture great


museums,

and

shall not

be

led to
over

infer that
bronze

similar

preponderance of

marble

in ancient
we

Greece.

to possessedall the ancient works that have come exactlyin the state in which they first emerged from the light at once proceed to their classification ; ground, we could now but We have another unfortunately this is not the case.

If

process

to recent

reckon

with
the

that of restoration. first,


first

Until
upon which

within
the

quite

years,
any

thing to

be

done,

covery dis-

of considerable it
over

to to

portion of an ancient statue was enough to be worth preservingat all, excellent f rom restorer. Many sculptors,
have many

seemed
to

hand

Michael But

Angelo

Thorwaldsen,
in

undertaken
cases

this

work.

though
from is in
content
were

may the point of view

the result

be

of
art

of the student disastrous.

of

high artistic value, historythe process


the
restorer

all

cases

equally

Had

been

with

the missing parts, restoring the the


was

however

erroneous

impression produced on would still have been possiblefor from what what was new carefully latter only for his purposes. But
did
not

the

untrained student
to

observer, it

distinguish
to
use

old, and

the

restoration

content

itself with

almost
to

all

cases

worked uniform

over

this ; the modern the whole siirface of the appearance

unfortunately sculptorhas in
old marble his
own

make

it

in

style and

with

10

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

entirelydestroyedthe surface It is to the lasting of the original.^ glory of Canova modelling that he probably saved the Elgin marbles from a fate like this, them himself,but also proby not only refusing to restore testing works and this of such excellent restoration againstany ; work that ancient has no so gradually prevailed, example
and additions, thus has would
now even

often

be restored the

cast, or

in any in original

first-rate

museum.

To

restore

without plaster, and often


must

cutting away

its

is of fractures, is sometimes any how work


much

course

harmless The

adopted.
discovered of the
statue

student the

useful,and this plan then, in dealingwith


allow then, if possible,

before

present century, first discover


even

is ancient ; and
to

for the surface been

working

which

that ancient

portionhas
scientific

before subjected,

he

proceedsto quote
we

it for any

purpose.

Assuming
extant

this to be

done,
this

must

next

works

accordingto

their

relation of view

proceed to classify the history of to


we

ancient works

sculpture. From of sculptureinto


be

point

may

divide

all

three classes"

(1) originals, (2) copies,


which
were

(3)imitations. (1) Originalsmay


made

defined

as

works

actually

of the by the hand or under they are to be assigned. But in this very sculptorto whom be ignored. must not definition is implied a distinction which work It is clear that we at its can only judge of a sculptor's in and for itself of art, made best from an independent work alone is it possibleto such statue in his studio ; from a and in such alone the excellence of his technique, appreciate of his idea and the authentic the direct expression see can we product of his genius. Works like these are of the rarest, as is the best of Praxiteles Hermes The we might expect. the immediate direction

example
the hand

which of
one

we

possess

of

the

direct from statue original of antiquity. It is great masters of


an

possiblethat
museums,

there
no

but in word
of of

in some of our be other instances may is the evidence other case so convincing ; needed have

and

warning is
sort

againstmany
made
with

rash
more

tions identificaor

this

that

been

less

Thorwaldseu,
restored of not

in the to

case

of

the them

Aegiua marbles,
uniform with

worked

over

the

surface

of

the

portions

make
"

tlie ancient

parts,

even

in the

appearance of course

equallyconfusing to proceeding equallyreprehensible.


corrosion, etc.
a

the student, though

INTRODUCTION

11

probability.There
having any have yet sculptor,
without
so

are,

however, many

other

works

which,

personalconnection with a known claim to be called original. Foremost a less other more architectural sculptures, or or these are among works decorative designed upon so large a scale that it was them entirely clearlyimpossiblefor the sculptor to execute the heads is hand : a good instance with his own supplied by A lea at Tegea, which, as we are the temple of Athena from the of Scopas ; and the sculpturesfrom the work told, was
direct

Parthenon, which
under the evidence

were

at

least

part of the works

executed
no

have of Phidias, although we supervision that he was responsibleeven personally

direct

for which when

their
tainly, cer-

design.
or

Then almost

again

we

possess

numerous

works
the time

were certainly,

produced at

the

were or originated styleand type they represent were in art, although the individual sculptorwho made

prevalent
them
note

may

be

unknown

to

us, and

his
as

contemporaries. originals ; they were


time thus

even may works Such

have
are

been

of

no

among

the

and

evidence
the far
same

actuallymade must to which we assign them in any classification ; in many trustworthy they aflford us more ways of well-known works later of than to style as copies how time they show school or period. At the same us
of the
masters
even

to be regarded certainly by the school,and at

the

excellence

had among Attic

penetrated among
the
artisans and

their craftsmen handi-

pupils and examples


any

followers,and
of their of this
extant

time.

The

tomb-stones
reason

afford suppose

good
that

kind.

We

have
were

no

to

of

the

specimens
us a

executed

by sculptorsof

eminence, yet they afford

of the art efficiency least free from at made ; and in them we are they were any such as a later copy of styleor subject danger of anachronism always have introduced into an earlier design. may spection be used with the greatest circum(2) Copiesmust evidently In dealing with for the history of art. evidence as
them
we
"

very clear notion of the general at the time when of sculpturein Athens

have
the

two

distinct

elements

to

discriminate

and

to

estimate

work

of the

copyist.
that

And

it is not introduced
use

has been

artist and the work of original have eliminated until we carefully that we are by the later copyist, is left
as

the

all
in
a

to make position the sculptorto

of what

evidence

for the

art

of

whom

is to be the original

assigned.

This

fact

12

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrXURE

the great be insisted on, because copies form in almost all European museums the statues preserved
must

"

majority of especially

those of

Italy;
recent

upon

them artists

of the best in
more

known

Greece

and

years elsewhere

the
has

knowledge of the works of most of antiquity is based ; and although of works in discovery many original
our

greatlyaltered

the

methods

and

for the results of criticism, especially

shall we periods, probably always have to supplement from copies the evidence which may be acquiredfrom more trustworthysources. Copies
may vary

earlier

very
are

in greatly

their distance from


a

from

the

from original

which the made


true

perhaps produced in replica, late Roman to a master's studio by his own pupils, copy, of which commercial demand had the to meet a public no of The two extremes knowledge or appreciation art. they
derived
;
"

the especially
infinite

former

"

are

far

less

common

than

the

almost
in

varietyof

intermediate
were some

examples.
amateurs

And

even

later

times from
we

there doubtless

who

knew

good work
good
than
same

bad, and encouragedfaithful and intelligent copying. But


may

take

it

as

generalrule
himself

that

Greek
to

artist of

period,even cared original,


for accuracy he

if he
more

set

for the

of detail ; even he always allowed conditions,


"

deliberately copy an and style of the whole spirit if he reproduced it under the
himself
rather
"

earlier

certain amount
the

of freedom
statue.

reproduced the type


conditions
to
were or

than

individual

And
from
"

if the

changed
from

if he transferred the round

bronze

marble,
had
a

in sculpture

the type to relief

as given field, upon a coin,to which he the type to suit its new recast must adapt it then he entirely material or surroundings such a work as ; he produced rather more
"

if he still,

artist would original for him, than prescribed the

have
a

made, with
in the

the

new

conditions
sense

copy,

narrower

of the

word, of the
the such from
case

extant

and

completed

work.

We

must

then, in

make of any copy of good Greek allowance for period, the copyistis likely have introduced modifications to as
or

artistic

other considerations
in which

; above

all,we
to

must

never

relyupon
his

it for accessories
we

he is

likely
him

have

asserted

freedom, though
us some

may

often of

for j)reserved scidptor. With Koman


the

touches

credit for having give the inspiration of the original

later and the


case

more

mechanical

copiesproduced
Those who

for the made

market

is

different. entirely

14

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

And

the Greeks

were

aware fully

of the

of necessity
work

more cases

or

less conventional

treatment

for decorative often be

; in such

too

great
of the

truth

to nature

would
as

as painful,

in the instance

giantswho
at

served

architectural

supports in the temple

of Zeus

reliefs with
seems

in the case of Girgenti(Acragas) especially ; and of accessories the archaistic treatment dancingfigures,
to

by
would

its stiffness
seem

bind

them

to

the
on,

ground
the

which

else

they
ness

ready to

leave.^ forms
case

Later
seems

mere

quaint-

of conventional
own

archaic

to have
new-

been Attic

sought
reliefs
-

after for its

sake, as in the
were

of the

and statues even mostly decorative); this principle, made sometimes were though most of the upon apparent instances are probablyrather to be regarded as copies of some In most imitative works. archaic originalthan as examples of these imitative archaistic statues or reliefs there is much not danger of deception to the trained eye; the artist almost advanced his knowledge of alwaysbetrays
art

(which,however,

the

resources

of

more

portions of his work, and he exaggerates such as the poise what he imagines to be archaic characteristics, the stilfzigzag folds of drapery, of the figures on turning tip-toe,
in
some

up

at

the

ends

in

an

unnatural In
some

manner,
cases

and

the conventional
so

treatment

of the hair. is

he has been

successful
or

that

doubt

possiblewhether

the work
to
see

is archaistic

truly
the

archaic ; but

it is of
a

usually easy
conventional
an

the difference between imitative frigidly do and


to to

production
the honest the

and

art, and
with
stift'
a

of striving
resources

earlysculptorto
at

his utmost
fill the
nature

types and
he has

his
a

command,
greater

forms
nearer

inherited
to

with

truth

and

approach

life. and
a

There

is another

diflferentclass of imitative
are

sculptures;
the
name

of this the best known


a Greek Pasiteles,^

examples

associated with

of

artist who

lived in Eome

B.C.

This and

artist and imitate

his scholars set the

in the first century themselves to deliberately result of

study
of the this

those style of early works, especially of the fifth century ; and


as a

athletic schools

not study they produced statues which, in some cases, were but generally copiesof any individual works of those schools, reproduced the styleand subjectsof the earlier period. Such this can a tendency as only be found in an age of decadence,
^

See Brunn,
^

Dns

teldonische

I'rmcip in
^

der

Kunst. gricchischen

See

below, " 77.

See below, " 79.

INTRODUCTION

15

since
uwn

in

an

impliesthe artist's dissatisfaction with the art of his that the only hope of improvement is day, and his feeling artificialreturn to a long-past stage of development. We
it
see we

may which

the

influence

of

this
to

in feeling
class
^ as

many

other

works,

should

hardly
Venus

care

instance, in the
the artist age

of

Melos

but

purely imitative ; for when, as in that case,


ideals of
or an

has

rather

earlier of

than

the from sought inspiration merely tried to imitate its types the

its details and


more

technical

execution,
character.

result

is

of

nobler

independent
from

his

Every sculptormust, such it is only when predecessors ;


rather than with than
to

of course, their

learn

study occupies

itself w'ith their mannerisms


defects

rather

which

leads

their style, ness that it betrays the weaktheir excellences, imitative and archaistic productions.

(h) Materials
The materials used

and

Processes the

^ of Greek Sculpture

by
"

Greeks

for

sculpture may
or

be

ilivided into four classes

(1)
whole

Wood

{^vXov) ;
portionsAvere
covered with

this

was

often
in

inlaid

gilded,and

sometimes
was

inserted

gold and

the or {aKpcXiOoi) ivory (xpvtrekecfjdvTLva). marble

(2) Stone or Marble {XlOos). (3) Meial,most frequentlybronze


2;oldwere
sometimes used.

(xaA/"os) ; but

silver and

such as and other artificialmaterials, (4) Terra-cotta (-Trrikiva), etc.) or (XiOtva x^'^'^j glazedware porcelain of made will first consider the use We by Greek sculptors each of these
and materials,

the

technical
are

employed
which

in

working

them

; there

which he processes also two other questions


"

find here their most of application


use

natural colour

(5) The (6) The

place to sculpture.
finished models.

of

pointingfrom
a

(1)
most

JVood.

"

In

primitive stage
from the which

of
ease

art

wood which

seems

the
can

obvious and

material,both
the

with

it

be

obtained the
1 2

with facility

it is Avorked.

ately Unfortunpreserve
so

climate

of

Greece

is

not

such

as

to

See

below, " 70.


secticMi T
am

'niroughout this

indebted

to

Bliimner, Technologicuna

Tar-

viinologie.

16

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

a perishable in preserved

material the

until

the

p^^esent time,^
from

as

it has and
we

been
are

earlywooden

statues

Egypt ;

gather our information as to Greek sculpture in wood either from from the traces left by or notices, literary the influence of wood-carving in more sculpture surviving upon
durable The substances.
extent to

therefore

left to

which

wood the
meet

was numerous

used

as

material

for

sculpture is
wooden But learn

testified which the


mere

by
we

of early descriptions and other


was

statues

in Pausanias that the

writers.^

beyond
very

fact this

material

used,
such

we

little from
we

notice. literary
of
a

Even
can

as descriptions

possess

few

of

them

only
were

meagre terprete be in-

in the
cypress,

of light

extant

monuments.

Ebony, cedar, and


wood,^
with
a

oak, olive,and
of the

other

kinds

of

used

to

make
to

statues

gods,often

doubtless

appropriateness
was

the

particular deity; in

fact, to

shape
the

statue

but

a as

of the stage where step in advance the symbol of the deity. The and notion
in

tree

itself sei'ved

that

wood

was

the material

most

found readily

worked
^

wooden
cannot

be
no

there is

early times is exemplifiedby the tale of the horse at Troy ; though this imaginary structure taken seriouslyas an exception to the rule that in Homer.^ mention of sculpture
attribution
^

Pausanias' time
to

of
us

wooden little
more

statues

extant

in

his

Daedalus

tells

than
we

that
come

of the conventional

archaic type. have

AVhen

they were to Dipoenus


doubt also

and

his legendary pupils, but Scyllis,


we artists, more

beyond

They are a group ebony, ivory; in cedar, in cedar and their pupils worked and gold,and in famous ivory and gold. Another specimen of early decorative in wood, the chest of Cypselus, was in cedar, with carved art insertions in gold and ivory, and its material seems to imply a
said
to

historical

definite information.
with

have

made

in

portions in

Pieces

of

wood,
work

structural of wooden
seems

or

decorative, have
a

been

preservedin exceptional
Pausanias, but
not

cases
^

; but no The word

sculpture.
to
mean

^6apov 1",
2.

wooden

statue

in

always

in other
^ *

writers. viii.

Pans.

i.e. made dovpareos, etc.


.

of

plauks and

beams,

like

ship ;

of.

dopxj vrjCov, doipara

irvpywv,
"^ "^

Ree " 1 1

'llie very

name

of

Daedalus

probably impliescunning

in

decorative

work, wood-

inlaying. especially

INTRODUCTION
"

17

connection
inference

with these from


these

Daedalid

"

artists.^

It

seems

an

obvious

sculpturein wood developed in technique, accordingto which the ([uite earlytimes into a new which wood Avhollyor supplied the basis of the form was concealed by more especially preciousmaterials by partially which find in the fifth century recognised and ivory, we i:;old It was materials for a great temple statue. the most as fitting and material probably a desire to imitate the variety of texture in wood which led to derived from inlaying work originally of a work, especially material for portions insertions of superior the face,hands, and feet. In the nude parts of female figures, of marble made it peculiarly this case the colour and texture Acrolithic statues was usually appropriate. The rest of such of wood ; but w^e also find examples, such as the later made
facts that
"

"

"

Selinus

metopes, in which
nature

pieces of marble
as

are

inserted

in

relief of inferior stone. The such


as

of
us

our

evidence much
As

to

sculpturein
about
we are

wood

is not

to

give

information
to

the

techniqueor
to applicable

I"rocesses that were from the character

used. of the

these
and

left to inferences
tools
we

material of wood

the

and from it, in


with
some more

such influence durable


;
"

techniqueas
Such

may
must

materials.

evidence conventional

preserved be used

see

caution
"

for

example, the
to whatever

application

(jf the word

wooden
one

lead might easily


to

to

lifeless in art, attribute the style of many earlyworks At the


same

is stiff and

the influence of wood the


ease

technique.
wood

time, it is clear

that

with

which

direction
tlat

of the

grainmight
such
same as we

be made in the to split may well tend to produce a series of


see, for

surfaces parallel The

example,in
often been

the

Spartan

tomb-reliefs.^

influence

has

traced in the

,s(|uare shape which we this opinion,though

uwing
and would

to

the

notion
that
to
a

therefore tend
to

commonly find in archaic statues ; but partly true, has gained undue support that a beam of wood is naturally square, made statue of such beam out a primitive
also.
tree
43.

be

square

The

Greeks
was

had

no

such

notion ; ^
1 2 ^

them

the

round
S.

truidc

the

simplest

So H.
See Cf.

Stuart Jones, /. B.
22

1894,

" (/3). Sk cttI ttjs'Acri'as o'lKlav Plutarch, Apoplilh. Lac. Agesilaus,9eaa6.(j.evos el avrols doKoTs, TcrpayiivoLS d!po(pwpL"vr]v KeKT'rj/xevov nrpdyuva Trap' rjpwTTjae tov el Terpdyuva rjv (pverai ^v\a. (pafievov 5^ ov, aWa (TrpoyyvXa, tL odv, elivev, (TTpoyyvXa ereXelTe ; See also /. //. S. 1890, p. 133.
C

18

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE statue

wooden Samos In
as we

form, and

we

see

in

round

like that

from

(Fig.11) its simplestmodification. the case of the great gold and ivorystatues, which were, have a development from sculpturein seen, originally
the

were plicated. technique and construction extremely comin small the whole in made was Probably, examples, in primitive times, and solid wood, as merely plated on the surface with ivoryand gold. But in colossal works such a process was impracticable.In the first place a strong and complete

wood,

skeleton be

of wooden

or

metal
so as

bars
to

was

necessary
statue

] and

it had it

to
was

constructed carefully either by the required, attributes they carried. framework which these of wood the
to

give support
of the
must

wherever itself
been
or

members

by

the
a

Over

these the

have

fixed

support

plates of
In order
to

gold

and
or

ivory
bend

formed

visible surface.

mould

plates into the requisite shape,a full-size model in clay and have indications that such or we was jolaster necessary, models existed : at Olympia, the workshop of Phidias was the size as the cella of the temple in which his statue of same at Megara, where Zeus was the outbreak of to be erected ; and the Peloponnesian war from prevented Theocosmus finishing his gold and but of all the head made was Zeus, ivory statue of clay and plaster doubtless the very model prepared by the artist to work And behind the same from. temple lay the
"

half-finished wooden
carry the

framework

which

had

been

intended

to

gold and ivoryplates.


or

(2)Stone
material
so common

Marhle

(XlOos). This
"

is

by

far it

the

commonest
not

in

all modern
as

museums,

though

probably Avas

bronze

in ancient

times, at least for works

of the

highest order.

comparativelyindestructible character of marble, and its want of attraction to the plundererin search of portable spoil, has led to its preservationin many cases Avhere all other materials have disappeared ; though marble
also has afforded abundant

But

the

plunder to
lime-kilns found

local upon But in

as settlers,

is

attested

by

the

numerous

every

ancient

site where
vast
us

to be found. was a sculpture spiteof this, has survived,and it gives of sculpture in marble quantity most

the

full and material

varied

information.
in Greece.

For It

marble
was

was

the essentially

of the greatest some finished with their own

by for the masterpieces which they sculptors hands ; and it also served the copyist

of all work

used

INTRODUCTION

19

to
were

reproduce

not

only
Such

marble
in

works, but

others

too

which
in

executed originally
and in

bronze, in gold and

ivory,or

other materials.
value

the

both in their artistic copiesvary greatly which with they render either the fidelity work original estimate
or

generalcharacter
but

of the

its technical

details ;

it

is

often

possible to

of them and to make use exactly, In earlytimes various kinds of soft stone, were to freely used in sculpture. carve, remembered
were

qualities pretty accordingly.


which
were

these

But

it

must

easy be

that

these

coarse

and

often with the


a same was

unsightlymaterials
coat

if not always,covered usually,


was

of

paint.
any

Thus

their texture

obscured, and
finish of the that

at

time

delicate

modelling or
first any and soft
;

high

surface be

superfluous. At
sidered concoarse

local material suitable for


limestone
at

could

sculpture. Thus was freely used


the

was easilyworked in Cyprus the local

at

Naucratis, often

baster ala-

and

Athens,

local Piraeus

stone, in the primitive

sculptures. This was the used also extensively was


inferior

which At^os ttw/oivos of the ancients, and for architecture. Many coarse also used
in

local marbles
to

were

earlytimes, and
as

tinued con-

be

used

well as by local sculptors


some

builders.

But

when Greece

once

the been

of superiority

of the
came

had

these recognised, any

to

marbles of exquisite used be exclusively

for all works Almost marble


came even

that had
from

from
not to

the

only to
the
more

to artistic excellence.^ pretension the the beginning of sculpture in Greece and Paros two neighbouring islands of Naxos but to be exported be used by local sculptors,

distant

parts of Greece.
found in
as places

Thus
remote

statues

in

Naxian and with have Naxian


one

marble another

have
as

been

from

Naxos that
^

Samos, Boeotia, and

Actium, and
statues.

too

differences of been

stylesuch

as

to

show

that the marble

must

exported in blocks, not


is

in finished

This

grain than Parian, but it usuallyof coarser the two, since there arc to is not distinguish always possible ^ of finer in Naxos in Paros, and marble of coarser ; quarries from the is always easy to distinguish but this island marble
marble subject see Lepsius, Griechische Marmorstudien. Not so Sauer, Mittheil. Ath. 1892, p. 37 ; but cf. Lepsius, op. ciL, Nos. 58, marble Besides, the argiiments applied by Sauer to Naxian 250, 373-374, etc. might just as well apply to Parian. ^ these two Prof. Lepsius is almost always very cautious about distinguishing
^
2

For

this whole

marbles, and

is

usuallycontent

with

the term

"

Inselmarmor

"

to include

both.

20

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

marbles fine-grained Pentelicus.

of the

Greek the

mainland,
marble
to

such

as

that

of

In later times the

Naxian continued

fell into
be

parative com-

disuse,but

Parian

as recognised

that of rather marble, especially sculptor's from finer the deep quarries on Mount comes because, it is said, it had Marpessa ; this was called lychnites, to be worked by artificial light. The quarries may still be of them was worked but quite recently, actually seen, and one

pre-eminentlythe grain,which

for

some

reason

without

success. was

In for

Athens

the

bluish

local
;

marble but from until marble

from

Hymettus
all finer The

used
was

almost Paros. the


was

work

sculpturein earlytimes executed in imported marble


Pentelicus time for
were

of Mt. quarries

not

worked Pentelic

fifth century ; but from that not only used in Athens

onward all

but also freely architecture, exported,and


as

sculpture and recognised generally

Attic artist like Praxiteles an only to Parian ; but even The Pentelic marble is preferredParian for his Hermes. and contains a good deal of iron, comparativelyfine-grained, is due the rich golden tint that it takes with the to which weather. The Pentelic still worked, though quarries are but white blocks. Another they now rarelyyield perfectly marble much used in the Peloponnese comes from the quarries of

second

Doliana,

near

Tegea ; ^

it resembles

grayishtingeand less pleasingtexture. is found in Thessaly. white and fine-grained,


to

Pentelic,but is of a Another marble, very


It would
be

easy

add

to

this enumeration others


were

of the marbles
more

most

commonly used;
Roman

but

few

of

than

local

In celebrity.

times, the marble of Luna, the modern Carrara, was extensively Greek artists used, especially by working in Italy ; its dull
white
to

colour and

too

close texture

form

an

unpleasantcontrast
such
as

the transparent beauty of Greek Pentelic. of the Indeed, one modern further

marbles

Parian

and

disadvantagesunder
; and

which
it must

sculpturelabours
be
in

is this inferior marble that


never an

remembered Greek marble

ancient

even sculptor,

when

working
until he if it did
intense

had
not

treated

its surface it
a

regarded his statue as finished with some which, preparation


colour,at
unable
at

give

tint

of

least
a

modified

the
sun,

whiteness eyes and

under which, especially makes


them
to

southern

dazzles the
'

delicacies appreciate
for tlie

Used, e.g., for tlie statues

by Damophon

and Lycosiira,

Pliigalian

frieze.

22

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

one

statue

we

see

the

drill-holes of
a

by

which
to

rod the
see

was

fixed

down vertically
eye

the

front
same

statue

guide
statue
we

sculptor's
how
out
as

and

hand.

In the

unfinished of the block


;

the
at

is figure

cut gradually

out

merely roughed
tools
are

finer processes and more exact final surface is approached. Thus the whole

while first,

used

the
over

is worked figure
to
come

again and again until


on

there is but littleleft

off.

Then,
and

this last layer above the final


are

the outlines of muscles surface, shallow

grooves ; thus the ai^tist has their guidance in finishing the modelling of the final surface. The marks
a

other details

drawn

in broad

of

working

on

statues, unfinished
of the tools used

or

finished,
the G-reek

give us

pretty complete

notion

by

used sculptor. For the rougher work the tool most was a sharp chipping instrument, either a punch used with a mallet Then the round chisel was or a pointed hammer. used, both in working away the surface where there was stilla good deal and in drawing the shallow to remove, that guided grooves the the

modelling. The claw parts approaching the


^

chisel

was

also

favourite

tool for

chisel

does

not

seem

to

final surface ; the square flat or been much have used except in
various

Other instruments, such as finishing. finishing of files, could hardly be dispensed with ; and doubtless used for smoothing and polishing.
statues

kinds
was

sand Some in

too

archaic

show

distinct traces

of the

use

of the

saw

the cutting

deep vertical folds of drapery ; in later times the drill was used both for these and for the hair. The tion invenextensively of the drill is attributed by Pausanias to Callimachus, who lived in the latter part of the fifth century ; this is clearly drill marks for example, in the Aegina impossible, being visible, ^ but Callimachus, who marbles ; noted for the extreme was and skill of his work, probably either improved the delicacy instrument used it far more or extensivelythan had before been usual in sculpture, for deep incision or undercutting. especially The invention of sculpturein marble is attributed by Pliny in one passage to the Chian family of Melas and his Ci'etan Daedalid the to descendants, in another artists, rival and two Dipoenus and Scyllis. He is evidently repeating inconsistent traditions, different sources;^ derived from two
"
"

"

"

'

For

ail

illustratiou
-

of these

tools, see

J. II. S. art. cit. p.

137.

Biuiiii,Geschichte
"

d. gr. KiiJistler, i. 253. See " 19.

INTRODUCTION

23

and
them of
"

there
any

is
more

no

reason

why
mean

we

should than
more

attribute the other. that

to

either of stories

historical value
"

to

Such
the

inventions

seldom

than

artists in

questionwere
to to

them
what

; and
we

the earliest among in the present case

to

learn from

other

sources

the craft attributed practise add nothing they practically about the early historyof
in

in marble. sculpture The (3) Metal.


"

use

of

bronze

early

times

was

so

naturallyexpect it to be among the bronze first materials employed for sculpture. Decorative is often found relief or inlaying(damascening), work, whether and is familiar to the remains of the Mycenaean period, among reliefs give us shall see ^ how the earlybronze Homer ; and we of the the first specimens of true Hellenic art, preservingmany also find types inherited from the Mycenaean period. We in bronze lead or statuettes, of the rudest workmanship, made from the most primitivetimes ; but there is a great advance in in about the same which the skill of working bronze comes in Greece of the at the time as the rise of sculpture beginning
universal
that
we

should

sixth
art

century.

This

fits in

of
must

foundry was Samos, although, like


be

of bronze

very well with the story that the invented by Rhoecus and Theodorus

all

other

stories In

of

inventions, it
present
had
case

received that

with

great caution.
and

the
who

it

would

imply

Rhoecus

Theodorus,

probably

learnt their craft in


or

Egypt, either
the

first introduced

it into Greece

greatlyimproved
this may
statues

be, bronze
and

processes hitherto from this time on Almost

both
of

for

statuettes.

ever employed. Howwas freely used great sculptor every

in bronze, and of them worked sometimes antiquity many those who especially exclusively, preferred athletic subjects. the material of the majority of the vast Indeed, bronze was number

of statues

set

up

in the
; but

open

centres religious

of Greece down
in

the

ease

air upon all the great with which the metal

could

be

melted
so

has modern

in almost
museums

all but

cases

caused bronze

its destructio
statues

that
a

few

survive, though
to
us

in

large number marble copies.


reliefs we
more

of bronze

are originals

served pre-

In used
"

earlydecorative
a

find

two

kinds used
a

of bronze

chiefly
mentation ornamore

harder of

and the

brittle kind

mostly
softer

for

Geometric
'

style,and
"9.

and

24

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

malleable

used

for AVe

the hear

Argive
of many
best

and

Corinthian

reliefs and used in

similar Avorks. Greece esteemed


in later

varieties of bronze known Delian


were

times ; the
and

the

Corinthian,

the

finest of

and all,

by Myron probably varying


Corinthian
but
numerous as

Aeginetan, ferred preThese were Polyclitus respectively.


of
copper

the

and

mixtures
to

and added

tin, to

which and

the

is said

have

sometimes failed of
to

gold
any
or as

silver ; The

analyses have
characteristic and for of copper been used

establish

particular

projDortions
combination
not to have

any

place
we

school.

zinc,which
of

know Roman

brass,seems

until sculpture

times.

Before
were

the

introduction
beaten
out

merely
or

foundry,platesor bars of bronze into the shape required, and all


were

ornaments

figuresin
behind with details

relief

beaten

up

with

blunt
graving en-

instrument of

from

and {repoussi),
a

finished
in

by the
front.

sharp

instrument

In

primitivestatuettes of the rudest workmanship it is often easy bent or beaten into the different bars which are to distinguish told also of statues the required figure. We which are were of plates, beaten in made into the out required shape j)ieces, and then riveted together of Zeus, made statue a by ; such Clearchus of lihegium,was shown at Sparta. A good illustration of the earlystages of bronze technique is offered by two by Pausanias ^ at images of Dionysus seen first of these was Thebes. The a log of wood that fell from heaven, plated with bronze, and probably resembling the column of a mere Apollo of Amyclae, which, we are told,was with and feet added. Beside bronze this stood head, arms, Such another statue of the god, cast in solid bronze. solid in earlystatuettes the castingis very common ; but for statues of valuable material and the inconvenient waste weight must
soon

have

led

to the introduction

of hollow

casting. This
were

may

be in
a

performed by
use core

various

methods,

all of whicU

probably

The the Greeks. essential thing is to introduce among that the into the inside of the mould, in such a way metal will the
not

molten

fill the

mould

as entirely,

in

solid
core.

but only casting, If the


coat

interval between
is to

the mould

and be

the

of metal
core

be

at

all

thin,as

it must

in fine

the casting,

must

size of the mould.

correspondvery nearly to the shape and This may be done by taking a mould from
1

ix. 12, 4.

INTRODUCTION

25

proof fireclay model, making a cast from this in some all over the surface and then matei'ial, scraping away of the cast a thickness correspondingto the thickness of metal required. The cast being then placed within the mould, the the them will take metal poured into the interval between
a

finished

exact nature

form
can,

of the

model. original
be of

mould
the is

and

core

of this
ease

however,
the the
use

produced
wax,

with what

greatest
now

and and in and

accuracy

by practisedas

in

known used
core a core

cire

perdue
a

process.
of
wax

The

method the

this process the mould.

is to introduce

coat

between

The

wax

may

be

introduced

by making

of

material corresponding exactlyto the statue required, tire-proof its final surface but fallingwithin by the thickness which is applied all the wax the bronze is to have ; to this core tailed to over bring it up to the final surface,and then all de-

modellingof
this the
a wax

surface

is added

on

the fine

wax

itself. laid
on

Over
with

mould

is

applied,first
with
out

with

sand

brush, afterwards
can

stronger and
and and
a

coarser

material.
in
to

The
take the

then

be

melted

the metal less

its
wax

place.
can

There

is another

poured simple way in


is made
on

which

be inserted. the

First

claymodel

corresponding
the
as

exactly to
Over Then taken

this is

required statue, and placed the mould, by the


is taken
coat
to
wax

finished
same

surface. before.

method

the mould
out.

pieces and the original clay model


of the

of

required thickness
the
rest
core. as

is then

applied to the inside with fireproof material


melted
seems

of the
to

mould, and
the
in

form

Then before.

is filled up is the wax This


process

out to

and

the been
-

metal the

poured
one

have
well
o

from
"v

his

known

to by Polyclitus, judge saying, xaXeTrwrarov orav epyov


to

used

oV^x'
used have

7r7/Aos. He

would

have

said

had
we

the
no

simpler cire perdue process. positiveevidence that he or


used
wax

On
the

K7]p6s if he the other hand,


other that

sculptors
the
use

of his time
of
wax

at

all,althoughwe
was

know least

in bronze

foundry

practised
"

at

by

later Greek

artists.

Technical
to

hold

details in this process such as the insertion of bars and the mould when the wax Avithwas apart the core

and the out drawn, the holes and channels for pouring the wax bronze in,and the vent-holes for the escape of the air have must been The similar at all times. was core usually,though not
"

26

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

always/ extracted by being broken


holes left for the purpose. It was in Greece common which
were

up

and

drawn

out

through
in
a

to

cast

bronze

statue

parts,
fifth

afterwards

welded

together. Thus
interior of
statue
a

upon

century

vase,-

the representing
see an

bronze
a

sculptor's
workman him
on

workshop, we of one fixing

unfinished while shows

into which

is

the
same

arms,
vase

the

head

lies beside

the

ground.
to

The

the

casting; the
Details with worked

surface

also the final process, is being polished by

subsequent
of the
were were

strigil-like

instruments.
were hair,

in the also,especially
a

treatment

graver or other sharp tool;the eyes and various details usuallyinserted in different materials, often inlaid in silver
on or

other metal.

this

of the surface finishing


"

of the bronze

Indeed, so depended it was that itself,

much

be also a master for a sculptor in bronze of to necessary " caelatura that is to say, to know all the technical processes used for decorative work in metal.
"

Silver

was

also used

as a occasionally

material It

for
was as

sculpture,

mostly for statuettes and for artists of by some preferred


The
use

decorative Hellenistic

work.

especially
Boethus.

time, such

of

has alreadybeen gold in gold and ivorysculpture

also spoken of as a development of wood technique. Statues were made of gold, entirely mostly as sumptuous dedications by the Such rich tyrants of earlytimes. are usually golden statues Sphyrelata,beaten with especially by the name distinguished the hammer that mentioned as probably the same ; the process was in plates bronze works which were for early beaten out The famous most example by a similar process, and not cast. at the colossal Zeus dedicated by the Cypselidsof Corinth was of statues in inferior or Olympia. The partial complete gilding not materials, only bronze but also marble, was common enough
at

all times.
etc. (4) Terra-cotta,
"

Greek
cannot

terra-cottas

form really
in such
a

subject
work
as

by
this
in

themselves, which
; but

be

included

they

cannot
some

earlier times

omitted, since they have altogether the formation of sculptural influence on


be the influence of various

types, and in later times they fall under


^

In

earlybronzes

the

core

is often

left inside

see

Furtwiingler, Olympia

IV.

Bronzen, text, p. 9. ^ Baumeister, Denkmiiler, p. 506 ; also


Greek

to I\Iurray's History of frontispiece

Sculjdurc.

INTRODUCTION

27

artists would

or

artistic

and tendencies,
been

otherwise

have

sometimes preserve At the lost to us. altogether


so seems

what
same

time, monumental
\cry
rare
:

in

sculpturein terra-cotta Greece itself, though it was


of life size the remains archaic
"

to

have
common

been in been
on

pretty
or

Italy
found
the

statues terra-cotta many and there are in Cyprus

largerhave
at

of

least

one

Acropolisat Athens in veiy The great majority of Greek

style.
are

terra-cottas

either reliefs

or

from these are cast a small statuettes, and in almost all cases often added with the mould, though details and accessories were liand
; in

the

case

of statuettes
to

it

was

usual

to mould to

the front it

only, and either


The

leave

the

back

plainor

model

roughly
and
cottas terra"

this use of moulds hand. great distinction between for is that the moulds of bronzes find in the case what we
were

that fact,

not used again and again, once only in frequently mercial the production of terra-cottas was regardedas a com-

handicraft
and

rather than
as

as

an

art.

The

head, the

arms,

other

parts, such

the

wings

of

were winged figures,

often and
in
was

moulded thus
it

and separately,
was

fixed into their

possibleto
same

from the cast figures

place afterwards ; produce considerable variety even The painting, mould. too, which
leaves
room

usually applied to terra-cottas variety. by known Copies of statues in terra-cotta. found occasionally,
free copy Diadumenus

for

considerable

artists
Thus
;

are

rarely,but very there is in Athens a


and the copy Hellenic
a

of the of

Hermes

of

Praxiteles

of

the

reproduced Polyclitus,
the finest

in

Journal,

antiqueterra-cottas that found of terra-cotta The great number have survived. figures of them of in Greece, though many elsewhere at Tanagra and storing wonderful give us much help in regrace and beauty, do not which of art of the period to the great works they Nor are the belong,mostly the fourth and third centuries B.C. from Myrina and elsewhere in Asia florid works later and more
PL

is,if genuine, Ixi., among

Minor

of

more

use

for

our ware

present purpose.
or

Statuettes and Some itself.


are

in

glazed

faience

are

not

very

common,

mostly
of the But

made

finest
even

Egyptian. foreigninfluence,chiefly in Egypt made probably specimens were


under
if
more
1

these than

are

of

purely

Greek

work,

they

are

not, any

terra-cottas, of any
PI. 7.

great value

'E0. 'Apx.1S92,

28

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE to

[I
historyof
Greek

as

part of the monumental

evidence

as

the

sculpture. of Colour to Sculpture} There is littledoubt (5) The Application that the intention of the primitive artist was to imitate his living
"

Il

models

as

nearly as possiblein
of the

colour

as

well

as

in form

; but

it

is the
the

merit great"

early Greek

sculptor to
limit

appreciate
endeavours

of tliis attempt, and to difficulty is the natural accordingly.Convention

his

result of this
to

artistic
the such

feeling that
"

is to

say,
nature

the

artist is led
set

select from_ and

TnBnite
schemes

variety of
of colour
as

such

types of form

he feels himself all others

aljle to deal with ; it is this

characteristic

beyond

that the

the distinguishes crude show less

first

promise
barbariam
the

of

an

artistic

style from
a

attempts of the
us ventional conor

Tei'ra-cottas and
of such

in rough stone sculptures of


more colours,

early use
find

scheme

in its application. The


we

commonest

arrangement, which
is periods, red
to
use
i
i

in terra-cotta continuing

through all
and of
men

white

pink
and

of women, for that to reddish-brown

for the

skin

flesh colour
; dark

varying from
for the hair

eyes, and red and white,as well as other the draperyand accessories. But there is no
:

for colours, simple fixed rule about the


ventional con-

this

thus

in

the Athens

rough
we

stone
see

architectural

sculptureson
as a

Acropolisat
men,

dark

blue,probablyused
or a

substitute and

for

black,applied to the beard and hair of


of
a

to the whole
are

coat

horse

bull ; and had the

the

eyes

of the

Typhon
in

^
the

The

green. introduction of marble the


we

probably

fluence greatest in-

modification

marble

works

this system. In some still find the old system preservedof with colour. But
for

of

early covering
female

whole

surface

the

skin

of

figuresthe white surface of the marble already oftered the required colour without the addition of any further pigment ; and when an opportunityhad thus been given for appreciating the exquisite of the marble and the beauty with which texture it adapted itself to the rendering of the human skin,the result the find the plan of colouring ^ was inevitable. We accordingly whole surface of a statue the best almost in entirely given up be laid and although no fixed and general rules can (period; down in this matter, the of Greek to the practice as sculptors
'

See

Rniitli's Diet.

Ant.,
are

art.

art. "I'ictiira"; 15ainiieisler,

"

Polycliromie,"

where

other references

given.

30

HANDBOOK

OF

GEEEK

SCULPTURE

'

of early period, are now fairlywell especially due the of the This is to statues on discovery which these preserve
are so

known

to

us.

the

Acropolis,
in the

to

remarkable

degreetheir

: original colouring

numerous

that it is possible to have

confidence

the examples of clear traces of Previously colour upon free statues so were mostly to scanty, and belonged late a period, that it was 50 dangerousto draw inferences from of Greek sculpture. In the early practice pthem as to the regular the Acropolis find the lai'ge surfaces of the marble statues on we marble left plain, while only borders or details are invariably Iadded, mostly in rich dark colours. Thus the hair is usually and the to the lips painted dark ^red and red is also applied and iris of the eye : the eyebrows, the outlines of the eyelids, e^"idence

they afford.

".

the

and iris,
that

the

whole

of the

pupil

are

painted with
of the

dark of

pigment,almost
Plato,
in

black,thus
statues

reminding us
most

statement

the

beautiful

part of the human

body, the
Xo hoi

painted black. The usually eye, was in the natural colour left in its largemasses
garment
it
a

drapery also
of the very
mass

is

marble.

is coloured thus

shows, and

all over, unless it does not ofler


serves

only a
a

small
of

part

broad

colour,
colour of the of rich

{.but merely Iand texture


f

patch

which

to

contrast

with the

the
rest

of the similar

marble
efiect

statue.

A and

displayedthrough is produced by the


see over on

borders

\ colour

designwhich

we

liythe
this
texture

ornaments

scattered is

every their surface. and

almost

garment, and
The effect of
;

painted decoration
and

rich extremely
are

harmonious

the

colour of the marble from


is

not

obscured,but enhanced
none sculptures a

by contrast ; and we have which unpleasantimpression


cast.

these

of the coloured

for example,by given,


to

The

reason an

is

not

far

seek. of

In

an

object covered
true
an

completelywith
hidden, and
material. there Here

opaque
textui'e

coat

colour,the
a

surface

is

arises consequently the than and obscured.


to

of suspicion quality of the the rules


were

inferior
is

marble

emphasised rather
We that
we

have have

no

reason

observed schools

that suppose in this instance and

as

to

observed

colouring by Greek

of aU sculptors evidence from


to

the contrary. Pompeii,^which

periods. We have, indeed, direct in a statue of AphroFor example, dite


leans
on a

work, imitated from the


1

draped idol of archaistic statues, type preservedin the Acropolis


; A. Z.

Baumeister, Denkm., PL xlyiL

1881,

PL

7.

INTRODUCTION

31

the the

drapery
inner

of

this archaistic the


outer

figureis

coloured

and

goddess herself
delicate tints.

the and garment; is also coloured, though in paler and

all over, both drapery of the


more

to have the artist seems figure the whole of colouring the priniitive chosen practice purposely soon given up in marble surface, though we have seen it was it is harder to statue As to his own work. speak ; he may in his time, of which common have been followinga practice that it was other examples are preserved; it is indeed possible unknown at any not period to give a wash of colour,tinting the nude on but not obscuring the surface of the marble even But the parts, before the process of polishing with wax.

In the archaistic

evidence unusual.

that

we

possess
case,
we

tends
may

to

show
sure

that such that rules the


we

was colouring

In any
not

be

of application have

colour,if
was

always according to

the

olDserved,'

and that there was no always within strict artistic limits, resemble wax-work to a tendency in a Greek marble statue image. That the process was not a purely mechanical one, but artistic skill and taste, is sufficiently required the utmost proved by the fact that the great painterNicias did not consider
it beneath in

him

to

undertake
statues

the of

the adding of details circumUtio, Praxiteles

colour, to
most

the

esteemed of this The

highly such touch. finishing painter's


of gilding
statues
was

that Praxiteles ; and had the of his works as mechanical from

advantage

a we

more

requiredfrequentrenewing,as
other evidence.

learn

process, and and inscriptions

only to bronze, but hear that the Eros of Thespiae,by also to marble ; thus we had gilt Praxiteles, wings,though the taste that permitted this in the case of the later critics ; and was impugned by some at its of colour found artist's Hermes, the only remains ?ame the of red and traces some gildingupon discovery were

Gilding was

applied not

sandal. In relief work


in the round. In

colour

was

more

used freely

than

in

sculpture

architectural
a

relief was the white


were was

often

as regarded

for example, the whole friezes, coloured member, contrasting with therefore both

surfaces

around, and
red

drapery and
The

flesh

sometimes

coloured

in their broad

masses.

background
were

usuallypainted added very frequently artist trusted quite as

blue ; details and accessories or in colour only ; indeed, in some cases much
to

the

the

colour

as

to

the

relief for

32

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE

the effect he wished architectural in painting

to

produce.
Greek
way
as same

This

is especially the
was
"

case

with

sculpture.
just
the
masses

architecture Greek

assisted that

by

say, the broad the columns as colour of the

and the

sculpture principal supporting members,


left in other the the

is to such

and

architrave,were

natural
were

marble, while
in

mouldings and
harmonise

details

picked out produced,we


colour in

colour.

To

with

effect thus

should

expect the
a

etc.,that
their and

ornament

ments, largersculptural groups, pedito be left also without building,


and
to

broad

masses,
to

have been
to
a

details

added the

by
case.^
was

painting ;
The wall

this appears which formed a


or

have

usually
such relief.
at

background
the

groups
first

painted blue
A
few

red, justas
in

ground
authors
was

of

passages
some

ancient

seem

imply

that

colouring process
we

in bronze.

Thus
statue
a

hear of the

appliedalso to pale hue given by SiTanion


an a

sight to sculpture
to

his bronze instance


iron
one some

of the

of

reddish bronze.

dying Jocasta ; and we flush being imparted by


It is obvious
no

hear in another admixture


statue cast

of in
to

with

the

that in

be

piece there can part by any due merely to a


was

be such

questionof giving a
The

local colour

questionmay process. literal interpretation by later compilersof


as

stories in

what

such a purely rhetorical description, originally blush Athena that


"

the the

maiden Lemnian either been been


a

Himerius^ also
a

describes work.

on

the
in

face other
may

of

bronze of
an

But

casgs.

mixture

of bronze

appropriatecolour
or

have have
in

selected for the whole


cast

statue,
inserted.
effect

else Such

some

parts may
statue
as

separatelyand
much details the
on same

often insertions, bronze

silver, gave

in

the

paintingof
usuallyof
also
to

marble.
"

In
a

inserted
to

materials But

the eyes were particular, ferred transproceedingoccasionally

marble. of
a

any
statue

attempt
seems

to out

apply a pigment
of
or

the

surface

bronze

the

question.
was

On
very

the other
common.

hand, gildingeither of the whole

of parts
In the

(6) The
bronze

Use

from of Pointing
cast

Finished Model. made

"

case

of

statues, if

and

not

worked
'

full-sized finished a process, and is an material, perishable


It is

mering primitivehammodel, in some easily obvious necessity. And

by

the

attested, e.g., in

the
2

case

of the

Aeginetan sculptures.

S.

Q. 761.

INTRODUCTION

33

we
a

have

seen

that

in

the

case

of

gold and ivory works

also

indispensable.When technically is by no means the case to consider marble come we sculpture, is to prepare modern The practice sculptors .so clear. among in clay; from this a cast is first a full-sized and finished model durable material. other more in plaster made some or usually marked ; these pointsare of points are On the cast a number of marble the block to then transferred by a mechanical drilled in to the required and are })rocess of measurement, until the points marble is cut away depth. The superfluous are reached,and then nothingremains to be done but to give
full-sizedmodel
seems

to be

the last finish to

the
to not

surface of the be the work

marble.

This

last process

ought of though it
the bulk
more

course

of the

own sculptor's

hand,
but the It
finished, un-

is

now

mechanical marble
on a

left to skilled assistants ; infrequently work of pointingand chiselling away


is

of the

done generally
made

by trained workmen.
this process, if left

is clear

that
some

statue

by

trace to

of the measured
and it is thus

is puntelli) points (called


easy
to ascertain whether

sure ])retty

remain;
we can see

they formed
And in fact

part of the method


such these

followed

by

ancient several

sculptors.
unfinished

puntelli upon

mostly belong to Hellenistic or of this later periodthey are times ; and even works Koman on while on earlier monuments not always to be seen,^ they seem If we to unknown. turn to be almost, if not our entirely, direction. all indications point in the same authorities, literary
works of

sculpture. But

Thus first

we

are

told of

that Pasiteles, who

worked

in Rome

in the

century B.C., asserted modellingin clay to be the mother

',

made that he never statue a sculpture ; and without first preparing a model in clay. Such a specific ment statethe practice in his case to imply that was seems by no universal. And whose means Arcesilaus, claymodels are said sold at a higher rate than the finished works of been to have other artists, a was Pliny says contemporary of Pasiteles. it that due the the invention was to or again example of the brother of Lysippus,that the practice became Lysistratus, without that no statue was made the construction so prevalent of a claymodel.We therefore prepared to find that in are of all kinds
' '^

I
i

Not,
XXXV.

e.g.,

on

the unfinished
res

parts of
in tantum

the

small ut

frieze from

Pergamus.
sine

153, "crevitque
These
words
are

nulla do

signa
not

statuaeve
on

argilla

1fiereut."

clear

enough, but
D

they

follow

what

has just

I
34

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

unfinished
but punfeUi,

statues

the absence

only is there no signof the whole system of cuttingis one that implies of such mechanical to be seems help; the sculptor
down if the of
to

of earlier date,not

cuttinghis
not
were

way

his

statue

with he
out.
was

caution that would


to

be needed It does

depth to which
and marked

cut

in each

place

measured already
not
was course

because follow,
was no

no

mechanical

system

of is
a

pointing

used, that there


cannot

claymodel
to find much

at all ; this

and
as

questionon which we different opinions may


to

expect
case.

evidence,

be the

to various views held,according

the

of probability

From

the

earliest time
to

in claywas modelling customary, and a material so easy work for the first efforts must always have been preferable

of

the

learner.
was so

But

in

early times
that

the
was

number

of

sculptural
for the
carve a

types
'

limited
a or

there in The

reallyno
was

need

to sculptor

make

model marble.

to clay before beginning

statue

in stone

type

fixed for

him,

and

alreadybefore his eyes in a conventional model. very possibly rather in Such variety he might introduce in his work as was study of detail than in he may figure ; and although
of what
suppose

the

the

conformation general made


a no reason

of the

often have

sketch in

clay
to

he

had

observed

that he worked

in nature, there is this into a full-sized and artistic


seems a

completeclay
When
are

model
we come

before he
to ; at

the such

began periodof
a

into his block of marble. cutting


it

freedom, the conditions


that
art
a

altered

time

obvious
work

embody
or

his first conception of


but

of he

in

would sculptor a sketch in clay


a

wax,

it does in he

not
one

follow of these

that have

made

finished and he
or

full-sized model his

materials
seen,

before
more

attacked hand. less free-

marble, which
A
a case

cut,

as

we

full-sized clayor

in such

and studious But


to
,

from is not model to work plaster the cautious more indisj^ensable, though doubtless to have would usually one. prefer sculptors among

we an

must

remember

that the confidence and the force of the constant in the

freedom of the

given
living

and and
him

sculjitor by well as as training, by human form moving


a

ancient

skill, tradition, hereditary


observation

and palaestra

great advantageover

the modern

elsewhere, gave who is mainly artist,

Either something is lost, which refers to taking casts from statues. precedec), his in has from omitted : probablythe or authority something Pliny compiling
latter.

INTRODUCTION

35

dependent
e;ise

on

the

study
some

of

posed
few have

models. could be

And,

moreover,

the it
a

with

which

the finest marble

obtained

made

fur less serious loss if


case

blocks
to

now,

when

fine blocks

bought at fancy prices. There a full-sized model Angelo, ; Michael sculptor's working without And fur example, is recorded to have done so often. although the in the custom there set no matter, and probably was roundings practiceof different artists varied according to their surit is likelythat Greek their individual facility, or with any of the finest period of art often dispensed sculptors .such help. In Jater times, when were genius and inspiration of academic less frequent, and art was study, more a matter universal find that the use of finished clay models became as we transferred it is at the present day, and that their form was as in mechanical the marble by the same to process that is now their comparatively from The however, seem, use. puntelli, in been rather a help to the sculptor limited number, to have embodied, carvingthe marble in which his idea was to be finally facmarble of than as a purely mechanical means producing a that is too often,in our simile of the clay model day, the final
and
,

spoiledthan is the be procured from a distance in a is nothing impossible


were

embodiment

of the

own sculptor's

work.

Free Architectural, Decorative, : (c)Sculpture If the whole


our

abundance
was

of Greek

were sculpture

available for
not

study as

it

in the

days

of

Pausanias,it would

often

be

of free sculpture. for us to go beyond the bounds necessary have which But the circumstances preserved to us the scanty
remnants

that

we

stillpossess be

have

enhanced
a

the historical value


as

of much

that must
to

in regarded,

sense,

decorative the

work.
of

and building, which made, the sculpturesthat they were pediment and frieze of a temple have in many

Owing

their

positionin

the

material

ornamented
cases

the

survived,

when

all the in

statues

that

stood

in

the

same

dedicated And

the

surrounding precincthave

temple or were been destroyed.

removed if these more portablestatues were again,even and not time, we preserved to our destroyed,and so are frequentlyhave no clue to guide us in seekingto ascertain made decoration when where they were or ; while the sculptural of a temple is often recorded by historical evidence,or can be

36

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

dated

by

the

architectural
in

forms
use

of

the

itself. building
or

We

must,

however,

making

of architectural

decorative the their

sculpture as evidence for the history of art, remember conditions prescribedby its surroundings, and allow for
influence upon the characteristics which we observe. In the earliest days of Greek sculpturethere seems been littlebut and from
to

have

rude, practically unsculptured, images of the gods, decorative relief-work, It was mostly in metal or wood.
the dedications
over

set

up

in

been also

graves, that developed; but the influence very

erected

or temple precincts, free sculptureseems

the
to

ments monu-

have
was

of the
were

decorative

woi"k

great.

By

it many
came

types
to

preserved,if not

which originated, of Greek

afterwards

sculpture ;
a

and
nature

pertoire adopted into the reit produced a skill in vv^orking

be

metal, and even greatestservice

study of

in

which detail, There


is
a

were

of

the

to the advance

of art.

whole

series other

of these decorative

works, beginning with

the shields and

described by Homer, and leading things up to such compositions the the Amyclaean throne, and even the chest of Cypselus, as throne of Zeus at Olympia,with which Ave shall have to deal
in turn.

decoration of temples occupies more an even sculptural cases prominent placein the historyof Greek art, and in some ofi"ersthe most to some trustworthy evidence we possess as particular sculptoror school ; the metopes of Selinus, the pediments from Aegina,the Elgin marbles from the Parthenon, almost be the heads by Scopas from the temple at Tegea,may of much said to ofi^erthe foundation which of the history on Greek With these also we sculpturehas been reconstructed. must deal,each in its place. But here we may note the general conditions under which architectural sculpturewas made, in order may of each work speaking of the may decoration which for
the
are

The

that

we

not
as

be
we

obligedto
come

return

to

them

when

to

it in

ment the historical treat-

subject.
be may and laid
not

It

down be

as

generalrule
to
or

that

sculptural

applied

those

essential

to its structure

parts of a building In the columns, stability.


rests

example,

the forms

architrave of Greek

that

fundamental

see them, we upon weaken architecture ; and to

these
we

in appearance

by carving is clearlyinappropriate. Yet


in this
case.

find

even exceptions

At

Assos

the

architrave

38

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

varying height of
require a room barely

the

field
"

from

the the

centre, which

seems

to

where there is angles, the utmost for a reclining figure requires ingenuity the part of the artist if the whole is to be occupiedby a on single group, in which no great varietyin the size of the various And besides this, the massive is admissible. architectural figures broad and massive in the frame treatment requiresa similarly often makes figuresthemselves ; while the wish for contrast violent motion seem quick and even necessary, if the monotony
to
"

colossal form

fillit,to

and

are repose of the surroundings The earliest pediments which we

to be broken

through at
those
as we

all.

possess
at
a

are

sculptured
shall
art.

in

rough
are are

stone

on

the be

Acropolis

Athens, which,

see,

to certainly

regardedas
case

development
of
an

of Ionic

These

almost

without

exception scenes
to fish,
cases

combat, and
a

the tail

subjectschosen
like that of the low
are a

provide in every
or some a

with antagonist its coils the in

snake In

fill with

anglesof

pediments.
in relief,

the

is sculpture

comparatively

others

merely set in later pediments, and strong projectionof the pediments we meet with adopted the introduction
"

in the round, and practically which a background a practice prevails against


the
are figures
"

which

is almost

necessitated In
was one

by

the

architectural another of
a

frame. which
;

of these

device chariot

the

very widely length of the car and

and

the

horses

is

an

invaluable
it also forms

help
a

in

the long filling interest the of the

and narrowing field, between


the

most

convenient

separation
position com-

middle

centres, and
thus may attention.
even

group, the subordinate


a

in which

the

at figures

which sides,

be

on

smaller slightly
are as

scale without

attracting
another the

When

there

two
at

one chariots, balancing

in

the

same

pediment,
scenes are

Olympia
on

and

probably on

Parthenon, the advantageis still greater.

earlypediments : the subject of the earliest marble pediment a gigantomachy was of the pediment of the Megarian Treasury at at Athens, and Olympia; and the Aegina pediments are another familiar instance. Here we not only have the requiredmotive for violent motion, assumed but the various positions fit the by the combatants
most

Combat

the

rule

other

field behind

excellently ;
the

the

kneeling bowmen

and

spearmen

are

and those who lie wounded or standingfigures, dying in the corners Other motives are are appropriateto the scene. employed in other pediments for the reclining figureswhich

INTRODUCTION

39

fill the

corners;

river
in

gods, to
cases,
some

whom and

such

posture is appropriate,
of this

appear

several had

the

convenience in

perhaps :ipplication

influence

fixing the
was

type.
used the
;

the corners Another, and still finer,device for filling the sun with his team the Parthenon, where on rising
sea

from

at

one

end

is balanced

by

the

of the sun similar was Delphi the setting its counterpart. moon as device, with the rising AVith the peculiar artistic excellences or defects which appear in the compositionof various extant pedimental groups we shall have deal in each case few to some separately ; but there are for all. general characterist"ics which may be noted here once We have seen the one on alreadythat either rest and stability motion is the other, requiredby the massive on hand, or violent architectural frame, accordingto two alternative principles ; the his figuresto harmonise artist either wished with the restful in which and quiet surroundings they were placed,or else he made them produce varietyof effect by their contrast with the contained. In many rigidlines by which they were temples of the finest period we find a stillfurther refinement ; the quieter is usuallyassigned to the eastern scene pediment, which is on ' the front of the temple,while at the back, on the western ment, pediThis find in motion. is we a vigorous especially group the case in the temple at Olympia, where the antagonists about
at
'

at the sinking moon probably used as a

other

to

enter

the

chariot

race

stand

around

Zeus

the

arbiter

in

almost monotonously symmetrical, the eastern on quiet, group is filled with the struggling pediment,while the western groups of the fight and violent contortions of the Lapiths and Centaurs. So too at Delphi we told that on the eastern are pediment was the western Apollo with his choir of Muses ; on Dionysus
with his
rout
more on

of Maenads.

In

the Parthenon
a

the
:

distinction,
the birth of
on

though
Athena

subtle,is still of
the eastern The
or

similar

nature

pediment, her
to

contest

with

Poseidon

the western.
more

violent

appears terrible manifestations


on

notion

have

been

that,while
power
were

the
spicuously con-

of divine

temple,the worshipper approaching and entering the shrine should rather be impressed with the quieterand more majestic aspect of the god,whose statue within of his usuallyexpressed his benignity rather than the power wrath. But this rule about the pediments was not universally after it had become followed even For example, customary.

recorded

the

40

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

Alea at pediments of the temple of Athena Tegea, j designedby Scopas, had the hunt of the Calydonian boar in \ front,the combat of Achilles and Telephus at the back. have seen, the only Apart from pediraental groups, as we place for sculptureon any buildingis the frieze. The proper
two

the

architrave,which
apparent

rests

immediately on
to

the
a

columns,

is too

a essentially supporting member

bear

weakening

of

its

strengthand

massiveness

though
tried
no on

the

such

experiment of the temple at Assos. In objection. In the Doric


on

by sculpturaldecoration, ornamenting it with bas-reliefs was


the
case

of the frieze there is the massive

order

triglyphs,
cornice

which

rest

the thus

offer ample support architrave, the

to the

above,
frame
so

and

metopes,
even we

or

open than

spaces in

between

them,

offer most in
same

suitable fields for this


case

sculptural groups.
heavier

The the

architectural

is

the

conditions

with

still greater force. The compositionto groups of two


scenes

of

combat, with their of lines,offer the best


When
a

pediment, and have already noticed apply here limits the square field practically sometimes three figures or ; and violent motion and angular composition
contrast to

the

surrounding

architecture.

figure is introduced, it is in most cases necessarily cramped, close against the margin of the metope. The favourite subjects for the metopes of a such as may be divided into a temple are naturally easily up of separate scenes. Such number subjectsare the labours of Heracles and of Theseus, or the combats of gods with giants with of Greeks or centaurs, which comply best with the most conditions,and therefore are ployed. commonly emnecessary find instances when a Occasionallywe singlescene
is divided Heracles could
this it

third

between and be

two
on

metopes,
the

as

in

the

combat

between
treatment
to

Geryon
made attained.

Theseum

; but

such

only
never

tolerable

by accepted convention, and

The

normal
is
on

temple
the

columns

sculptured metopes on a Doric the outside of the temple that is to say, above of the peristyle find them on the we ; this is where
"

place for

the

Parthenon

and

elsewhere.
at

On
are

the

Theseum, only the metopes


addition
to at

at the front and at

the

back sides.

in sculptured,

four
the

the

east
are

end

of the

The

rest

of

the

metopes
not

sides But

plain,and Olympia
the

were

possibly ornamented
are

by painting.
above the

at

sculpturedmetopes

INTRODUCTION

41

columns and

of the

but peristyle, the of

above

the columns

of the pronaus
seen

opisthodomus of
the columns

between back. In the is of

temple itself. Thus they were the front and at the peristyle

the

Ionic lighter
above

"and dispensedwith,
ornament

the support of the triglyphs band the frieze appears as a continuous entablature

the

triplearchitrave.

The

most

suitable of
is

field are continuous scenes subjectsfor such a long narrow combat or processions.The usual position for this frieze also above the
at

columns

of

the

on peristyle, runs

the

outside the

of

the

temple ;
Ionic

Phigaliathe

frieze

round

above

internal

of the temple, columns, surroundingthe central chamber which, hoAvever, resembles an open court rather than a cella.

We

find

continuous of Doric of the

Ionic

frieze used

also

to

add

to

the

Iornamentation
the columns character is above the the

temples,though not,
The continuous
pronaus

where peristyle, of the


we

of course, over it would destroy the and

of the order. columns

frieze of the Parthenon

where temple itself,

find the the walls

opisthodomus of metopes at Olympia, and


of the

it is continued

all round
an

cella,within

the

peristyle.For
effect is thus

a peculiarly advancing procession appropriate if it were seen gained; by a spectator walking the side of the and seeing successive portions along building, of the frieze between the columns of the peristyle, the figures

would

seem

to advance

as

he moved.

Over

the

east

end

of the

temple,where they would be seen from in front by the approaching the of are worshipper, placed the seated figures gods,who await the approach of the procession : an quietly arrangement
similar in effect to that

which here

we even

have
more a

noticed

in

the

subjects
the
the

of the In
antae

pediments,but
and columns

subtle in its

adaptation.
and

the

Theseum, too, there


within

is the

continuous

frieze above the front

at peristyle
are

back, where
Theseum the

the

Doric

metopes
scenes runs

placed at Olympia.
of

In the the
east

subjectsare
the frieze breadth of

combat, but

on

front,where
also
a across

the

peculiarvariety.

Seated

the antae, but only between the peristyle at each side,there is as figuresof divinities, spectators
not

of the scene, are introduced between the scenes of combat above the anta at each side,as if to continue the supporting member

by a more quiet and appearingonly above

stable group, the figures in violent action the more open spaces in the structure.

42

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

Continuous other

bands

of

frieze

were

also

applied sometimes
had normal
exact

to

parts of buildings ; thus


which

the

Mausoleum

three such

of friezes,
of the

only one
over

can

have

occupiedthe

in the entablature

the
matter

columns, though the


of of

position position

other two later

is

conjecture.
relief
were

In
in
a

times

panels
in The and

frequently inserted
reliefs^
common were

and buildings, decorative

large vessels, in candelabra, etc., for


new

designed
affected

purpose. for such use, of the

Attic
was

it

very

to

mostly adopt an
ventionality con-

archaistic

style for such figureswas


so a case

panels; perhaps
be
more

the

stiffness and bind them

felt to

to
a

their structural

frame, and
use

to

to appropriate

such

purely decorative
In
we fact,

than

free and
a more

naturalistic strict

treatment.

only see
"

in this have

of application
or

the

which we principle sculpture that


existed

noticed

in all decorative
not

architectural
as

such

sculpturemust
we

be make

judged
as a

if it for

for itself alone ; but that its relation to its surroundings, and
a

must

allowance

regard

it also

part of

decorative

whole.

(d) Division of the Subject


It will be convenient
to divide

the

the purpose of our present considered in one of the six

study into chapterscontained


"

historyof Greek art six periods, each to


in this book.

for
be

(1) Before 600 (2) 600 B.C. to 480 B.C. to (.3)

B.C.

Early influences
B.C.
B.C. B.C. B.C. A.D.

Decorative

art.

480 400 320 100 300

The The The The The

rise of Greek
fifth

sculpture.

(4) 400
(5)
320 100

B.C. B.C. B.C.

to to to

fourth

century. century.

(6)

Hellenistic age. Graeco-Eoman period. the influences

prevalent in Greece and in the neighbouring countries during the period which immediately preceded the independent existence of Greek and we shall observe the circumstances that sculpture,
surrounded contained We its

In the first chapter we

shall consider

origin. We
the

shall also seek

for the germs

which

in themselves

shall then

proceed,in

of so glorious a growth. possibility the second chapter, the earlier to see


1

See

" 77.

INTRODUCTION

43

stages of development of Greek


;uul uncouth

from sculptureitself, little better


than

the rude of

images which
up
to

seem

the work

children of
a

savages difficult art This and

or

those last

material. Salamis
and its

precede a ends with periodfitly


; for
we

that

with the technic|ue struggles the perfect mastery over the date how of the battles of invasion the Persian

Plataea

shall

see

themes for the artist, repulsenot only supplied fitting field for the exercise of his art by but actuallyleft an open destroying much of the work of his predecessors. The third attainment, when the chapterwill deal with the age of highest his alreadycompetent to express sculptor, thought in bronze or in yet richer materials,is also inspiredby the in marble, or noblest Greek
ideals
"

the

age
the

of

Phidias

and

when Polyclitus, found its most


in rendered

the

conceptionof
the

highestgods
of
man was

perfect
its most

embodiment, and

form

how perfecttype. We shall then see, in the fourth chapter, refined beauty, with a skill in a greater delicacyand more the period of rendering various passionsand moods, marks oi care Scopas and Praxiteles, while academic study and execution distinguishes the school of Lysippus. The Hellenistic its character to the conquests of Alexander, owes age, which be considered in 323 is to begin with his death B.C., which may therefore

approximately

taken

as

the

shall trace the chapter,in which we homes in the East. sculpturein its new taken (146 B.C.) might perhaps be fitly Graeco-Roman

beginning of development
The
as

our

fifth

of

Greek

sack

of Corinth the
but

perhaps
convenient little

the

age, to which our beginning of the


it is

sixth
first

beginning of chapteris devoted ;


B.C.
some

the

century
even

is

more a

limit, since
schools.
not

reached,
downward

in

cases

trangi'essed, by

the To

later
a

developments
limit
some

of

some

of

the

Hellenistic
Roman

fix

for the

Graecoto

age is the date of the


be

easy ; but foundation of

perhaps
age, is

approximation
324

in Constantinople,

taken, for
of the

the

Byzantice

completely

A.D., may beyond the


is the

scope

present work.

So

also, for that matter,


is
is meant

monumental Roman in

sculpture and portraiturewhich character ; by Graeco-Roman work


the demand the
taste
to
a was

especially
that

produced to meet while sculpture,


under

of the

Roman
"

market
or

for Greek

in fashion that

at

least

produced
is here

the influences

which

demand

had

given rise.
as

It is clear that

continuous

development such

44

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

traced
more

might
or

be

followed

both succession

backwards
;

and

forwards ourseh^es
our

in

less

unbroken
we are

but

by

limiting
pursuing
or

to

Greek into earlier


a

sculpture,

precluded
with
;
to
on

from

studies
of
so

region
or

identified nations

the
we

history
must

attainments touch far


of

later

these the
is

only
of
us.

as

they

are

indispensable
of

illustration
now

that

portion

the

history

sculpture

which

before

46

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULl'TURE

chap.

advanced material he the time that


must

school the

try merely to may in effect which he sees


or

reproduce
nature

in

permanent
own

with

his

eyes,

always be, consciously


the the
art

affected unconsciously, his

by

conventionalities when
meet

of

adopted by is sculpture
at

in

predecessors. But at a the difficulties its infancy,


often
in

imitate
whatever

every turn the conventionalities which he origin ; although these


must

artist

must

compel him
modify
and

to

he

sees course

earlier

models, of
plement sup-

of

until he direct observation of nature by his own founded his claim to have a acquires a style which justifies and independentschool of sculpture. Style which riew may translation of be defined,in the case of sculpture, as a system and permanent which in material is nature reproduced by living
"

form" well
latter
as

must

thus
a

be due

to

an

enlargementof convention, as
And
or

to

selection
true

from

nature.
an

while of
a

it is in the nation the be shows


sources

that

the

genius of
be

artist

the former itself, whence the into account We if


we

cannot

ignored ;

and

therefore derived
must

conventions were particular in the historical study of then the think

taken

any

artistic

need

not

trace

it any derogation to Greek foreigninfluences that surrounded it made


free

development. sculpture
it in
we

its

earliest years ; in the use the promise of that see marks

of those

influences

shall that
true

and

perfect development
has its well

prime. As independence of Greek

its

F.

A.
art

Lange
lies in

said,^"the
in

not perfection,

its

origin."
We Greeks used admit that the alphabetof art may from their predecessors ; but the write their
own

it to

language from Egyptian


or

by the that they statement the first still requires


was

borrowed

explanation. An himself will help


like prose

illustration which
us. or

is also

by Brunn suggested Assyrian wall reliefs are

chronicles

record to imaginative touches in of and exploits facts or to supply testimony to the possessions kings and men, than to embody an idea or to present an the space is clearly artistic picture of life or story. Even mapped out with this view, and we miss the sj'^mmetry and Greek works. the most primitive composition that distinguishes On the other hand, in Greek sculpturefrom the first we find the presentationof scenes which are imaginary and typical
1

often indeed with inventories, detail,but intended rather

poeticor

Gcschichte

dcs Materialismus,

i. 127

in Frieilerichs-Wolters, p. 12. qiioteil

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

47

rather

than
to

records express

of

actual

events, and
ideas

we

meet

with

an

attempt
the

artist's skill

conceptionsand imagination is always


or

of

poeticalnature
as

exercised

well

as

the be

manual
rivalled

keen

observation

of nature

in which

he may

this tendency in shall see by his predecessors. We before of art by Homer, even of a work the poetical description their arrangeGreek sculptureexisted ; the subjectsselected, ment, already show the poetical composition,and conceptioTi istic shall always find to be characterchoice of subject which we of Greek sculpture. Gods and heroes and mythical scenes it attempted,but which have been the first subjects not may they always offered its chief themes ; and the devotion of art least in earlier times, at the service of religion Lo influenced, and the manner of its representations. both the matter The of Egypt could art only have " 2. Egyptian Art. of Greece at a very late period of its influenced the rising art own development ; but in order to appreciate its character this period, at some knowledge of its previous vicissitudes is The best times of Egyptian art, when nature was necessary. and individual with character studied extraordinaryfidelity, was expressedwith the greatest cleverness, go back to an age for us even to remote too realise, probably to about 3000 B.C. After a long period of comparativelyuninterrupted development, the historyof Egyptian art is rudely interrupted by the Asiatic invaders who rule of the Hyksos or shepherd kings until they were five centuries, held Egypt for about expelled These national in 1600 about B.C. by a Hyksos, though rising that of setting they adopted many Egyptian customs, including
"

"

"

"

up

monuments to

of have

sculpture,seem
debased the

to

have

been

of

barbarous

qualityof the sculpturewhich they employed, while they imported into it mixed animal and other forms which due to Asiatic symbolism. After their are the great dynastiesoT the Ramses and others expulsion come under whom the Egyptian Empire attained its highestpower their rule the largestand most and influence ; under imposing of Egyptian sculpture and monuments architecture were but materials their and colossal size could not erected, costly the loss of the freshness and originality had which compensate the first bloom of Egyptian art. It was distinguished duringthe threatened reignsof these kings that Egypt was repeatedly by shall see, were the Libyans,who, as we Greek allies helped by

taste, and

48

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE

chap.

who

have

left traces After national

of their invasion

and

occupation of
confusion I.

the

country.
a
"

another revival
won

period of anarchy
under rule Psammetichus of

and

comes

second
a

princewho
Carian

the

and

mercenaries.

historical and the

period in
later

the

Egypt by the We have reached the now actually relations between Egypt and Greece ;
these

(664-610 B.C.) help of Greek

under Psammetichus relations, and his successors, Amasis, belongs to the record of especially that later Greek of the primitive to colonisation,and not influences
art

historyof

with

which

we

are

here

concerned.

The

Egyptianjust
work

periodof PsanynetichjisJ^^diatjwit^^ inflnp.nnpi Greece tfwTftaj i^ij2Qi!STdftrTrig_thp. "^f,^gypt_upon


sculpture. This
seventh delicate century charastensecl Egy_pt~"is
with

of the

before the rise of Greek


in
contrasts

by

fine and

which style^

the

coTossal monuments
in its treatment the

of the models

earlier national of the earliest

and rSvfvjxlj

recalls

TEe elaborate period before the llyksos invasion^ and perfecttechniqueof this later Egyptian art, its complete mastery of the subjectsit chose to represent, and its system of that conventionalities, surmountingor avoidingevery difficulty characteristics most the very a sculptor has to meet, were to impress and influence an art like that of Greece in likely its infancy alphabet of art which the ; for it supplied the Greek as yet lacked ; while its stereotypedforms and lack of and^Jinest
" "

new

ideas

to

express

were

no

drawbacks and

to

one

who
own

was

only

embarrassed
was

by

the

freshness
means
"

varietyof

his

ideas,but
of

at

loss for the

to

"
could

3.

Assyrian Art.
have

The

them. express like that art of Assyria,


at
a

Egypt,
own

only the case history ; but of sculpture primitive


now

influenced here the


to

Greece

late

period of its
With
we are

is somewhat

different.

the
not

earlyBabylonian Empire
notice that from
it
was

concerned, except
know
an

derived

the

of Assyria, sculpture already even


we

in the earliest

showing
archaic

the

character
Thus
we

of
see

examples that highly developed rather


in the fine reliefs of

than

period.

even

Assurnazirpalfrom
of the ninth

Nimrud, which
an

date

from

the

century B.C.,
the muscles of the

exaggerated and
and visible, could
an

earlier part conventional

rendering of
in the
ornament

where

over-elaboration

drapery,which

in any stylenot in direct succession to some From this time onward the sculptureof

hardly be expected earlier development. Assyria continued to

EARLY

INFLUENCES

"

DECORATIVE

ART

49

develop in
and

the

direction
and

of

vivid

of execution, of grace and delicacy of animal truthful representation, especially

the last of the great reign of Assurbanipal, (Kouyounjik) has Assyrian kings,whose palace at Nineveh the reliefs which, if not the finest to the British Museum yielded and the most characteristic are striking certainly artistically, rendering of lions, examples of Assyrian art ; the magnificent

forms, until the

horses,and
in equalled,

dogs

in

these

reliefs has

never

been

surpassed,if

it is these And ancient modern. or any sculpture the greater part of the elements very animal forms which were In this case, however, the from Assyria by Greece. borrowed
means never

of transmission
any

are

not

at

first easy to

see.

There

was

direct communication

between

Assyria and

Greece.

althoughSargon extended his rule to Syria and Cyprus and Assurbanipal could reckon even Gyges,king (721-704 B.C.),
And of

Lydia, among
on

his
art

the tributaries,
is

influence
The

Greek

hardly to

be

explanationof Assyrian found in political events.


intermediaries But and
it must

will

importanceof the Phoenicians as section. be spoken of in the next


that it
was

in this
not

case

gotten be forrobes

the

rich

woven

embroidered
most

of

Assyrianworkmanship that were Oriental types to in transmitting


have travelled and

probablyof
the west Into
; and

importance

by

wild beasts the borders If asked

channels. many also the fantastic


; and

them

these stuffs may the were woven


that
were so

winged
many

animals

imitated extensively
or

the decorative in

forms

that ornamented models that


were

the

field also offered

reproducedin
we

or painting

carving.
of the of the

went
was

beyond
the Greek But

the

nature

types borrowed, and

what

character
to

style which

Eg3'pt and
a

offered Assyriarespectively

the admiration

and imitation of the

yet untrained
discussion.

we artist,

might
this

well be led into "The

lengthy

here

it must

suffice to

quote the admirable


"

paragraph of M. Perrot on the forms sculptor simplifies


were,
more

subject^:

Egyptian

in
at

an

abbreviated

of nature, and sums them up, as it abstract ; the Assyrianrenders them


The

human visible

length and in body througha


and

detail.
fine

former hides the

seems

to

see

the all
i

which veil, outlines

from

his view
as

accidents of surface

all unessential

so features,

to leave

nothingbut
On

the main
the
1

and

generaleffect of

the contour.

other

hand, the Assyriansculptor appears


K

Histoire de I'Art, ii. p. 693.

50

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

study nature through a magnifying glass emphasises ; he the things that the Egyjjtianrefines away ; he observes and then, that if the Greek sculptor was exaggerates."It is clear, likelyto learn from Egypt the fixed types and conventional w^hich would the first difficulties treatment help him to surmount of expression, he would also profitby the close observation of in Assyrian works, though joined with which is seen nature exaggerationin the execution ; and from Assyria also he
to

borrowed and

wealth

of decorative

forms

which

he

transformed

variety. How these influences came be considered in subsequent paragraphs. to reach him must " 4. Phoenician Art. The art of Phoenicia stands upon quite that of Egypt and Assyria. It is imfrom portant a different footing
"

transmitted

in endless

to

Greece, not
not

as

source,

but

as

channel
or

of influence. that
were

We

shall

have

to

the types distinguish

motives

first invented

by

the

Phoenicians, for in almost


can

where

Phoenician

influence

be traced downward it back


to
an

case every into Greek

art, it is also
none

to possible
can

trace

earlier

origin ;

but

the

less there

be

no

doubt
"

that

Phoenician
must

traders

and much from

Phoenician of the them


"

settlements

in the
to

Aegean
the

have who

taught

alphabetof art
to

Greeks,

borrowed

also the

alphabetof letters.
obtain

It is difficult the

historyand

or any accurate attainments of Phoenician

complete

notion

of

art, because

of the

circumstances

made and distributed. productswere Unlike other peoplesof antiquity, the Phoenicians seem to have worked hardly at all for themselves,and almost entirely for others. Their works of art were not usually made to decorate their own or templesor publicbuildings privatehouses, but for purely commercial nation of a purposes ; they were and their shipscarried to every port of the Mediterranean traders, the carved work and reliefs in metal or ivory or other materials which they produced in such abundance. This statement may but be a little exaggerated is remarkable it fact that in a spite ; of careful and scientific explorations, Phoenicia itselfhas yielded while every no examples of the art of its inhabitants, practically other site exploredupon the Mediterranean has yielded coasts less rich treasures of Phoenician more or origin. Cyprus and have yieldedbowls of bronze and silver with Etruria,especially, of ornament in relief which concentric must zones certainly have a common that origincan origin hardlybe sought ; and

under

which

its

EARLY

INFLUENCES

"

DECORATIVE

ART

51

elsewhere

than

in

Phoenicia.

If

so,

they certainlyare

the

known But these of Phoenician to us. art as now masterpieces finest specimens can hardly be dated earlier than the sixth ^ although their periodcoincides with century B.C. ; and therefore, that of the rise of Greek sculpture, they are alreadyfar removed

the age of those earlier arts besides this,they belong to a


from influence
was no

that
time

we

have when

so

far considered Phoenician

direct

longer felt

in

Greece.

from probablethat they differ essentially same during the centuries in which art, made had the
same

It is not, however, earlier products of the Phoenicians the Levant still


; and

in their hands
more

most

of the

commerce

of

scanty

remnants

of earlier

character.

All

alike from

which
or are

types borrowed

to have the periods seem show strangely composite scenes, in Egyptian or Assyrian art alternate

mingled
by
M.
"

in

confusion
to

the

result has

been

well

pared com-

Perrot
one a new

what

is called in

a chemistry

mechanical do not
bine com-

compound
to

in which

the

constituent

elements

form
not

substance,but remain

easily distinguishable,
Whether
not

and
an

modify their essential nature. earlier, independentPhoenician art ^ or


do
matter to at

there

was

is a

comparatively

indifferent

composite stylewhich
who
were

this us certainly present ; for it was belonged to the art of the Phoenicians

known

to

Homer, and who


of the

continued
were

to

trade

with

Greece later

until the markets

Aegean

closed to them

by

political changes.
exact

The is not
to show

nature to

and

extent

of Phoenician

influence

on

Greece

easy
that
to

ascertain ; tradition agrees with other evidence the Phoenicians from with trading not content were settlements
in

port
the

established commercial port, but actually The islands them of

Aegean.

Thera, Rhodes, and

others,were

in this way ; the tale of Cadmus occupied by certainly and the Phoenician colonyhe established in Thebes may perhaps be

regardedas having some


traces

historical foundation settlements


at

; and

there and

are

distinct
on

of Phoenician mainland.
are

Corinth
poems

where else-

the Greek traders


a

In the Homeric
; and
even

the visits of

Phoenician feature
as

still common of the

if

we

regard this

days before the Dorian invasion, it is clear that Phoenician products ai-e familiar to the audience of the poet. But the predominance of Greek colonists through'

reminiscence

Helbig,Das
2

Homerische

Epos,

p.

67.

So ihid. p. 28.

52

HANDBOOK
must

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

out

the

Aegean
to

soon

after this have and

closed the markets

of

Greece

Phoenician

ships;
as

in the time

before immediately influence On


not can-

the rise of have other with


more

in sculpture
so

Greece

direct Phoenician

been

strong
and

in the

precedingcenturies.
Minor
came

the

hand, the Greek


other
or races

colonists in Asia

into contact their


art
was

kingdoms, which
models, and
had

also derived another been

less from those the

Oriental

channel

opened to by

influences which

hitherto

veyed mainly con-

commerce

of Phoenicia.
"

I
they
Greek Asia

5. Asia
were

Minor.

We

have

seen

how

the

Phoenicians,while

still masters
art

of the
to

sea,

carried the But

products and
establishment the
was

the
of

types of Oriental
colonies

Greece.

by
and

the

in the this
"

Aegean

islands

Minor,

direct

Phoenician

upon influence

coasts

of

almost

and that too at a time when Greece was entirelyexcluded making its first steps towards the creation of an independent On the other art. hand, the change in the relations of continued Europe and Asia begun by the Greek colonies, by concluded the Alexander the Persian wars, and by conquests of the Greeks have had a great effect upon at this early rmust period of their development; and it brought them for the first time into direct contact with great dynasties and established heard rumours of before such as they might have civilisations, have seen with the Phoenician from traders, but could never and Gyges, and even in Midas their own Croesus, seem eyes. from the heroes of mythical romance little removed ; ways many historical e vidence that have the best possible but we they were the early colonists of Ionia; and known to kings who were
" "

recent

have explorations the


art

civilisation and The less have


art

of all these
a common

of the notion given us some which they ruled. of the kingdoms over or kingdoms can be traced now with more
even

to certainty

source,

in the works

of

people who

left

no

trace

of their attributed scattered

people are
which
famous
are

to be

historyin Greek tradition. To this primitiverock-cut sculptures many

found

throughoutAsia
of

Minor.

The

most

of them

the Niobe all,

Mount

Sipylus,was

in

all

intended as an image of the great mother originally probability universal to us as Cybele,whose worship was goddess known in all this Greeks with

though region,
the mother

it may

have

been
frozen

identified into
stone.

by

the
But

whose
monuments

was grief

the chief centre

where

of this art have

been

found

is

64

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

therefore this

cannot

be earlier than
to

the

seventh

century

B.C.

To

and period, of

the

two

centuries

all the preceding,

earlier

works lion
era.

be assigned. Thus the series of Phrygian art must tombs belongs to the ninth and eighthcenturies before our In them we see treatment of a very vigorousand spirited
animal

the

forms,

of rendering from that of

in the exaggerated and conventional muscles, as might be expected in an art derived Assyria. The chief importanceof this series in our
to

but

present study lies in its strong resemblance

the

lion -gate
a

at

Mycenae
ornament

and which

the is

tomb-fronts geometrical found frequently


; these
two

also show

styleof
in first to

in the

gold ornaments
at

the be

Mycenae
a

tombs

facts

together seem

confirmation of the tradition which traced to striking of the Pelopiddynasty of the Atridae, lords Phrygia the origin of Mycenae rich in gold. But the Mycenae treasures, as we shall see, belong to a time some four or five centuries earlier than the Phrygian tombs ; and althoughit might be, and has at Mycenae is later than the been, contended that the lion-gate

tombs,
a

even

then in
a

the

is difficulty

not

removed, for Mr. Petrie


about
1400

has found lion of

Greek

settlement
once

wood gilt

which

formed

We must then, composition.^ difficultsubject, acknowledgethat Phrygian art

B.C., of similar a precisely part without going farther into a shows


a

in

Egypt, of

further

development of types
many
two

which One

were

known

to

the

Aegean peoples
a

centuries before.

fullyarmed
has
some

Phrygian tomb has warriors attacking a


to a

relief,senting reprelike
a

monster

gorgon, Greek

which but

resemblance
to armour,
are

work

of archaic Greek
a

sculpture ;
is also such any
not

it appears

be

too

earlyfor
have

of possibility of

and influence,
as

the

which
to

is like that invented.


seems

Greeks,
But in
a

the Carians

said in its

case,

this relief is of
a

promise
for

unique development never


time
recover

kind, and
the
a

to

show

fulfilled in from

which Phrygia,

did

long

blow

before inflicted, of

the middle
the

of the

seventh

century, by
left
us

inroad devastating
monuments

Cimmerians. The
art

of

Lydia
at

has

not

any

like those

of

but Phrygia,

all indications tend least of


and

to show

that the civilisation


in

and
1

attainments

the

rulingcaste
viii.

Lydia
with
a

were

Petrie, Elahun, Kahim,

Qurob, PI.
; Perrot

20,

p.

15, Ibuiul

scarab

of

Ameu-hotep III.,18tli dynasty.


"

Ramsay,

/. //. S.

1S8S,

p. 363

et

Chipiez, v., Fig. 117.

EARLY

INFLUENCES

"

DECORATIVE

ART

55

Phrygia ; and upon the earliest coins ever struck the credit for to the Lydians belongs almost certainly the favourite types, and the of this great invention especially resemblance lions' heads, seem to to show a Phrygian work. to the shrines of Greece, and Alyattesand Croesus sent offerings contributed to the to Delphi ; and Croesus materially especially buildingof the great temple of Artemis at Ephesus. But here in the region of archaic Greek we are anticipate art, and must further. The art of Caria is hardlymore known to us no by than Carian that of Lydia ; but monuments representative influence upon Greece cannot be dismissed so lightly, because of the very considerable place assigned tion to it both by Greek tradiand by some modern Thucydides ^ tells us archaeologists.
similar
"

to

those

of

"

that

the

Carians

in old

times

shared and
,

with

the

Phoenicians he mentions

the
as

occupationof the Aegean islands equallyhistorical the empires of


confirms

though
and

Minos

of

Agamemnon,

he

his statement
was

about
of

the Carians the


arms

by

the fact that when


to

Delos

cleared
was an on

graves

greater part belonged


and been the method found both have

Carians,as
Traces islands of and

shown

by

their

of burial. in the been will

early civilisation
the mainland The

have of

Greece, which
it may class of very the

to assigned

the Carians.
in

accuracy

of this attribution be

be here

considered
as

subsequent sections; but

noted

very probablethat a certain found in the islands does belong to statuettes view confirmed

primitive
Carians
"

by

the

discovery of
the

similar

figuresupon
whom
an

the

mainland The had

of Caria
most

itself.with peoples the


art

southerly of nearly akin

Greeks which

to do

in Asia

Minor, the Lycians,developed


to

is much mentioned
that

more
:

that of Greece

than

those

already

later it fell

completelyunder

Greek

influence,so

from

the sixth century down\yard

Harpy tomb,^ are of Greek later shall have to recur to them sculpture ; and we few monuments to illustrate our subject. But there are some which probably belong to a period earlier than the rise of Greek far as so sculpture they may appear to resemble ; and
archaic Greek

the

like Lycian monuments, commonly quoted as typical specimens

works,

this

is not
1

due

to

the

influence of Greece

i. 8.

Bent,
3

J. II. S.

1888, p. 82.

See

below, " 21

[b).

56

HANDBOOK
to

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

upon

Lycia, but

an

types and resources. Oriental art may be mentioned


be

independent development of For the sake of completeness, one


here
"

similar other

that of Persia.

As

might

this shows distinct signsof Assyrian or Babylonian expected, though the beauty of its work in enamelled bricks gives origin, it a character of its own. But so far as sculpture is concerned, by the time the fall of Croesus brought Persia and Greece into

contact, Greece
After Greece
was

had

far

more

to

teach

than

to

learn.
to

this brief review liable from

of the

artistic influences
to

which

inhabited and and

next turn outside,we must by the Greeks themselves, and observe

the lands tion civilisa-

the

artistic attainments the


course

of those the time

who

inhabited Greek

the mainland

islands

before

when

sculpture
some

began

its

of continuous

development.
"

"

6.

EarlyPopulation of Greece.

We

have

now

obtained

the generalnotion of the artistic influences which surrounded We have later to arise. as region where Greek art was yet Greece of of the which it art seen or itself, produced nothing in the primitive lie outside the scope of our really ages which estimate the relation of this study. But before we can rightly

sculptureof historical Greece, it is necessary the nature of the eai'ly to consider briefly populationof Greece, and of the changesit had undergone before the era Avith which concerned in fact realise whether must we are especially ; we have deal with other foreign influences, to we predominant in
to

early art

the

the

land

that and

was

later

to

be

called

Hellas,

or

with

the

ancestors

kinsmen

of the Greeks
cannot
art
as

themselves. be

For

Mycenae
discussion

and
on

its wonderful the

treasures

ignored in any
who made

originof
we

Greek

and the

those
men

treasures, whatever

theory
B.C.

may

adopt
than

to

them,
about

are

earlier certainly It the


must

the

Dorian

immigration of
the

1000

be

acknowledged
before the
to

that

people
had

who

inhabited much

Peloponnese
their
not
owners no

Dorian the
name

invasion of In

just as assign to

title as did
true

successors

Greeks, although they


to

call themselves all the


to

Hellenes.

order

their

remains great prehistoric

in
in

Greece, there
ancient and

is

need

go

back,
any

as

many

have

both

modern
or

times, to
other
name

any

called Pelasgians people,whether equally lacking in historical authority. earlier knew less than
we

The

Greeks

of histo'ical times

do

of

the

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

57

state

of their country
but there
state

more

than
reason

1000
to

years

before that poems

their

own

day,
and

is every

social

depicted in
No

the
one

suppose Homeric

the

political
far

is not

removed
or

from

the truth.

would

archaeological accuracy
ruled removed Iliad and

in such
over

expect to find historical records, and the age of the

who great dynasties

the many

Peloponnese was own day; but the


of those who

by

inhabitants of the pre-Dorian from the poet's generations written for the descendants
the

Odysseywere

of Mycenae and glories vaders Sparta, although they had been driven forth by Dorian inNor the Aegean. were home they across to find a new colonies amid foreign surroundings. driven to plant their new both shores Greek of colonisation, Long before the great period were of the islands, already of the Aegean, as well as many nected or race closelyconoccupied by a people either of Greek find during the period before the with it. If,then, we that distinct evidence invasion Dorian people of a common could stillremember of similar customs, civilisation, and
a

and

of

common

artistic tastes

inhabited acquirements,

many

of the
we we

great part of the mainland


of

of Greece, Greek
; and

and Aegean islands, in shall be justified need


not

regardingthese people as
records

search

for

afterwards who were aboriginesof different race all progress who monopolised of foreign or expelled, conquerors and show civilisation. that the The Homeric of Ionia
as

poems
at

alone

would

suffice to

Greeks
on

regarded the
least not

attainments inferior
to

of their

their ancestors
own

the

mainland

and

even

and imagination allowingfor poetical


is

the

praise
in

of

old

times, there

probably some
"

foundation

of truth

this belief.

" 7. Civilisation of Mycenae. We

have

seen

populationwhich
before the

tenanted

the mainland

and

the that among islands of Greece


as

great immigration commonly known


was

the

Dorian
in

invasion,there
the
arts

scope

for
;

very

considerable

attainments direct

of

war

and this

peace

and but

although
Greeks
to

historical is

evidence evidence
in the

upon

subject is
traditions

scanty, there
show

enough
and had

both

in

the

of the

themselves that

records
a as

of

neighbouring nations
advance in in

they
won

made such

considerable that of Minos

both.

Powerful
to

dynasties
the

Crete, who
that

is said

have

supremacy who led

of the
the

Aegean, or
Greeks

united

Pelopids in Mycenae, againstTroy, are regarded by


of the

58

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap

Thucydides^
power
to

as

historical examples affording


as

of

and

prosperitysuch
any credence

could

hardly
And

fail to
if
we

political imply a
refuse
must

advance corresponding

in civilisation.

even

acknowledge

historical basis for these


to

we legends,

still the

give

great invasions of footingin that permanent


owed allies from their the west
success

Egyptian record which states that Egypt, by which the Libyans gained a
country for
some

the

length of

time

and repeatedly harassed (1500-1200 B.C.), in

the national
to
"

great part

the

government, of co-operation and


"

of the Mediterranean

lonians

Danai,
bronze-

Trojans
clad
men

and from

Dardanians, among
over

the

"

sea

who

others ; the same in the seventh later, his rule who in

century,
We
in

helped
should between

Psammetichus know
1500

to

establish

Egypt.

but and

little of these
1000

people

lived

Greece

portance of sufficient imwere B.C., and who to be feai'ed even by the greatest civilised power of their day, were we records,whether dependent upon literary
cut
on

stone

or

preserved by
have of them from

the late

tradition

of

manuscripts. trustworthy Mycenae


and

But

we fortunately

information
source.

about

years and another Dr.

gathered abundant
a more

The

excavations

of

Schliemann

at

startled

the world

to by restoring

us, if not

the bones

the the

himself, at least those possessionsof Agamemnon of a time very near princesof Mycenae rich in gold,"
"

of

to that

traditionally assignedto
more

the that

conqueror
even more

of

Troy ;

and

it

seems

than

coincidence

similar

workmanship

have

been

found

great

centre

in Greece

of the government of the itself that the remains of


come

perfect specimens of a the other near Sparta,Atridae. Nor is it only


this rich
towns

and in the

powerful
Fayum,
we

people have
tenanted
to

to

light. At
Greece
and

certain the the

by
come

those

allies of foreign remains


to

Libyans

whom

know

have

from found

neighbouringcountries,
other

have

been

of

pottery and
at
are

antiquities
rich
mere an

similar precisely
treasures

those

discovered graves

of the wonder

Mycenaean
and

Mycenae.^ The thus no longer a


survival

object of
1 ^
"'

admiration,an
See p. 60.

isolated

from

i. At

8,

9.

near Vapliio,

Sparta.

his Kahun, Petrie ; see By Mr. Flinders Guroh, and Hawara, and his in the Journal Guroh ; also his papers Illahun, Kahun, and of Hellenic Studies and 1891 of 1890 "The on Egyptian Basis of Greek History,"and "Notes on the of Mycenae." Antiijuities

EARLY

INFLUENCES"

DECORATIVE

ART

59

extinct civilisation of which

we

have whom

people and the dynastiesto point reached by the highest


the

knowledge. The they belong represent the


no

other

civilisation of S.E.
1000
B.C.

period between

1500

and

It is

Europe during perhaps even

and decline, within this period to notice their advance possible until they are overwhelmed by the Dorian invasion. I 8. Art of Mycenae. It may well be asked what is the importanceof an artistic development which had passedthrough
"

all

stages of its existence before 1000 B.C. and then practically Ijecame which, as extinct,to the history of Greek sculpture,
we

have
B.C.

seen,

cannot

be

said_to take
will

its rise much be

before
in

600

This

is

questionwhich
At
art

partlyanswered
to

the

next

section.

present it will suffice


of

notice certain

characteristics their relation


remote

of the
to

however
been

Mycenae which are of interest in the later development of Greek art. For, have in time, the artists of Mycenae cannot

of alien race ; and even entirely apart from traditions of have handed down which form to their successors, they may and spirit of their work often gives promise of^ the character Hellenic style. what later to be known as was Greek soil is which exists on work of sculpture The earliest, the colossal group the great above stand
one facing

of

two

lions which

fillsthe

triangular space
The
a

at Mycenae. gate on another, their fore-paws resting

of the citadel

lions
or

basis which

altar above

which

stands

column.

This

is

scheme

is

repeated in frequently
discovered sculptures the this in the earliest of the whole

Oriental

art, and
is upon

also in the fine tomb

Another Phrygia."-^ series


"

example probably gold plaque found in


"

Graeco-Libyansettlement
motive, whatever
at
a

in the

Fayi;m.
known
"

We
to

see

then that

its

was origin,

the inhabitants the all

of Greece thirteenth

very

remote

century
a

B.C.

And

period at least as early as which the Phrygian reliefs,

be period,about 900 to 700 B.C., cannot as showing us the models whence the Mycenae lions were derived,though it may be disputedwhether they show us borrowed later survival of the Oriental original, or a type a by Pausanias Phrygiafrom Greece. says that the Mycenae lions which made were by the Cyclopes from Lycia a statement

belong to regarded

later

"

we

must

consider

in

"

10.

For

the

present
2

we

must

be

content
1

with
.1. Z.

the evidence 1S65, Fig. csciii.

of the
; B. D.

itself. sculpture
VA.

This
See

offers in "
.''..

60

HANDBOOK

OF contrast
we we

GREEK
to
see

SCULPTURE

chap,

its execution
treatment

marked

the
in

vigorousbut

conventional
in that of

of beasts which

Assyrianart, and
seen,

Asia

Minor, which
are

is,as

have
mere

dependent on

Assyria.
form

Nor, again,
which

they like those


the

abstractions

of animal

Egyptian art of the period. Yet, in spite of the careful modelling and detailed truth to nature which has excited so much of admiration, they have a conventionality their own, not only in their position but in their style. It is enough to observe that it is not yet agreed whether they are for lions or lionesses. from meant They are not to be separated the rest of the Mycenaean discoveries ; and although, have as we from be derived they cannot seen, any Egyptian or Oriental models, they are separatedby an equallywide gulf of styleas well as of time from the earliest productions of Greek In art. this Mycenae art the rendering of some beasts,lions and bulls not was only different from that we find in Greek especially, excellence of work to it ; so that mere superior art, but actually is no that cannot for assuming an be proved. reason affinity The relation of Mycenae to later Greek be afterwards art must considered ; but the art of Mycenae must first be treated as the distinct and independentproduct of the people who ruled at

belongto

Mycenae
These among
but

and

elsewhere
over

in Greece

before

the Dorian
as a

invasion. of

lions

the works with ornaments

the gate stand alone of art that belong to and


to

work

sculpture
stone tomb-

Mycenae.

The

carved figures render

clumsy attempts
works
of

upon them show nothing in flat relief subjects borrowed


are

from

the

and are modelling, to pass impossible work


at

which, if

not

entirelydevoid of of no artistic interest or importance. But it is the magnificent over specimensof goldsmith's small scale, to be regarded as on a sculpture

goldsmith ; they

least

belong to
work found

the

kindred

art

of caelatura.

The

finest of

these

is offered

by the
at

repousse

pair of gold cups Bapheion (Vaphio)


the outside

ornamented
near

with The
up in
are

Sparta.
is beaten
a

which design, from behind

is all round into bold

relief,and
at

of the cups, finished with with


as

chisel

front ; the repouss6 and turned over plain, the


vases

plates are
the with

backed

others,which
in the
on

top

so

to

hold
scenes

reliefs ; the
two

handles
are

are

fixed
in

rivets.

The show
which

similar
a

One

has

wild
a

scene

subject,but of hunting, in
betAveen

also wild
;

great
bulls
one

contrast.
are

being
has

driven

into

net

secured

two

trees

of them

62

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE two

chap.

turned other
or

upon
scene

his hunters
is
more

and

overthrown

of them.

The

and represents peaceful,


A.

Mr. as possibly, bulls by the help show very and power slender,and way
more

J. Evans
a

of

decoy
muscles

cattle at pasture, suggests, the capture of Avild The these vases cow. men on their

fair

of

modelling, though
are

proportionsare
in in
a ventional con-

their the

only
are

rendered

animal in their for


one

forms

far bolder and

design,
The
to

accurate
we

character
or

proportions.
similar rendered
an

bulls, if
those
common

allow
on

two

contortions

the

island truth of

gems
to

(" 9), are


by
but
we

with

wonderful
has

vigour and
resources

nature, and

artist who
:

all the
in
no

skill and

at training

his command

they
the

way

resemble
an

the often successful archaic Greek artist ;

always
see

tive tenta-

experiments of

here, as
the
same

in

Mycenae daggersand the the highestattainments style,


attempts of
trace
some one

other finest of
a

products of
art, not
We the may

mature

promising
able that
to

that is yet in its the links between


two

infancy.
art

be and

of

Mycenae
not
same sense

of

historical
a

Greece, but the

do certainly in the

combine

to form

continuous

development, except

in which

the art of the Renaissance that of classical Greece

be said to continue and develop may and Eome. The interval of time is not And what

quite so great,but
traditions
were

it is still considerable. have


to be

types

or

transmitted and

traced in both What of those

cases

alike

through
were we

obscure
case

indirect channels.

channels
art

in the

of that little which section. and

survived

Mycenaean
"

shall

see

in the next

We have seen Early Bronze Reliefs. how widelythe art of Mycenae is separated both in style and in actual lapse of centuries from the first beginnings of sculpture in Gi'eece. We have also seen, in speaking of other influences to be traced in early Greek art, that the interval unfruitful of artistic works and tendencies was by no means But in the case the other peoplesof the Levant. of among of sculpture Greece itself we must give up any exclusive pursuit

"

9. The Island Gems

if

we

wish

to

bridgeover
is

the

chasm, and be

content

with
must

such
turn
art

little help as
to

what

is in

And given us by other arts. on some sense a only sculpture

first we

small

the scale,

of the gem

engraver. class of gems, their style, and the A

easilyto be distinguished by their shape, subjectswhich they represent, has been

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECOEATIVE

ART

63

known found

for

some

time

"

as

the

Island

Gems."

These

had

been
on

in the islands of the

Greek
not

in Crete, and Archipelago, in Asia

the mainland years the

of

Greece, but

Minor.

Within

recent

examples found in tombs at Mycenae and and interest those both in number near Sparta^ have surpassed These gems are proved alike by known. that were previously stances of them and by the circumthe subjects some on represented
numerous

under

which Thus

they were
How

found

to

belong to

the

civilisation.

their connection

with

the art of
to

Mycenaean Mycenae is
made
we

established. clearly
cannot

long they
among

continued

be
must

say ; but

on

certain

them, which

almost

theus, Promewith Argive bronze relief, Heracles and Gorgon, Geras, and and Heracles Triton, from Olympia (Athens, National After Museum). Olympia, iv. Taf. xxxix. Fig. 699a. Fig. 2.
"

Fig.

3."

Heracles

and

Triton, on an island gem (British Museum).

belong certainly
even

to

much

later

we periods,

find

figures and

which groups of figures such as Prometheus subjects,

and
man

appear the

to

represent
^

mythological
ling wrest-

vulture,or Heracles
Now

with

Triton,

"

the

old

of the sea."

and groups are repeated almost exactlyupon figures reliefs, early bronze proved by the forms of letters on their be of Argive origin, to which have been found at inscriptions * and elsewhere ; these bronze reliefs certainlyare Olympia the earliest examples of the continuous succession of among reliefs and which sculptures belong to archaic Greek art, and be earlier than the beginning of the sixth they cannot

these very series of a

century.
*
2

The
By
'
*

same

bronze

reliefs also

borrowed

types
vi.

of

See Milchhofer, Die


M. Tsountas the See

in GriecJienland, cc. ii. and Anfdnge der Kunst 'Apx. 1888, PI. 10 ; 1889, PI. 10. ; see 'E"p. in Bronzefande

illustrations

See Furtwangler, Die

Milchliofer, op. ciL, p. 185. aus Olympia, p. 92.

64

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

cuap.

Oriental

and these borrowed origin, types are bronze reliefs. The primitive upon more of these is a plaque in repouss6 work, narrower the bottom, and divided into four fields by The
two

still
most

more

mon com-

remarkable

at the

top than
bands. decorative
a

horizontal

uppermost types, birds

of and

these

fields have the

purely
lowest

Oriental

gryphons;
the

has

large

of the figure hand. But

winged
in the

Oriental

Artemis, holding a
top is
a

lion in each

third

field from

purely Greek

Heracles Another relief shows a shooting a centaur. subject, of the single figure of Heracles shooting; the peculiarity is techniquein this case is that the figure cut out as well as and so is evidently modelled meant to by repouss6 technique, solid background, be affixed to some of wood.^ probably shall see later how We early Greek sculptorsdid not invent types,- but repeated or adapted those which they usually their predecessorsor inherited from borrowed from foreign nations ; at present all that concerns us Argive bronze workers who made those
a

is

to

notice

that

the

earlyreliefs

drew

from of the
*

store

of

types which
; and
some

was

also known

to the

engravers

island

gems with Sicily, their

earlyvases
work

found

mostly in Italyand
them,
We
seem

stamped
from

in relief upon
same sources.

to derive

decoration

the

see,

then, that

there existed among the Greek to the flourishing period of

peoples, some subsequent and Mycenaean civilisation, to the independentdevelopment of Greek a sculpture, previous and groups which were, so to speak,the common store of figures
at

time

the

property of the gem-cutter, the potter, and


and which served
as

the alike the

bronze could

worker,
exercise

models

on

which

each
was

his skill.

types
source,

is such Greek

originof these to but they certainty any foreign and the nature of the subjects chosen for representation that hard that it seems to deny to they belongdistinctly decorative of later than that of art the a period art, to
poems
from plate, it would have

It is not

easy to say what be traced with cannot

the Homeric

and

about

contemporary

with

the Hesiodic

bronze

ibex, is also cut out ; but


thus details,
where
2 ^ one

it lias much of

two men, one Crete, representing no modelling, only incised the


same

of lines

whom to

carries

an

represent

all

eifect

as

vase. black-figured

Only

portion is "
18 below. these

in front

another,as
used

in the arms,

the

front

part

is raised.

See Of

course

names

are

in their wide

conventional

intention the Works

of

the attributing and Days.

Shield

of Heracles, for example, to

sense, the

without
same

any

poet as

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

65

for,as
but

we

shall

see

the repieaantation of -"ul4ecta_nejther later, merel J conventional or symbolical, is the characteristic which then mythology, Greek artist.
This

takexuirom derived

Jikil^iJiffi. Jipr
from

the beginsto distinguish shall have


suffice for
to
us

decorative

art

we

consider
to have

in

""
two

11, 12.

For

the
arts

present it
which

must

minor observedjbhose and of


we

connecting link between


a,s

those of

Mycenae

supply a artistic periodssTiJwidely separated the rise of Greek sculpturein the


have studied
"

seventh

century.

So

far

this dark

interval

of the monuments to give a large to name entirely by the light small things. We must turn however to consider, now briefly, the views held by the Greeks themselves to the periodwhich as artistic activity.^ precededtheir own etc. Telchines, " 10. MythicalTraditions : the Cyclopes, Dadyli, We have first to deal with stories about purelymythicalartists. If we knew of these stories as they were told among the more Greeks themselves during an we earlyperiod, probably should have no need to discuss them seriously evidence for the early as But here, as elsewhere, the historyof sculpturein Greece. traditions of popular mythology only reach us, for the most
"

the medium part, through and gists,

of

historians rationalising

and

my

tholo-

the to have value from more consequently appear and less value from the point of view point of view of history, of mythology, than they really possess. In almost all primitivemythologies with tales of meet we

creatures, human

or

superhuman,
to

who
are

possess

marvellous

strength and
works, real
or

and skill,

whom

later

assignedvarious

which excited the astonishment and imaginary, admiration of later generations. The giants and dwarfs of northern mythology were with believed to have piled up stones have to superhuman strength, or wrought metal with magic subtlety. So too in Greece we hear of the Cyclopes,a gigantic to whom race are assigned walls like those of Mycenae and such as works of sculpture to them Tiryns assigns ; if Pausanias bhe lions of Mycenae and a head of Medusa at Argos,he is only
impossible to omit all reference to the ingenious theory propoumied by in Griechejiland, that Crete was in Milchhofer, in the Anfdnge der Kunst times the of chief centre and civilisation the art for us by the Jarly exemplified of Mycenae and the island More discoveries ;reasures recent to seem gems. show that the chief seat of this civilisation was probably in the Peloponnese "tself. But until systematic excavations carried have been out in Crete, it is ascertain to the mpossible exactly position and influence of that island, which jindoubtedly played a very important part in the prehistoric age of Greece.
Dr. F
"*

It is

66

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

a conjecturebased repeating

on

the

that supposition
that

these

popular
from
not

tales

were

true.
more a use

Nor
to

is the
us.

story

the

Cyclopescame
does
; and
or as
"

Lycia of
indicate
is
more

A
on

study
"

of the

monuments

Lycian influence
to

Cyclopean
use

work

nothing

unscientific than of
a

the reject
to

miraculous remains

improbable
historical

elements

myth, and then


rests
on

what

evidence, though it

the same precisely authority. Idaean In similar the primitivemyths, Dactyli and the Telchines are the first metal workers ; they also deal in magic, and ai"e associated in mystic rites with the Cabiri,the Curetes, The Cyclopes too are and other semi-divine personages. sented represometimes with the Greek
as

working in metal, and


orthodox
"

are

later associated these


more

god Hephaestus, who


in

supersedesall
Greek

metal workers, as primitive


"

polytheismsupersedes
of

at

least
we

literature

the

polydaemonism
the Telchines

popular

belief.

If

were

merely told
of

that

forged the
arise. made But the

sickle of Cronus

and

the trident of

Poseidon, or that the Cyclopes


no

forgedthe

thunderbolts

Zeus,
and
as were

mistake the

could

later authorities earliest statues


to

assert distinctly

that

Telchines is

of the
statues

gods ;
such

this statement those


known
are

probablydue
and The fact is with and the

the fact that Telchinia the

of

Apollo Telchinius
to

Hera that

in

Rhodes Greek

exist.

gods

Ox

the
of

Pantheon

here associated

those

creatures

supersede;

hence the

popular myth whose the epithet, which


than in the whom

worship they absorb


no case no more

refers Athena

to

making
at

of

statue

of

Telchinia
The

Teumessus

in

Boeotia, of
the

statue

existed. of

Telchines
appear

belong to
at

primitivemythology
Boeotia
may and

Rliodes,and

also
name

Sicyon,in
is
a

elsewhere be

; the

Dactyli
"

whose

and puzzle,

either

the

cause

or

the

result of the stories of their artistic


"

have no or activity, possibly all with at connection them belong to Ida in Phrygia or in Crete : the two are often confused in myth, and certainly are in and ritual. associated The names closely primitivehistory been in times have taken historical the skill as symbolising may in metal work, perhaps derived from the East, which ised characterthe earlyart of Rhodes and Crete. But they certainly cannot
be from

trusted

to

giveus
as

any

information

which

we

cannot

gain
cerned con-

other
11.

sources

to

the artistic activity of


and

times. prehistoric
have been in

"

Art

in Homer

Hesiod.

"

So

far of

we

either

with

the

scanty remains

earlyart

Greece,

EARLY

INFLUENCES

"

DECORATIVE

ART

67

or

with
a

such

until
from

have never, as popular traditions about their origin period, found any recognition comparatively recent We
must
now

literature.
"

turn

to
^

very

different

source

of information admire

-the Homeric

poems

and

it is fat easier to

the
we

and spirited
meet

which
exact

in

value
we are

for the
now

of works of art poeticaldescriptions their Homer than to appreciatecritically It is with the latter only history of art.
;

that

concerned

and,

in

one

sense,

of the
imust

adds to our poet'simagination his conception of between distinguish


and

ness very richfor we difficulties,

the

what

he This

is describing

the work

itself which

he

has

seen.

brings

us

The difficulty. poet is not a Pausanias, of art ; and of works and description givinga careful catalogue one product might even imagine that all he describes is the mere his own A phantasy,having no counterpart in the outside To a certain degree this is true ; it is not world of his time. existed any such be supposed,for example, that there ever u its complicated that of Achilles in the Iliad,with shield as and figures. But, on the other hand, no irrangement of scenes uninfluenced by his external ooet, however great, can be entirely
to

yet another

surroundings.Just )ljjects, though not follow must diing,


n-eate

as

his

of descriptions from
in

natural

scenes

or

derived
nature

particular landscape or any and all essential features, must

after of
art

the he

laws
must

vorks

of of nature, so too in his descriptions of the art of his follow the character
in

ime, and
.vhich
ore was

reproduce
the works
art

his mind

that

style and
We

composition
may Homeric
of

adopted by contemporary
of Homer
as

artists. the best

therethe
age,
c? 5

quote
not

for authority existence

"haracter of the
lie

known
as

in Greece

durina; the
actual

hough

of

course

proving

the

any

jarticular work If then


,tate
we

which
may
use

describe. he may the Homeric poems have the


still to
to
course own poet's no a one

as

evidence whether
to

for the their

of

art

in
to

Greece, we

consider

estimony is
vhich
Lccuracy vould at
or

apply
Of

time, or
and

the ages of therefore


it

he writes.

would

expect ai'chaeological
suppose that Homer's

research first
seem

from
most

primitivepoet,
to

natural

if jxample,
a

Homeric

criticism

is

beyond

the

that the
it

shield of Achilles

It is probable,for scojjie of this work. is among the later portions of the Iliad; but the

any

case

he rise of

belongs to the period between Greek and that is what sculpture,

days flourishing
concerns us

of

Mycenae

and

it most

to know.

68

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

are descriptions

based

upon
extent

the the

works
case.

of

art
on

of his

own

day ;
hand,
the

and
we

this is
must
not

to

great
were

But,

the other under

forgetthe

peculiarcircumstances

which

composed. Without concerningourselves with disputed points, take it as generally we agreed that may the Iliad and Odysseywere designed for an audience of Ionian
poems memories Greeks, full of glorious when these of the the

Homeric

their
two

ancestors

had

ruled

in
not

"good old times" Peloponnese ; and that


product of a new its development.

greatest of epicswere

the first

but rather the mature fruit of poetic style, a They have clearly long tradition behind them ; and just as grammatical forms and stereotyped phrases form part of many the conventional that
some

apparatus
of his

of the

poet,

so

too

we

may

even

suppose

their

substance,be the besides this, it is by no

of works of art may, in descriptions of earlier examples. And, reproduction heirlooms means improbable that some may have survived the
to

belonging to
poet
whom
some

an

hints
wrote.
a

earlier age to the as But

give the
about

surroundings of

heroes

he

of such

work,

in any case it is evident that the description for instance, the shield of Achilles is as

understood clearly like

the poet who wrote it,while it remained tators imito the Greeks of the classical period, to Roman unintelligible

by

and Virgil,

to

modern the
true

artist like

Flaxman, until the

geniusof

explanation. Though Homer of impossible to the heroes magnificence may attribute possessions who were in every way far superior his own so to degenerate his when with he deals descriptions day, yet must, except magic refer in similar to kind those which he or to fairy-tale, objects around saw him, if often exceedingthem in splendour.
We Iliad
I
ments
we

Brunn

recovered

may and
of

then, after

so

much

consideration, make
for the
; and

use

of the attainfact

Odysseyas evidence in early Greece art


is that

knowledge

and

the

first remarkable

that

sculptureis almost, if not quite, unknown. The only real exceptionis the statue of Athena in whose knees the Trojan matrons Troy, upon lay the robe Avhich this implies no they offer.^ But even great skill in in Asia known were sculpture certainly ; roughly shaped figures
Minor,
^

notice

free

as

we

have
'

seen,

before

there

was

any
It

such
seems

thing as
Keirai,

II. vi. 303, dqKev AO-rjuairis eiri yovuain.v


this may if so, one be
can

riVKOfioio.

quite possible
youfaai

that

merely
draw

a uo

metaphorical
inference from

expression like de^of


it.

ewi

and,

70

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

sizes ; ^

thus,

if viewed

from

above,
is

the

whole

would four

have
narroAV

the

appearance concentric bands of A

of

large disc
so

surrounded

by

; and

there

ample

long and complicatedgroups


upon that

scope for the ment arrangein these narrow bands. bands manship workof

similar arrangement precisely metal have shields and been


^

of reliefs in concentric bowls in works Phoenician


in

is found

found

Cyprus,

Etruria, and

actuallydate from the sixth century B.C. ; but the style to which they oelongmust have existed earlier, and the shield of Achilles, though not so late as this, is yet acknowledged by Homeric scholars to be the latest portions of the Iliad. The technique as among described in the shield does not, on the other hand, appear to be that of relief, but rather of metal I iidayingor damascen' Here ing,since differences of colour are often insisted upon. we see an analogy in the dagger blades of Mycenae ; may

elsewhere.^

These

Phoenician

though

these

are

of

course

far too

remote

in

time

to

have

influenced

the poet, a similar technique may in his time, and it is even possiblethat some manufacture
may

well have weapons


as

existed of

early

have

survived

as

heirlooms,or
as

dedicated remained

like the famous shield of Euphorbus, offerings, to be recognised by him againwhen re-incarnated When notice actual
we

which

Pythagoras.*
first all from know of

proceed to
none

consider
are
a

the from

scenes

themselves,we
to
we

that life.

of them
we

mythology, but
what
we

Here
art

have

contrast

earlyGreek
bowls

; biit it is

justlike

what

find in the

nician Phoe-

already referred to of a mixed Egyptian and ^ all the scenes how Assyrian style. Mr. Muri-ay has shown described be found these bowls can by Homer actually upon other similar works thus by a kind of patch-work or ; and from these he has actuallyproduced a shield approximately
Ueber Ilomerische that the shield is of the Reicliel, Waffen, p. 44, maiutaius in the oval middle, and not a circle. But Mycenae shape, an typical compressed is to be regarded as he regards it as probable that tlie compression in this case and but slight, does affect W. the t n Leaf, Iliad, xviii. seriously composition. maintains that the Trxi^xes refer only to the leather, not to the metal 478 (note), of have covering, and that the five folds can nothing to do with the formation bands but of the If so, there is no evidence the of arrangement must generalprinciple it could be worked out. etc. Inst., X. xxxi.-xxxiii., p. 67. PI. xix. ; Mon. decoration. for the be division and into five fields, the
^

the same,

diagram

shows
^ "* ^ ^

how

Cesnola, Cyprus,

Helbig,Das
Of.

Homerische Od. \.

Epns,
11. i.

Horace,

28,

Greek

PL Sculpture,

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

71

resemblingthat described by Homer. and composition of the various authorities are agreed. But in the
lialance of the various
scenes,

As

to

the
no

exact
two

scenes

arrangement modern

artistic
seems no

composition and
doubt that the of the that
that
; and

there

poet
metal

was

influenced whose

workers

far beyond by an imagination before his eyes productswere

Pio. 4." Homeric Note. This is derived The central end of from disc the
on

Shield

of Achilles.

Brunii is made second


same

"

modifications.

after the description, third

{Kunstgeschichfe,Fig. 58), witli some much larger in proportion ; and the back to return baud, is made along the
direction.

band,

instead

of

going

in the

in

this

sense

the

shield

of

Achilles

has

some

claim

to

be

regarded as
all the
The
scenes

the

first true
are

example
based
scenes a

of Greek

art, even

it contains of

upon

types of
in the

though import. foreign


in the

arrangement
be is

the
at

probably present
the

poet'smind may diagram, which

seen

glance

modified

from

scheme

accompanying suggested by

'
72 A HANDBOOK OF GREEK SCULPTURE
chap.

Brunn. in

Only here the centi-aldisc has been the surrounding bands narrower. proportion,

made

of this alteration is obvious ; otherwise it is third circles the to fit into the second and

larger advantage possible impractically


The
numerous or

much

impliedby figures
metal works
bands

the
are as

And description.^

the

shields
thus
see

other

which

quoted as
narrow as

similar in of
in

have designusually
are

of decoration inmost life of


a

those which and

off'ered.

On

the

of the three bands


town

we figures war

all the
come

varied

in peace
trace

; on

the

next

the various these main


scenes,

employments
divisions
seems we can

of the country ; and


a

within

each of

symmetry

in all the smaller

the to completeness give a poetical of a composition which seems whole. The conception like this, them in a to illustrate all the phases of human life, balancing and delicate contrasts,is perhaps system of subtle comparisons
which
to

such

as

would
extent not
or

commend

itself to what
an

poet leather than


have he had

to

an

artist.
to
we some

must the poet's And, although imagination

been

dependent on
any
use on

seen, yet actually

do

find

trace

of

allowance

culties, for technical diffior

of the

of

conventional of

type

designto
which

fill a the

at given field,

least

the bands

within figures

human We
in
as

interest is concentrated.

alreadyfind
when
we

great diff"erencein this respect as well


come

as

others

to

consider

the
is of

shield
course

of Heracles
to
a

described
a

by

extent
so some

mere

poem imitation of the Homeric

Hesiod.^

This

great

far

as new

it is so, it is of littlevalue to

shield of Achilles ; and But it introduces us.

derived from contemporary clearly intermediate to establish its position as art, and which serve between the shield of Achilles and the chest of Cypselus if and Pausanias be pardoned for classifying Homer we may their between find in common can according to what we The whole arrangement of the shield of Heracles descriptions. is probablyto be regardedas similar to that of its model, but
are
"

elements which

nicade the description go Overbeck, to avoid this clifBculty, Not

from
to

the innermost of tlie fields

circle to the fonitli, third, second, and then the fifth. of order, even this does not remedy the awlcward inversion

speak
of the

shape

provided.
"^

The

name

Hesiod

is of

course

used the

here

in the

same

conventional
about

sense

as

that of Homer.

Whoever

wrote

Shield, the
to

artistic innovations

which

it introduces

into the Homeric

seem description

belong to

the seventb

century

B.C.

EARLY

INFLUENCES
to

DECORATIVE

ART

73

it does what

not

seem

be

thought clearly
symmetry
shield
; in
we

out

and in

distributed it is

correspondence and
from
on

find

merely
than

derived
a

the Homeric
to

fact,it is little more

peg

which
as

scenes,

such

mark

of various hang rhetorical descriptions these Under a period of epic decadence.


not
seem

circumstances, it does arrangement arrangement


hints of

any
even

use

to

try

to

restore

the
an no

the

whole
out

if the
ow"n recover

poet had
has
we

such

mapped
from the

in

his

mind, he
it.

given
may
as an

by

which

his readers

could

But As

learn
identified un-

something
Centaurs
;

subjectshe
we

selects.

well
the

battle scene,
and

find

the

fightof

Lapiths

and

Apollo
Some

and

the these

mythological subjects are introduced, such as Muses and Perseus pursued by the Gorgons.
subjects, too,
are

of

oftered by peculiarly adapted to the narrow For example, the frieze of lions and this style of decoration. the of horses and chariots, or races boars, the long processions that recur schemes hare pursued by dogs and men, are again from The and in art relief work. and both on vases again
which the

those among bands of ornament

which

are

poet

draws has

the

additions

that

he

makes

to

his these also from

Homeric schemes

model
have

been

evidentlyreached the stage at selected as appropriate ; and


Greek

which
it has
scenes

begun to illustrate ordinarylife which


In
a

mythology,as
side of

well

as

the

continued

work

like the chest

by side with heroic exploits. Cypselus we shall find mythological


;

scenes

employed exclusively
reliefs the various

but

we

can

trace

on

vases

and

on

decorative from

stages by which
of

types, sometimes
decorative

ordinary life,sometimes
to be

purely

come gradually

identified with certain

origin, scenes, mythological

and

is probably far which appropriatedto a significance removed from that which possessed. they originally In the Greek epic poems we found hardly any trace of the of sculpture have a series of art we peculiarlyGreek ; but which decorative works, beginning with the shield of Achilles,
to

be

seem

to to

reflect

the artistic tendencies which


we

of

their

time, and
the his

to

lead

up

the

examples

learn, from
"

Pausanias, to have

been

preservedat actually
Works. We have

of description day. how the

"

12.

Other

Decorative

seen

had alreadyimagined decorative works, poetical fancy of Homer of which the conception and seem already to arrangement Greek anticipate art, although the technique and the tj'pes

74

HANDBOOK
to

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

imagination were probably of natural enough that the earliest artists foreignorigin. It was of Greece should apply their efforts to great compositions like
the shields of Homer recorded such
as

which

lent definite form

his

and

of Hesiod

; and

we

find, accordingly works,


of

in Pausanias'

the

chest
can

of
be
to

some description, Cypselus and

great decorative
the throne

Amyclae, which
extant

restored
a

in

Ap^olloat imagination, by the help of


to

monuments,
neither
sense

sufficient extent

enable
art.

us

to

judge
true

of their that
narrower

positionin the
of
these

is

development exactly a work


; it is ti-ue

of Greek of

It is

in sculpture,

the

of the word
one

also that both


a

of them later than

probably,and
that which
we

certainly, belong to
yet reached
culmination Homer's
; but

period far
as

have

yet,

Brunn
series

pointed
of similar
serves

out, they form

the

of

long

works,
to

which

begins with
and
more

shield of

and Achilles,

transmit

to

develop many

a therefore,

fitting placehere
But
a

artistic types. They find, than in their proper chronological the


we they belong, the gap separating imply a very high

sequence.

for the series to which

might well
Homeric

be

at

loss to

bridge over
in

and of

Hesiodic

which descriptions, certain

degree
first

artistic attainment

from directions,

the

of the growth of independent art in Greece. beginnings Many attempts have been made to restore both the chest of of Cypselus and the Amyclaean throne from the description
; and

Pausanias
are more

there

can

be

little doubt
nearer

that

these

attempts
more

approachingnearer
monuments
are

and

to the

truth,as

and

discovered
as

which

throw

and

and composition, leads to


more

the

study
to

of the

lighton the types able material alreadyavailcertain inferences. that


either

definite classification or
it is not

more

At

the

same

time,
or

be

supposed

the

selection of types than a matter more

be the arrangement of the scenes can ever of conjecture, though the limits within which

conjectureis confined may

be drawn

yet closer.
What of the
our

This is not

the

place either
or

to

give an
another
to

account to

of the various

tions, proposed restoraconcerns us

to

add

their number.^
note
as

at
seem

present is merely
to be

take

of

some concern

results which

far so established, of

they
that

The
^

chest
last and

Cypselus stood
:^estorations
are

in the

subject. opisthodomus of
Stuart Jones in

the
the

The S.

best

given by H.

J.

that by Furtwangler, 189-1, PL i., of the chest of Cypselus, and of the Amyclaean tlirone ; Mcisterwerke, Fig. 135 (omitted in the English edition),
11. p.ach is

accompanied by

full discussion

and

quotationof

earlier authorities.

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

75

Olympia ; it had probably formed part of the of Corinth dedicated there by the Cypselids offerings magnificent the beginningof the sixth century. near Though the story
Heraeum
at

that when

it
a

was

the

identical
is

chest

in

which

Cypseluswas
"

hidden

is no there adequate generally discredited, with his its association for nection reason family a conrejecting its is of decoration. which borne out by the character For the nearest analogy to this decoration is to be found in of the same the Corinthian vases period,and on them it is of the scenes possible to find exact counterparts of many field for ornament either the described The by Pausanias. sides front of the chest only,or the front and the two was

child

"

"

divided fifth
"

into five bands the


or

or

friezes. middle
scenes

Of these the first, third,and


ones
"

top, bottom, and


or

either

form

single
to
tinuous con-

scene,

offer two
treatment

three

which

lend themselves

; in

second

and

fourth

short,they resemble an Ionic frieze. The bands, on the other hand, fall into a number
were probably groups, which structural partitions, just as

of isolated divided from

and
one

clearlydefined another by some


frieze
what

the metopes
We
are scenes

of the Doric
not

are

divided

by

the

triglyphs.
these
was

told
were

by

technique the
The material
in partly

figuresin

various

rendered.

of the chest

were partlyin wrought ivory, figures and partlyin the cedar-wood itself. This seems to imply gold, in its effect by the use enhanced of inlaid of relief, a use materials ivory,for instance,was doubtless used for the nude the thus have analogies on parts of all female figures ; and we

cedar ; and

the

"

one

hand

with

coloured
we

on relief,

the other
to

with

the

gold and
the
were

ivory techniquewhich
Cretan Daedalid also exhibited
can

know
and

have

been

practised by
works
has been

artists

their
The

whose pupils,^
as subjects,

in the

Heraeum.

said,

be

most paralleled art ;

readilyin
vases

the

products of
us

Corinthian

decorative for

the Corinthian

offer

the richest material

because comparison, chiefly


;

they have
scanty

been remains

preservedin
of

the

greatest abundance
reliefs in

but
are

the

decorative

mostly of Argive or Corinthian the suffice to show as that, were origin, they as numerous lend themselves to help in even more readily vases, they would the same the restoration of the compositionson the chest. At exclusive. time, this Doric influence is by no means Many of
bronze,
which
1

See

lutrod.

(i)1

; also

" 20

bulow.

76

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the

scenes

can

only

be

found is this
same

upon

vases

of

Ionic

origin,
;

Chalcidian. especially for in


some

Nor

merely
scene can

the result of chance be found both


on

cases,

where

the

Corinthian scheme that

and
is

Chalcidian

vases,

it is the
carver

Ionic,not
chest.

the Doric

preferredby
vases,
was
a

the
must

of the

quoting
less than

Chalcidian

we

remember
of

And, in that Chalcis, no


work

Corinth,
that

home the

early decorative

in
or

metal, and
made
in

much imitate

of

relief work

either in metal

is due to metal, which we find in Italy, in Corinth the influence. We Chalcidian see, then, that even both in the of decorative Ionic art was influence felt, strongly

clay to

types used
The
same

and

in

the

style
of
work

in

which

they

were

treated. be
seen

close interrelation
an

earlyschools
made
case

is to

in

the

Francoisvase,
^

Attic

under

strong Corinthian
more

influence

and

what
arts

is

true

in the holds
us

of the

industrial of

and

decorative The

doubtless

also in the

case

diff'erence that strikes

most
or

in strongly
even

sculpture. comparing the


shield
if not

chest of

CypselusAvith

the
now

Homeric
come

the Hesiodic

is that the

subjects have

to

be

taken

almost

from mythology. It is true that they are quite exclusively identified by inscriptions second, and fourth only on the first, bands (countingfrom the bottom),but we can hardly doubt that to most is rightin giving Pausanias a mythological significance of the
was scenes

in

the

top band

also.

In the third

band, which

continuous
two

between

of battle and negotiation scenes represented of those to recognise one armies, it may be simpler and
scenes

unidentified which
are

battle found
as on

which

are

so as

common

on as

Abases, and

Hesiod's

shield

well

Homer's.
can

sanias' Pauhave

doubt
been
no

to

its identification proves

that there

it ; and to recognise features by which distinguishing such a scene, without inscriptions, can hardly be said to represent such combat if the artist had some combat, even any particular when he made it. But this is the exception in his mind ; most to them, which have appropriatetypes assigned of the scenes less stereotyped have l)ecome more or by usage ; and thus there is containing canon, being formed a kind of mythological gradually various Of course illustration for every scene. the appropriate

similar

types may
be

act

and

react

upon

one

another, and
of

new an

types may
-

introduced, usually by the modification


VorkgehlaUer,1S88,
PI. ii.-iv. ;

Bcniulorf, Wiener

Baumeister,

Denkmaler

V\. l.xxiv.

78

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

The

arrangement
for doubt
a

of

the

scenes

on

the
can

chest, which
be

is

so

described by clearly any


seen room

Pausanias

that it
as

restored

without be

except

to

few

minor

details, may
A
more

at

glancein
of

the

accompanying diagram. help one


exists
to

comparison

of this vvith the than and

diagram of the shield of Achilles will do


between the two.

to description pages also the difference which

realise the resemblance

The
work

throne

of

Apollo at Amyclae
of which
we our

is another
are us

great decorative
of the

for the

knowledge
Here

dependent on entirely
the
name

Pausanias.

informant But his

tells

Bathyclesof Magnesia.
he

of the throne description clue whatever


or placed,

artist, is,as
as

himself
most

says,

where
were

have no : we summary of the scenes he mentions were


nor

but

to

how that

they
his it is
more

arranged ;

have

we

any

reason

to

suppose

enumeration

is exhaustive.
any

Under

these

circumstances do

impossiblefor
than show how The
statue

however restoration, have may the throne


45

the whole for which

been
was

to ingenious, arranged.

made

was a

mere

tive primiand

of pillar
feet attached

bronze, about

feet

high with
stood
on a

head, arms,

6). (Fig.

The

statue

the pedestal,

tomb

some Hyacinthus,on which were deification of Hyacinthus,and on

of

of the the

the reliefs, representing other sides of Heracles it might seem


one

and

of Semele. for the

The
to

throne
sit
on

was

so

placedthat
at

pared pre-

god
was

; but

it offered not

seat

but only,

several. Hours the


and

It

supported at
Graces
;
on

the front and

the back and

by

two
on

two

the left

by
of
was

Echidna relief was outside


sets

Typhon,
round
enter

rightby
of

Tritons.

long
either

band
it

set

the
; the

inside of the
rest

throne, under
scenes seem were

which
on

to possible
or on

the

the three

the back.

These

groups

to

fall into

of

nine

each, with
ones

larger groups intervening ;


since
his
we

in the middle

and

at

each

side,and
some

smaller

but
must

is to this arrangement Pausanias' remember


:

extent

atic, problemthat

express

warning

only be pickingout the more The remarkable scenes. subjectsrepresented are similar in character to those which find on the chest of Cypselus. we Some introduced were evidently by the artist from his Ionic home ; others illustrated local myths and traditions. It has been conjectured with great probability that Bathycleswas one of the Samian school of sculptors M^ho worked at Ephesus and

is summary description

he may

Magnesia in

the

time

of

Croesus, and

that

his

migrationto

EARLY

INFLUENCES to the

"

DECORATIVE

ART

79

Sparta was due that city and


Croesus
to

in his

existed between relations which friendly have been sent by the Lydian king; he may other he sent when offerings days of prosperity, he
may with have
come

Sparta, or
the

after the
In any
case,

fall of his tradition


set
on

patron
says

before

Persian

invasion.

he

broughtworkmen
The date

him, whose
in any
case

he figures
seems

the

throne.^

of his work

to

fall

later than that of the chest of Cypselus may ; and we bronze in executed which were his sculptures, probably
to

have

resembled

those

on

the

columns

dedicated
the

considerably imagine relief, Croesus by


number

in the

temple of Artemis and subjectsrepresented,


seem composition,

at

Ephesus.- But of the overloading


just
been

vast

of

detail in the whole


same

to
we

put this throne


have

into the

class

as

the

decorative

it of which considering, the latest example. It is probablethat almost probablywas also at Chalcioecus the temple of Athena Sparta, which was reliefs by Gitiadas, a local sculptor, decorated with mythological of of Bathycles. If the work imitation of the work was an Gitiadas had been alreadydone, it is hard to see why a foreigner works

should
we

have

been

called in.

But

of this and

other

similar works

know

nothing. practically
Daedalus. for
our
"

"

13.

If

we

were

dependent on
might

the well

later Greek be led


to

writers

notion

of

Daedalus, we

describes many Pausanias regard him as a historical character. attributed in various parts of Greece that were statues primitive that his works are to him, and adds strange to look upon, yet other From in them." manifest divine have some inspiration
"

late authorities
eyes

we

learn how
to

Daedalus

was

the first

to

open

the

of

statues,

free

their~arms

from

their" sides,anXjo
left their eyes legsas if gi-own

had while his^predecessors stride, make^theirlegs

andtheir then- sides^ shut, their_afffiK-^il"2.^ft It together. shall


may

be said
course on.

at

once

that tins
in

is

Vtiry inaccurate'

of the description
we see

of But

improvement
examine

later

if we

and

it with earlier references compare find that it is merely a selection of the the
numerous

as earlysculpture, in itself, the statement to Daedalus, we shall possiblefrom among

marvellous

attainments

ascribed

to

him, and

rationalistic
^

explanation of
represented
a

the

way

they

were

performed.
the

Tlie

identification of these
were seems

figuresseems
to

that

they Bathycles

imply

very doubtful ; but that the tradition


^

suggestion
of

companions
p. 108.

formed

distinct

body.

See below,

80

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Earlier Daedalus

authorities made bound


of the

show
statues
a

no see

such
and

caution, but

tell
away
we

us

that unless

his

speak,and
is a

run

theywere
true
nature

by
feats
seems

chain to' their

Here pecrestals^i of the

see

the

story. Daedalus
similar
even

magician, wonder-working god Hephaestus,


When
as

and with
we

performs
whom he follow the
seen,

to to

those
be

identified sometimes. Homeric


poems,

name

back is
as no

to

the

where,
or we

we

have

there

we questionof sculpture,

find Daedalus

mentioned

only
"

having
Ariadne

devised

dance Now

"

prepared
have
seen

dancing-placefor
the

in Crete.
are

that

tendency of
came

later
to

times, we
a

not
a

to surprised

learn that

this dance

be such

as interpreted

marble

relief made
at

by

Daedalus, and
in Pausanias'

that

work

was

shown actually its

Cnossus

day.
name

In
an

fact,the

Daedalus
some

belongsin
magician
of of

origineither

to

to or artificer-god,

The the
reason came

word

implies skill in all kinds


and
it is not

inlayingof wood,
which
to
name

metal, and

superhuman power. in handicraft, especially ivory. But for some

be

easy to trace, the functions of Daedalus restricted to sculpturein later times,and specially
of its advances

his
of

of the ser^^ed-as a.n imjiersonation


upon

primitiye._"Ciilpta

images which were It is clear, of gods or men. the fTfgt-representation therefore, historical him little of that the stories about are value, very held to the theories and merely represent as by earlysculpture Greece, and
later Greek
can

the rude

only
of The

attributed writers ; while of the statues supposed in later times say that they were very

to

him

we

to be

the

works

earlyperiod.
in
us

one

remaining fact
importance
This
to

the

traditions
connection

about with

Daedalus Athens

which and
that

is of with

is his is

Crete.

tradition existed

in both

places there
Daedalids, and
which

supplemented by the fact called families or guildswho


a

themselves handicraft

transmitted

skill hereditary
to

in

was certainly

applied
We Athens Theseus

sculpture when
here recognise Crete
in art
as

common sculpturebecame some very earlyrelations

in

Greece.

between

may and

in

other

matters

the

legends of
are

and

Minos, with
same

which

those

of Daedalus But such the


a

all point in the associated,

direction.

importance for
of the

relation goes back too far to be of much historyof sculpture. There is little trace
it may

connection,whatever

have

been

being originally,

EARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

81

kept
course

up

until

the

time

when

sculpturein
and
were

Greece

began

its

of
14.

development.
Earhi Temple Images jback to
Thus
a

"
sacred

temple images in Greece


time
we

Offerings. Many of the of a most primitive nature,


"

and

went

long before
of

the

beginningof

Greek

and unwrought fetish stones trunks of wood as being preserved in a temple as the symbol of the divinity of the early^6ava,though probably many ; and have shown rude attempts at anthropomorsome they may phism, are garded hardly to be reof sculpture. as works Thus the Apollo at Amyclae

sculpture.

hear

had, as Pausanias
tells us,
; it
was

expressly
column
a

no

artistic character
a mere

of

bronze, with
and

head,
was

Fig.

7."
statne

tive Primion a

hands,
This

feet

attached.

colossus unsightly

Apollo of Amyclae.fromacoinofSparta.

Fig. 6."

throne,
coin

from

of Aenus.

later hidden
process was often were
so as

similar a by a sculpturedthrone or screen ; and adopted with greater ease for smaller images,which either envelopedin drapery or covered with branches,

to

escape

the

eyes

of those who

might

otherwise

have

to counterbalance reverence religious the artistic defects of the object of their worship. Where the temple image was of this sacred yet uncouth that there was conclude not much nature, we might reasonably for the art of sculptureto render its services to religion. room this conclusion is to a great extent And For a long correct.

found

it difficult for their

time

the

Greeks

must

have
their

remained

content

with

these

])rimitive symbols of
need
"

of

worthier
art

until religion,

had

gods,and there is no sign of any of divinityarising from representation already asserted its capacityto render
"

the

human

form service Greek

divine
this
was

in

more

adequate
art
we was

manner.

So

sodn7'however,as
in the the of spirit

the

case,

of

religion ; and

sculptureduring
almost

its

listed immediately enshould miss entirely if we earlier period, was

failed to realise that


in
one

way

or

another

every work which it produced intended for religious dedication.


were

But
make

the
way

primitivefetishes
for
more

not

at

once

discarded
the
as

to

artistic

of representations
until
G

deity. In
the chief

many

placesthey remained

even

later times

82

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

in many of worship. And although cases a more adequate objects set of the god was representation up in a conspicuousposition, in the sacred hidden while the primitive fetish remained this kind of substitution obscurityof the inmost shrine,even in the earliest days of Greek is not often recorded sculpture, the archaic end of the middle towards but or more frequently by Tectaeus period. Thus the statue of Apollo at Delos was and

Angelion,whose
that

date

is
at

uncertain, but
Branchidae
near

cannot

be

very
was

early; by Canachus

of
of

Apollo

Miletus

and Sicyon, The Athenians the

belongsto
were

the

beginning of
with the

the

fifth century. Xoanon down


to

content

tive primi-

as

of representation
; and set
even

their
after
a

the

time
statue

of Phidias had
own

patron goddess, his great chryselephant


embodiment
still the

been

up

as

worthy

of

Athena

in

her

retained
most

in the

Parthenon, the old image was of the actual centre Erechtheum, and was
of when
new

sacred
it
must

religiousceremonies
be

Athens. the
art to

On Cretan
the

the

other

hand,
the
some

recorded

that their
a

Dipoenus
state

and of

Scyllis brought Sicyon gave them

sculptors Peloponnese,
statues

public contract

for

of

of the

chief

gods,which

temple statues, though that some at of Pausanias to show and the descriptions seem he describes which least of the earlytemple statues belong to the most period of Greek sculpture. primitive of the temple statue, however, the spiritof In the case iiiiist conservatism always have been predominant ; religious in the fifth century Onatas was we hear, for example, how even which horse-headed monster to reproduce the uncouth obliged at served to Phigalia.^ The sculptor's represent Demeter been would have work in the service of religion extremely
confined to these chief objects limited in its scope had it been of worship. But no such restrictions existed, or they existed
in
a

been intended for well have may them ; about this fact is not recorded

much
to

milder

form, in the

case

of the

numerous

statues

dedicated the both

the

god
The
in

within

the

sacred

often precinct,

within

temple itself.
in earlier and

of these oiferings number extraordinary referred to has alreadybeen later times An illustration At the from
a

(a),p. 5). (Introduction


will
at

minor

site

help

us

to

realise this fact.


was
1

Naucratis, which

temple destroyedby violently


" 26,
p. 198.

of

Aphrodite
Persian

the

See

KARLY

INFLUENCES

DECORATIVE

ART

83

invasion

of of
a

Egypt

iu about

520

B.C./ there

were

found

ments frag-

of statuettes, varying in types, great number which had all been dedicated to the goddess;2 and size, material,
;iiid every
:i

local shrine

in Greece

would had

probablyhave

yielded

similar

treasure, if circumstances
to preserve

contents

them

for
on

our
a

suddenly destroyed its discovery. We have seen that


at Athens, where larger scale,

the

same

is the
was

case,

only

the destruction

also due A

to the

Persians,and took placeabout


of

fortyyears
no

later.

shrine like that

Olympia, which

went under;

such

sudden the

destruction,cannot
have been

givesimilar
well
as

evidence the small the

but

here too

of early statues, as pedestals buried


in

votive show
a

that offerings

similar wealth
nature

of dedications dedicated be
is to

in accidentally earlytimes.

soil,

The

of

these

statues, and

must rhey reproduced,

considered notice

the types which are' later (" 18). All we and the varied

liere concerned

with

their number,

scope
of

they gave to could religion,


skill and he been

the

Avho,while working in the service artist, do his best,' to freedom himself allow a
of

whether
own

in imitation

foreignmodels
as

or

in the exercise of
never

his

such imagination,

he could

have

attained

for the with making temple statues concerned chiefly "^ ^'^^'^^' ^^^-'^^^^"^ ""^' worship of the people. It wasjrnbL-y^^" works been surrounded often uncouthjmagesjiad by numerous contrasted by their excellencejwjthJts rude of sljuIptureTwhich
had thata simplicity,
was

moreartistic

^mbodiment_of J.he___divTnity
even

allowje(nbo~take~its~pTace ; and
restrictedn^he
necessary in

then

servatism conreligious

narrower scuIptoi^~within

limits than It
was

were

the

case

of

mere

dedication. the handmaid


most

after art that


even

had

vindicated allowed
to

it

was

as position approach the

its

of

only religion
and
were

'

sacred

things;

then

it had

to

submit

to

the

already established
in the

and

sanctified We shall

ideals that religious by popularworship,at


see

least
fifth

sixth

century.
rather

later

how

in

the

century the
became but
a

sculptor went
than
a

beyond
a

all these
in

conditions,and
until
many

leader
was

follower
was

thought; religious

this

positionthat

not

attained

of service had generations


^ ^

led to mastery.

Naukratis, II.
Similar
the of

cc.

iv. and have date art.

vi. been is
so

discoveries

made

npon

but

here

question of early Greek

diflicult that

we

local shrines in Cyprus ; many cannot safelyquote them iu

illustration

84

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

"
with

15.
"

Changesin
the
or

Greece

600 hefore

B.C.
we

Later Means have


been

of Foreign
concerned

In Influence.

last few

sections

belong to the earliest days of historical Greece, before any independent developmentof Greek but later than the Dorian mediate sculpture, immigration. The imresult of that great change in the political, and social,
racial conditions the
nascent art

those facts

traditions that

in

Greece

was

two-fold

in

its influence
upon

upon

of
were

Greece, and
then

in its action

the

foreign
of
the
tinguished ex-

influences
t

which

paramount.

The

invasion

comparativelyrude and uncultivated Dorians the already decadent civilisation


at

expelled or of Mycenae ;
Greece commercial
same

and

the

same

time traders the

it who

closed
had

the

ports of
free the

to

those course interthose their

'

Phoenician with

enjoyed
a new

earlier inhabitants.

At

time

who

were

expelled, drawing
to have

stimulus
more

from

seem change of soil,

established
over

) before
and

the

GreeK

ascendency
new

the

completelythan islands of the Aegean


farther and prosperity

the

coast

of Asia
in

Minor, drivingthe Phoenicians


centre

\ west
power.

to find

Carthagea
the Greek
to

for their

Then
from

colonies,spreading from
the Euxine

Cyprus

to

and Sicily,

Egypt
the

coast, brought
more or

the Greek

into than

contact

with

barbarian,whether
a new

less advanced
no

himself

in art, under

character.
wares bringing

He

longerwas
unknown
over

visited in his home

by

the trader had


the

from

lands,but
those who for
a

he himself receive
man

his visits.

advantage It no longer was

of

the

traveller
a rare

tion distinc-

that I'Sev acrrea dvOpcoTTOiV the


as artist,

TToAAwv

kol

voov

eyvu),

and

the

of intelligence the various

of all

others,must
whose
art

have

profited by
The Greek have

change. peoples
must

of

Asia become

Minor,
we

v/ith

the

colonists

have

familiar

during this
have
seen

alreadybeen
a

considered channel
to

(" 5); and


which

period, that they


ciently yet suffiartist

afforded could
be

direct

by

earlier Oriental But


we

influences

transmitted noticed the

Greece.

have the

not

conditions

under

which

Greek

came

into

contact to

with these
east

influences

in the outposts of Greek


and the in all

civilisation African

the of

and

south, in Cyprus,Rhodes,
and

colonies

Cyrene

Naucratis.

Cyprus

has

86

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Egyptian types
To this fact
we

to

Greece

we

can

discover
recur

shall have

to

Gyrene,which
claim
some

is also best

known

for

during that period. (" 20). The colony of its pottery, may perhaps
; but

share

in this transmission the shrine

the
must

vast

space

of

desert between

it and

of Ammon

always have
great

impeded
We national

artistic relations. or very close commercial thus see that while the direct influence of the two
any
arts

of

early times

must

have

been

scribed, circumstrictly

and
as

well have been very great ; their indirect influence may this quite as much through the outlyingGreek coloilies

by

the intermediation these


were

of any

other

people. during the the sculpture,


able. less remark-

While

the

foreignrelations of Greece
rise of Greek
at

period immediately preceding the


and political The and the
"

social

developments
tyrants
on

home
one

were

no

rise of the

the

tion hand, and the founda-

gradualgrowth in importance of
be reckoned among
for
a

other,must
of others
"

the national games on the conditions that prepared The


to

the way
names no

rapidspread and development of sculpture.


associated landmarks be with inventions
or

and of Pisistratus" Phidon, of Cypselus,


-are

mention

dedications
art.

that And

form it
was

prominent only to
art

in the

early historyof
an

tyrant would

be

expected that more likelyto

and intelligent
to

cultured those who


we

offer facilities

practisedan
shall
see

still in its

infancy ; though doubtless,as


to possible

the highestproducts of Greek later, that made them the the whole fostered

the conditions of these


was

people. The growth of by the great national games


a more

sculptureowed pride and aspirations such feelings as


and festivals of

Greece, which
at sculptor
once

also had

the athletic exercises the

which models

his art, while the sites of exhibited where his masterpieces were From four the
custom

sculpture ; the to they encouraged supplied and the subjects for the exercise of their celebration were the places
and dedicated. of the
But of the

direct influence upon

of later

times, we
as

think generally

great athletic festivals


had

although they

pre-eminent in Greece. acquired this positionby the end

sixth century, in the earlier time with which we are now cerned conThe celebration of the the case diff"erent. was regular

Nemean, Pythian,

and

Isthmian the
aC

games years

was

not

dated sixth

back

even

by

tradition

beyond
each
case

early

of

the

century,
claimed.

althoughin

far earlier

was mythical origin

EARLY

INFLUENCES

"

DECORATIVE

ART

87

The
;i

continuous

much

earlier
or

dating of the Olympiads of course here it seems period; but even


Pan-hellenic

goes

back

to

the national

character

of the

probable that festival was greatly

developedin the sixth century, under the influence of Pisistratus and other enlightenedleaders of the day, who alreadyforesaw
the

with struggle
of

barbarism which

and alone

the

need

for that

ness conscious-

give safetyto Hellas. Delphi,as the seat of the worship of Apollo and his oracle,was influence in this earlyperiod; and the of even wider [)erhaps great Ionian festival of Delos, as portrayed in the Homeric hymn to the Delian Apollo,was at its zenith in the eighth and At seventh centuries before our era. Olympia, Delphi, or dedicated of the chief recorded Delos were examples of many
Greek

unity

could

archaic

art, and
local

to

these

we

must

also add had


become

Athens, where

the
more

Panathenaea
than
a

under

Pisistratus
were

something
manner

and festival,
with

remodelled
to attract

after the

of all Pan-

the other

great national
Greece
"

parts
and upon them

of

games what

competitors from

success

is shown

by
at

the

athenaic

prize amphorae that in Italy. With the direct deal in must we sculpture
rather
as a

have

been

found

Gyrene

influence
a

of athletic contests

historical

and

later section ; here we note social condition,determining


new

the character in Greece.

and

direction of the

attainments

of

sculpture

"

16.

Summary.
which
were

"

We

have

now

seen

something of

the artistic

in Greece and in the neighbouring prevalent countries during the period which preceded the rise of Greek however and and sculpture unique independent we may find ; influences

the
have

art

of Greece
to

in

its most

characteristic
owes

attainments, we
injts origin
to

learnt

recognisethatat
with

much

its

predecessors. The
of Asia and

of Assyria, and great civilisations of lEgypt, its


own

Minor, each
at

artistic

character,had arisen
had enriched the

fallen into decadence the

; and

each in its turn

material

of the artist by a number of types and disposal the study of nature. These conventions,based ultimately upon of woven partly by means types and conventions,transmitted stufl's, partly by decorative work in metal and other small such as could be exported,and objects, partly also by more direct
common
as

intercourse,came

to

be

regarded more

or

less

as

the

his nationality whatever times, property of the artist, ; somein Cyprus, he never mechanical got beyond a mere

88

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

and combination of these various elements, without repetition of his own. But ever beyond them, so as to create a style rising in Greece there had already been signs of artistic which promise, showed that there was fear of such lifeless of no a adoption had In the of there been foreign products. goldenage Mycenae,
a

civilisation in Greece

of sufficient power

to

make

itselffelt

Pharaohs of Egypt, then in the zenith of by the powerful \ its prosperity ; and this civilisationhad been accompaniedby to the influence of Oriental artisticattainment not due solely an but of The people to models, apjparently independent origin. whom this art belonged of but were probably Gi;eek they j^ace; had to giveway before the immigration of their more vigorous vasion. kinsmen from the north, commonly known as the Dorian inAfter this change, of their theyleft behind them little in art on Greece, preserved except a few types which were gems other small and did for not their successors time or a objects ; of rivalling show any promise them in artisticexcellence. But
even

when, after

art longinterval,

did

beginonce

more

to

flourish

marked by a yet closer studyof nature it was upon Greek soil, in detail, and conciseness of work beyond anything by a vigour that had been
'

seen

in the earlier ages.


to

The

poets had already

j given definite form

which conceptions, mythological

only

awaited the
the

of the traditional types. And although adaj^tation still as worshippedin their temples, images of the gods, for
some

retained !| the
more

time their

and primitive with shall


see

inartistic character,

custom

of

scojdc to
use

them surrounding the sculptor. We he made of his

dedicated

off"erings gave
chapter

in the next

the

which

opportunity.

CHAPTEK

II

THE

RISE

OF

CxREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

"
"

17.

Character
we

and

Limits

of

the Period for

Possible Subdivision.
most

Hitherto

have

been

concerned
were

the
in

part with
before
the work

the the of

foreign influences
sixth
a

which
if
we

prevalent
in
an a

Greece
seen

century

or

have been

few

cases

foreign masters clever imitator of foreign models, rather than the originafor a or of art. of an of new independent work types or the author Xor was exception offered by the first rude sj^mbols of any deities which were preserved as objects of worship by the
Greek

artist,he

has

apt

pupil

of

Greeks
no

even

until be

later times.
as

For works

the of

most

part these

have

sculpture at all ; or, if artistic tendency they have, they do not belong to any original this is to be in Greece. enter We now a period when upon sculptor, changed ; when the primitive attempts of the Greek and in appearance, rude uncouth however ning yet show the beginof that development which lead to the works of to was
claim
to

considered

Phidias

and

Praxiteles,and
It is
not

when
to

their

chief

interest
in their

for

our

stud)^lies,not
for which of whom

in their relation

the

past, but

promise

the

future.

this
we

change
hear than

takes from
the
are

])eriodearlier
statues

which inscriptions do
take rise of
not
seem

date at possible to fix any exact place; but the earliest Greek sculptors do not literarytradition belong to a beginning of the sixth century, and the found of the most some primitive upon indicate
convenient
an

to
as a

earlier date
for

time.
the

We

may

then the made then

600

B.C.

beginning of
some

Greek that

while sculpture, date


may

admitting

that

works which

before

have
and

anticipated the progress

began

its continuous

rapid course.

90

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

The in the Persian

lower

limit of the

period with
best
two

which
at

we

are

concerned of the

present chapter may


wars.

be

fixed

the

time

greatest event
the of history which the East
was

why this,perhaps the forms a prominent landmark in history, also. In the first place, the total revolution scu-lpture Greece and produced in the relations between
are reasons

There

in Greek

by

the destruction
new

of the Persian
;

army

led,as
the

we

shall

see, to many

artistic tendencies

and, in the second


as

the actual sack Athens

by

the Persians

of sites such works of the

place, Acropolisof
when the

led to the burial of many recovered, an excellent notion

of art which

giveus,

sculptureof

period
which

immediately preceding. We
circumstances enable
us

a landmark have, therefore,

exceptionalaccuracy ; and it off"ers a good lower limit to the period of the rise of Greek which be made work to contain all pre-Persian sculpture, may the words as an inaccurate but convenient for to use equivalent
to
"

fix with

all that

was

made

in Greece

before the date of the Persian


to divide sculpture

wars.

It is customary in histories of into two, making the" division at date


comes

this

period
this

about of
new

540

B.C.

Before

what

is called

the There

age

the age of demarcation date and


or

development.
which
can

after it inventions, is,however, no definite line of


between

be drawn

the two

either

at

this

begun,was continuous any other ; the development,once unbroken the more even plausibleassertion that ; and
its old centres bear and found
new ones

left sculpture time does


not

at

about that

this the

critical examination. for assigns,


not

It is true
most

places to

which

tradition

the

part, the first


carry
on

of beginnings

Greek

are sculpture,

those which

its
on

development down the other hand^ we placeswhich are activity began to

to

the close of -the archaic

period. But,
of later

have known have

good
to
us

reason as

to

believe that

all those artistic

the

centres

at a date not sculpture far removed from that of the first recorded beginningsof Greek and certainly sculpture, long before the division of periodsabove

local schools of

referred

to.

It therefore traditional of its of

seems

best, after

brief sketch

of the

actual and
to
a

in Greece, to proceed of sculpture origins

sketch

subdivision local

further spread and local development without influential and important the period. The more then be treated
most

schools
and

can

tendencies
more

distinctive

and their separately, productscan be described

chief with

detail.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

91

"
last

IS.

Inherited and

chapter seen
from which

abroad
upon
our

which

in the Types. We have already and both at home sources something of the_ the early Greek sculptorderived the types

Borrowed

"

he first exercised

his skill.

We

have

seen

also that

in

of Greek art and perfection of the originality appreciation need not the its highestattainment prevent ovu' recognising that
art to
an

fact

these
were

rude

types,

out

of which
in

the
most

noblest
cases now

forms be

of

Greek
hack
more was

evolved, can gradually


is not

traced

originwhich
nature

Greek.

We

must

consider
use

in detail the made of them


in which
Ave

of the the

types, and

notice the

that

direction
for the

by they
must

present
that

types
have

"

is to say,

and the sculptors, underwent gradual development. And confine ourselves to simple sculptural and independent figures. We to single
to
or

earliest Greek

reference already,in " 9, made some of certain groups preservation and repetition
but

the

traditional

compositions,
them
in

these

were

and other antiqiuwith detail, treatise of very considerable would alone require a special ties,
dimensions. of
course

gems and reliefs ; and the illustrations offered by vases


upon

to

consider

The

list following
;

even

of

sculptural types
we

is

not

exhaustive

from

the earliest times


even

may

meet

with

occasional
to

and deviations, of
a new

with
; but

such

the creation of

type
Greece

the

to lead as originality great majority of early


to

works
one

sculpturein

will be found

fall

under easily

of these classes.
"

scripti standing(cf. draped type, {a) Nondescript Fig. 14). This deout will apply to most of the rude statuettes, mostly withpretension to artistic merit, that are found in such any numbers in Cyprus,Ehodes, on site, especially any early Greek and Naucratis. It might even be possibleto include also the

primitive terra-cotta
"

idols that
;

are

of

still earlier

date, and

of

almost

universal

distribution

but

I doubt

Greek development from these can be traced The usual material with which we here concerned. are sculpture is a rough soft limestone, a for the early statuettes very easy substance There is littleattempt at modelling, to carve. beyond the indication close
to

any in the period of

whether

direct

of the limbs
rest
on

and the

features.

The

arms

are

either

the

or sides,

breast,or the

two

varied for the

but in any case they are from the body ; the lower part of the figure is either round of the two, flat at often a combination more rectangular,
two

arms,

are positions not separated or

the

92

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

back
skirt

and

rounded

in

the feet The

project at
whether

front ; out of the shapeless of the mass the bottom, set close together side by is almost the

side.

head-dress

foreignmodel,
frisure or
mass

Cypriote cap. less of any renderingof folds or texture, much the forms beneath ; the edges of separate garments are merely indicated by incised lines. I purposely describe this type in its to find in various simplestform ; doubtless it might be possible of most trace of examples that might be assigned to it some those improvements which we shall notice in the more advanced types derived from it. So far,however, as these improvements are introduced,we must regard them as deviations from the advanced type, usually in the direction of those more types
without which follow it in
our

the

always an imitation of some Egyptian wig or the Assyrian The drapery is usually a solid

enumeration.
"

(b) Draped female type,standing (cf. Figs.28-30). This is a type in which it is easy to trace a continuous and uninterrupted tinguisha development,beginningwith statues or statuettes hardly disfrom our type (a) except in a rough attempt to indicate the sex and to imitate the nature of female drapery, and leadingup to works of transitional period, alreadyshowing a of the finest attainments of Greek The art. promise ments developin detail may be readily described. Thejeft foot is almost but both soles flat the ground. rest advanced, invariably upon The arms first fixed close to the sides pEhM^ie 3fe-at other or is placedacross the breast, but stillin no way detached from the body ; the next step is to raise one or both from the elbow, thus causing them to project freely, the free parts being often

^made

of the separate block and inserted. The treatment offers the widest field for ment. draperyin this type clearly developa

from

At

first it is
to

and

no

relation

solid mass, with the limbs it covers.


a

no

of its own, ture Graduallyboth the tex-

character

of the material

and

careful

study of

artist's attention, until towards find


an

the end

the folds occupy the of the archaic periodwe the


we

extreme
amounts to

and delicacy
to

in complication which

drapery which
find
a

almost
reaction

and from affectation,

strong

simpler forms in the fifth century. At the same time the modeilingof the_body itself is more and~more_con-aiid the drapery, if not^ subordinated to sidered, it,is at least made _to follow the forms of the body, ;ind to .ivail itself of them for graceful and pleasingarrangement of folds! So'tooT'

94

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

becomes generation of this


statues

usual

in another.

Vie

have

no

illustration

change
the
a

earliest Greek feelingin sculpture ; in the usual and complete; though if we nudity is already of little
on we farther,

go

back

find the

use

of waist
^

cTol!is~n:ot

uncommon

some

classes of
of

confirmation striking
in

the

TJius w^ have a earlyvases. view that t^ie^ of sculpture^ history^


before the

Greece_dn"s_

not

begin

end__Di^the
of
our

seventF^
be

century.
common
^

Upon earlysites where "a few examples of these


the direct and

statuettes

type (a)are
may

nude

male

statuettes

seen

and

continuous

from develo^jment

them

to the

"Apollo" statues and athletes of the earlyfifth century find thp. is just as in type (h). We as easy to trace fixed positionof thejegs^witlijLh^ left foot atlvancod, a-nd the sjjne varyingpositionof the armSj as (h) in_type_ ; and in
samp.

"

other

respects the

progress

follows

similar lines.

But

the,

was especially statue, which developed under the it ig ihe treatinflUx"Ece-oi_athletic competitlonTaiididBrlicatlong,

niide male

nient of the

audit the

is

attention ; occupies the"sculi5!ioPs body wblch niaihly inTEe careful^udy of nature, irTthe comprehension of

and in positionand~~relation l7f^^"fl^"-Hft"d-_ii2Uscles, of the^proportions to a truthful rendering jxpproach gradual the'strnctttre of


in

that tlre"^^aiOtfidy,

we

may

see

most

clearly

early

times

the

had

the practised

who of the Grpp.k tr"fl.n nf^hers sraeriority And of sculpture before him. it was art by

and masteringthoroughly them to reproduce striving that the Greek


in the fifth

all these details, and conscientiously


with

accuracy and severity, which fitted them sculptors gainedthat training

the utmost

the highest ideas and to attain century to express the greatest dignity of style, not though we must forgetthe the of execution which grace and delicacy female draped type had called forth. We sections attainments
to

development
shall
see

of the

in subsequent chief

what

local schools

we

must

assignthe
a

in either
a

branch, and also how


of the
one

it was

combination

of the two, and the

reaction

upon

the

acterised other,that char-

beginning of
female
occur

the finest
be

period.
very
are

The
a

nude

type may
in

dismissed

briefly ; though

all of Oriental examples statuettes, they early and significance, and led to no Greek origin development. This

few

type is indeed
'^

of

extremelyrare
1

occurrence

in Greece

until the

E.g. NauJcratis,ii. PI. xi. 2. Xaukratin, i. PI. i. 1, 3-5 ; ii. PI. E.;^.

xiv. 13.

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

95

fourth
.ire

century.

To

the

Oriental

mind, nudity and


in
in

indecency
but

inseparable. It is entirelyotherwise
men.

Greece,

only

Women__are its severest long as_itj;^etains


for
I hat

almost

always draped

so~A sculpture,

may

he

ohseryed

in

and dignity, life, or daily


from siich

presents only siibjects (^ ji ideals that seelc tHeir f C^


ohaervation
.
"

inthe. typp.sdp.rivpd e xpressTon


Male ~{(1) lie

and

draped (cf. Fig. 8). female seated type,


subdivide this type in the same manner little would be gained in clearness
suffice to say

It would
as

possibleto standingone, but |)roceeding.It will graduallyfrom a mere


the chair
on

the

that

this

by such a type also develops


in
one

which

block,made, as and the figure isseated,

it were,
so

piecewil
in square
tirely en-

enveloped

jj masses
seen

thefTorms^of the body and limbs are l)f7Tfaper^That concealed, to_a^^tat]ie3ii~wJiichI2he bodily forms may

"be'

throrighthe drapery, in which


of its texture

the

with" drapeiylsT'enclered wJiich


seems

careful study

and ancTltolds,

riST-TTf"
down

with its chair, but looks "as onejjiece such could gaLup again." In details,
arms, atfirst
we

if it had
as

sat

and
thd~
the

the

arrangementof
raised
the from in

resting^alongHh^ knees,
notice the that
same

later
as

elbows, We
and
to

may
see

change

other

types.

shall
was

used

by

this type was wide of very in almost all schools of sculpture


men.
"

distribution,

earlyGreece

represent both gods and

what

(cf. (e)Winged figures Fig.13). for the rapid motion is meant


that regions,
it
seems

So of

many

winged figuresin
been

have flight
to

found

in

various
a

worth

while
a

include
as

them

under

separate type.

It is clear that such fiwi variety,


a

type

this offers

ful plentipose

opportunityfor

conventional stiff^ajid

This type in motion! we to-a-graceful-study-isf-fly-iii^jirapery and its female find both male (sometimesnude) significance ; vaHig; in earlier times it may, where its purpose is not purely to decorative,be meant represent the winged Artemis, or a in direct imitatioiT~of~Oriental corresponding male divinity, models ; later it develops into the types of Victory and Eros. of a difterent nature, the represenAnd are although the figures tations sirens in early and of sphinxes,harpies, so common Greek similar treatment of the wings, and show art a are
doubtless If the
we

derived
examine

from
any

similar

source.

list of works
as

of

earliest

such period,
shall

we Schriftquellen,

be may find that

sculpture preservedfrom compiled from Overbeck's almost all the examples

96

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chaP.

be classed under other of the types just or one readily may of Aphrodite,Artemis, Athena, the Graces, mentioned statues
"

and priestesses, fall under consider

so

on,

under

statues type (h);

of

Hermes, Apollo,
divinities
; monuments

athletes, etc.,under
or men we

type (c) ; while seated type (d). So, too, with


free statues
in

figuresof
extant not

if

only
do

the

round,
few

architectural
in
our

or we reliefs, sculptures museums

shall find very

earlyworks

that
but

very in artist most cases


serve inscription

with

belong to one or other of these types, slightvariations;though the meaning of the


not

remains show

doubtful,unless
be
same so

some seem

attribute

or

to

his intention. much

It may

surprising

at

first that

there

should

wearisome
a

iteration of the and

types,
of

such almost sameness, in the first outburst of observation

young

promising art, full


Such

and originality

of certain fixed types with varying repetition of art, to the decadence appropriate meaning might rather seem and the sculptor and imagination when invention were effete, had brought could only reproduce what his greater predecessors shall see, is perto the highestperfection. And as we this, fectly of nature. true.^ of Greek lack that of But
between

the is
an

two

cases,

the

rise and

the It is

fall
no

there sculpture, far imagination,


a

essential

difference.
and

less the

carelessness the

indifference the that

proceed in
his
to

decadent

period from

fatal

of facility

artist and leads


catise

despairof advancing beyond

his masters,

of type in earlyGreek the monotony sculpture. The is rather to be sought in the correct by the appreciation the great difficulties that
true distinguishes
are

of sculptor

before

him
in

"

quality
from

that the
A

at

once

art, though yet

embryo,

barbarian. uncultured styleless attempts of an easy and and an honest due realisation of the difficultiesof sculpture,

and

attempt persevering
are

to

overcome

them,
of
not

are

the

signs of
art; and
the artist

promise that
when
we

most

characteristic need

earlyGreek
that

observe

these,we

wonder

he fixed and definite limits within which eagerlyadopted some and lost otherwise liable to be dispersed might exercise his skill, of a free and untrammelled the infinite possibilities among of rendering what he
saw

around

him. their Value.


"

"

19.

Stories

of Inventions and
we

threshold

of what
are

may

call the

historical

Upon the very period of Greek


we can

we sculpture

met
1

by
See

certain " 77, New

which traditions,
Attic Reliefs.

neither

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

15.0.

97

accept

ignore, concerning the inventions earlyartists. Thus we are told by Pausanias


nor

made
that

by

various and

llhoecus

Theodorus
to cast

of Samos

were

the first to invent


;

bronze

foundry,and

statues

of bronze

renown

in the

by Pliny that the first to attain of marble were sculj)ture Dipoenus and Scyllis
this
statement

and

of

Crete,though
that
even

is afterwards

modified his

by the

addition

before

their time

Melas

and

marble Here practised sculpturein Chios. rival and inconsistent certainly repeating side by side two traditions in historical authority. probablyboth equally lacking We have already seen how worthless the traditions preare served by later writers as to the inventions attributed to ^ Daedalus Herodotus mentions a great dedication made ; by Samian workers bronze before the time of Rhoecus early long
"

family had Pliny is almost

and

Theodorus
were

; and

we

know

that

statues

both

of marble
not

and

of bronze

made

often

enough

outside

Greece, if

in

it,

before any of these so-called inventors. We these stories of may then dismiss at once far
may
as

inventions, so
same

literal accuracy is concerned ; but be worth while to consider whether

at

the

time^it

they are

less merely base-

traditions with or conjecturesof later Greek critics, some truth, though misunderstood underlying by those who record

again we are helped by analogy. In the case of the alphabet, similar traditions of inventions can be confronted with its history, based upon ascertained facts. And find as we
that

them.

Here

while

one

which tradition,
to

assignsthe
Cadmus,
in matters

introduction
is very
near

of the this find

letters into Greece

the Phoenician others

truth,there
tradition and

are

many

equallyinconsistent
And

both

with
we

with

the facts.

of detail

the stories that

assignthe

invention
to

of various letters to various

mythicalor
We
which

historical personages attach

be

false entirely
to

and

leading. mis-

shall then

assignvarious
various

very inventions

little
in

weight

the traditions the


art

connection

with

of

to sculpture

masters. early

except that these


with
amount

masters

excelled

tell us nothing They certainly in earlytimes in that branch


are

which of
a

their

reputed inventions

concerned. is

But

the

which originality
of the and
1

they can

claim

from

generalsurvey
as

evidence,both
See " 13.
H

only to be and literary

learnt
mental, monu-

to the nature

the limits of their artistic

activity.

98

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Crete AYe LiteraryEvidence. of Samos, Chios, authorities on which find in the literary we are dependent for various stories as to the schools which the historyof sculpture

20.

Schools

"

first attained

eminence
in the
case

and of

influence

in Greece.
name

We

have

already seen

Daedalus, whose
of the

is introduced

again in
how shall them
not

connection

with

some

worthless
see

these any
reason

stories for

earlyschools of sculpture, for scientific study ; and we are attachingmuch greater value to

is,however, necessary to repeat in their main them here outlines,partly because, however truth,and partlybecause partial, they probably contain some
present
case.

in the

It

many

statements

based We

upon

them

may

be

found the

in

accepted
of the

hand-books. authorities

must, however,
which stories
are we are

remember

nature

with

dealing (see Introduction,


from late and uncritical which these versions and

[a] ); they

all the

derived

who compilers, have earlier writers and

repeat side by side inconsistent


from various
a

culled

earlier

writers ;

often

represent

certainly repeated in some place or school, by claimingthe earliest inventions or attainments for its primitive and sometimes mythical representatives.
After stories themselves. Next described after Daedalus
as come so

vented prejudicedview, perhaps inorder to enhance the glory of

much

we reservation,

may

proceedto
are

the

certain artists who

expressly
these
are

his

Dipoenus
the
sons

and

pupils. Most of Crete, Scyllis


In

prominent among
who
were,

according to
with
this

some,

also of Daedalus.

accordance

mythical

of told also that they made life-size statue are a date, we sent to Lindus. emerald, which Sesostris of Egypt (Ramses II.) Smilis of the

Aegina
master

was

another
was a

contemporary

of Daedalus

and

Athenian his

Endoeus

in his

pupil of Daedalus, and If this were Crete. to flight

panied accom-

all

we

heard

about

these But

we artists,

might
we Scyllis,

dismiss them
are

them
seem

as as

legendary.
historical.^ about
580

other

statements

about

entirely clearly
famous

Dipoenus
B.C.

and

told, were
to

they
to

then

came

from
statues
"

Crete

they undertook
to
some

make

various

of the
at

Sicyon,where gods. Owing


the death of

breach

of the

agreement
B.C.
"

Cleisthenes the tyrant in 573


*
"

perhaps they went

off to

Ambracia,

See Robert, Archdologische Mdrchen.

For

the

chronology see Urlichs, Skopas,

p. 219

sqq.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

99

preserved. Later, the Sicyonians after a famine having been advised by the Delphic oracle to and made recall them to carry out their bargain,they returned of of Apollo,Artemis, Heracles, and Athena. Works statues also shown at theirs were Argos, Cleonae, and Tiryns ; and the best known early sculptors, pupils of theirs were among in Statues them also the were by especially Sparta. among spoil carried off" by Cyrus from Lydia (in 546 B.C.) Besides the materials they used were marble and bronze gilt, ebony and at a ivory,in which they made Argos of the Dioscuri group and their sons, and Hilaeira and Phoebe. This subjectat once reminds of the groups in relief on us earlydecorative works ; but the groups by the Spartan pupils of Dipoenus and Scyllis in the round,^ and have been must so probably theirs were
where
works

of theirs

were

also. Before the discussing notion from historical accuracy of these facts, let us of the other information which we possess about

get
this

some

Endoeus, whom we literarysources. have associate and pupilof Daedalus, said is also to have made the statue of Artemis at Ephesus,the ancient statue of Alea at Tegea,and a primitive Athena seated statue of Athena at at Erythrae ; but he also made a seated statue of Athena dedicated scripti Athens, which was by Callias,accordingto its inrecorded (probablyabout 550 B.C.), by Pausanias and his name archaic inscription occurs on extant an actually
in Athens." shall have amidst the
to

early period justseen as an

To

this
as

strange mixture
about

of fact and
our

fiction

we

recur,

it off'ers the safest clue for

guidance

earlyartists. Another to whom as artist, we trustworthy information, not get no to his name, is Simon even as or Simmias, son of Eupalamus, who made the statue of Dionysus Morychus at Athens of rough The title of this statue, and the recorded stone. practiceof its face at vintagetime with wine-lees and fresh figs, staining to show that it was seem a jDrimitive objectof worship.
AVith
as
1
~

evidence contradictory

Smilis
an

the

case

is

somewhat

diff'erent.

He

is described
were

Aeginetan^ by Pausanias, but


no.

his works

See below, " 23.


a As I. A. I

477.
conventional it is very probable that this classed Smilis criticism, which If so, Smilis must

Furtwangler [Meistenv.p. 720) points out,


a

is
as

simply

misunderstanding of
i.e. archaic, of the
a

Aeginetau,

certain

type, in style.

naturally

be classed with

Samian

artists.

100

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

shown
the

in

Argos and
at
was

Heraeum
statue

the sacred Elis ; he made in this case Samos we ; but


a

that his

substitute

for the

image of Hera in told are expressly plank that was shapeless


is also
in
junction con-

the earliest mentioned

of representation Khoecus and

the

as

the architect of the

goddess. This Smilis Labyrinthat Lemnos,


to whom
we

with
turn

Theodorus,

must

next

in These

our

enumeration.
two

artists, togetherwith
been
"

Telecles

"

the

three

are

said

to

have

of

one

variouslygiven
school
to

are as

the
we

is relationship of the early Samian representatives

family, but
seen,
to

their

which,

have

the

invention

of

bronze

foundry
and the

is attributed. invented

According
also

another

story, Ehoecus
before

Theodorus

modellingin clay,long
from Corinth in Butades
of

expulsionof the however, they have


who
is said to

Bacchiadae
a

(663 B.C.);here,
Corinth,

rival claimant

have

made

this last invention his

clay
from

the

outline

which

daughter had
Both

in with by filling traced by lamplight stories


are

her lover's face upon of equalvalue. Theodorus Daedalus


as

the wall.

probably
mythical
and

is coupledby Plato with the and famous Theodorus


as are

and

architects

Epeius. Rhoecus of temples as

mentioned Samos

those

at

Ephesus, and of the Skias at Sparta. But the only works of sculpture attributed to them are a statue at Ephesus called a by himself, holding Night by Rhoecus ; a statue of Theodorus minute work file in his righthand and a chariot of remarkably in his left ; ^ and the statue of Apollo Pythius at Samos, as to
which made
at

is told the
two

the

curious

story that
two

Telecles
at

and

Theodorus

halves that

one independently,

Samos, and
This

these

halves

Ephesus, the other when fitted perfectly


is attributed
to

joined.
fact that and
arms we

work remarkablysystematic trained


that
to follow

the

they were
are

the

Egyptian proportions,
and legs striding
its

told

this statue

had

its

close to

the

after the Egyptian model. sides,


statues

4V^
in

have

seen,

however, that nearly all archaic male


same

Greece and

follow this inventions


even
1

type.
are as

of tools famous

many attributed to
a

Then

technical

improvements
was,

Theodorus, who

however,
made
gem. of

more

gem-cutter and

goldsmith. He
a

Tlie

fly that

The work facta not

expressionis
; compare
"

this with its wings can covers hardly mean one, to express probably a purely hyperbolical similar textual
one

scarab minuteness

the
a

about unless

error, probably improbable. The point is hardly worth

is

Myrmecides Pliny has

; S. made

"Simul Q. 2192-2201. a mistake himself,as is

discussion.

102

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

out.

At

either in Palatine

Eome, works the pediment

by Bupalus
or as

and

Athenis the

were

set

up

acroteria

upon

temple

of the

(adds Pliny) in almost all Augustus' It is especially to be noticed that the great majority buildings. of the statues made of female by these Chian artists were
and

Apollo,

divinities ;

we

shall

see

how

this both

preference for
of Ionic and

the

female

draped
and which

figureis characteristic
with

of Attic

art,

preferencefor the male athletic type shall find in Aegina and the Peloponnese. we Another Clearchus of Ehegium, was called by earlyartist, some a pupil of Daedalus the story is probably ; but in this case due to his having made which a statue appeared to later critics to show a very primitive technique.^
contrasts

the

Other

names we

might
should

be

added

to

those
as

included
to

in

this

but section, of

learn

nothingmore
now,

the

earlyhistory
to

which sculpture, already mentioned.


some more

is very We

little the clearer


must

even

for the records

however, attempt
of this evidence. that
we

get

definite notion

of the value be observed

It is in the first all the artists who


that
are

place to

concerningalmost
have
make
some

have

just been mentioned


others that
on

stories
to
same same

mythical,and clearly
both often
one occur

claim

be

historical; yet
and authority, author. Pausanias

apparently rest
in consecutive shows
was

preciselythe
sentences

of the

Perhaps
tells
us

example
Endoeus his

this
an

most

of clearly who very


is

all :

that in

Athenian
in

panied accom-

Daedalus
sentence

to flight

Crete ;
a

the for

next

probably that extant inscriptions actually working at Athens in Callias' day. And, Pausanias tells us he is quoting an inscription, and in moreover, such well allow considerable a case we authority to his may Yet we see here how he places statement. side by side with a most another which is both inconsistent with it trustworthystatement and impossible in itself. And so, where we have no certain means
statement

he says that Endoeus in the dedication. mentioned from

made

statue

as Callias,

is

Now

this last

know true, for we Endoeus artist was an

of
we

the source from which he derived his information, ascertaining allow hardlyany weight to his critical discrimination in can with what that

acceptingand

is this the case repeating it. Even more who is merely a compilerfrom compilations. With Pliny, he compiles may be seen from his statements impartiality
'

See below, p. 154, and

also

Introduction, p.

24.

II

fHE

tllSE 01?

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

lOs

and Scyllis the one hand, and Melas and his family on Dipoeniis the first sculptors in marble. The two stories the other,were on inconsistent with one are proceedfrom another, and evidently
the
arose

rival traditions
we can

of various

schools.

How

these

traditions

only conjecture; but few if any of them have any fact that they are earlyauthority. Yet it is a singular mostly associated with the names of early artists whose existence is The either extremely probable or attested by certain evidence. of these artists were names probably preserved by inscriptions, till later and of their works remained extant possiblysome their attainments, very times ; but as to their date, their lives, or littlecould have been known. Those later critics or compilers the of who championed claim school or another to the earliest one in any branch of sculpturenaturally of the made eminence use thus names preserved, eking out the scanty facts recorded by the aid of their imagination or by borrowing from mythical
sources. as
a

Thus

it does

not

follow because

an

artist is mentioned

companion of Daedalus, that he is therefore an equally mythical personage ; but on the other hand, we have no certain criteria by which the true from the false we can distinguish with which the various information we are supplied by among ancient writers. We must as historically not, therefore, accept about of this the information accurate early artists of any and the most careful caution Greece, except with the utmost it comparison with ascertained facts unless,in short,we know
"

to

be

true

upon

other

evidence.

Least

of all must

we

select

preservedfrom ancient writers such as appear to us to be intrinsically probable or consistent with our theories Such a proto the exclusion of all the rest. ceeding j and expectations, is most unscientific in its method, and can only lead to of error the concealment of ignorance. The the perpetuation or in the history alone can study of the monuments guide us safely evidence, I of this earlyperiod; supplemented,indeed, by literary but never with what, after all, constrained into consistency may well be a partial account. or misleading
The unusuallylow estimate made in this section of the value of authorities for the history of archaic Greek firmation literary sculpturefinds conin the facts analysedby Loewy in his Inschriftcngriechischen BildIt there appears that out of the total number of sculptors hauer, p. xvi.
"

from

the passages

Note.

the

whose

names

are

recorded

on

the inscriptions, varies


"

number

whose

names

are

from to us sources already known literary period. Dr. Loewy's table is as follows :

considerably according to

104

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Some

additions of

to

this table

from be

more

recent

discoveries, on especially

the tlie

Athenian
nature

Acropolis,would the proportions.

possible. But
fourth

they

would

not

change

We all the that sixth

find tlien that

and in the fiftli in Greek of statues other have

greatestnames
on

art, tlie

tlie periodthat includes centuries, tradition faii'ly coincides witli literary of the artists whose ancient
names
we

of

about inscriptions, the bases


on

two-thirds

lind the from

inscribed recorded times

being mentioned
but been inference
a a

century,

the

hand,

to by inscrij)tions

very active from

small

by of proportion
facts is that

authors the in

; in to

sculptors
us

in Greece these

is known

primitive and fragmentarynature, while, partial fourth to the fifth and v.-ell as century, the facts about artists were fairly and known Pausanias pretty completelyrecorded by those autliors, chiefly and Pliny,on whom information. This is exactly we depend for our literary should what of the case ; and in particular, we expect from the circumstances led by the nature the doubts which of the evidence about the earliest we were Greek entertain the trustworthiness of that evidence, to to as are sculjjtures confirmed failure to its with the evidence of correspond strikingly by tions. inscriptlie

evidence. literary

The

natural

eyidence literary

is of

very

In later authorities their

times, though
record

the

of proportion

known

liyinscriptions again becomes


less about and tlie

small, the

reasons

artists among somewhat are


not
so

those much

recorded Our of

diff'erent. because

the artists of later times

of findingout the truth, as from the impossibility lack of interest in tlie subject after the days of decline had begun. And again, the earlier historical and which authorities on our descriptive comjiilations based the literary and are probably date from the end of the periodwhen evidence epigraphical correspond.

ignorance

We have seen that Earhj Monuments, locally classified. evidence as to the earlyhistory is the literary of Greek sculpture the one hand so untrustworthy,on the other so fragmentary on and that it cannot be used as a foundation for the partial, It follows that such indications as study of the monuments.
21.
"

"

to

various
as

artists
we

pendenc schools,their relations and their decannot serve authorities, gather from litei\ary classification of methods
extant
extant

and

as

basis
are

for the

works

of

sculpture.
be

There

three other arrange


may
or

to which according

it would

to possible

;
were

we

found,

ment systematictreatthem according to the place where classify they to which they are proved to belong by certain

these

works

in any

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

105

evidence, such
turn

as

that

of

inscriptions ; or
we

we

may

follow

in

each

of the main

types which try


to

have

through the various and we periods ; or

modifications
may

it underwent

already noticed in various places

order. adopt a chronological in dealing The last of these three is,however, impracticable have works with numerous made under varying conditions ; we of that the course of development was to assume no reason and similar tendency in different parts of Greece ; equal rapidity and thus a chronological arrangement is only possiblewithin various local subdivisions.
An

attempt

to

follow

the

main

sculptural types through their various examples would be very and is indeed indispensable to the student ; but we instructive, should thus be restricted almost entirelyto sculpturein the in our in the gaps round, and should be precludedfrom filling evidence with reliefs, which in many form our cases only source ourselves in of knowledge. It seems to content best,therefore,
the

present section
works
of

with

an

enumeration

of the
to
a

earlysculptureaccording
inferences
or as

representative purely local


cerning con-

most

classification.

Such

may

be

safelydrawn

the relation

influence of
in

ap23arent
a

as

we

proceed ;

early schools will in part be pointed out part they must


in this local classification follows
:
"

be in

subsequentsection.
For

the

sake of clearness localities as

we

will

divide the various

Aegean Islands, (" 21) Ionic: (a) Ionia,(h)Asia Minor, (c) Athens. N. Greece, (e) ((/) (" 22) Doric or Peloponnesian (a) Crete, (/3)Sparta, (y) Rest of Peloponnese, (S)Acarnania, (e) Megara, {() Selinus, Boeotia. (?/)
:

I. Ionic,

(a)Ionia.
of

"

Two archaic

sites

in Ionia
"

have

siderable yieldedcon-

which sculpture the very two of worship,and therefore attracted those the chief centres were for have seen, offer most dedications which, as we opportunities the temple in earlytimes. These the energy of the sculptor are of Apollo at Branchidae near Miletus,and the temple of Artemis that lined the at Ephesus. At Branchidae of the statues many remains sacred way have
some

survived
in

; most

of these Some
at

are

now

in the British
statues

Museum,
'

the

Louvre.^
Discoveries

of

these

have

C. D.

141-143

Newton,

Hcdicarnassus,etc., PI.

Ixxiv.-lxxv.

106

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAf-.

inscribed

which dotliciitioiia,

are

most to
one

givingus additional evidence as the subject on ; the inscription

valuable, not only in us date, but also in telling


of the
statues

asserts

that

Fio.

8." Statue

of

Chares, ruler of Tichiussn, from

Braiichidae

(British Museum).

it is

Chares, ruler

of

Tichiussa, and
himself

in is

worshipper or these inscriptions we

the

dedicator
may

probably represented. From


cases

all

assign the

statues

to various

dates,

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

107

mostly not long before differences corresponding


The earlier among
the
common

or

after
the offer

550

B.C.

and

we

can

see

in

styleof
some

the of

statues

themselves.

them

the

examplesof
to

be

of

one are

piece with
felt
or

The seated type. and the chair, none

primitive seems figure seated^


most

of the

forms

of

the

body

indicated
contours

wliich
mass.

the envelopsliTl Yet


even we

through the flat heavy drapery, and unyieldin if in_a_s_olid as


we

in

this

case

may
to

see

some

character
in

istics which lonic.^style or both and figure, remlered

shall under

frequently have
influence the
"

notice

works

of

Tonic

the

full

and_heavyforms
_

of hjiaiLand

body,

rounded

builSToFThe' an'd'tl^Ey
olten
of the

of details ; these are of modelling the^ absenjce in the case especially by mere Incised outlines, The
more

drapery.
statues

advanced
same

examples

among

the Branchidae
in them

generalcharacter. el^ tKe_drapeij_j^s _arranged^iax_jnQre.


show
the

Although
of

is rendered the

with

more

care

in

while details, the


clothes and

the

forms

body
and

in
we

some

cases~show
filTdlliesame

through

that

envelop them,
of
mass,

still
same-

clumsiness

heaviness

the

absence~of any

organic distinction between the drapery and the the figure and. the chair that it sits upon. humaii figure, or The sculptures of the temple at Ephesus are somewhat formed The most different in nature. interestingof them of columns of the temple, most the of relief round bands scription, dedicated which were by Croesus ; ^ and fragments of an inhas been restored with which great probabilityby found have been Hicks Bao-tAek Kpoto-osavedijKiv, Canon as
vipon
some

of the

bases.

We

are

thus

enabled

to

date

these

reliefs

lasted from approximately,for the reign of Croesus and later than 560 to 546 B.C. ; thus they are earlier than some, also remember others,of the Branchidae figures may ; and we the foundations in the very temple of which are that they were best We of Samos. laid by Theodoras been said to have may set up from now one nearlycomplete figure, judge of the style from female head, also in the in the British Museum,- and a which is shown British Museum, by the curved background attached
to

it to

come

from

similar

column.^

So far
are

as

it is

possibleto
to

the
1

compare conditions
i. 92.
"*

architectural

which sculptures,

imposed by
-

another
J. H. S.

art, with

subject independent
D.US.

Herod,

Murray,

Greek

1889, PI. Fig. 22. Sculjiture,

iii.; B.

Fio.

9."

SculptiircJ Column,

dedicatcil

by Croesus (British Museum).

in the

temple

at

Ephesns

no

EANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

in its nature Greek partially ; but lighton the beliefs of the people

it throws
to

good
not

deal

of
to

whom notions It

it

belongs as
to

death

and

the
to

afterworld
we

; and

their Greece.

seem

be the

dissimilar

those
are

find in
some

is clear

that

strange

monsters

kind

of death

genius,carrying off
throned who figures

the souls of the

deceased, and

that in the

Fig.

10.

"

Ilarpy Monument,

from

Xantlius

in

Lycia ; N.

and

W.

sides

(BritishMuseum).

receive
we

have we offerings shall meet again in


it may

In them the

often the

be

subject to that with which reliefs (see" 22, /5). the Spartan tomb should recognise whether doubted we
a

similar

deities

of

lower

world

or

the his

deceased

as

hero

receiving the
the
two

funeral

from offerings
are

descendants

ably prob-

notions

not

clearly distinguished.The

11

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULrXURE

"

600-480

B.C.
"

Ill

survivors

below,
and

have believed that their ancestor sat enthroned may receive the offeringsthey brought to his tomb, to

symbolised in the reliefs that decorated it. And the him in included that which was worship they accorded It is,however, they paid to the deities who ruled the dead. This with the style that we are now mainly concerned. and find their closest analogy in the other Lycian sculptures have just been examining. We works of Ionic art that we see the full and round proportions, the again the lax archaic style, in which the chief forms are^mphasised, while there is no way in detail. In the drapery too^ tLougK^w^seel finer modelling in the rendering and care of its folds,as in the^ mQre_elalioraiion find little approach to a harmonious later Branchidae statues, we and~of tHe combination of the rendering of the figure clothes that envelop its forms. Arms_and '_,legCls^e""i simply_ of drapery,which, to mass projectfrom a solid and unyielding of the body, though it follows the main outlines and contours theni in rounded is filled in between tHlT and hea,Yjmasses show no understanding of_the Jorms_beneath, and butHttle^oT*
the
texture

of

the

stuff

itself.

On

the

other

hand," irT'tfe^

and when the positions especially design, generalcomposition of rest monious or are see a only gentle motion, we quiet and harconceptionwhich goes far to make up for defects of well imagine the artist as satisfied with his and we detail, may that stimulating discontent which was work ; he lacks entirely elsewhere he to lead to the surmountingof difficultiesof which As to the periodof this Lycian relief we unconscious. seems certain evidence,and comparison with Greek have works no in development it seems be misleading about ; but may upon and a little more the same stage as the later Branchidae figures, advanced than the Ephesian columns. It must probablybelong the later part of the sixth century. to Other Lycian tomb reliefs belong to the same but one period, example is sufficient show how the influence of Ionic art to the spread down Asiatic another
coast

to

the

south.
same

To

the

north

we

may

see

yet

of the sculptures These form a band temple at Assos in the Troad. sculptures of ornament along the architrave of a Doric temple,instead of the on taking the usual positionof sculpturedornamentation frieze.^ They are chiefly remarkable for their subjects, which
^

example

of the

influence in the

Mon.

Inst. III. xxxiv.

See Introduction

(c).

112

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

consist

partlyof
feasters

groups such

of

animals,bulls
couches Heracles

and

and others, lions,

partlyof
and the

on reclining as

and

partlyof drinking,
the

mythological scenes,
Heracles
same

shootingat

Centaurs,
These
are

wrestlingwith subjectswhich we
works,
and confirmation the architrave

the fish-tailed Triton.


find
on

early bronze
just the
the

reliefs and
same

other thus

decorative additional

they
are see

follow

types
an mental orna-

is lent to but also

theory
the

that

these

sculptureson
metal

substitutes
in

for

casing. We

them

carried to its extreme. isocephalism such in the the Nereids as figures, at the banquet, have to cover the reclining as figuresin the same
are

Small Triton the

of principle or runningstanding
or

scene,
saime

the attendants

vertical interval and

scenes,

consequently
include Minor all
and

made

at

about

one
"

half the scale. Under this the

Aegean (c)
the islands

Islands.

heading
coasts

we

may

that

lie between

of

Asia

Greece, except those


alike
more

which, like Cythera and

Aegina, seem

by their positionand their history to attach themselves Some of these islands must to the mainland. be closely
their
own

connected closely have


influences.

school ; others may artistic character, or fall more under


with

the

Ionian

either other

But

such

distinctions

at recognised present in a limits. We shall, however, find that geographical fall into three groups ; firstly, those which naturally

problematic to be which classificatiop mainly follows


are

too

the

islands

like Samos
be hardl}''
;

and

Chios

are

close to
in
art

the from

Ionian

coast, and
and

can

widely divided
more

Ephesus

Miletus

then

the

central

and

Naxos, Thera, and


and works

the Cyclades, southerly islands,especially rather more Melos, which seem independent;

with these, under together

Delos, we

must

mention

those

which, being found


we

Apollo,presumably

in the great centre of the worship of represent the styleof Ionia or the islands,

though
about

cannot

as

yet make
must

any

more

definite statement
to

them.

we Lastly,

proceed

consider

the

more

such as Thasos and Samothrace, in which we northerlyislands, distinct development of the Ionic style, which a can recognise itself. to the north of Greece to spreadthrough them seems Samos.
"

The

Heraeum
and

at

Samos

must
as a

once

have of Of
a

rivalled the

temples of Ephesus
therefore but
one as a museum

Branchidae of

centre

early sculpture.
that of

worship,and this sculpture


un-

specimen has survived,and

somewhat

Fio.

11."

Statue

dedicated

by Cheramyes

to Hera

at SamoR

(Lonvre).

114

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

nature. satisfactory

This

is

statue

found

close

to

the

site of

bearing an inscription statingthat it was Idedicated to Hera by one Cheramyes. It is of veiy primitive circular column type, the lower part of the body being a mere from which the feet project at the bottom. The head is f! wanting,but the upper part of the body shows more attempt at rendering the form of the human is Jthis, however, figure ; only in the main contours, there being no modellingat all in jjj ""^detail. The tion, drapery has evidently occupied the artist's attenbut he has taken more about the ate elaborpains extremely of of a complicated system arrangement garments than
'

the

Heraeum, and

:,

about

the

study of
content

folds
to

or

the

of rendering of these all the follow the

texture

; he

lias,

indeed,been

indicate both

by

conventional
of the
a

lines which system of parallel drapery,and giveto the whole

contours

large tooth-comb

drawn

over

the

appearance With surface. Ionic this

of

havinghad
our

present
is
no

knowledge of the historyof the need to place the on inscription


middle
statue

alphabet there
statue

later than

the the of
most

of the does not very

sixth

century, and

the styleof certainly the


treatment
a on

suggest a
we see

later date.^

The

in peculiarstyle,especially in

drapery, which
Athenian

this Saniian that have

statue, finds
been of

striking analogyin
resemblance
three
seems

two

statues
are

found work.

the The

but Acropolis,

close

not certainly to us justify enough

Attic in

the treating

here,though it would be rash in the present state together of our knowledge to assert dogmaticallythat the Athenian examples were imported from Samos, or made by a Samian
on one

artist.
in

It may be noticed also that the of the bases of statues found on

name

Theodorus

occurs

the

written Acropolis,
seems

the

Ionic, not
Ionic
works

the

this identify
so, Samian

character ; it M'ith Theodorus sculj^tor Attic need


not

natural

to

of

Samos, and, if
The
on

in Athens of evidence
in
some

surpriseus.
statue

weak Samos which One

link in the chain is


we an

is that
ways

the

found

isolated and
cannot

example, from peculiar


to

as generalise very confidently

Samian
lacks

art.

of
^

the

statues

found
been

in

Athens, which

also

its

head,-

It lias often

to assigned the

archaistic ; but, apart from


so

late,and
-

there

is

no

reason

tlie end of the century, and then explained as would I do not think any one place it inscription, after 550 B.C. for placing the inscription now

'E4". 'Apx.1888,

PI. 6,

11

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

115

Otherwise

the Samian statue, except that very closely the lower part of the body is oblong,not round, in section ; it The of the o-avis rather than of the kcwv. reminds us, in fact, resembles of position
to

the

which figure,
one

holds while

fruit
other

(pomegranate1) close
is close to

the breast with

arm,

the

the

side,

I'^.c-'

Fia.

12.

"

Statue

found

on

the Aciopulis at Athens, resembling that from (Athens, Acropolis Museum).

Samos

drapery,though its arxangemenL is- here less ^elaborate, are in the see we preciselysimilar to what similar The second Samian from Athens ately fortunfigure. figure has its head preserved, though the body is lost below the waist. But the positionand drapery are again so similar that almost Avhat is missing in any restore we one certainly may from what is preserved in the others. of these three statues
and

the treatment

of

116

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Thus

the

one

head
narrow

remaining has
and

are proportions

their

meagre, All details ]unctions~lingular.


work

very high value to the broader surfaces


are

us

; its

and flat,

shallow

and the lines, The the hair also

extremely the eyelidsare merely indicated by incised ; thus folds and texture of the drapery are hardly clearer. is thin and wavy, with lines like those of parallel
The
and shallow line, moiithjsjiierely'a straight thus ofFejijig the contrast to ITps, the_greatest smile
common

added' iTT

drapery. lips and


and in many

thin boraeredlSy full


art

exaggerated
others is weak
at
an

in

works

of

Ionic

earlyperiod.
as indefinite,

The

whole

conveyed
diffident and least Samos which

and

if the wished

impression sculptorwere
for with the

tried to

gain

the

effects

he
are

possibleplay
to be

of surface.

If

we

rightin suggesting
notice the
contrast

the home

it offers to

of this art, we the usual full and the absence


than

must

rounded

forms

of

Ionic

sculpture, though in rather and incising


resemblance.
work which
case we

of finer
of

the drawing modelling,


there details, is also
a

moulding

their

Possiblywe may see here in marble the kind of was produced by the earliest bronze founders ; in understand avoidance of deep can a careful easily
such
as

or cuttings projecting masses,

would

offer

grave

culties diffi-

to

unskilful

bronze-casters. of the male

Another

statue, this time

type, which

offers

in the treatment of the face to the very close resemblance Athenian has been found in Boeotia,at the temj^leof exam2:)lc,

Apollo

Ptous. Samos

It is

described,however, under
case

Boeotia,^ the
to
us justify

links with

in this

being

too

slender

in

here. placingit definitely CJiios.


"

The

school of
in
one

Chios, which,

as

we

have

seen,

is said
tioned men-

to

have

continued upon
an as

family for
base

four
at

is generations,

inscribed
to

found

Delos, which, however

it be

read

Micciades the
same

of details,^ certainlycontains the names and his son Archermus. Near this basis, and within
was building,

found

an

which early winged figure, connection much


in

it. The upon but there is so certain, absolutely

probably once

stood

of the

two

is not that it

its favour

us justifies

questionunder the head of Chios. It is a draped female at figurein rapid flight ; such least is shown by the outspreadwings on back and feet to be the rather UT intention. of the artist, tlioughat first the statue seems
in
statue

the treating

in

'

See p. 150.

See

Classical Review,

1893, p.

140.

Fio. 13."

Winged figure dedicated


of Chios

at

(Alliens, National

Delos, probably by Micciades Museum).

and

Arcliermnfl

ruAP.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

GOO-480

B.C.

119

have to fruelyor seem any independent existence ; ijLs__biLaHiL seems nejdbj_f(illaiv:^ folds, slightlyJo_oifiiJap,_tthe each_of which^ lines. .JL"Iiides and the lixed~contours in parallel enyelopsthe~forms of the~Hody, without its form of to own having any

siiBstltute.
The
ws

'

treatment

of the hair follows

conventional

system which
It

shalTmeet^vith
The

in aicliaic works. freciueiitly


are

is divided
one

wliich into__threeportions, another. circular

treated

independently of
of the within of Over

diadem, is parallel wavy


forehead
we

head, space~crrrthe top each into in four dividied quadrants, fmm lines run the ceTitre to the edge.
see a

the
"

which

ther

each of waves, divided by lines flat spiral, while in the mi^ldle is a cnrions pafaTTetTo'irs'Tcrge,"

succession

divided
wavy

symmetrically.
mass,

Down

the

Ijack

the
in

hair
front

falls in
from

while is very
bounded

se})arate tresses

hang
the

the

temples over
The
are m a

tEe'ljreast.

face

bony
with

and

angular;
up
at

merely

incisodTmes

for

projecting eyelialls tlie mouth, eyelids ;


into
a

runs strong but" simplecurve, "offJesIftfaST^urves found it both

tlic corners
and
was

band The
,

"

above

at

the

side.
a

ot finishing

the

corners

of the

mouth in
a

always
"

difficulty
in the*"
'

with

earlv

sculptors ;

it is solved

very

simitar way
"

Apollo In short,this
that

of ^rhcra.i

statue
we

shows

have

of the defects and ventionalities conmany alreadynoticed ; but it also shows both
in its

and great originality

promise
a

conception and
monument
we

its

execution.

Thus

it is

most

characteristic

of the
or

earlydevelopment of
not

Greek

whether sculpture,

associate it
have

with

the Chian

artists of

whom,
not

otherwise, we
to
us

little

knowledge.
Naxos.
" -

This
an

island

is

known But

from

authorities works
some

of of

earlycentre of some sculpture,


as

of art. them found

the number

literary of early
itself,
covered dismere

them
even as

dedicated
far off
as

by Naxians

the island upon in Delos, and one


to

Boeotia, is too great


material with

be due

to

accident.

The
a

marble favourite
to
an

of

Naxos,^ like that of

its sister island

Paros, was
have island. The

contributed

and may earlysculptors, early development of sculpturein the

earliest in type, and


'

probably also
2

in

date, among
(6,2).

these

See

p. 124.

gg^ Introduction

Fio. 14." Statue

deJicateU

at Delos

by

Nicandra

of Naxos

to Artemis

(Athens, National

Museum).

CIIA1-.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE

600-480

B.C.

121

Naxiau

is sculptures

the

statue

dedicated

to

Artemis
we

at
no

Delos,
direct

by

the

Naxian that

Nicandra. Nicandra

Here, indeed,

liave

statement

employed

Naxian
a

is strong prcsumi)tion

in favour

of such

the artist ; but This statue, view.


is is

which
of the

is

now

in

Athens, has alreadybeen


The
^

quoted

most

primitive type.

or pillar

thick

board, and the

body, which which position,

example like an oblong perfectly rigid,


as an

with

the feet
on

advance gone.

The

close to the sides,show no togetherand the arms is quite models ; the face,unfortunately, the simplest hair is rendered by a curious convention which can from
an

only bo
broad
works.

derived

Egyptian model
each
find
we a

it fits close
over

over ear

the
in
a

top of the head, and


mass,
a

projectsat
which

side in
some

the other

scheme
see

primitive
from
a

We

here, then,

statue, possiblyimitated

cultus image primitive


in

earlier than

showing little trace models, Egyptian and other, that in its earlydays. Greek sculpture
Greece, and
We
must turn next
to

development any sculptural of that imitation of foreign


gave
a

great stimulus
all

to

three
Two

statues

which
are

reproduce the fragmentary, surviving.


the basis
at

ordinary nude
none

male

type.
torso

of these The

unfinished,but
is hand

the less instructive

for that.
and

third
one

only
This Delos

portionsof
last is the

the

legs and
once

colossus

which

stood
tou

upon

bearingthe

well-known
on

inscription
the other
was arms

dFvTov

kWov

did

Kttt TO di'Spias letters Na^tot 'AttoAAwfi.

while o-c/jcAas,

side is added
an

in later of the
the

The

statue

example
raised

(probably with from only distinguished elbows),


nude
male

type

the
others

from

by
the

its

and great size, is still

by

curious

metal

girdle,of
At

which

attachment

visible round

its waist.

the

front, back, and

sides, it is
and

the outlines extremely flat ; thus there is little modelling, cuts muscles or depressionsin being indicated by mere

the
of
;

surface of the marble. little


here

The
as

hair
are

at

the back
seen over

ends

in

row

spiralcurls, such
the scale of the

often

the
some

forehead such

work

probably
been

made

finish

desirable. The
another
statue

Naxians

seem

to have

fond
on

of
the

making
island
state

such

colossi This

lies unfinished is about 34

quarry feet long; in its

in

itself.

present
flat

it is instructive

to notice how

it is worked
1

in entirely
Cf. S.

planes at rightangles

aavi^.

Q. 342.

122

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

another,formingthe front, back, and sides.^ The left \c.g "" advanced bent forward from : the are arms is^asusual,slightly
to
one
"

Koss suggests, that this'lmay'^liave as possiljle, been "M ii^Miially intended for the colossus to be dedicated at Delos, If so, and indeed and was given up owing to flaws in the marble. in any case, we can see on comparing the finished and unfinished front and work to how this system of working in planesparallel

the cll)ow.

It is

the flatness side affected the finished statue, in which we see can though it is disguised produced by the process still remaining,

by rounding
unfinished quarry
same were on

off the

corners now a

and

addingsome
was

details.
near

Another the
same

statue,
Naxos

in

Athens,
manner

found

; and
as

study of

its form
in which

leads these

conclusion cut.^ We have

to

the

again to the earlystatues


a

yet another
size and It
was

example
of
a

bronze

of smaller

more

of this type from Naxos, in advanced periodof art, now

in Berlin.'^
case

dedicated

to

of

small bronze of
a

it is not

Apollo by Deinagores. In the safe to infer a local origin as so


the conventionalities the
flat

in the

case

largemarble

statue; but

of pose

and

hair,the careful yet

modellingof

body, the

heaviness of the calves, are disproportionate and shall meet we againamong the islands,* justwhat we might expect, with the advance the somewhat crude forms of the
nature.

all 'features which the type of face is of art, to replace

Nike From

of

Archermus, without
the

changing their essential must statue belong to


is
so

much
same

of the

this inscription, the sixth century, though its style other examples than that of many advanced more the end of the be placed near type that it must
must

century.
we Finally,

mention

here

the work

of

Naxian

artist,

Alxenor, who

century.^ The which records of the inscription date is shown both by the lettering his name, and by the styleof the relief (found in Boeotia and This is a tombstone, in Athens) on which it is inscribed. now and holdingplayfully a a man leaningon a staff, representing his hand. back its neck towards tvirns cicala to a dog, which
worked Thus
^

in the first half of the fifth

we

have
2

little
der

more

than

genre

scene

from

actual
p.

life,

Ross, Reise auf

plateat end, and griechischenInselm. vol. i., See Introduction {b,2), and /. //. S. 1890, p. 130. ^ See Arch. Zcitung, xxxvii., PI, 7. "* See especially Melos, p. 125. ^ Conze, Beilrage, etc., I'l. xi.

39,

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

123

such

as

is not

uncommon

on

tombstones.^

The

styleis
care

able remarkskill
flat

and for the for the grace of the composition, in the very with which all the details are rendered features time there are some relief. At the same
way in which

and

low

and

"

notably the

the further shoulder

rests
"

on

and in

the

of the fol-eshortening

left foot

the top of the staff, which look awkward

used to the more and suggest that the artist was sculpture, best be realised This may of drawing on a flat surface. resources with a photograph or cast or a by comparing the original only drawing ; what in the latter appears natural and graceful in relief. It is hardly rash when seen shows its awkwardness
to infer that the artist must
was more

have

been

trained in

school Avhich

drawing and paintingthan in sculpturein this the difference in period between relief. But considering also that they are and the earlier Naxian and sculptures, sculpturesin the round, we have no materials for exclusively the wider inferences about any further comparison or for any its later work. of this, school in the light Naxian for us by is represented of Thera The earlysculpture Thera. in an Apollo now in Athens, a nude male statue corresponding from the have just seen to those we type and stylevery closely
skilled in
"

"

"

island neighbounng

of Naxos.
in any

It affords finished front and noticed

the throughout of that


at

clearest of

example
to
one

to

be

seen

statue

system
statues

to working in placesparallel

side,and
in

rightangles
are

another, which
Naxos.

we

have

the unfinished

from

rounded grooves

colossal torso, the corners ancflhe outlines of muscles are rendered off, As
in

the

merely
shallow'

by

which

cannot

be called surface

flatness "general

of the

"treatment

of headland

face,we

and do not aff"ect the modelling, which on they appear. In_the of similar re|)Ctition see a very in the head
of

the characteristics

jhaTw^
same

noted

the "Nike

of

Archermus

"-^the

ment treatand angula^Jorai^jhe^same slight

of eye and spread in a row compare Boeotia of

mouth. of flat with

The

hair is somewhat
over

different, being
If
we

curls spiral the

the forehead. the Ptoan

this statue

Apollofrom

(see" 26, p. 150)we are struck at first with its proportions. But this similarity only serves
essential difference rounded
For

temple in the similarity to emphasise

the The
^

of

which style Boeotian

we

the modelling_Qi example from


the

detail. in every both in face and figure,


see

another

island.s very similar

in

see composition,

below

p. 130.

124

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

body, the siniple, exj2i"^ssionlessJiri"s_of eye and mouth, contrast with the flat intersecting most strongly planes and the^exagger-

FiQ.

15.

"'
"

Apollo"

found

at

Thera

(Athens, National

Museum).

features in this tha,t_axe" the-jnost repiarkable expression^ from the^islands. iiTid[ other^worksthat come rich harvest of sculpture which has^yietdedra of various '"MeTos^ of Euroi)e, until recently to enrich various museums was periods, only known in the earlyperiod of art for its remarkable vases ated
'

126

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

around

it,with which

its richness
and

in marble

must

have

stantly con-

kept
Delos.
"

it in commercial

artistic connection. that many Delos.

We

have

early sculpture not


distant Delian islands
were

already seen only of the


dedicated
even more on

examples
even

of the
more

Cyclades but
The the great
and

of

shrine

of the
Asia

Apollo
most

was,

than

temples of
of statues.
on

Minor, the
the far
we

centre

of

Ionian

worship
the the
works

and festivals, Delos be

fore thereSo those

place for fitting


selected from other

dedication found could

have from

which other

or inscriptions

evidence

to assigned

islands ; but a largeresidue does not distinction. The conditions at Delos, where

admit
even

of

any

such
was

residence the

placed under
a

were restrictions, local school,though there may

not

favourable
been

have
to

probablywere
These above
most

stone-cutters,attached

the the

growth of and there sculptors, service of the temple.


to

men,

however, would
to

belongto

islands, neighbouring
islands which

all

Naxos

and

to

Paros, the two


it
seems

yielded
century.
the the

of the marble without of further

employed by
evidence

in the sixth sculptors

But

best

to

treat

under

head

Delos

what

is left of the

which early sculpture has and yielded,


same

excavation

of the

sanctuary of

Apollo

which
as

we can hardly be wrong in examples we have just been


""^

to the assigning

class

the

considering.

these Delian statues form a among series which offers different variations upon the draped female Similar statues have been found at Athens, which are type.
most
numerous

The

far fortunately instructive. At

more a

numerous,

and

in

far better
two

state most

of

preservation. But
.

comparison of first glance they seem


not

the

series is

almost
a

but exactlyalike, between


some

i a

closer examination
statues

only reveals
but place,

difference

the

individual distinction Athens. and its


we

in

each

also makes
in

general
those in
this

possiblebetween
We
must
reserve

those
a we

found

Delos

and

of generaldescription
come a

type

development
must

until
to

to

the

Athenian

series ; ^
series of

'here

be

content

notice
can over see

few in

features distinguishing
as

,of the Delian


statues [early
I

statues.^ which

We

them,

in any

stretches
a

different stages,from ;that dedicated by the


*

square Naxian
])e
"*

and

periodof some length, many almost shapelessfigurelike


to such
as

Nicandra^

show

con-

See " 23.

Honulle.

Dianae Antiqtiissiinis

Simulacris

Deliacis.

See

above,

p. 120.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

127

body and the rendering the simple system of parallel folds in Delos of drapery. But is developed of the earliest draped figures in some which we see conventional sometimes in a more ; they are way than at Athens with the help of a saw. The in deeper,in one even cut case
siderable skill in the

modellingof

the

same

statue

which
the

shows

the

use

of this instrument its

is also

remarkable
familiar

for

with

squareness this shape and the


"

of

shape ;

we

are

already
and back
cuts

flat surfaces

r-t side

that contain
that

it it
"

it is all the but


mere

more

noticeable

for the

deep

intersect

work This

modelling, though it from appearing monotonous


a

stitute depth of cutting in does not conproduces shadows which prevent the

and
reminiscence

lacking in
of such
we

character.

appear may squareness Artemis ; but on Nicandra's

figuresas
seen

the

other other

hand

have and

the is
no

process
need
to

by

which for

it is any

in jDi'oduced different

cases,

there

look

explanation here.
Delian
cut statues out

Another those
at

the that distinguishes peculiarity

from
a

Athens

is that

most

of them the

ai^e

of

block single
was

of

even marble, including

projectingarm
of the Parian
of

; this

doubtless

quarries ; at avoid Athens the greater distance transport made the sculptor of large blocks by inserting the necessity any such pi"ojecting istics portionsof the figure. The pose, drapery,and other characterbest be considered in of these female draped figures can of the Athenian and the proprietyof the name the case series, can Artemis, sometimes given to these Delian figures, hardly in their case it is be discussed separately the on same footing ; the the nude as name Apollo,commonly given to con^esponding owing
to

the

proximity

marble

male

type

"

type of which

two

or

three those
we

more

examples,

not

in differing

have

any essential points from also been found on Delos.


"

have

already seen,

Thasos.

We

now across

leave

the

of Ionic influence forms of its

the

and follow the course Cyclades, north of the Aegean. The peculiar island of Thasos
to

alphabetshow
Paros

the and

have

been of
in

in close relations with the its sixth


art
a

are century ; and we resemblance to that of

Siphnos in the latter part accordingly prepared to find the Cyclades.


hitherto One
on
: uow

The
are

most

characteristic works
the the round.

discovered them
side is of
a

on

Thasos
relief of

in not relief, Apollo,Hermes, and


^

in

of

Nymphs,

each

the

opening

-B. C. II. xiii. PI. vii.

in Athens.

" O

"-1

.a

73 C ci O
o

CHAP.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

129

of

sacred

cave.

This

work

is remarkable

and in the pose in the figures advance in this respect that we drapery ; there is so much may the of relief earlier fifth the to even century. assignthe years of variety But in

grace and arrangement of their for the

spiteof
we

that absence which

here still sec all this grace and delicacy, we and accuracy and modelling of form of severity
seen

have

in less advanced the again,

Ionic

works.

We

see

also, repeatedagain and

conventional

treatment

of

here and there modified drapery with which we are familial', of Apollo by a careful piece of study,as in the rich draperies and the nymph that crowns him, or in the lightchlamys of Hermes. But

here, as
of

in works

in the round skilful in

of the

same

class,
the
wet

the treatment

drapery,however
yet attained
Sometimes
a

compositionand

detail,has
forms and it

not

covers.

it it

completeharmony with close to them, as if clings


envelops them
folds. This

transparent, sometimes
in

completely or
relief is

hangs
now

independent and
Thasian

conventional

in the Louvre.

Another

also in the Louvre, is the tombstone relief, of stilllater date,which might perhaps of Philis,^ a work

find

more

placein fitting
here with because
a

the

next

chapter.
same

But

it may

be

mentioned combined
flatness of

it shows

the

essential in
art.

character,
But
some

still further
survive

advance and

conventionalities

in hair
once

doubtless surface,
true

deficient in and shade


on

and modelling, The

drapery,and there is a but helped out by painting, the consequent play of light

the surface of the marble.


"

has island of Samothrace neighbouring these of various periods : among sculptures yielded interesting is a relief, of a chair,representing probably from the arm and Epeius Talthybius Agamemnon seated,while his henchmen Samothrace. stand behind This work his chair ; ^ the names rather belongsto the
to

each person. decorative class of primitive


are near even

written

reliefs than

free Greek and reliefs of

sculpture ;
below
a are

the bands

of decorative
we see on

patterns above

like those which


nature
:

early bronze alike figures


Before
one or we

decorative

decoration

and

are

translated clumsily
works about
L ;

here into stone.

leave the
more

islands of the

Aegean, we
we

must
no

notice
certain

two
1

which

have

Ann.

Inst. 1872, Tav.

Ann.

Inst.

1829, Tav.

C. 2 ;

PI. 2, 1. Selections, Mitchell, II. Anc. lined. Mon. Millingen,

i.

130

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

evidence from the

as

to provenance,

though they
is the

almost the

come certainly

region of
The

Ionic

whether influence,

islands

or

the

mainland.
at

first of these

relief in

the Villa Albani

from relief,^ commonly called the Ino-Leucothea a now interpretation mythological generally acknowledged to be Most it is simply a tomb-stone, of someerroneous. what probably

Eome,

size larger deceased attended almost


a

than

usual, with

domestic

scene

upon

it ; the
and

lady is representedas playingwith her The seated figure seems by her servant. of the seated figures, some repetition
thrones, on
see

children

at first sight

of

them

on

identical
the

the

Harpy

monument
a on

from
exactness

Lycia;

and

standingattendant
we

which

in

one

repeats with of the nymphs


infer
owes

like

the Thasian facts alone

the type relief. It that the


"

might
we

not

be

safe

to

from its

these

relief in the Villa Albani have but

with
to

how seen already modification slight conclusion


same
:

"

school originto the same universally earlytypes are repeated but a study of the styleleads us
see

the

same

we

here of

again

the

same

full and

rounded
same

forms, the
and defects

careful
same

the does

the modelling, elaborate arrangement of drapery, marred by and misunderstandings the drapery ; though

absence

detailed

envelop and conceal the forms beneath quite as it is still far from completely as on the Harpy monument, of those forms, in harmony with to a due expression attaining its own and folds. texture The whole composition, again,is
not

in design graceful ;

but the

child, though from


we

its size

mere
:

with baby, is represented this is


a

the

convention
to

which

proportionsof a grown woman shall meet constantlyin Greek


century.

sculpture, righton
Another its
but

the fourth
in

now relief,

design
differs

the

stela made from

Naples,resembles very of Naxos by Alxenor


it in execution. In

stronglyin
in

Boeotia,case we

widely

that

all and the skill with which surface, details were drawn rather than modelled it. Here, on upon the other hand, the forms much are rounder, and it is their

noticed

the flatness of the

heavy proportionsand
in

certain
a

flabbiness connection

and

lack

of detail

the

We

which modelling know nothing as

suggest
to
seem

with of this

Ionic

style.

the

subjectand stylealike
^ ^

provenance it to this to assign


Mon. Ant. xi. i. 56.

but relief,

place.

Winckelmanu,

Conze, Beitrage, etc., Taf.

See p. 123.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

131

(d)Thessalij. Early sculpture in Thessalyis represented by


"

several

tomb-reliefs. is
now

The

best

known

of

these the

comes

from

Pharsalus, and
it is and from

in the Louvre.

Only

and preserved,

holdingup

it represents two maidens On another flowers in their hands.


in
a

part of upper each other, facing

tombstone,
a a

Larissa,now

brimmed

see Athens, we hat (petasus) his head, and on

youth
clothed

with with

broad-

chlamys

Fig.

17."

Two

maidens

holding

flowers

; relief from

Pharsalus

in

Thessaly (Louvre).

which holds

falls in
in
one

broad
a

simple

folds

over

his short

tunic. ^

He

hare, in the other a fruit (pomegranate 1). but of of inferior similar to A companion figure material, this, and now found in the same and perhaps later work, was place, It is a draped female,also carrying stands beside it in Athens.^
hand
a

hare.

Two

other hear
C. H.

examples
names

of finer local marble


of

are

also in

Athens, and
1

the

Fekedamos
2

and
Alitth. Ath.

* Polyxenaia ;

Bull.

1888, PI.

vi. p. 89.

1887,

p.

78.

'

See

Lepsius,Cfr. Marmorstudien,

MitOt.

1883, Taf. ii. iii.

132

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

stylestillremains at Tyrnavo ^ (Phalanna). These works suffice to give a notion of the number and character of the Thessalian sculptures, though the list is far from Some of the examples already quoted probably complete. the fifth belong to ment century, but all alike show a local developof a peculiar related to that we have already style, closely
a seen

and

head

of similar

in the

northern is the of the

Aegean
contrast

Islands. between

Here the

again the
excellence of

most
position com-

feature striking and I


^

in deficiency incorrect

Ior

and the carelessness or general effect, the good drawing and the poor modelling. The various reliefs vary considerably between details, thus
;
a

among maidens

themselves
we see

in

the

Pharsalian thick

relief of the

two

renderingof
youth
with
a

drapery which

is well
an

and designed, excellent with


a seem

the

hare, from

Larissa,shows
nor

study of folds ; but in other cases, as hare, the folds are neither conventional
to

in the maiden natural ; the artist, the Thus

they

be of

cut
a

into obliquely model and under from

the

surface any he is due

without character

study
and

without which the

by regard to

conditions

working.

by
and

the

folds that radiate the elbow that

breast,or
the

below
to

holds

meant

the

express the forms clothes ; but the method


as

up of the he

that appear above he doubtless drapery, and of their

body

has taken

impress on successful doing this is unwhere relief

well

as

inaccurate.
cut

the edges, at deep it is flat in its general and there is no attempt to reach surface, rules or system of sculpture in relief. The artist is any that he finds easy, the effect content to produce,by any means which he desires, and in this he is sometimes successful ; but there is no striving after accuracy and definition of style. Athens. The of Athens is now (e) earlysculpture preserved
"

is

high,and

therefore

In all cases, even down rounded or

to to

us

in such

abundance Yet

that

separate section
relations of

must

be devoted

study. deranging our


as especially we

its

it cannot of

be the

omitted altogether the of the Asia

notion
some

here, without early schools,


types which
and the is
of

of the
recur

have

found Islands

to

examples again and again in


discovered
on

finest

Minor

Aegean

have

been

for example, to separate the impossible, female figures the found at Athens from preserved, examples of the same type from
B.
a II. xii. PI. xvi.

Acropolis. It magnificentseries similar, though worse


Delos
; and

the

if the

134

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

is

hardly such
a

as

to lead

us

to

expect that
and
influence.

Sparta was
But
us

times
sources

centre

of artistic work

for the

historyof sculpture tell

not

early our literary only of an

in

4 %
"'i

" 0K.'SC;

-"
,j A

4'H
I
'

^v

"'-

"-Mf

PiG.

18.

"

Cretan

Statue

(Museum,

Canrtia). After

Reime

Archiologique, 1893,

PI. ill.

Amyclaean throne,^made by the foreignsculptor Bathycles of Magnesia, but also of local school of sculptors, a flourishing pupilsof Dipoenus and whose works were both at Sparta itself and to be seen Scyllis,
1

elaborate

artistic structure, like the

See p. 78.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

135

Olympia. At present, however, we are concerned only with and these,though they the extant specimensof the art of Sparta, of literature the evidence and so confirm are fairly numerous, of sculpturein earlySparta,are of a totally the practice to as mentioned of Spartan sculptors from the works different nature pendent by ancient writers. Thus we are reduced here also to an indethemselves. the monuments on treatment, based entirely The most primitive of these is a quadrangularblock, of
at

blue

marble,
its
two

narrower narrower are

at

the

top than

at

the

bottom, which
it.^ On
the

has, on
two

snakes sides,
scenes

curling up

reproduce types similar to reliefs and other earlyworks those on the Ai-givebronze (see marble Thus link have a sculpture in we connecting I 9). decorations. In each case see we a relief with those primitive
broader sides which
man

and she

woman,
a

but their relations wreath


a on
"

on

one

side he

are seems

friendly,
to

and

holds

on

the A

other

side

be

stabbingher
scenes

with
see

sword.
one

is to

side

of possibleinterpretation Polynicesand Eriphyle,on But make without such


more

these the

other

Orestes

and

Clytaemnestra.
impossibleto
types
too
a are same

tinctive dis-

attributes it is with

identification

certainty ;
we

the

often for

The styleis significations. but


may

rude

repeated with varying any detailed analysis,


and

recognisehere

roundness

heaviness of of

of form

which

with other examples strongly here a work We cannot, however, recognise the stela is rather to be regarded as a sculpture,
contrasts stone

Spartan art. independent


into reliefs from

translation

of Avork

such

as

we

see

on

the

small

bone

Sparta published in the Hellenic Journal, 1891, PI. xi. ; and these again fall into their placein the series of earlydecorative have works, in bronze, ivory, and other materials,which we AVe come next to a series which now alreadynoticed. sents reprecharacteristic for us the early art of Sparta in its most
is repre-| in which the deceased reliefs,^ sented throne, alone or with his wife, while his descendants,usually doubtless smaller figures, representing Often he holds a cup in his hand, while bringhim offerings. form
"

series of grave seated upon a

the

is emphasisedby sepulchral significance

the

snake

which

sometimes
in

here We curls up the back of his throne. see may the worship of the deified dead, which its simplestform
1
'"'

Ann.

Inst.

1861, Tav.

C.

Sammling

PI. i. ; Mittheil. Ath. Sabouroff,

1877, Taf.

xx.-xxiv.

136

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

later Greek funeral reliefs in the form frequently appears upon of a banquet at which the deceased reclines. The Spartan reliefs
are

even

more

remarkable

for their

than style

for their

subject.

Fio.

19."

Spai-tanTombstone,

formerly

in the

SabourofT

Collection

(Berlin).

as as parallel planes, many behind five of these planes being clearly one distinguishable, another, and each at its edges is bounded by a cut that runs in in at rightangles to it, the corner being hardly rounded

They

are

worked

in

succession

of

11

THE

RISE ; thus

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

137

most
near

cases

the

face and
are

arm

of the

nearest

and figure,

side

of

his

throne,

highest plane, his body and the as Modelling hardly exists, outline drawing; but here and mere there,as in the or foot,there is some modelling in the intermediate
Details
the
are

in the first or usually worked leg in the second, and so on. of these planes are boundaries

shoulder surface.

added, incised
of the in

or

in

but relief,

in
the

flatness

generalsurface.

On

modify way other hand, this


no

the to to be merely a device due planes seems crudeness of the sculptor's attempt to render one objectbehind It is not based on any strict adherence to an another. accepted the for not convention, always worked respectiveplanes are into consistently throughoutthe relief ; one sometimes merges

working

another

where often

it suits
curves

the

artist's
to

convenience, and
so design,

the

ground backstrict there

about

suit the

that

the

of parallelism
must

the

planes is completelyviolated.
in the

Where
are

be

some

as modelling,

face,the features
to nature

cut

out

without the lower

any

consideration

of truth

in

their

contours,

jaw, for example, forming a sharp edge that would And in the whole compositionthere is almost cut. with and stiffness of positionthat well accords an angularity the angularnature of the technique. This peculiar techniqueis usuallysupposed to be due to the would certainly influence of wood and the grain of wood carving, .be a help in splitting the surface from one plane to the away next, after incising deeply the outlines of what was requiredto be left in the upper culties plane. But, on the other hand, the diffiwhich he has to reunskilled sculptor, when meet present an several objectsbehind another in a relief, one might perhaps have led to a similar result. (y) The Best of the Pelopmnese. The curious reliefs which in a similar,but have noticed at Sparta find a parallel we at not identical, subject found Tegea.^ The style of this relief closelyresembles with their that of the Spartan ones, curious succession of planes. The subject also is the bringing of offerings to the dead ; but here, while the small worshipper and the seated wife are figure just as at Sparta,the principal reclines on a couch, of which the end only is preserved ; we have thus a transition to the ordinary type of the so-called funeral banquet so common tombstones. on
outline of the
"

MittheU.

Ath.

1879, PI. vii.

138

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap

To return of the
near

to

in sculpture
to

the

round, we
One of

first notice two

statues

primitiveseated type.
a
^

these, which

was

found seated
a

Tegea,resembles
;
we

remarkable
same

degree the

Cretan
"

statue contrast

find not

only the

rather slender form

great
"

to
same

the massive

of the Branchidae proportions of rendering the hair. The

figures
face in

but the the

conventional

Tegea figure has unfortunatelyentirely disappeared ; the with a curious border or across drapery, fringededge slanting the chest,and ending in a tassel thrown the shoulder,is over
perfectlyflat,and
which statue,^ The
was

has found
seem

no near

indication Asea in

of

folds.

The

other

Arcadia, has lost its head.


one

body

and

chair and

made

all in

square

flat; but

the

form

markably piece,and are reless is again heavy a name

than

in the
on

Branchidae

inscribed

so, the statue

figures. This last statue has it, 'Ayefiw name, ; this is probably a proper most set up monument was as a likely
worn

and, if
over
a

tomb.

It is much

and
offer

weathered much

; but

in the

feet,the

only part
between
care.

left which

it is clear that their

the

sandals been

for detailed ling, modelscope and show the sinews which worked
out

thongs have

with

considerable

The
we are

Olympian excavations have yieldedseveral heads, which in assigning to a local school of probably justified
these is the colossal head the of of

sculpture. Foremost among which probably belongedto


This head On is in many ways the head rises a
in flat

Hera,

temple statue in the Heraeum.^ uncouth and primitiveworkmanship.


the
to

hair is worked
eyes
are

high crown ; over close waves, clinging


lids but with compasses, mouth is a
most to

forehead head.

the The with


lines out-

the

with largeand flat, iris incised fillin with

little in

and relief,
as

the

eyeball and
to

doubtless

colour ; the the archaic smile in its producing the the is

bony

structure

of the

skull

seems

simple curve, thus form. But j^rimitive felt by be distinctly

artist, and, in spiteof all roughness of execution,the form


the

is full though exaggerated, expression, of life. Tavo heads of Zeus from Olympia* belong to a much advanced for the conmore trast period of art, and are interesting which and the technique of bronze they offer between
1

clearly cut, and

Bull. C. If. 1890, PI. xi.


3

1874, 'E0_ 'A/)x.


p.

PI.

71.

Olympia,
*

iii. PI.

1 ;

Botticher,Olympia,
PI. vi. etc.

237, etc.

Botticher, Olympia,

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

139

terra

-cotta.

The

first

seems

to

be their

contained

clearly defined
while transitions
same are

surfaces, with
the
more

by a series oi phasised, intersecting angles emits outlines, and alike


we see

other

is softer But

in

the the

gradual.

in both

almost slender, A bronze head

meagre, proportions. in Berlin,shows from Cythera,^ now


to

technical

resemblance a peculiarities But and its proportions

the bronze
too

in many head from


are

Olympia.
different ;

nical due to techperhaps the The to many common earlybronze-founders. proceedings Cythera head probably represents Aphrodite, the goddess of the but
a

its appearance resemblances may only be

very

after island,
a

type which

is found

on

the coins

of Cnidus

similar type is not uncommon is dedication likely foreign enough be

elsewhere,^and
at
so

although
a

it would

rash,in
any its very of

the

present

state

of

important shrine, our knowledge, to

assign it to
mouth with

definite

of the end

origin. But the half-shut eyes, the ling and the careful modelsubtle triple curve, in the the lips, be paralleled most can easily
Athens.
If this head

Acropolisstatues
a as

at

is

not

Attic,we
our

have

warningagainsttrusting any
to

such

criteria while

evidence

the local distinctions of

The_best

preserved of

Peloponnese is the so-called be assigned to all probability


found.
as
"

earlyschools is so scanty. in all the. early woi'ks found must Apollo of Tenea ; its origin
the where neighbourhood of the nude male and
"

the
in
was

it

This have
"

statue

is
seen

an

embodiment it in the

type,
the

we

already
of Melos there is

Apollo

"

of Thera

Apollo

; its
some

is equally uncertain, though significance evidence The the that it stood


statue
over a

in this

case

grave

toT

represent the deceased.

Tenean
most

is all but

in perfect of all the!

preservation ;
series
to

it is also

executed carefully

is not care only seen in the'^s belongs. of the figure, but also InThe finish of details, j generalproportions which it This such
as

th^ knees.
free from

The

hair is treated

in broad

and

rather

spirals. In the face is an with the exaggeratedattempt at expression which contrasts development given by Attic artists to the uxchaic sniile^ Here, ; though the eyes are convex, not flat, they are stillwide open, ) the lids rior suiilv in berreath the brows ; the not narrowed~T3y uioutfa~ts a simple curve, and there is none of the Attic delicacy
flat waves,

conventional

"

Published
^

by Brumi,

A.
on

Z.

xxxiv., PI.

3 and

4.

E.g. for Artemis

Arcadian

coins.

Fio.

20.

-"Apollo"

found

at Teuea

(Munich).

142

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

scratched left
case as

on

the much

background of
to colour
as

the relief ; the effect form


;
we we see

was an

less doubtextreme

to

have

here

of the influence

of.

as painting,

it,for example, on

the Boeotian

relief of Alxenor.
"

in early represented sculpture by two works. The first of these is a colossal torso of the male type,^ resembles the early which, in its shape and proportions, strongly from the temple of Apollo Ptous in Boeotia ; only here statues

(e)Megara.

Megara

is

the

of section which squareness works is avoided much not so


away

we

have

seen

in

some

early
as

by making

the

body

circular

by cutting it

The obliquelyat the sides. exaggerated slimness of the proportionsand the elongation of the waist are most conspicuoushere, owing to the colossal size of the statue. The other work is the pediment of the treasury of Megara at and is carved in the Olympia.^ This represents a gigantomachy, soft local limestone of Olympia. We at least until are justified, further evidence in classing this as a product of appears, Megarian art : it is unlikelythat the decoration of a building destined to represent the devotion and the gloryof Megara at is it any proof Olympia Avould be entrusted to a foreigner ; nor
to

the

contrary that
works

contained

by an is the giant who figure In spiteof the group.


to

this treasury, in the time earlySpartan artist. The


was

of best

Pausanias,

preserved

the

of antagonist of
out

Zeus

in the central

bad

state

show the

that

the

stylebears
was

preservation, enough is left the statement of Pausanias,


statues primitive
on one

that

treasury
This

later than

the

it

tained. con-

who giant, freedom

sinks wounded and

knee, is rendered
of
pletely com-

with

considerable

power. all as well colouring the figures,

The
as

old fashion

the blue the

background,
of that their from from

was

the

followed,owing to necessarily material. The periodis probably not


here
^

inferior nature

far removed

of the metopes of the third series at subjectoffer the easiest comparison.


"

Selinus,which

Selinus. As a ({") colony of Megara Hyblaea in Sicily, Selinus naturally finds its placenext to Megara,the mother city this have both. The of ing interesttown of a most temples yielded series of metopes, which are now preserved in the museum
at

Palermo.^
must
^

These be

metopes
until

fall into
we

four the

sets ; of these

the

latest

deferred
marble.
"*

reach
^

fifth century, but


iii.Taf.
;

In

Naxian

Olympia,
von

ii. iii. /". 286-293,

See

below, p. 145.

Benndorf, Metopen

Sdinunt

B.

II

THE

RISE sets
us

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

143

the first three

find their

place here.
on

The

which earliest,
a

perhaps show
and enlarge
to

the first attempt translate into stone

the

part of

sculptorto
with

the

scenes mythological

Fio.

21."

Metope

of earliest

series,from

Selinus

(Palermo).

which

he

was

already
cannot

familiar be

in

bronze

reliefs and

other

decorative of the

work,
; the

much placed of these Perseus

later than the


are

sixth

century.

Three

in

beginning fairly good preservation


head of the

subjectsare

the ofi" cutting

144

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Qorgon pole

in

the

presejica_jiL,Athen_a, ^eracles carrying the


of
a

Qercopes suspended head


which
seen

horses,

at each end downwards, one his shoulders, and chariot with rests on a full face, with a draped figurestandingon

four each
on

side of the charioteer.

These

types

are

all of them

common

earlydecorative
and show the
same

works

are ; the first two very similar in style, defects and peculiarities. In all the figures

the face and in

breast

are

full

from face,the legs,

the waist

down,

and the profile.The heads are disproportionately large, of the body and limbs are very heavy,though the proportions emphasis given to the jointsand muscles prevents the fleshy, almost which was flabby, produced by similar proappearance portions Ionic works. in early The hair is rendered by simple without curls the and almost large flat, spiral waves, ; eyes are indication without any of lids, except in the case of the Gorgon ; the ears but slightly projecting and shapeless ; the mouths there is a curved, and devoid of expression cases ; in most rather than the grimacewe often find in archaic stare vacant The face of the Gorgon is worked with more sculpture. facility and it because familiar to was definition, probably already
or rather architecture as a decorative sculpture type ; and so sculpturein this case is of a less tentative nature than in other figures, for which the artist probably only knew models

the

the of

minute size. On the other hand, we in the see comparatively the part of the on body of this same Gorgon a misunderstanding doubtless artist. In his model the Gorgon was representedas with her legs drawn running or flying, up in the customary archaic scheme

figureis unmistakably representedas The littlePegasuswhich the Gorgon holds knee. on one kneeling is very likely a part of the primitive type. The relief generally stand out which is not after any system, but the figures, cut nearly in the round, are cut in as far as is necessary in each even plane. case, and the background is not an
;

but

his

The

third metope
seem

is very different in style, ditions though the conof any great diff'erence to preclude the possibility full-face chariot is
a common was

of date.

The

type of earlybronze
in this
case

relief ; but difficult.

the translation It is

into stone

peculiarly
greater
Then
the
are

contrived,first by
as

givingthe relief much


metopes.
out

depth, about of fore-parts


while the

twice the

great
are

as

in the other

the

horses

completelycut

in

round,
in relief

and the chariot, hind-legs,

the charioteer

ti

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

145

of the bodies the horses are background. Thus in at omitted but when from seen front, a distance, practically ; the effect of the foreshortening is by no unsuccessful. means
on

the

In The

details, too, the work


eyes

both
are

better than in the other metopes. of the horses and the charioteer are and convex,
seems

marked do better shaped,and are clearly ; his ears The difference is probably not projectlike those of Perseus. skill of the various sculptors to be explainedby the uneven who these metopes, probably after selected types. set to make were The whole was covered by a brilliant polychromy,of which once blue. To appreciate the traces stillremain ; the background was effect of these compositions they must be seen set,as at Palermo, the lids
in their massive

architectural frame
seem proportions

; to these to be

their surroundings

heavy
\

and

uncouth

Tie^^second set of metopes, of which


were^ found
in
as as"7ecehtly

^partly so,
removed different

peculiarly adapted. are or preserved, 1892.^ They are not far


three their

period from

the

first set, but

styleshows

and the subjectstoo seem to be derived influence, which from Crete. .Qiie,_ represents Europa riding on the bull a dolphin is swimming, reproduces oyer the sea, in which almost exactlyjfc^e scheme which we earliest ~coins the see on

Gortyna. Here there is an and there seems proportion^


in delicacy^ uncouthness Cretan
'a many

of

almost
to

slimness exaggerated almost


an

of of the

be

affectation

which details,

contrasts

with strongly

visible in the

earlier metopes. The character is same scanty remains of the group of Jleracles and the bull,which forms another of the metopes ; the third is
a

of the

singlefigureof
models.
seems

sphinx, which
the
an

is

clearlyderived
of
this

from
set

Oriental

Indeed,
to

whole

character

of

metopes
The

to be due set

accession of Oriental

influence.

of metopes, which is a good deal later, and the earlier of the to fifth is probablybelongs part only century, two and of these the lower half represented by examples, only is preserved; both are scenes from a gigantomachy. In one the who is fallen on extent giant, one knee, resembles to some giant on the Megarian pediment, but his positionis far forcible thrown
;

third

the

less
is

the other is fallen


a

on

his

back, and
attempt
to

his

head, which

back, shows
we see a

remarkable the lips

render

in the half-

open mouth these two

and the drawn

good
'

agony of death. deal of refinement and even


Professor L

Throughout
mannerism

By

Saliua.s.

146

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

cnAt".

in

but detail, and

weakness

and

lack of This is

the

execution.

ception vigour alike in the conperhaps characteristic of

the

great cities of Magna

Graecia, which

were,

at

the

end

of

Via.

22."

Metope
at

of second

from serie.s,

Selinus

(Palermo).

the the

sixth

century,
of way

the

zenith had
was

of their

and, prosperity,
a

like

lonians

Asia

Minor,

adopted
yet known

softer
to the

and

more

luxurious

of life than
or

Greeks

of

Central Greece

the

Peloponnese.

ir

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

147

Boeotia. (?/)
trace

"

Literary evidence
we we are

fails
may

us

in

the artistic influences that

expect
that

attempt to any in the sculpture


case

of

Boeotia; and

therefore these
we

reduced
see

in this

to

the

sculpture velopme have had distinct features and an to seems independent desuch as implies a flourishing local school, subject, The the end as at the beginning, to foreign influence. at remains earliest extant of Boeotian sculptureare a portion of seated from the sanctuary of Apollo Ptous, and the statue a
monuments

only.

From

in Boeotia

monument

of also

Dermys
by
the

and

Citylus. Both
of much
a

of these

are
a

tinguish dismost
B.C.

presence
not

of inscriptions later
than

archaic
The

character,^ probably

600
statue

Ptoan
at

fragment- is part
Branchidae, but
even

of

seated primitive
and

like
;

those

squarer

less modelled

it

signature of an artist the last half only of whose is preserved, This is unfortunate, for it is otus. name The the earliest artist's signaturewhich we ment monupossess. ^ of Dermys and Citylus is of rough material, and of the in the positionof the rudest and most primitive style ; but
Ijears the

two,

each

with of the

his

arm

about
can see

the

other's

neck, and
an

in

the

treatment

hair,we
models.

clear indications of
treatment wig-like

tion imitaof the

of

Egyptian

The

same

hair appears also on head and shoulders of an a early figure from the Ptoan possibly a portion of the same sanctuary the These statue inscribed as fragment just mentioned.
"

Egyptian features are in considering another


The
art

to

be

noticed,for they
which
we

are

of

importance

influence

shall later shows


and
us

recognise.
Boeotian
now

so-called

Apollo'^ of Orchomenus
the first of unearthed
certain
a

in''rEs'most characteristic

development ;
in
common

it is

ho

but forms longerisoTaFed, other examples have been Ptous.


All

of which series, the

several

of these
from

have
most

temple of Apollo which peculiarities


statues.

them distinguish among


^

other

earlyGreek
their
as

most Fore-

these
6rror

is peculiarities
has arisen here later than asserted

remarkable
from

rounHrless
unwarranted
vii. p. 235.

00113136131516
that

elsewhere See Journal


and

the

assumption
Hence
some

"

is

always

^.
that

Hell. Stud.

be late. Dermys work view refutes this on an more example undoubtedly primitive completely than anv epigraphicaldiscussion. 2 Bull. C. II. 1886, PL vii. 3 Mitth. Ath. 1878, Taf. xiv. ^ As to the name to be given to all these statues see " 18 above, "Inherited

have

actually
?

Citylus must

Another

of

and

Borrowed

Types."

148

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

of

shape, such
jn
seen

that

horizontal armost

section

through the
This which
a

waist
is a

woul3

each

an case^give

great
have of

contrast

to

the

perfectcircle. square~c)r rectangularform


and the in which sides is

we"

in other cases, We also

probablydue
front of

to

systemof

to working parallel
see

and
a

the

block

marble.

all alike

stalidity of-expression,
which is
in

by produced_^aainly

the

line straight

of the mouth,

FiQ.

23.""

Apollo

"

from

Orchomenns

in Boootia

(Athens, National

Museum).

marked

contrast
we

with
see

the_" archaic
other

smile." that

In

Orchomenus
in the
rest.

some

features the
to

Apollo of areTiot~repeated
of the domen ab-

the

In is
an

the

rendering of
attempt
a

muscles

there has the

evident surface

imitate

nature, w^iieh

given
treatment

to

the

curious

ribbed

of the back naturalistic

and

the elbows the

shows

aj)pearanceX~aTid a remafkTihly
of theskm.

careful

and

renderingof

texture

Pio. 24-ApoUo

from

Mouut

Ftous

in Boeotia

(Athens. National

iseum).

CHAP,

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

151

Boeotia

was

the clearly

subjectto foreigninfluence,and reproduced dependen inThen characteristics of Egyptian models.^ an


at

first

seems locar^chmji-tjf"~scutptufe

to

have

durins; the sixth century,


in the

which

attained male

considerable
statues

up grown excellence

developmentof

the nude

type of

commonly

Fig.

25.

-Apollo, showing

Aeginetan influence, from Museum). (Athens, National

Mount

Ptous

in Boeotia

called

"

Apollo."
to

But

growth seems
influence from

have

again in the fifth century influx been swamped by a new

this of

local

foreign
last

Athens,
taken
the

Aegina,and
:

other

Aegean

islands.
"

i^23.
^ seen

Evidence Literary been


up

Relations with
an

ofArchaic
enumeration
with

Schools. of the
Samos
and which

The

section has
In in

extant
we

connection
one were

with

rather indirect

connection that

have

Samos

of to remember instance, it is interesting influence than the artists who, more others, brought Egyptian any Rhoecns Theodorus See

into Greece,

above, " 20.

152

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

works
next
same

two

If we sculpturefound in various parts of Greece. evidence which applies to the proceed to notice the literary shall then be in a positionto see how far the we period, supplement or correct one another,and what inferences it is from either
or

of

safe to draw The

from

both

combined.
artists of

evidence literary

which We

appliesto
have
is

the

sixth

century is but
nature
or

scanty.

of the information

which

in " 20, seen the already, given us about the invention

the first

in Greece, and beginningof sculpture


were

the families

or

schools which sections have

associated with deal with what


we

it.

We

shall in the followino-

evidence learn,from literary well as extant the schools of Athens, of as remains, about and of Aegina. Apart from these,we hear Argos and Sicyon,
to

but work

little from
is due

ancient

authorities from

about

the

artists to

whose

the advance

the rude

and primitive beginnings the time

types of the earliest Greek

to sculpture

just before it

the admiration of all subsequent produce statues that were them few, if any, of Probably there were ages. among genius ; but the slow and patient progress which distinguished lasted for nearly a century prepared the way for the brilliant and rapidadvance which marks the beginning of the next period. In Sparta there existed a school of which the foundation was attributed to the Cretan sculptors Dipoenus and Scyllis.Works

began

to

of

the

Spartan
and

masters

Dontas
at

and

Doryclidas, Hegylus Megarians and

and

Theocles, were
the Heraeum

shown

Olympia

in Pausanias'

time, mostly in
of the
were

in the treasuries of the


are

Epidamnians.
made,
some

These

all similar varied

in

character; they
in the

some by gilding, fully in The each case subjects ivory technique. extensive groups of mythological far independent are so figures, of one another that they could be moved hear away ; thus we that the Hesperids,belonging to a group with Heracles and

of cedar

wood,

developed gold and

Atlas,and
of Heracles enumeration seated
or

an

Athena, who came and Achelous, were


of many other

group with the combat later kept in the Heraeum. An


a

from

figures, separate or grouped together,

standing, onlyshows us how much of the work of these artists was preserved at Olympia, but gives us little more in every way similar to knowledge of their style. They seem the group by Dipoenus and Scyllis at made Argos, which was of ebony with details in ivory. From their material we cannot hope to find any works of this nature preservedin Greece ; nor

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

000-480

B.C.

153

have
us as

we

in any certain copies their to their style or


to make

more

durable

material

to

enlighten
is
a really

composition.

But

the ambitious

attempt
survival
and
so

what

seem

such

complicated groups
decorative

from

the
not

earlier technique of

work

in

relief,

does
hear

imply a great advance


made
a

in

composition. sculptural
same

We Cretan and link

of another

artist, probablyof the


statue gilt

school,the
one more

who Chirisophus,
a

of

Apollo at Tegea,
makes

also

marble

statue

of himself. the

His

name

between

Crete

and

Peloponnese.

Another later

a Gitiadas, probably sculptor, be placed as late as the beginningof the his work even may two at Amyclae, with figures fifth century, since he made tripods underneath matched of Aphrodite and Artemis them, which a third made by Gallon of Aegina. This fact need not imply that of Gallon ; but his great work, the temple he was a contemporary

belongsto

rather

Spartan period;

of Athena

Ghalcioecus
are

at

was Sparta,

decorated

with

series of work also

reliefs which done made

by the

the similar to be earlier than likely foreignsculptorBathycles at Amyclae. He


not statue

the bronze clear

of Athena of
a

Ghalcioecus

or

Poliuchus.

Another the Cretan

example Dipoenus and


work

temple statue
the

made

by pupilsof

is Scyllis

Apollo of Delos,the Angelion. The god


on

of Tectaeus

and

held the three Graces


a

his

left has

hand,
it
a

which this

made
on

peculiar attribute possibleto identify


of

statue

coin

Athens,^ which,
on

however, reproduces it
scale to notion the
, ,

too

small
a

give us
of the
Till-

much

more

than

general
in

type.
his

The

god
were

stood the
lii

usual

archaic
; both

attitude,with
arms

left
at

fig. with Tectaeus

26." the

leg advanced
the

bent

coin of Athens, Apollo of Delos by and Angeiion.

elbow.
As
to

the works still less.

we

know

and

Chionis,made
the

strugglingfor

of this period sculptors Three Corinthian artists, Diyllus, Amyclaeus, Heracles for Delphi,of Apollo and a group and Athena tripod,supported by Artemis
or

the

styleof

other

The respectively.^
^ ^

character

of the work
29.

may

well

have

been

P. The

Gardner,
treatment
at

Types of
of the

Greek
same

Coins, PI. subject on

xv.

the

pediment

of

the

treasury of the
as

Siphnians
the

Delphi

is probably different

; in

it Athena

appears

arbitress

in

middle.

154

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE

chap.

similar to that of the groups their Spartan pupils. Clearchus anomalous Daedalus
on

made

by Dipoenus

and

and Scyllis from


a

been mentioned Khegium has already evidence as positionhe holds in literary the made made
one
a

of

the

pupil of
the
was quired re-

hand, and the


bronze of
statue

master

of
at

Pythagorason
Sparta which
out

other.^
not

He

of Zeus

cast, but

plates of metal

beaten

into

the

historical date is shape and riveted together. The more his master, to one version, probably the correct one ; according and this might Eucheir, was the pupil of Dipoenus and Scyllis, of the fifth centxiry, well bring him down to the beginning when

Pythagoraswas
for
was some reason

young. executed

We

must
a more

suppose

that his

statue

was

by

primitivetechnique than

usual
extreme

in his

time, and

hence

may in

proceed the
this
case

stories

as

to

his

antiquity.
shown between the

The

artistic connection

the regionimmediately it is or Peloponnese and Sicily adjoining attested by other examples. Thus of Ambracia Polystratus probably a pupil of Dipoenus and Scyllis was employed by
" "

the famous Phalaris, tyrant of Agrigentum. Later on, another Gallon of Elis, was Peloponnesianartist. employed by the people of Messina
to

make

bronze

boys, with
on

their trainer
across

group, and flute

commemorating who were player,

chorus lost
a

of
sea

at

their way
a man

for

of

Rhegium Rhegium ; both


to

also made ; Gallon these works were

Hermes up
at

set

Olympia.
Another
statue

which

is recorded and

on

coins of

is

huntress she

Artemis, made

by

Menaechmus

Soidas

Naupactus ;

appears on coins of Patras, whither Augustus sent the statue. It is clear from this brief enumeration of the literary evidence
as

to

artists of the and


we even

amount

of too
can

period, that it is too to supply any a character partial


archaic monumental the
extant test

scanty in
framework

into which insufficient


to

fit the
to test

evidence. which But


we we

It

is,indeed,
clined inanother is a
or

inferences remains.

might be
have There

draw

from
we

the
can

method number

in which

those inferences.

large
other

of

archaic
we can

statues, mentioned

by

Pausanias

with ease and certainty classify according the with which to the type which they represent : consistency followed by earlysculptors makes this the customary types were
^

writers,which

See above, p. 102.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

155

possible.The
the with

nude

male the

and

the
"

draped
offer

female
us

type
what

"

at

once parison comus

simplest and
the

commonest

the

easiest

monumental

evidence.

Here

strikes

of archaic statues iirst of all is the very great number in the Peloponnese belonging, mostly to artistically,

recorded

Sparta

or

Argos ; among them the large majorityconform to one of these of each. two simple types, and there is about an equal number few archaic In Athens, on the other hand, there are comparatively
works

recorded
upon

; the

number

is too

small
a

for

us

to

be able to it may

depend
be noted

the results offered


also the

by

but classification, of the two

that here
number.

examples
a

types

are

about

equal in
We survived recorded
we

find

have of statues large number but few are the present day in a place where to the other hand, on places, by ancient writers ; in some
that

sometimes

find but Pausanias

scanty remains
or

of the This
find
a

numerous

statues

recorded

by
the

other

writers.
we can

may

often be the result of


reason.

accident,but sometimes
case

historical of the

Thus,

in

of

Athens, the destruction


caused

earlystatues why

by

the

Persians,which
to
were

their burial and

therefore

the present day, is also the and others left for Pausanias

cause

their tion preservafew of them so

to

record.

But,

the proportion of the various types recorded or and where such causes to were likely so, operate,
are

regards no preserved,
as

the

numbers

large enough
some

to

offer any

test, we

may

accept the

results

with

confidence.
way in

The various

which

knowledge
to
us

of the

types preferredby
In the first
it
can

schools is of value

is two-fold.

types may
mere

be characteristic of schools ; thus accident that so many examples of the found But
in

place, hardly be a
female male

draped
nude

type

have
in

been

Boeotia.

Athens, and so many then, again,there is


the

of the
no

doubt

type that the type

the sculptor ; perhaps even and harder modelling for a nude would use a severer same man and a softer and more male athlete or Apollo, graceful stylefor with its elaborate drapery ; and certainly various a female figure artists of the same be influenced by the type which school would different schools, which specialised so they preferred; still more the study of one another type. or upon l" the grace and delicacy of early contrast we When, therefore, con-li Attic sculpture with the severe and vigorousstyle of affected represented

styleof

the

156

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE must

chap.

temporary
contrast

work, Peloponnesian
be

we us

remember

that

the

by accident,and that we should not feel it so stronglyif we had more Attic very likely works of athletic type, or any early Peloponnesian works of the draped female type, to enter into the comparison. But although
may

exaggerated for

these considerations do
out not

may

modify our
either annul

criticism
or

to

some

extent, I
we

think

they
in
a

need

invert

it ; for it is borne
meet

by
In

the characteristics of the various


on more

schools when

them

later the

fullydeveloped stage.
22

last

sections, ""
almost

and

23, the order of provenance

tinguish disbecause cannot we exclusively, the diflferentlocal styles with certainty able enough to entheir to to us classify earlyworks of sculptureaccording in the case of schools ; almost the only exception has been made identified by inscriptions other certain evidence statues as or that where to a different placefrom found, they were belonging

has

been

followed

as

in the

case

of the
at

Naxian

or colossus,

the

statue

dedicated

by

Nicandra

Delos, or the sculpturefrom


In
one

Megarians at
site of all

Olympia. not discoverywas


even

other

cases,

the treasury of the when the especially


to

of those

Greeks,

works

described

accordingto
in such
as one

of certainly the place where


a case

common practically foreignoriginhave

been
; an

they
as

were

found

important work example, of


to
no

may

show
a

much

about

the local

artistic influences

made

by
at

small
a

import for
a

know

that

stela found
that
an

sculptor. It is,for the historyof art in Boeotia Orchomenus made was by a


local
to

Naxian the work

and artist, either of

statue

dedicated
or

Apollo Ptous
one

was

Aeginetan artist

of

who

had

been

trained in A

classification is offered by a very mostly under Samos, group of works which has been described the typical because example is the statue dedicated there by

Aeginetan traditions. difficult problem in local

Cheramyes
the

and

two

similar statues the

found
most

Athens, and
female

also representing

draped type,

could

hardly be

Acropolisat variety of primitive for they separated,


on

the

not are Attic,though it may well be doubted whether certainly A of the male type, which, in the statue they are Samian. of the examples to one face, shows a remarkably close affinity cated dedifrom Athens, the only one of its type with a head, was in its in Boeotia,and has been described to Apollo Ptous
"

See

p. 113.

158

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

J chap.

both
our

as

it aftected the their

Greeks

themselves

and

as

it has led to

of possession

Among
the Athenian the

the

numerous

productions. fragments found


from be
once

in the

excavation

of

all coming Acropolis,

by

nature

Persians,one class can at of its material, a soft brown


coarse

buildingsdestroyed distinguished by the


or

limestone

calcareous The

tufa;
thick
to

this

was

called irwpivos XtOos usually


stone
was

of this

and layerof paint, from distinguished As the colour has


must

thus

by always completelycovered by the sculptures executed in it are


in any
extent

the Greeks.^

surface
a

be

those made
to
a

material

meant

to
we

show.
now

great
be

what disappeared, the


core

possess

be
was

regardedmerely as
to
we

upon

which

the

visible surface of any such of the

overlaid.
restore

Before in
our

judging artistically
the

work,
of

must

with imagination, the

help polychromy
resembles

of vestiges its in

colour

that

still When

state. original

remain, thus considered,it


varied
or or

work

terra-cotta,rather
which dark
a we are

glazed or enamelled than any sculpturein


The colours
most

brick
stone

in

painted
with

marble

familiar.

red, light red, or pink (oftenfor We that there see blue, and green. lighter
the of

commonly used are flesh colour), dark blue,


is

betAveen

polychromy of earlyvases, with which are to colouring the four colours of Polygnotus the vases we ; on brown and red, only Avhite and a scale of colours exclusively colour to dark purple; in them blue is varying from cream and I most unusual,^ know, is not used at all.^ green, so far as in this rough material were Most of the sculptures tive decoraarchitectural in character, the buildingsto which or they built of also the but covered same stone, belongedbeing usually with stucco. The remains of several pediments more less or in the Acropolis museum Athens. at complete may be seen We do not know for what temples they were made, but we can in the their variations trace development of architectural sculpture in Athens. All of them show remarkable in a similarity and in composition, be partly due to the which subjects may
limited
' ^

early sculptureand

affinity strictly be compared usuallyfind


no

the

Known It
occurs

as generally on

poros

in German
vase

; in French

it is

usually called t%if.


;
see

the

Polledrara
p.

(probably made
other colours from

in Etruria

J. H.

S.

1894,
^

PI. vi. and Mr.

and vii.,
vases

206).
and the

Petrie's and

Kahun,
are

of

course

witl" green Guroh, PI. i. 2) are of later period.

Fayum

(seeIllahun,

not certainly

Greek.

The

polychrome lecythi

li

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
to be

"

600-480

B.C.

159

of exigencies of
so

the

triangular space
the deeds fact which

filled; but_the devotion


on

many
^

pediments to
is
a

of Heracles

the.Acropolis

of Athens

explanation, /i^neof the earliest ajid also the most complete of these pedimentsrepresents ^ his club with this hero attackingthe Lernaean Hydra ; while the Hydra of the composition, the centre he stands near its snaky heads rears againsthim ; its coils extend rightback On the other side lolaus appears to the angleof the pediment.
stillawaits with
meet

the with ends

chariot

of Heracles

"

device

which

we

shall often and figures

to fill out

the

of

the central the space between pediment; and beyond it is the

huge crab,

associated

with

designand

Hydra, which fills the other angle. The of this pedimentare excellently adapted composition
the

tofill its space; the relief is very low, and there is little scope but Another size, for modellingn. pediment,of about the same and bolder relief,^ in much represents Heracles wrestling higher" with Triton
"

the

"old

man

of the sea"

as

he is called in the

the same shows which composition that is Argive relief,* of the subject. "We reproducedin all the later repetitions of those had occasion to quote this type as one have already inherited another which from the earliest times. time
more

At

Athens

there The

is yet

example, this

than

life size.^

pediment

stone limewith it is the last and corresponds to the most restoration, probable groups, where, according Heracles fights the snake Echidna, while his father Zeus, in the

finest of these

other half of the space, combats a strange three-bodied monster, There seems and snake-tailed. to be the Typhon, man-headed visible and

throughoutthese earlygroups
seems

strange love for uncouth


first very

monstrous

usual

such as shapes, of Greek art. conception snake-like forms


are

at

far from

the

But,
used

in

the

these composition,

fish-like or the
most

with

great skill

to

meet

chief

of pedimental sculpture. They difficulty


corners

naturallythe
from
so

of the
or

pediments, and
conventional And
most
have

fill up thus the which also

artist escapes
we

the awkward with


in
so

devices the tails are of their


been

often meet in

these
as

places.
make
of them for

treated
1

themselves

to

the
may

scaly
up Acropolis

It is

that perhaps not impossible

some

brought
of the tells

from

the lower
in Cimon's

town, with other


time. But

material
"

filling up

the

ground

the

such
"*
*

theory.
;

completenessof most of the groups 'E"p. 'Apx-1884, PI. 7.


xi. Taf. ii.
XV.
5

against

Ibid.

also Mittheil. d. d. Inst. Athen.

Fig.2.

jifiit;^^j^th.

Taf. ii.

160

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAt".

all his invention in devising the artist exhausting decoration, various schemes of form and colour to adorn them, from the

snakes in of the Triton to the three intertwining broad fish-tail bodies of the Typhon are contimved. which the three human show a continuous developmentfrom the These pediments earlier to the their

characteristics.The but all have the same later, but not unnatural in forms of the'* body are heavy and massive,

generalproportions. We

find another in Ionic work. much and shallow

feature which The muscles

reminds us of what Ave have seen not so and sinews are rendered,
as by the so-called, use

by modelling, properly

cut lines, usually with a round chisel. These follow the lines or shadows, and effect of true modelling at a distance an which, on a so produce i s to be the close examination of surface, seen producedrather

of broad

Fio. 27.

"

Half

of

Typhou pediment in rough limestone, representing (Athens, Acropolis Museum).

by

and heavyin drawing. The faces also are fleshy and life-like form, though often remarkable for the vigorous

incised

The types show expression.


to
some

minds

too

resemblance to the severe, but little conventional beauty that is generally

^ rather associated with the idea of Greek sculpture they seem ; in the details Ave find a naturalisticstudies from life; and even of treatment, as if the artist Avere -making ments experigreat variety

in different effects.

round

and

eyes are to the prominent,according the face

The

lifeto giving

by an actual of the muscles that surround instead of a skilful manipulation incised but not always, is usually, it.^ The outline of the pupil with a eompass ; doubtless it Avas ahvaysrepresented by colour
The hair too is treated with
a

Avide open, usually of method primitive of the eye itself, projection

good deal

of

and variety,

Avith a

^ It is but I do uot true that the heads preserved are mostly those of monsters, them as other than human. think there is any attempton the artist's partto represent '"' See Conze, Darstdlungdes vienr'-hlichen Aur/es in der griechischcn Skidptur,

J
.

h^i

'

t"

riu4
.1

/ ,1,

11

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

161

remarkable

freedom

from

the

conventional

or spirals

other

systems commonly found


the most

in archaic art.

and successful of all this series impressive Perhaps had any does not to have is a splendid group, which seem lions ^ pulling ai'chitectural purpose ; it represents two directly down the bull ; the colossal size of this may his extended fact that the bull, from
a

be

estimated hoof
to

from

hind

the
two

broken

base of his

horn, measures
red

12

feet 8

inches.
the

The

lions have
from

dug

their claws
in broad
a

into his
streaks

back,
; the

and

blood

flows

the wound
"

bull is coloured
for

dark-'
in

blue

doubtless beards

conventional
the

substitute

black,as

th^

Typhon and in the hoises of Heracles -Hydra pediment. Here again we see a great vigour in^_the is no fine anatomical 6T composition modelling of ; there of surface details, but, on the other hand, there is a treatment effect at a distance as the finest which often gives the same the for instance in the series of deeply cut lines on modelling, bull's neck, or the holes cut in his muzzle, givingit a porous, The lions are so fragmentary that it is velvetyappearance. difficult to judge of their generaleffect ; but the last convulsive
haiKand
of
.,

of struggle

the

bull

is rendered

with

wonderful
if it did in

power,
not

and

Ijshows a study of animal forms I anatomical accuracy, is still hard

which,
to

attain

surpass

its

and lively

sympatheticappreciation. and they certainly To take them altogether" seem these sculptures in peculiarstyle of their own
"

to

have

soft Piraeic

V.

limestone

are (poros) manner

remarkable which

both

for choice It
can

of

subject and
be
an

I
'

for the accident

in

it is treated.

hardly
to

that

almost

all the
treatment

I form,
rather

and
than
we

that the
to must

contain some groups in detail is such as allow

monstrous

increase

diminish

the

grotesqueness of the
a

subject.
naive

Though

doubtless
to

i attempt of the artist


I think
we

must

produce a recognisein

good vigorous and


some

deal

for the

life-like impression works


a

of these

intention. It is true humorous that,as has often consciously been remarked, when an earlyGreek artist attempts to represent he often only succeeds in attaining to the what is terrible, grotesque, and that expression of face often has little relation look at the Typhon, at to dramatic we propriety. Yet when the most characteristic and the best preserved of all this once
^

Or

perhaps four, to judge

from

the luimber M

of

fragmentsrecovered.

162

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

it series,

is almost

to impossible

resist the

must have sculptor was creating. Nor

revelled need
we

in the resist

impressionthat absurdityof the monster


this

the he

impression
of the

on

logical archaeo-

treatment sometimes subject, grounds. i s to no means uncommon caricature, by tending upon class of vases a which, earlyvases, and especially though upon in Italy,almost from found Asia Minor, and come certainly

humorous

which

otherwise

show

many

affinities with

these

architectural

sculptures.^
-At the
same

time

it is to be observed
monsters

that,in spiteof
an

their

grotesqueness, these
of human and observation
we see

show which

skill in the

combination and
telligent in;

animal

forms of the

shows

accurate to

different elements of nature and

be combined

in them

both

study

just as in the wonderfullysuccessful


which
be
an we see

creatingafter nature, of the Centaur treatment

in later Attic art.


one

absurdity, yet
is what

cannot must
are

exist,this
utmost
_

they
^

compositemonsters may if that, they did help feeling that all organic be like,and
solved
or

Such

difficultiesin the combination

concealed

with

the

ingenuity
we

If many
many

proceed

next to to

to

sculpturein marble,

we

shall find
also

due differences, due similarities, marble from


the

the influence of the the influence of the


in

and material,

earlier the
;

technique.
century
beautiful
not to

The
came

mostly used
islands
of Pentelicus

Athens
and

during
Naxos

sixth It is

of Paros
not

for the

local marble

imported in order with over paint that its texture could not be seen we imagine the Athenian ; nor, indeed, can the beauty of their artists to have so far failed to appreciate favourite material, if it had been obtained. even more readily Yet the habit of paintingsculpture continued ; and there are in which this is possible, without two completelyhiding ways the the be applied of the marble. Either colour texture ] may borders or patterns on on or only here and there eyes and hair, of the drapery,for example, or the Avhole surface of a over of which only a small portionis visible ; or else it may garment the whole surface of the statue, but in a tint or stain, cover by method which whatever marble discolours the applied, only

imaginedthat so covered to be so completely

was yet worked. would be a material precious

be

"

I
^

without

in

any
1

way

obscuringits
Mitlh.

texture

or

impairingthe

Dummler,

Rom.

1888, p. 166.

II

THE

RISE most

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.
were

1G3

effectof the

delicate modelling. Both


even

methods

used
can

by
see

the

Greeks, and
of both

in sixth

we -century sculpture

at Athens ; but the former is by preserved in the series of female far the more especially conspicuous, in the Acropolis statues In these the nude parts(face museum. and neck, arms and feet) are alwaysleft in the pure white of the nude parts of female .the marble, just as in early vases not often painted white by a convention probably are figures far removed from reality. the Thus in this first step toward traces
use

of uncoloiu'ed marble

there is

no

real innovation
to
serve

; the

natural colour of the material is merelyallowed

instead

pigment which apply. The same


of
a

the artist would


is the
case

otherwise the

with

to obliged drapery,where the

be

white
woven

marble
or

well represent a white stuff, decorated with embroidered ornaments.


may

The

first marble

work

which

claims

our

attention

was

like the coloured limestone groups, of an probably, It has been conjectured character. with some

architectural
^ probability

that it filled the


which

pediment of
are now

the

earlytemple of Athena, of
to

the

foundations The

visible

the

south

of

the

was a subject gigantomachy ; the most is the upper part of a figure considerable piecepreserved of with her spear a pi'oAthena, with extended aegis, striking To this strate giant. the head of Athena,^which figure belongs has longbeen known, and is quotedin all histories of sculpture of the typical as one examplesof Attic art. While it remained

Erechtheum.

almost

isolated in its

kind, it could
a

not

be

to assigned
now

any

definite place in the


we

of Attic history
so

sculpture ; but

that

possess

so

numerous or

the

half-century

series of Attic statues,coming from the Persian wars, we can preceding works of the
same

judge of
full and
curve

its relation to

other

school.

Its

heavy form, its round projecting eyes, and the of its mouth, with the conventional "archaic
more

simple
smile,"

remind

of most of the other marble us T^Dhon_than is conveyed heads on the Acropolis ; and a similar impression of the

which, with its gorgeous decoration of red and by the aegis, blue (and green)scales, reminds us of the richly variegated
^

By

Dr.

to Studniczka,

whose

and the piecing ingenuity together


as

tion identificamueli could

Mitlh. Athen. 1886, p. 198. of this groiip are due. There is happily no doubt whatever about this join. I wish
museums.

be said of many others that have been made in the Athenian is reproduced Ancieiit SculjUure, in Mitchell, PI. i.

The liead

Op\i]C\

164

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SOULrTURE

chap

tails of the

earlier monsters. be inclined works the


to

shall therefore

we purely artistic grounds, the this place pediment among

On

earliest of the marble

destroyedby
of the

the

Persians,and
century"
a

to

assign
which

it to

about

middle

sixth

date

mentioned the theory above with excellently which was that it belongs to the early temple of Athena, Pisistratus.^ its with by peristyle probably supplied remarkable the most discoveryof recent times is y^^^Perhaps the Acropolis found -^^f^the series of female on draped statues of the of them of Athens togetherin a pit N.W. many accords
"

Erechtheum,

others There
is

scattered
no

over

different

parts
thrown

of

the down

Acropolis.
when have
been
too

doubt

that

they
were

were

the Persians found much

sacked
when
to

Athens, and
the Athenians

buried
to

where their

returned

they city.

It is not
our

knowledge
to

revolutionised say that these statues have of which of early Attic sculpture, they are

the most

characteristic ask whom

products.
these

The

first and

most

natural

questionis
and their
an

statues

represent ; their number


it

generalsimilarity suggest that


answer,

ought to

give

anything of the have We made. which (" 14) how already seen they were of filling the custom universal was every shrine with dedicated they representing the divinity to whom statues, sometimes And himself. the we sometimes dedicated, worshipper were
if
we

know

be easy to conditions under

have but

also noticed

(" 18) how


in

limited

number

early times, served the represent different subjects; he depended mostly on Thus his meaning clear. make accessories to attributes or in identifying have difficulty we already met with the same meant male type ; some are of the nude statues clearly many athletes ; but human are to represent Apollo; others as clearly
little variation
in many
case cases we

of types, with the sculptor to

must

be content from
the

to

remain

in doubt.
at

In the the

of these that

statues

Acropoliswe
meant to

least have

advantage
whose without
so a

they cannot
are

well be

represent Athena,
not

attributes
trace

well known it is very The

and

could

have

been

lost

; and

many

similar
chosen

unlikely that we should find within of any other divinity representations


obvious alternative dedicate
is to

Athena's
them
as

shrine.

regard

who representingAvorshippers, the


1

themselves

to symbolically

goddess.

Some
Athen.

go

farther, and

identify

Doipfeld,Milth.

1886, p. 310.

Fio. 28."

Draped female

statue

(Athens, Acropolis Museum).

:iAP.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

1G7

attrilnite. or offering probably held some The left hand usuallygatherstogetherthe loose drapery of the" to cling and stretches it tightly so as skirt close to the left thigh, contrast to the rich thus producing a marked close to the legs, the upper part of the body j folds of the drapery that surrounds

liorizoutal ; the

hand

and

hangs down

at

the

sides.

In

some

cases arms

there

are

slight
being
sponding corre-

varieties of pose, the action of the both being raised from or i-eversed,^ need
in
no

two

for instance Such in

the elbow.
occur

varieties the

surpriseus way nude male type ; a draped type

they

also

greater constancy in the pose


to chiefly

of

the
hand

female

is due

the

motive

of the

the draperyat supporting of the chief attainments

the side. of the is


an

earlyAttic school in the arrangement and delicacy elaboration extraordinary of drapery. The treatment garments representedare not
One
same on

and the
or

all the
two
or

statues, but
three
usual

most

of them In

conform the

to

one

other

of

schemes.

commonest

of

these,followed
a

by

great majority,the chiton


or

is secured sleeves of

by
from

series of brooches
to

buttons, so
this is
a

as

to

form

shoulder
or

elbow, and is ornamented


Over

with

bands

embroidery

often folded over at peplos, the left arm which is passed under the top to form a diplois,^ of brooches and fastened,often,like the chiton,by a seines or both It falls in ample folds on buttons on the rightshoulder.
woven

borders.

sides,and
across

it is in the

of renderings

these

thaFThe'
the

Attic

artist

so^tiiuch spends"

skill." TKe'band
is

from

which

peplos hangs
and is
as

the

breast
manner

usually elaboratelydecorated,
impossible for
a

arrangedliTa

simple garment, Greek 2B); weIaj!CaccustQ5iB"to~cxpectin drapeiy^Figthe artist has


in his artistic convention, departed, than is probable, from his models must we suppose in its have been however to an origin, simple ladies by Athenian made-up garment as worn much

such

Unless farther

the

peplos, elaborately
the sixth

in

century.
contrast
so

This

is but

one

more

indication of the artificial and Attic


taste at

over-elaborate

tendencies

of

this the

time, which
century

strongly with only notice


by
some

the

reaction

in

next

under We
^

Doric
can

towards influence, here


been
one

and simplicity. severity


or

two
a

other
of

varieties of dress,
origin, but
without that the

Tliis point has


reason.

made

criterion

sufficient
-

The is

of patterns on identity
one

the has

lower
often

part
been

whole

garment, not two,

as

the diplois and proves supposed.

168 y

HANDI500K

OF

GRKKK

SCULITURR

CHAP.

smallest modification of the ordinai'y scheme is to fasten the peploson both shoulders instead of oidyone; then if the artificial band at the top be omitted,it becomes practically The from indistinguishable
ment
over

the Doric chiton.


or

In another
small

arranse-

there

is

no

over-garment,
;

only
a

shawl

thrown

the shoulders

then

the

chiton, which,as
ribbed
or

in all the other


texture crinipled

cases, is

as represented being of

Fio. 29."

Diaped female

slatuo

(Atlioiis, Acropolis Museum).

where

it fits over loosely


so as

the

is usually drawn up through breast,

while ample fold or koAttos, the legs below this it is strained tightover by the hand that and thus itscrimpled texture disappears supports it at the side, in folds its 29). TJie arrangement q" the drapeiy, zigzag (Fig. the belt
to

hang down

in

an

and

in the

of variety
;

texture

t in di (Keren

mass parts^s__a

oF

conventions

but within the established schemes

we

often find

11

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

169

here and

there

careful study after piece_oLYei'.y

uatiue.

TIerc,
and

the asHiroughout

historyof archaic art

in-Greecc,freedom
'

"

advance towards 'vroi'^ktn-detait precedes a"ciiTacy~TJf any general freedom of ty[)e and of composition. in marble of the early Attic school are -BuT if the sculptors of drapery, in their treatment for grace and delicacy remarkable the care and skill which they devote to the modelling of the faces are Indeed, we worthy of observation. may yet more the the athletic that artists of while without exaggeration say schools were devoting themselves to the study of the nude, of with accuracy the muscular structure and learning to render of the Acropolisstatues the human body, the sculptors werej outward make the however t o inadequately, already seeking, It Avas character. of the mood form an or only to expression
"

be

expected
often
must

that

the
to

more

ambitious
to

nature

of

the

attempt

would

lead
be

indeed, it

success only partial ; and, too earlyin the acknowledged that it came or failure,

the less instructive for that, development of art ; but it is none in the light it shows the tendencies of the Attic school on been duringthis early period. Had the earlyAttic sculptors have led to a these tendencies might well completelyisolated, and too facility, rapid development in the direction of grace which we probablyto a premature decadence, of leading may in in artists who those an traces even see some preserved uncontaminated
see

form

the
this

traditions of the school influence of


an

; but

we

shall and

how,

in

the fact, arrested

outside

art

severer

less refined of strength which


was were

luxuriant
to

growth, and

added and

the Ift the

the athletic schools

the refinement

delicacy

characteristic of Attic art. always pre-eminently

not

without

good

reason

that tradition
as

called Phidias

of Ageladas of Argos,as well P'upil


of Calamis.
The
not treatment

the

fellow-countryman
statues

of the face in the


in character from

earlier marble
we

is

far removed

that which

have

noticed

in the

in rough limestone. We the same see earlysculptures wide-openand staring already treated with eyes, but they are moderation sunk in beneath not more the) ; though they are like the eyes of the brows, they do not project unnaturally, marble pediment(Fig. Typhon or of the Athena in the early 30). The mouth terminated in too is a simplecurve, and the lips are
a

vertical

without line,

any

transition

to

the

of modelling

the

i\

Fio.

30."

Draped

female

statue,

of

luiinitive sliape (Athens,

Acropolis

Museum).

cnAr.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-4S0

B.C.

171

and without much play of surface. cheeks, which is also simple, of the face as well as of In fact,we can see, in the treatment
the rest of the

body, very
Athens

little diftercnce
and

between

these

specimens of the female tj'pe. It seems merely to have been adopted at Athens the addition of any peculiarstamp to elsewhere, without as Yet there is no it as belongingto the local school. .distinguish of foreign as sufficient reason to regard any of these statues marked exceptions. Still less origin with one or two clearly them of the foreign with any to connect is there evidence to know from we inscriptions artists, mostly from Ionia,whom form whole number in Athens. worked The a have single in all a nd connected we are series, certainly justified assigning Within the series alike to the placewhere they w^ere found. a gradualdevelopment is visible,not always along the same The tendencies. with the same but always in accordance lines, desire of the artist seems always the same, to modify the stare or grimace of archaic work into an expression ; and in order to refinement and delicacy do this he is constantly new introducing without into the rendering of various ever details, giving up the general character of the type. The first step is the! narrowing of the eyes from the round wide-open stare of the almond-shaped; in the early statues; sometimes they become examples
from other
"

early draped

more

extreme
curve

cases

we

find

conventional

aft'ectation in The

the is

S-shiqicd

of both

lids

28, 29). (Figs.

change

analogousto the one which we see on earlyAttic vases, where the while those of men remain become almond-shaped, women eyes7)f round and staring.It implies that the artist has, in part at least, realised a most importantfact that the expressionof the eye depends not on itself but on its surroundings.The large and on are a naive prominent eyes "f primitivesculpture recognition, that the eye is a prominent feature in the part of the ai'tist, In the next any face. stage he has observed that the glance becomes more when and the expression more concentrated, lively,
"

the space between the lids is narrowed. But later that he realises how the eye becomes

it is not
most

until far

impressive,
even

when when

deeplyovershadowed
narrowed,
to

by

the

brow

it still remains
set

but

earlystatues, sunk beneath slightly


to

; in

the

brow, and is not


far less \eye is
\ to

deep enough to
effect of shadow.
a

be true

the actual
treatment

form,
of the

gainany
as

Another

leave it

roughly-shaped projecting mass,

without

1?2

llAKDBOOt

OP

GREEK

SCULPTURE
to add

cHAP,

tl

to attempting ;
was

indicate the
have
we

or eyelids

any

ling detailed modelcolour is well be the


same

the effect must

to the colour which been left entirely


no

well

and as applied, the preserved,

have

success

of the

example in which the experimentcannot


we see

estimated.

In the treatment
in the treatment

of the mouth of the eye.

much

tendency as
to

Here

the again

artist

feci that in the type as used by his predecessors there seems is a grimace rather than an expression, and tries to escape from in the modelling this by elaboration and delicacy of details. of the mouth ; it is no longer the curve of a complicates line turned up at the simpleshape, varying from a straight He ends
at to an
arc

of is The

but is divided circle,


a

into three

curves

; the
one

central bend each side. the utmost

supplemented by

smaller and

shallower

extremities of the

offer another lips

pointof

J.

and here too the to the earlysculptor, difficulty his skill. He is no all the of displays subtlety be cut off" to let the lips content at the end by a vertical longer transition into but he works them off by an line, imperceptible sidiary with the helpof a small subthe surface of the cheek,usually curve beyond those we have already noticed. The whole modelling of the face, too, is softer and rounder,and Attic artist the result in have almost adds lips
no some

where instances, intense


a

too

to eyes seem and the fulness of the curved glance,


narrow

the

to

the

less than

that which

is an exaggeration of their smile, expressiveness to avoid by the the artist was striving
a

of delicacy which i
"

his finish. It is in

sense

but after realistic, the

an

unpleasant manner,
we a severer

and

we

are

for fully prepared

reaction

shall find in the

next

century, under

the influence of

and strongerif less graceful style. But before this reaction came, what we may
art

the pure Attic which of are stiff"ness.The the

of the

sixth century of these

call reasonaljly works some produiced archaic free from discovered head is a

great beauty, though


most

not

remarkable

on Acropolis justbefore the great find of 1886 of which to the same series, belongsundoubtedly

31). (Fig.
it is the

It

most
we

advanced have

example.

Here

we

see

all the tendencies which

noticed in the rest,but which they sometimes

free from entirely

the exaggeration

thrown into sufficiently and free from affectation; but of the mouth and checks

display.The eyes are not yet shadow, though their form is natural
it is above all in the

modelling
the

that the

has excelled ; sculptor

174

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

ciiap.

is

an

and delicacy extraox'dinary


in

skill in his treatment the

of the
a

archaic

smile,which, in his hands, has reallybecome

half-

modelling of the cheeks, the lips, there is a delicate play of that skill in the working of marble shows surface which characteristic of Attic sculptors. peculiarly statues as So far we have treated the whole of the Acropolis the productof a single school, though varying forming one series, from the and so showing a considerable advance in period,
and expression, round the end of especially conscious earlier the
same

to

the

later.

This

view

is in the main

correct

; but at

the various statues within to classify possible different subdivisions of the and so to distinguish the series, school. To attempt a classificationby any one detail of treatment, or even of hair, by the general tions proporeyes, mouth, or drapery, would be fallacious ; in an age when all were of the figure, rapidlyfrom their models both in nature and in art, learning and also from one another,any successful experiment or new often have been transmitted by one sculptor observation must time it is But another,or borrowed in imitation of an exhibited work. to several different indications, them if we classify according we and then find that the different classifications coincide, may
to

reallyhave found a distinction beyond the Such a distinction comes of the moment. influence or caprice of the earlier examples. of some in the case most out clearly Thus there are two or three figures remarkablysquare in shape,^ ment treatwhich also have wide-open staringeyes and a peculiar the shoulders of the hair in the long tresses that fall on from side to side and are (Fig.30) ; these tresses zigzagslightly lines which follow their length. This class has divided by wavy and in it the the most in many primitive appearance, ways We least marked. characteristics are Attic may peculiarly it was the as it that shows common conclude us type safely and first taken over reproducedby Attic artists. Again,the form of the Attic type, with the full and most exaggerated almost leering, and the narrow, carved lips eyes, is found richly
conclude
that
we

in combination

with

other
on

characteristics in the shoulders


from

such detail,

as

of rendering
1

the

tresses

cuts by alternating

at

This

in the flatness and squareness of its lower statue, Fig.30, approximates


a

drapery to
think and the texture

figure like
of hair and

the

primitive one

Delos

(Fig.14).

But

I do not of face,

generalcharactc

of this statue

is archaistic.

In the treatment

drapery, it finds its natural

place among

the earliest of

the

series. Acropolis

ri

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

GOO-480

B.C.

175

the side and

on

the

across front,

their

29). length(Fig.

It would

/.

this on a scale far be easy to follow out such points as limits of the present work; hardly anythingis more

beyond the // instructive/'

study of an extensive series of works like these,/ first sight impress the spectator with their general which at differences upon but are new constantlyrevealing similarity,
than
a

minute

closer observation.
.statues

What

we

see

above

all in this set

of female

sculptors, by whose! the hands was brought up to the highest in It is true reached. perfection it has ever they worked imported material, mostly from Paros, and had not yet adopted the almost, if not quite,equallybeautiful marble of their own
is the

growing working of marble

skill of the

Attic

Pentelicus
work
we

; but in the finest


can see a

examples
delicate

even

of this

earlymarble
a

soft and

modellingand

lightand shade upon the surface which show that of the material, already completely realised the possibilities with and here it there is only treated perfectskill. though The especially at early Attic artists also devoted themselves
"

play of they had

least

so

far

as

we

can

judge from
an

this

set

of

statues

"

to

two

things:the study

of

extreme

refinement

and

in delicacy

the arrangement and of the archaic smile


* both
cases

of drapery,and rendering

the modification
of

into
a

an

expression full
to

life.

But

in

there

was

tendency
which

elaboration

in their work
fifth

early in the
models. the end The

exaggerationor to overaction, unnaturally to a retowards and severer simpler century,


led
not

first traces

of

this reaction
before of
some we come

will meet
to

us we

before have

still to notice Attic

of this section ; but the treatment what


we

them

other

types by this early

school,though
its
far
most
we

have

alreadyobserved
with exclusively exclusive
to
us.
a

probably
~

shows So

characteristic work. have


but

been these
in

concerned
are

female

draped figures ;
Attic
statue

not

the

product of the
The
man,

school, even
in

what

is

preserved

earliest
nude but
a

marble

on

the
over

Acropolisrepresents
his hind
on shoulders,

for

chlamys thrown
The
coarse,

which his hands

he

carries

calf, holdingits fore


him. and material with
none

and

legswith

in front of is

is

Hymettian marble, and


of the refinement that like Parian.
addition of

the work
seems

rough
been

to

have

induced
trusts
a

limestone

by a good deal to the sculptures. The

finer

material

The

artist evidentlv
in the

colour,as

rough

eyes, of which

the iris and

pupil are

176

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

hollowed

out

for the insertion of other mouth in the


;
a

materials, are
The

wide

and

and the staring, not so heavy as under

Ionic influence

proportionsare directly Typhon and other works more the muscles of the body are rendered by simple
curve.

conventional

without divisions of the svu'face, The calf is

much

attempt
more

at

modelling.
success

rendered,

on

the

whole, with

than

to

have

but that the anatomy of its jointsseems the man, has basis of this statue misunderstood. The been discovered, and

recently been

contains

dedication

in

very

Fio.

32."

Statue

of man carrying calf,dedicated (Athens, Acropolis Museum).

by (?)Conb08

archaic

which letters,

shows

it to

belong to

the

first half of the

has been a matter sixth century. of some Its subject whether the to doubt here,as in other cases, it is possible

intended

to

represent a god,or
The may latter be
seems

for sacrifice. if so, the


statue
a

dispute; sculptor his oftering a worshipperbringing the more probabletheory; and,


either for
a

or offering, were

as regarded substitute symbolical

record But

of

an

actual

one.

such

figures

sometimes

used, whatever
the

be the

originof the

symbolism,

to

represent

of Hermes

god bearing a ram

and

object of his care, as in the case the patron of flocks. as (Criophorus),


the

ti

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

17?

Two
be taken

male
as

heads, one
artists at

in Paris

and

one

in

Copenhagen, may
of the male
come

typical examples of

the treatment

type
from

by early Attic
Athens. The

difterent

periods.

Both

first, commonly called from its owner


is
a cleai'ly product of

the

Rampin
statues

in periodto the earlier of the female head,^corresponds


on

the

and Acropolis,
are

the

same

school. the hair

The is
some

eyes

wide
a

open,

the mouth

simple curve,
its nearest

and

arranged after
of the
same

system which
the
more

finds
manner we

analogy in
what some-

but figures,

of
see

is rendering
man

and different,

like that

in the

with

the

calf; it resembles
is

simply
and

in at intervals; the bound long fillets, of small knobs. The packed mass closely

beard other much that


eyes

head, in the Jacobsen


freer

collection at

is Copenhagen,is

work

later in
curve

style ;
and of

but

it is

althoughthe
stillremain
statues"
as
a

of the mouth open,


are sex

notice to interesting the more complicated,

wide

not

narrowed

as

in the in

female

distinction
in

apparentlykept
vases.

up

well
over

as

early Attic
forehead,
of the
as

The

hair

forms
this

sculpture a simple
head is

roll

the
work

in

later works

; but

a clearly

untouched purely Attic school,

by foreign

influence.

earlywork is a torso found in Athens, though not and representing the common nude male type ; ^ the Acropolis, on remarkable it is chiefly for the exaggeration of a characteristic which we have already observed in the modelling of the nude by earlyIonic and Attic sculptors. Here, on the lower part of the body, the division of the muscles is indicated in the crudest vertical ci.t, crossed by three horizontal manner possible by a mere
Another
ones

there

is

not

groove.

Otherwise
*

the least attempt the form of the

even

to

soften

it into

body

is almost

without
a

modellingin detail ; it is
of
mere a

rider

found

on

the

nearlysquare there Acropolis

in section.

is a similar

figure by rendering,

On

incised grooves, of the outline of the false ribs and of the This is the earliest of a whole abdominal muscles. series of

horsemen,
in

in which

it is

to possible

trace

continuous horse.

ment developAnother

the

treatment

both its

of

rider

and

example,which
a

rider

decorated
1 3

shows styleis also among the earliest, with and -coloured brilliantly close-fitting leggings, in a lozengepattern ; he is evidently all over bara
Grccs, 1878, PI. i.
PI. i.
N
-

from

Monuments

Ibid.

1877,

PI. i. xii.

'E"/). 'Apx-1887,

Mus.

PI. d'Athenes,

i?8

HANDBOOK
to
not

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chai'.

barian,perhaps meant

represent a Scythianor Persian archer


careful
as

(Greek
costume
on

artists in

were

to

the

accuracy
us

of

national scales

The pattern barbarians).

reminds

of the the In

the tail of the Athena

Typhon
the

and

of the

from

other monsters, and on early marble pediment.

aegis
later truth of its

both examples,to
nature

horse and choice of

rider

rapidly improve in
here
once more

life and

; the

sul)ject again seems


skill in

characteristic leads
up
to

the

early Attic school,which


in

culmination
was

Calamis, whose
also several

the

rendering of

horses

equalto
We

that he showed

in the faces and reliefs


to
us

draperyof
same we

women.

possess
are

of
now

this that

early
have
some so

Attic

school,which
free
are

of less value
same

statues

by

the

masters, but which


their

in

many instances

still among the relief work, the slab

examples of a man representing


best It shows
a

style. For Attic mounting a chariot ^ is


over-

still characteristic.

almost careful,

elaborate
; and

study of drapery,here in a figurein gentle motion indicate also rich curving folds of the cloak, which
below

the

the

limbs

them,

are

another

indication

of the

excellence
;
a

in such

effects which

the Attic

school would

later attain
in
a

somewhat

similar, though much


on

simplereffect

is seen

draped male figure

in

Acropolis ; both have the same advanced earlywork of the more


the covered
or

drapery is
to

with

convention,not uncommon of schools, by which a mass of parallel folds, largenumber serving


also valuable between them

emphasise its modelling. with reliefs are Some of the earlytombstones for their artistic style ; and there is less difference in early times than and dedicated or other statues
indicate

in the fourth

century, when
left to
a an

their manufacture

was

inferior class of artists.

head

regulartrade, mostly of a youth carrying


it forms
a

that his shoulder,^ round disc (orquoit) so on large quaint background to his head, almost like a nimbus

in effect, the
open,

is among
Attic

the earliest of these monuments.


a

It shows
The eye

us

early
and

in profile

pronounced

form.
nose

is wide

as represented

if full face ; the

at

the
^

end, and the mouth

drawn

very prominent and swollen up into a crude smile; while the

called an Amazon this has been Jahrb. 1891, p. 241. ; but, though By some sliow it is intended to be male. remains the is to the upper of lost, enough part figure 2 135-156. Jahrb. 1894, pp. * Tlie rich drapery is the originof the have supposed,a woman. Not, as some mistake.
"*

Cf. Jahrbuch, 1892, p. 54, wliere


iv. Grabrelicfs,

Hauser

identifies it

as

Apollo.

Att.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

179

of angularmodelling

cheek-bone
most

and

chin
other

though
marble.

less
But

soft,effect than
the most

give a more vigorous, early Attic works in


is the work

of interesting

all these monuments

stela with

the

of Aristion in relief, the standingfigure Aristocles. The inscription sculptor this


near

the

of

shows
tomb

which relief, Marathon,

was

found
to

on

to

belong

the
it
as

latter years of the sixth century ; and shows just the same character of work the
finest

of the The

female mistakes

statues

on

the
as

Acropolis.
the incorrect
and full

in

it,such
eye
as

drawing of the

righthand,
if

the

of the representation

simply due to an imperfect of relief ; but mastery of the exigencies the grace and dignity of the general effect are duced so impressiveas to have inBrunn, forty years ago, to infer
from

face,are

this stela alone

that
a

these characteristics

belonged in
to

Attic

work,

as

peculiardegree opposed to the finer


details which In
a

study
the
of the of

of nature

in

marks

Aeginetan style.
rightarm
such
as

the

modelling

there is
a

delicate finish

the

and surface,
can

shade
at

and play of light only be paralleled


at

this

period,or
work The the

indeed of the finish


as

any

other,

the among in marble.

Attic is
to

adapted

to

material
a

sculptors so subtly be practically

invisible in

expressionof
the
to

the

In the cast. plaster of face,and especially


is

mouth, there
the female

again a strong
the
on

semblance re-

finest of the

Attic While
as mere

heads

purely Acropolis.
so

the archaic form


is

smile
to

appears,

far

goes,

be

its preserved,
and

effect

entirelychanged;

the

fio.

ss.-steia

of

Aristion,

almost gentle, the his


warrior

National melancholy expressionof i^'yAj-istocies(Aiii who stands fullyarmed on

tombstone

is

inconsistent strangely

with

the

apparently

180

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

inadequate type
be

into which

it is infused.

the most among at masters, Avho aimed grace and harmonious in the face,and classed

still Aristocles may of the early Attic I'epresentative


at delicacyof detail,

eftect

sion expreswithout generally, any the

daring innovations
of archaic art. Before
we

or

violent

from departures

simpletypes

development of the Attic proceed to the new at the beginning of the fifth century, school,which took j^lace of outburst partlyin the new partlyunder foreigninfluence, at home, it will be as well to give and artistic activity political the of the literary evidence,so far as it concerns a brief review have yet menThe only artist's name tioned earliest Attic school. we is that of Aristocles, appended to the stela of Aristion. the bases found that appear of sculptors on Other on names such as foreignartists, Acropolisare partly those of known of Chios, and Theodorus (probably of Samos), Archermus Ionic ^ at also uses an Gallon and Onatas of Aegina. Endoeus so earlya period that he has been supposed to be an Ionian. Among Attic artists are Thebades, Euenor, Antenor, Hegias, Eleutherus, Philo, Euthycles,Gorgias,Leobius, and perhaps and None of these except Antenor Alcmaeon. Hegias were do the mere before ; nor names to known us even by name
inform
us

of

much

except the
Of

scantiness

of

our

sources

of
is

evidence. literary
to

Endoeus, Antenor, and


with
name

Hegias

there

say. rore have already We


"

met

Endoeus
must

as

companion
come'into

of the
con-

Daedalus.^ /mythical
as

His

have

this

his of early Attic art; at an}' rate representative 'SJ historical existence is now amply proved. He made the statue and the of ivory, Alea at Tegea, which was of Athena entirely !o| Polias at Erythrae of wood ; in ^1 seated image of Athena "^ Pausanias front of her temple stood Graces and Hours, which ship the clearest proof of the workmanto offer by their style asserts I The image of Artemis at Ephesus is attributed of Endoeus. seated Athena He made a to him also, probablyby mistake. the Acropolis at Athens dedicated on by Callias ; and an ^ be this the Acropolis found archaic seated Athena on may since identical work, but the identification is very conjectural, has seated than one more figureanswering to the description been
1

"^1 nection

found.
Sue

In

any

case,

however, these seated


^

Athenas

may

above, " 20, p. 1 02.

Lebas, Mon.

Fig. i. 2

Overbeck, Fig. 24.

182

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

objections two, exceptionally large size and general correspondence in shape has led to its general with acceptance.^ The statue is a simple and dignified figure,
name

the

of Antenor

and

though there

are

some

grave

to

the

connection

of the

their

more

breadth would

and

less elaboration
as

than

most

of its of
one

companions.
of the best-

One known

gladlyrecogniseit artists of the earlyAttic

the work

school ; but

in the

uncertainty

B^-ly
V. FiQ.
34.

*kJLMl
a

"

Relief

on

marble

throne from Alliens, represeuliug Harmodius Aristogiton (Broom Hall).

and

of its

it identification, of this
assert safely

is best not
to

to

particular figureas
that he must

istics from the characterargue the style of Antenor, though have made
a

we

may

statue

not

very

diff"erent in character. The


were

bronze

statues

of Harmodius when he

and

Aristogiton by
Athens

Antenor
B.C.
new

carried off the


For That

by

Xerxes

sacked

in 480

When
^

Athenians

restored

their ruined
Berlin Dr. Antike

city, they had


Denkmiiler,
is nj* the

reproductionsof
the

this statue,see
first of in Dr. the

22.

connection,
conclusion the statue

suggested by
Wolters,
Berlin

Studniczka,
sums

i. .53 ; B. D. probable,but not 44. p. See

certain, is the

who

contro^'ersy in his
I.
v.

publicationof

Antike

Denkmaler,

p.

Studniczka, and 1890, p. 215

Jahrb.

1887,
; and

p. 135

MiUheil

; Builder, 1888, p. 261 Alh. 1888, p. 226, and

; /. //. S.

1889,

278,

1890, p. 126.

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

183

statues

of the heroified
; the

Nesiotes

of slayers original group by


or one

the tyrants made by Critius and Anterior restored to Athens was and the two of his successors, side in the days of Pausanias.
shield of Athena
on

by Alexander

the Great

have stood side by to appear have various copiesof this group, on the We marble chair from Panathenaic a a on vase, on
an

Athens,^ and
in figures

Athenian

advance

coin ; in all of them against the tyrant, the with

we

see

two

younger
the

rapid rushing impulsively

forward

upraised sword,
and
on

seeming
advanced

to
as

support
a

to

is bearded, elder, who protect him, holding his chlamys

right holds his in reserve. With sword repi'oductions, Friederichs recogniseda full-size coj^y of the two figuresof in a marble and Aristogiton Harmodius group at Naples,which another. As combatants had been restored two one as fighting the to as placed side by side,the resemblance soon they were
shield
his

left arm, while his the help of these

smaller

copies

coidd

not

be

mistaken.

And

so

we

possess

good copy of this group, complete all but in modern times for which Aristogiton,

the. bearded
a

head
most

of

fine

but
on

appropr in-

Lysippean head
statue.

has
to

been

substituted

the

Naples
these

The

next

question
work

be

considered

is whether

copies reproduce the


Nesiotes
of
; and
we

Antenor, or that of Critius and them to the latter pair must, I think, assign
of

sculptors. Unfortunatelyit
so

that the date of any of Antenor's figures, and the group

impossible to prove appears of the copies is earlier than the restoration


this evidence
cannot

be

used.

But

of the most by Critius and Nesiotes,set up in one familiar from 477 B.C. so conspicuous places in Athens, was until Hellenistic times that it probably had established a type for the tyrannicideswhich could not be superseded even by the of the earlier group. So bold and return tion vigorous a composiof and his associates, seems improbablein the cycle Antenor far as we works ; but it is fully can as judge from their extant in accordance with the new life which was inspiredinto Attic fifth century by both and at the beginning of the art home and influences, foreign have been among Lucian's
of which

Critius and

Nesiotes

appear

to

the most

active

exponents.

descriptionof

the

borne Nesiotes,is completely and

Aristogiton. The
'

works

and style of Hegias,Critius, of Harmodius out by the statues he says, are of these sculptors,
now

Brought by

Lord

Elgin to England, and

at Broom

Hall.

Fia.

35."

Copy

after group

of Haniiodius and Nesiotes

and

Aristuyiton,probably by Critiua

(Naples).

ciiAr.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
exact

"

600-4S0

B.C.

185

"

concise and

sinewy
be

and

hard, and

and
on

strained

in their

lines." The

It would

difficult to

improve

this brief criticism.

like not are compact and neat in figure Naples tyrannicides the same but they show the Aeginetan sculptures, dry and The athletic training seems accurate renderingof the muscles. such that there is not carried be to a here also to pitch only no the sinews and but hardly enough to cover superfluousflesh, show clearlythrough a mere envelope of skin. veins, which stiff and statues of the two The positions are angular,in spite this characteristic combines with of their vigorousmotion ; and of surface to produce a distinct severity of the hard treatment even grandly proportioned, style. But the figuresare largely, and heroic of form to give an so as impression stature, even the scale of the what is statues, greater than impliedby beyond life. In this respect we recognisean idealising tendency may from that of Aegina, otherthe Attic work wise which distinguishes Even in rendering a subject so the to similar. near so life of their own to show a day, Critius and Nesiotes seem desire
men

to

make

their heroes

greater and

nobler

in form

than

the

even they saw around them, while the Aeginetan sculjjtors, the heroes of when mythical Troy, adopt a system representing and finished and of proportion more a style complete in itself, which perhaps, but less full of promise in the artistic aspirations

it shows.

The advanced

head
in

of

Harmodius

style than

appears the bodies

at

first

sightmuch
of

less
two

and

limbs

the

cannot tyrannicides, regard this as an argument in yet we favour of attributing the group to the earlier of the two sible posdates. For this head cannot be assigned to its place at all easilyamong the series of early Attic heads which we

possess from and simple

the

latter years

modelling, the

of the sixth century. The severe heavy forms, the clearly marked
not

outline of the
but

jaw-bone, the eyes,

sunk

in below

the

brow,

by strongly projecting eyelids,which, again, are separated from the flesh under the brow by an incised the almost straight line of the mouth, which bends, if at curve,
all,more
down than
we

bordered

up
meet

towards

the and

corners

"

all these Attic


arc

are

indications which the earlier years to be attributed


art
"

again

again

in

works

of

of
to

the the

fifth century, and which influence of the severer


more

certainly Peloponnesian
of
a,

an

influence

the

readilyaccepted because

Fio.

36."

Copy

after

statue the head

of

from

Aristogiton, probably by Critius (Naples). later statue a

and

Nesiotes

CHAP.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

187

natural reaction towards which

the against

excessive

elaboration

and

delicacy
The ous varianother

at

examples all closely, though they


;

alreadytending. pure Attic art was this resemble do not of one tendency
all show several
the is

characteristics

just

enumerated

it

clear

that

of sculptors,
all and

different

artistic character in the


were same

and

considerable
a

were originality,

at direction,

time

when

Phidias

to

succeed

and

their
"

artistic

career

perfecttheir work, Avere by going to study under


statues

working Myron, who both beginning

Ageladas

at

Argos.
One
of the
set

of female
new

from
first

the

Acropolisbelongs
not
seem so

to distinctly

this

style.
the
rest

At

very from

different from
a

of the shows
of

sightit may series to which


it is

but belongs, them

closer

study

that

apparently really distinguished

it

in

characteristic.
and

one every Its charm

the

is due

mentioned as points above to not to simplicity, delicacy


treatment

subtlety of modelling.
in its contrast that
we see corners

The
to

of lines
female

the

mouth

is
to

marked clearly the

the

wavy

curling up
heads
on

in

the

other

the

shallow Acropolis. Here it consists merely of two curves, ends and at the middle, where at the outer tending downward the two are joinedtogetherat an angle. The projectingeye-

1
'

lids also The


tive

offer

strong

contrast

to

the is not

other in of
a

female

heads.

of application

colour to the dress

designalong the
on on

borders, but

consists

merely decora- n a processionoffi


texture (
i

doubtless represented as chariots, being woven


or

into the

embroidered
A

it. the
way

^J-i
Acropolis, probably that
the of
a

male

head
in

youthful
head. the chief
is still

is athlete,

every

counterpart
not

of

this

female
;

The

styleis extremely similar, though


the shadow of
a

identical

technical difference is in the treatment under

of the eye, which

the eyestronglyprojecting eyelid ; but lid one piecefrom beneath the brow, instead of being bordered by an isolated ridge which, in effect,would rather than any modelling of flesh after nature. represent the eyelashes
in projects

In all these varieties

the attempts of the artist to throw the eye into shadow erred ; he has realised that his predecessors in making it too px'ominent, the device but has not yet hit on
we see

of

sinkingit deeper in under accordingto a characteristic


drawn
from the

the

brow.

The

hair

athletic coiffure of the


which long plaits,

arranged period; it is

is

back

in two

encircle the head

Fio. 37."

sho^ving Doric Draped female statue,

influence

(Athens, Acropolis

Museum)

190

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

already
of He from
statues
was some

noticed

the

similar

and him

more

trustworthy criticism
Critius and Nesiotes. of the

Lucian, which
known Greek

associates

with

at Eome

by

his statues
a us

site ; he

also made

Dioscuri,brought Heracles at Parium, and


of

of

which.remind boys riding,

the

horsemen
a

froin of the other


as

Acropolis. Critius and Nesiotes also athlete Epicharinus, and at inscriptions


the works founder included

made Athens

statue
attest

by
of

their
a

hands.

Critius lasted

was

also

celebrated

the

school which

throughmany
influence

and generations,
a

of sculptors Sicyonian. Thus we school returning to derived.

various
see

even nationalities, including

the

of the it
so

Attic

athletic

the

region whence

largelywas

"
most

25.

Argos and Sicyon:Athletic


that the schools of and

Art.

"

There

are

many among But we any


not statue

cations indithe
are

Argos

and

Sicyon were

prominent

influential in

early Greece.
do any
can

when at a great disadvantage we attempt to of their notion style and attainments, for we either in the
we can or original

reach

clear

possess

in

an
^

adequate copy

which

regard as
reasonable

characteristic

with
reason

of their art, or of their to one probability

even assign

masters.

The of their

for this is
was

partlyto

be

found

in the

material

and bronze, partly in geographical usually which never or conditions, political broughtto Argos or Sicyon, to Olympia,where so Argive and Sicyonianworks were many

statues, which

dedicated,a

destruction

like

that
on

which the

has

led to
at

the

servation pre-

of many Probably,too, the critics also


to
even

archaic

in
seen

the in

be

Acropolis noticed by ancient was monotony, which of Polyclitus athletic statues himself, was of his predecessors of the same the works

works

Athens.

for a later school ; there would, if so, be the less inducement imitator to specimen of the type before it had copy any attained to technical perfection and compositionwould ; subject
offer but

little variety. And


us we

the

same

monotony
an

would of

render these

it difficult for

to

identify any

work particular

schools,even
a

if

copy
^

which

could

possessedin our museums be attributed to them. safely


"

or original

Under

these
but
our

"Apollo of Piombino its Sicyonian or Argive attribution knowledge.

The

iu the Louvre cannot

is

by

some

be

proved

iu

the

regarded as such, present state of

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

191

circumstances

all that

we

can

do

is to

give
traces

summary

of
or

the

evidence,and literary
onian influence owed
we can

to

notice what

of

Argive
seems

Sicydoubtedly un-

recognisein
the

other

schools
now

which
to

much

to

sculpturewhich
exaggerate the

be

lost. irretrievably It would


upon be

difficult
of

to

influence

exercised

sculpture by the great athletic of which festivals. In the constant they gymnastic training the culmination the artist found the best opportunityfor were study. In every Greek town there Avas a place where its youths and in the habit of practisingtheir gymnastic men were exercises running, leaping,wrestling,boxing, throwing the and the quoit and here it was to see javelin possible constantly the nude human body in every variety of action and repose, And the extrathe without ordinary, necessityof posing a model. almost superhuman honours paid to the victors at for the sculptor the great national contests made them a theme adapted for hardly less nolile than gods and heroes,and more trained the display of his skill, of as by the observation those exercises which told by led to the victory. We are Pliny that,while it was customary to dedicate at Olympia a such statues statue to every victor, not were portraits, except
the

growth

Greek

"

"

in

the

case

of

those

who

had

won

three usual
in

times.
nature

This

is

in itself an
statues

admirable in

illustration of the
were

of dedicated

early times merely variations of a few types recognised as appropriate to the It is the refinement and perfection of these types, purpose. and their gradualapproach to truth to nature in detail, which form the whole of the athletic schools of the practically history Peloponnese. The earliest athlete statues set at Olympia, according up the those of Rhexibius to Pausanias, were Opuntian and in 544 536 of Praxidamas and B.C. won Aegina, who
B.C.

Greece, which

respectively ; both
as

were

of

wood, but
whom
are

we

have
were

no

formati in-

to

the

Statues

of

earlier

sculptors by Olympian victors


twice honour
of 628

they
also
B.C.,

made.
;
a

recorded
had

thus very
at

Arrhachion, who
archaic
statue
were

won

before
set

564
at

in

his

up of

Phigalia.

Even

Olympia
won

statues

Eutelidas"

boys' pentathlon in
between
664 and

of B.C., and 656 B.C. ; but in the

the won Sparta, who Chionis of Sparta, who last two


cases

the

192

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE
to

chap

set certainly up unique performance.^ who The earliest sculptors statue


was

later

record

remarkable

or

are

recorded and

victorious but it is
Te^i'av
to

athletes be noted

are

Eutelidas that

making Chrysothemis
as

statues

of
;

of

Argos
as

describe they expressly


as

themselves

eiSdres Ik irporepm',
of the the French well
-

if the

reputation of the Argive

school in this kind


at

sculpturewere
excavators

alreadyestablished
discovered
a

; and

Delphi

have archaic

nude bears

male the

statue, of

known

type, which

of those preof an Argive sculptor signature decessors ; perhaps one Eutelidas and Chrysothemis. The acknowledged by and in 520 victors for whom B.C. they worked won succeeding is which has given rise one Olympiads. The next artist's name from the extraordinary to much discussion, lengthof his career.

Ageladas
"

or,

as

he of
a

spelthis

own won

name,"'^ Agelaidas of Argos


"

made
nor

the statue
is this
an

victor who

at

Olympia

in 520 have

B.C.

isolated
a

honoured of
a

with

statue

example long after


On the

of

an

athlete who

may

been
first
a

his

for it is the victory,

continuous of Zeus

series. Ithomatas

statue

also hand, he made for the exiled Messenians, who were other
in

established is
more new

by the Athenians probable than that


home
a

Naupactus

in 455

B.C.

Nothing
set

these

Messenians

should

up

in

their had of

statue

of the

god

as

whose

suppliantsthey
alliance

been

spared by
and

the

and Spartans, the


veteran

in the

temporary

Argos

Athens

receive naturally If of

the

commission.^ between the

Argive sculptor might Nor is there anythijig


earlier and he made he later dates. the
statue

incredible in the interval

Ageladaswas

eighty-five years old when when Zeus, Sophocles was eighty-six


after
The statue

Philoctetes,and
^

that
of be

he

set

to
was

work

brought out the the Oedipus on

S.

Q. 373,

549.
a

statue may

Chionis
set up

here to show
those of

that

long

after

by Myron ; it is only quoted the victory it records,but

Rhexibius, and Arrliachion,


is shown
name

Praxidama,s

were

probably contemporary with


made by his son (Loewy, no. stands for 'Aye'Katda jirobably

their victories.
-

Tliis ;

by

an was

on inscription

statue
more

30)
6

perhaps the
Robert,

but Hagelaidas, doubts had this


no

'A7eXai''5a.
'^

Arch.
it.

MdrcJien,
The then

date, but

the
at

historical before
for back

probabilities
their in revolt
B.C.

seem

to favour

Messenians and

existence political commission statue

in 465

they

B.C., and between have would no must under have

their establishment
of

Naupactus
a

455

opportunity
their

giving
would

statue. them few

The from years

tradition

recorded

bringing the
not restoration.

with

Naupactus
of their

Epaminondas ; they wandering which preceded their

have

forgottenit in the

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

193

Coloneus.^ Heracles
up in

Another

statue
"

attributed Preserver

to

Ageladas
Evil,"which
430
was

is that
was

of
set

the 'AXe^iKaKo?,
to

from

Athens
may

stay the great


been
on an

plague in
one

B.C.

But

the

statue

well have and


set up

old

which

brought from
from
with

elsewhere have title,


famous confirmation

this

or occasion,

else it may,
later

its the

been

wrongly

associated
in

in
case

days
same

plague; there
as

is not

this

the

historical
so

in that

of the

statue

from the

Naupactus, and
a

this Heracles Zeus


and

may

be

omitted in

from

evidence. chronological ject subhe commission

Heracles,both

youthful type, again offered


to

for executed

sculpturein
for

bronze
He

Ageladas in
dedicated

Aegium.

also made, besides

women group of horses and captive celebrate a victoryover the to

athlete statues, a by the Tarentines and


an

Messapians;
Muse

epigram,
he made

perhaps of doubtful
to match two

others
us

describes a authority, by Aristocles and Canachus. but little about the His the from school. he
was

which

All

this tells

Ageladas, except
type which
for
us

that
was

he the lie

deviated occasionally chief product of his


in the

athletic

chief interest
master

must

tradition

that

of

three

illustrious of

Phidias, Myron, pupils,


late been
reason.

and

Polyclitus. This
^

tradition has without have

somewhat The three

but discredited,

I think

sufficient been
temporary, con-

since

pupilscould not, of Polyclitus belonged to


But Attic if
we are

course,
a

than

the other

two. two

generation younger in right our chronologyof


been succeed under the

the Ageladas, his head


extreme

and maturity,

artists may have who was to Polyclitus, have worked

pupils of
at

him him

the

of the

Argive school,may

in his

old age. in this last case The connection but the difficulty of the dates in favour of its
case

has everything

probability ;
or

in any

the succession
to

of

whether Polyclitus,
two contrast

immediate Attic

not,

givescolour
are

circumstances

the the story. With difterent. Great as is the and


can

artists the the

between

subjectsand

styleof Myron
we

the Attic
see

part of the sixth century,


in the works

of the later sculpture ments of his attainanticipations


at

of Critius and

and of the Aeginetan Nesiotes, worked Athens


in his

whom sculptors
"*

we

know

to

have

youth,
by
it that

sculptor of

the

standing of Ageladas would


of and the under Ai-ch. statue his to him need

of

course no

be
more

surrounded
than

Ipupils.The
Iwas
^

attribution

imply

made

in his studio

supervision.
O

Especially by Robert,

Mdrclien.

194

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

even

more a

than

in the

Argive school.
a

But,
master

on

the other

hand,

there is which
been

mastery

and

moderation
a

in his treatment whose of

perhaps impliesstudy under devoted to this more entirely


are

of anatomy had energies of Phidias And school


to
we

branch The

though sculpture,

Myron's motives Ageladasis the


have the

all his

own.

relation

best established in the

alreadyseen,
of beginning

evidence. by literary the historyof the Attic tracing

at

period. In the reaction it was towards art of Attic Argive strengthand severity, Attic sculptor,thoroughly in likely enough that a young sympathy with the tendency of his age, should go directly
nesian
to

fifth century, how influence which affects it at this

strong is the Pelopon-

the

source

of this alone

Argive influence
he
Avas

for his instruction. Phidias and the the and

The school

monuments

suffice to

of artists and that

by

whom of the

prove that surrounded

combined the grace

dignity
delicacy

accuracy

Argive stylewith
the earlier Attic

they

inherited

from

The

two

Sicyonian sculptorswhom
with

sculptors. have we already seen


of three have

associated brothers fame


the

Ageladas in making
and
seem Aristocles,

set to

Muses, the
was

Canachus
influence.

enjoyed great

and bronze
a

The

best

known

work

of Canachus

his hand of Roman

Miletus, who carried in near Apollo of Branchidae stag.^ This statue is reproducedon Milesian coins in the statuette and by their help a bronze period,^
^

British Museum of the

has

been

shown

to

reproduce exactlythe type


statuette

Apollo

of

Canachus.

This

is not,

however,

largeenough in size or us any very good notion


indeed, be
no more

accurate

of
a

than of the

enough in execution to give the styleof Canachus ; it may, of the conventional reproduction
Branchidae Darius which sacked Canachus Miletus
in

mythological type
also followed
494 in

Apollo of
When

his statue.

B.C., he also carried off the Apollo from the Milesians restored to by Seleucus. was made at Thebes, which was Apollo Ismenius
was so

Branchidae;*
The of
statue

it of

cedar-wood,
seen was

similar
at

that

Pausanias could doubt


are

says

nobody
one

who
at

had Thebes
about

the

statue
1

Branchidae
has
some

that the

also

Pliny
was

remarks

which
the

difficult to understand
describes
was

stag
2 3 *

balanced.

Probably
very

he peculiarity

due

this the way to accident

rather tlian to the artist's intention.


There is another Or. says fine copy

Overbeck,
Pausanias

Plastik

(1893),

gem Fig. 24.


on a

in the

Hermitage

at St.

Petersburg.
vi.

Xerxes, but this is clearlya mistake

; cf. Herodotus,

19.

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

195

by
or

Canachus.

It

is not

givingthe

confirmation

he is this passage whether of his criticism to an acceptedtradition, clear in artistic less

merely expressing an perhaps we should attach


mentions
were

theory of
The
seems

his way
to

own,

to

which he

weight.
works

in which that

the

two

statues

elsewhere

imply

they
He

both

recognisedas generally
an

of Canachus.

also made
a

Aphrodite
head, and
materials he

of

TToAos
an

on

her

gold and holding in


he

ivory at Sicyon,wearing
one

hand
in

poppy,
too.

in the The

other

apple. Pliny

says

worked

marble

variety of the subjectswhich


when bronze contrasted

by Canachus, as well as of the is very remarkable, especially represented,


used the
which

with

somewhat
are

monotonous

series the

of

athletic statues of his

usuallyconsidered

most

characteristic
successor

school.

But

Canachus, like his greater

his surroundings, above Polyclitus, evidentlyrose his highestpowers and devoted of the gods, though to statues have it is probable that he also studied athletic sculpture. We ^ only three works of his recorded,and one of these is merely a of an artist of so high reputaof another ; in the case replica tion, is very inadequate,and there this evidence unfortunately of supplementing it from other sources. As t6 no are means criticism his style, have only the vague and unsatisfactory we of and

Cicero, who

says his statues than those of less advanced

were

too

stifi"to
There

be is

natural,
no really we

Calamis. individual
is

artist of

equal
the

eminence His

of whose

characteristics

know

so
as

little.

brother of
a

Aristocles definite

corded practically only re-

founder

artistic

school which

was

recorded

so

we

selves through seven generations. His pupilsdevoted themalmost exclusively to the making of athletic statues, and that this was the branch of sculpture assume safely may
he also excelled.

in which
It is

probablethat the influence and Sicyonmight have been traced period. Thus the artist Laphaes Heracles at Sicyon, where he would
the influence of the local
if Aegira,
we

of the allied schools of


in many

Argos
of this
of

other works made have


a

of Phlius doubtless
as a

statue

fallen under

school,as well
the

colossal

Apollo at
pressly ex-

may

trust

judgment

of

Pausanias, who

says

that his
to
a

resemblance too, who made


'

the

its only evidence for the attribution was Heracles of Thebes, at Sicyon. Ascarus
statue

colossal
we

of Zeus
the Muse

at

Olympia,is
above.

said

to

Or

four,if

include

mentioned

190

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CRAP.

Sicyonian master, though a gap in the text of rausaiiias prevents our more. learning If any works could he attrihuted with certaintyto extant it would tlie Argive and be possibleto fill Sicyonian schools, in this meagre of their style and outline with some account is worse this conjecture characteristics ; but in such a case as
have
worked

under

some

^3*T^.

l'"io.39.

"

liroiizo slatucUc

from
ztuK

iicar AHo.y I.i^'ourio, ICiiidaunis(Bciliir). Winckclvuinimfcsle, Uorliii.

50//i

I'lvgnniim

useless,and we must and cognisetheir influence,


than

be
to

content trace

for

the

present

to

le-

it,where

in possible,

the
to

remains have
may,
statues

of contemporary
some

had

artistic

which we know sculpture dependence upon Aigos or Sicyon.


or some

later

We

however, obtain
from
a

notion found
at

of the

appearance

of

their

statuette

near Ligourio,

P^pidaurus,

198

A at

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

down
some

so

and earlya period, his


we can own

later
to

theoryof

which be

had

compiler may have had be supported by facts ;


for the it information he

but

in any case, gives us, and we


extant

must

thankful

test fortunately

works.

Gallon, the
and

first of the

by comparison with was Aeginetansculptors,

who made the statue of Angelion,^ the to Peloponnesian belonged school of the Cretans, Dipoenus and Scyllis. His style is of archaic severity, quoted by critics as typical just before the time of transition ; in this respect he is compared to Hegiasof

the

pupil of Tectaeus Apollo at Delos, and

themselves

of Sicyon. His Peloponnesian connections Athens, and Canachus confirmed are a by the fact that he made tripod at Amyclae, with a statue of Cora beneath it,to match two by Gitiadas of

Sparta. Probably the two artists worked together ; they may well have been contemporai'ies, have seen, Gitiadas we as since,
appears
to

have

worked which
statue
we

towards
must

the end also

the The
at

period to only other


Troezen. As
to

of the sixth century assign Gallon of Aegina,


"

of his recorded

is

one

of Athena

Sthenias

Onatas, who

seems

to

have have

been
more

the

most

famous

of

all the

we Aeginetan sculptors,

information.

Among

those who and the

employed his talents

were

the

Achaeans, the Pheneans,

Phigaliansin the Peloponnese,the Tarentines and the princes of Syracuse in Magna Graecia, and the Thasians ; a of his most One statue shown at by him was Pergamus too. commissions make of the Black statue to was a interesting for the Phigalians, Demeter who had lost their ancient image of dearth. the goddess, and had a consequently suffered from This image representeda monster of the most grotesque type, with a human of a horse ; and body and the head and mane Onatas in with bronze is said to have reproduced it a fidelity so
miraculous that he
was

supposed to
a

have

been

assisted

by

vision in dreams.^
scope

Such

work

can

hardlyhave

offered much athletic


He
ment treat-

for the

least skill, sculptor's


in which

of all for that

of the nude

he and
chariot in 4G8

his school excelled.


and

made

u-

for Hiero
his

Syracuse a victory at Olympia

of

charioteer
; this
was

to

commemorate not

r".C.

dedicated

^ ^ no

See above, p. 153. of the words Such is the only possible interpretation
to

of Pausanias dream
as

support

Brunn's
more

for

adopting a

suggestion that artistic type.

Onatas

pleaded

his

; they give justification

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE^600-480

B.C.

199

until after
two

Hiero's
with
a

death riders

in

467

B.C.

; it

was

accompanied by

horses
are

works

Heracles, 15
and
a

Onatas' other Among by Calamis. at Pergamns, a colossal colossal Apollo of bronze feet high,dedicated by the Thasians at Olympia,
at

Hermes

Olympia,
ram

dressed
under

in his

helmet, chiton, and


arm,
a

chlamys, and
the

carrying a
Pheneus
a

dedication
been
a

of

peopleof
us

; this

close

reproductionof
most

to again seems primitiveimage.

have

pretty
that
extant

But

the works
to

interest

of

all,from

their

resemblance

are Aeginetan sculptures,

the great groups

by

Onatas.

One

of

Olympia by the Achaeans, representednine stood on a curved basis, of the Greek heroes before Troy, who while Nestor stood before them, on a holding in separate basis, should decide the champion to accept the lots which a helmet Hector's challenge. This was hardly a group in the strict sense
these,dedicated
at

of

the

word,
a

but

rather
to

collection of statues,

placed side by
but
have in the

side with

motive

group dedicated by the relation. closer dramatic a of


the

explain their juxtaposition ; Tarentines at Delphi there must


It
the re})resented

been

death

in battle

the lapygian king Opis, and, in all probability, Taras and his body, above which stood the heroes over anthus too, as well as figuresof horsemen ; there were
on

fight
Phalbatants com-

foot.

In
"

this work

Onatas
mere

is said

to

have

been

assisted
his
son

by Calynthus
or

probablya
assisted him
Pheneans.

MS. in

error

for

Calliteles,^
Hermes

pupil,who
above made
a won

also

making

the

mentioned Glaucias
of

for the

chariot
at

for Gelon

of

Gela, afterwards

tyrant

who Syracuse,

Olympia
on a

in 488

Hiero
seems

later
to

employed
excelled

Onatas
most

B.C., and whose brother Glaucias similar commission.

have

in

statues

of boxers

or

pancratiasts.
and 476
at

The

in victors,Philo, Theagenes, who won all commemorated Olympia, and Glaucus, were

480

and

represented as o-K-ta/zaxwi', boxer's exercise. a air," Anaxagoras made a feet high,dedicated at Olympia by the Greeks
the
was

last

or

by his hand ; beating the


"

colossal Zeus, 15 who


had

at

Plataea.
of

To

these

we

may

add

Ptolichus, a

fought pupil of

Aristocles
who

made

Sicyon,who made athlete statues, and Aristonous, with crowned of Zeus for the Metapontines a statue
be due
to the similar termination of Phalanthus line two

liliesat
1

Olympia.
error

The

may

or

below.

200

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap

To school Gallon Athens The

the
we

evidence literary
may

of the

of activity

the

Aeginetan

add

that of
were

which inscriptions,

and

Onatas

before

the among the Persian invasion of 480 of

proves that both who worked at sciilptors


B.C.

in the history of sculpture appears know alreadyfullydeveloped nothingcertain of its earlier ; we confidence the influence growth, though we may infer with some

school

Aegina

under

which

it

arose

; and

after

brief

period

of

which activity, comprises the first thirty yeai's of the fifth century, it disappearsas suddenly as it arose, apparentlysome time before the political extinction of Aegina in 455 B.C.^ Both the artistic traditions of the school and the athletic subjects for which it shows so strong a predilection associate it with the Peloto came ponnese ; and the great majority of their commissions the

Aeginetan artists either from the Peloponneseor from the southern part of Magna Graecia,which, as we have alreadyseen,
of art. But the distinctly Peloponnesian bias in matters such that it could hardly fail to be positionof Aegina was affected to some in the extent by the influences which prevailed it is clear that there Aegean, and with Athens, in particular, find traces of boldness artistic intercourse. We was accordingly in the Aeginetan works in literature, and originality recorded beyond what is recorded of the purely Peloponnesian sculpture of the same period; not only are there colossal bronze statues, such as the Apollo implying a high degree of technical skill, which of later sculpture at so great a centre even as Pergamus
a was some

had

admired

for its artistic excellence


are

as

well

as

for its
a

but size,

of the athletic statues

exhibits of Thus
we

their skill in the contest


the rendering find in

representedin and gives the


acme

positionthat
an

artist

in the figure
an

of muscular
the

tunity opportension. of

them

of anticipation than
a

attainments

Myron
correct

and but

rather Pythagoras, somewhat


monotonous

mere

elaboration

of the
was

athlete

type which

the

special product of Peloponnesiansculpture. It is to be noted that we have not a single female figurerecorded among the products of Aeginetansculpture for the Black Denieter can hardly ; for in the The material used by even such, catalogue." pass the Aeginetan masters been almost to have seems exclusively compositionof bronze for which the island was famous. _that
"

Tlie
B.C.

latest All

recorded dated

work works

by

an

167

other

fall iu the

Aegiuetau sculptorwas period of the Persian

dedicated
wars.

about

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

201

So

much

we

may

infer fairly

Fortunatelywe are able to by the study of a set the date from the product of Aeginetan art, and the pedimental highest perfection. These are the island acroteria of the temple of Athena on
which
are now

evidence. literary ences to test and supplement our inferwhich of sculptures are indisputably
from

the

time groups
of

of its and

Aegina,

in

the

museum

at

Munich.

The

western

which

is the better

preserved, represents,in
of

all
at

pediment, probability,
the feet of

the

lightover
beneath

the

body

Patroclus,who

lies

Athena

Trojan heroes
restored his

the apex of the pediment, while the Greek have advance from either side. The statues
are now

and been

by Thorwaldsen, and has only design, which

mounted

according to by
some

to

be

modified

small

Fio.

40."

West

from After Cocliereira pcdiiiieiit temple at Aegina (Munich). and Bassae, drawing between Tl. xv. and xvi.i

Aeginii

additions
a

second

since his time ; especially the existence of stoopingfigure, balancingthe one which he restored

discovered

grasping at the fallen warrior ; and the fallen warrior himself be placed nearer the centre, so that both sides of the pedimust ment correspond exactly. On either side an unarmed figure stoops to snatch the fallen warrior,protectedby an advancing or probably Hector for Troy, and Menelaus Ajax on spearman, the Grecian side. Behind these come two kneeling spearmen, and beyond each a bowman, Paris on the Trojan side and Teucer the Greek, while the group is completed at each end on by a in wounded the corner of the pediment. The warrior,who lies the eastern almost identical in pediment was upon group but its subject evidently composition, belongsto the expedition
^

The

figuresiu this

cut

are

iu Thorwaldsen's

order, witli

the

bowuieu

in front

of the

Icueeling spearmen.

202

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

made

Troy against by
the

earlier genei'ation

than

the

as great siege,

of the kneeling of Heracles as one presence is preserved most Much archers. 11 less of this group ; the remarkable figure from it is the warrior who lies mortally is shown wounded The in
one corner

of the

pediment.
two

compositionof these
to
use

ingenuity
the The
are

is adapted with groups the triangular field of the pediment, but not of
some

great
out with-

conventions

to

facilitate the themselves


or

adaptation.
their efforts

composition from either as side is an immense gain in concentration and unity of design, the Aegina pediments when most we can see we clearly compare is broken with the Megarian gigantomachyat Olympia, which
the middle
of

way in which directed towards

either the warriors

the

up

into

separate groups.

We

may

here recognise

the

principle

sculptorsof the eaidyAttic pediments, Iwhere the combatant monsters always attack from either side, the Aeginetan artists and fill the anglewith their coils /and in this matter. affected by Attic influence well have been may those \But in so complicateda combat scene as representedat
also ; recognised

by

the

Aesina
towards

the

effect

of

continuous
a

advance

from

either
it is

side

the centre

involves

serious

since difficulty,

only

and the archers to occupy a for the foremost spearman possible in the fight ; place where they can reallytake an active part with their representedas actuallystriking yet the others are must Yet in spiteof this defect we acknowledge that spears. the Aeginetan sculptures are a great advance upon all previous AVhen we proceed to attempts at pedimental composition./ remai'ktheir excellence is yet more notice their stylein detail, in all respects. As we uniform might able,though by no means it is expect from the athletic traditions of the Aeginetan school, in the modellingof the nude male form that the sculptor chiefly and of the active, excels. The figures are slight proportions without in the finest training, a particle and, like those of men of superfluous fat. The muscles and sinews are clearly rendered, and with master's hand ; there is little or nothing of that a in some of the Attic athletic works, which we see exaggeration The made figuresare perhaps under Aeginetan influence. squarelybuilt,with great breadth of shoulder and slenderness So and full of life and vigour^ of waist ; they are well-knit, far as the body is concerned, the sculptorknew exactlywhat it with concise modelling and a firm rendered he meant, and

tl

THE

KISE

OF

GREKK

SCULPTURE

"

600-480

B.C.

203

hand.

But

in tlic strong, almost in

and liguies,
we

the

of the violent action of many angular conti'asts of their body and limbs, of the shall
too

may

see

something
we us

exaggeratedreaction
meet

against

archaic

stillness which

again

in in

an

artist like

Myron.
which
far
we

They
know

remind
to

of the statues made

athletic action

have

been

by Aeginetansculptors. So
there
are

the

criticism

but generally; apjjlics

many

in-

Fio.

41.

"

Figure reaching to grasp

fallen

warrior, from

E.

pediment

at

Acgiiia (Jliinicli).

in the work. equalities eastern pediment is more the modellingis finer and veins
are an indicated,

In

the

first

place,the
that in

style of
western

the
;

advanced
more

than

of the

detailed, and,
attributed

the particular,

innovation

Rhegium. Here we learn that it was with it too in a statue from Boeotia the Aeginetans; we meet of about the same period. We may notice the difierence of the I of the wounded warriors. two pediments again in the treatment
of

goras by Pliny to Pythaalso practised by

204

HANDBOOK
western

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

i!

pediment have their limbs and muscles drawn the pain of their wounds, and in the up so as to ease contortion thus produced there is some expressionof pain ; but their faces show, hardly if at all modified, the conventional
on

Those

the

smile

of archaic

art.

With
; he

the

fallen warrior

of the

eastern
on

pediment
arms,
so

it is otherwise

is half
over

turned, supported
the
up,

his

that his face is bent smile


in

towards

archaic

his

case

is not

given

ground, and the but undergoes a


and drawn

remarkable

transformation.
is
an

In

the

clenched

teeth

lipsthere giant
is most

intense
with

expressionof anguish; yet


artistic
we or reserve a

the

sion expres-

is rendered from

more

than

in the wounded

Selinus,in whom

noticed
to

similar this

It attempt.^

of how and

to compare interesting Aegina with the dying Gaul

contrast

dying warrior
to

of

Pergamene
Greek

art, and

notice

the

same

motive

is treated

by

sculpturein

its rise power

in its decline ; and in spite of the wonderful dramatic of the later figure, and there is an artistic moderation
the

about the

Aeginetan warrior
the

which

makes

it

not

in comparison,even uses sculptor eveiy the impi'ess spectator; render from The what the
narrow

pathos of
of
a

its effect.
free and

rhythm unworthy of The mene Pergaart to to

resource

eclectic

the

Aeginetan master
without

endeavours

he

has

observed

undue he
has

departure even
been

conventions

in which and

brought up.
the
; the

faces of the

warriors fighting
a more

the other

figuresof

Aegina pediments show


is firm and

ordinary treatment

ling model-

if somewhat clear, of the

heads,

modification

hard ; we see, as in the Attic The archaic type. conventional

line of the

marked, an advance which the eyelidsis strongly Attic artists do not reach without foreign and instead influence, of the 'complicated of the Attic mouth we see a diff"erent curves dentatio modification of the archaic smile ; there is usuallya deep inand in the middle of the lips, from this they run up almost in a straight hair usually The line towards either end.
descends ends
in
a as

in wavy

lines towards

the

forehead, over

which

it the

heads,
inferior

projectingmass, faced with spiralcurls. But artistic a rule, give the impressionof an
that which modelled of the bodies
"

skill

to

clear

tion indica-

of the
Athena the
"

tendencies

on

stiffness
so

Aeginetan art ; and the figure of both pediments is far inferior to the rest, in of its pose and of its drapery the conventionality
that
some

much

so

have

even

suggestedthat

statue

of

206

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Athena need
not

is

meant

rather for such


an

than

the

goddess herself.

But

we

that explanation if we remember almost female by Aeginetan entirely avoided figures were the forms and that their study of rich drapery and artists, look below
it may

well

have
so

been
seem

far behind

that

of other their

temporary conown

schools, and
excellent The battle

inconsistent

with

modelling of the nude. Aegina pediments were


Salamis, in which
the the

most

of

erected after the likely the prize of Aeginetans won combat


so scenes common

valour ; if so, they to the victory over fifth

belong to
the
any
case,

cycleof
which
cannot

allusive in the from

Persians

are

century.^

In

they

be

far removed

by literature and the questionnaturally the height of their activity, at were the extant in assigning arises whether sculptures are we justified in remarkable is certainly There of these. to any a similarity by Onatas subject betAveen the pediments and the groups made the fall of Opis in battle ; and his other at Delphi,representing great group at Olympia representeda Trojan subject,so that the design of the to him for attributing there seems good reason remember pediments also. But, on the other hand, we must attributed to of the various works the remarkable similarity in us artists of the Aeginetan school, which hardly justifies have what of its masters one may assigningto any particular Yet this same been made similarity justifies by any of them.
this date, when all the

Aeginetanartists

recorded

us

in makino;

inferences

with

considerable

confidence

from

the

of Onatas, for they were to the style certainly as sculptures if not by himself, by another artist of remarkably designed, and preferences. The difference in the style similar attainments the two of execution between tion. explanapediments calls for some Their compositionis so similar that the design can hardly
extant

be attributed been been

to

different hands

in the the west

two

cases

; and

it has

that suggestedaccordingly made


first

pediment

may

have

and that the eastern by the originaldesigner, in skill. advanced then was completed by a sculptor more designed probable that the sculptorwho Perhaps it is more of the principal entrance both made the eastern pediment, over to his the temple, with his own hands, and left the western
or pupils

assistants.
turn

We

must

next

to
^

some

extant

works

which, thougli

See

" 29,

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

600-480

B.C.

207

not

found

on

Acginii, may
The shows

be classed

on

internal evidence
in
we

with

Aeginetan.
British noticed modified
which
we

so-called

Strangford Apollo,^now
characteristics which

the have

Museum,
in
;

all the

from the Aegina pediments,only slightly figures like some it is probably much of the athlete statues know made the Aeginetan sculptors in such to have
the
we a

numbers, though
bronze

may

doubt
work

whether in

it is marble

originalor
influence.
a

minor We
have

of a copy made under of the

Aeginetan
in

letter class in
of is
a

statue

dedicated
in
an ^

certainlyan example to Apollo Ptous at his

shrine

Boeotia, which

form all the characteristics exaggerated of all Aeginetan style. But the^most interesting of
a

shows

life-size head
extant

warrior of

from

Athens,^ which
statuary.
of for If
we

is the
are

finest

specimen

early bronze
as a

this head in regarding justified it is the


care

work
we

Aeginetanart,

then
a

most

important
a

which

possess,
as

it shows

of finish and
it
as

as strength

well

of stylewhich delicacy it is in

stamp
certain but
an

the

work the

of

master

; and

bronze, the
all other
can

material

used remains

by

while Aeginetan sculptors,


art
are

of their

in

marble, and
was

so

give us
On the

imperfect notion
bases

of their

style and

technique.

at Athens, Acropolis

where both

this head

found

of statues
is at
to

there were discovered, by Gallon and Onatas, so that the


not

external
it is very

evidence

least

against our
head
a

assignment, for

difficult
; the

place this
with
nor

Attic

works

contrast

iri any classification of bearded head like that of resemblance either


to

Aristocles the

is evident ;
in

is there much Avorks under

or Tyrannicides come

to the

Peloponnesianinfluence
And if the and
so

which

about

this

period.
both

head

is

not
an

Attic,there
attribution

is
to

good Aegina.

evidence At

external
same

internal for

the

time,

long

as

our

knowledge
we can never

of the

other
any

school
case,

it

sculpture of this period is not exhaustive, be quite certain that it may not belong to some which has a strong affinity the Aeginetan. In to is an admirable specimen of the bronze work of
the
hair
over

the
^

period;
n. In D.

the
"

forehead

is

most

delicately

51.
J. H.

1887,
I
am

work.

glad

S. p. 191, I to find that the


come

placed
As he

this head
seems

among to have

above, p. 151. expressed an opinion tliat this was Aeginetan M. CoUignon has expressed the same view, and certainlyAeginetan worlds in his Histoire de SculjJture.
the to this conclusion

See

is independently,its probability

greatly confirmed.

208

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CllAI'.

rendered, in
hair whole

tresses, and the working of the fringeof minute hair over the is beautifully beard and finished, every ever, surface being indicated by fine Avavy which, howlines, in any way without the surface, modifying only diversify
a

the

cut sharply

outlines of the difterent of the

masses.

The

strongly

projectingline
the

which eyelids,

of eyebrows, and the indented projection to give the effect of eyelashes,are seems

Fig.

43."

Bronze

head, perliap.5 Aogiuelan (Alliens, Acropolis Museum).

also most
first-rate

clearlyshown.
bronze work
are as

The
most

study

of all these The the

details

on

is original the

instructive.
as

finish and finest Attic


in

delicacy of
mai'ble

remarkable
same

in

of sculpture

but period,

different entirely

show a would not their nature, owing to the material,which but is susceptible delicate play of light and shade on its surface,
to infinite

pains in

the elaboration

of details. and conciseness


of

It is the

combination

of this accuracy

II

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE"

600-480

B.C.

209

detail with

vigour and
forms

fulness

of life in the

attitude

and

expressionthat
masters

the chief characteristic of the

Aeginetan

after

extinct although the school of Aegina became ; and its influence may brief but brilliant periodof activity,
some

be traced in

of the most

remarkable

of productions which

fifth-

century

sculpture.
Other

"

27.

Early IForhs.
"

In

book

is concerned from the

mainly

with

the the

as history of sculpture,

derived
a

literature and

monuments,

rather than with

completeand

study of the extant remains of ancient art, it is often systematic difficultto find an appropriate placefor many statues Avhich are
in themselves
may

of

great excellence

or

interest.

Some

of these

be omitted

will

be easily trained by the

with altogether by the appreciated observation

the less student

because they hesitation, whose

of other

eye has become Avhich oflier similar Avorks,

more

data for the determination

of their exact
or

periodor
which

school. of
so

No the

attempt is made
finest statues

here to enumerate

to describe
are some

even all, are

preserved ;
a

but

there
or a

either from instructive, that it it is


seems

technical

historical them

point of view,
here,although

advisable at least to

mention

make to impossible any definite assertion as to the exact periodor school to Avhich they must be assigned. Most bronze statues or conspicuous amongst these are some become to classify more heads,which it may ultimately possible discoveries supply fresh data for comparison, as new definitely, scientific study of what or a we already possess leads to more results. But in the present state of our knowledge it seems precise
wiser

for

handbook

like this not


cannot

to

venture

upon

theories of
In the

which Louvre
it
or was even

the correctness is
a

be
a

as regarded

established. from the

bronze
as a

statue

of

boy, known
A

found of

the

Apolloof
doubts
Ave our

Piombino.^ be that have


in

study of
to

placewhere the original,


the student
seems

cast, cannot
some

fail to

instructive been
a

for,in spiteof

it expressed, bronze

pretty certain that archaic period. But


not

have

this statue the

of original

early schools does it to its origin, to assign and therefore it us be cannot discussed with much here. Another archaic profit is noAv in the bronze,of the same type but very different style, Palazzo Sciarra at Rome, and is therefore known the Apollo as
suffice to enable Sciarra ; ^ it is about
1

knowledge of

half life-size.
2

Perhapsthe

best known

and

B.

D. 78.

j^fi^f^^ji^j^

1887^ T^^f^ i^.^^

210

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

most

which Here

of. all is the bronze head of interesting is in all probability a true specimen of the like curls spiral
so over

youth
made

in

Naples,

fine archaic work.^


are

the

which forehead, then

separately
a us we see

just

many

and cork-screws,

instructive

example of early bronze technique from which the conventions original


are

fixed on, are work, and show which

most

the in

marble works early many Another very curious

derived.
of

example

archaic

work, this time

in

in head of advanced of a man portrait age, now whether It is unique in its character at such a period, Madrid.2 Its inscription, the or a as we regard it as an original copy. is of doubtful of the philosopher name authority Pherecydes, ; intended as a be doubted that the head is really but it cannot almost of some individual ; it has littleof the general, portrait in Greek art rather than individual character so common typical the style of all periods. Here again we at a loss in assigning are school. to any particular

marble, is

It Avould be easy to add indefinitely to this enumeration these examples have mostly been quoted to show how
as material,

but

much

yet hardly available for

and systematic It is to be

historical

still awaits a certain study, that order will ultimately be

identification. introduced

expected

the present it seems wiser for us internal or external evidence,admits on classification.

into this chaos ; but for ourselves with what, to content of


a

definite and cautious

"
Greek been

28.

Summary.
of native

"

In
or

whether

chapter we which foreignorigin,


of its the
career.

the

first

saw was

the

material,
for

available

art at

the outset Avith

This of

second that

chapterhas

concerned

assimilation
an

development of sculptureinto
the formation the
not

material, the independent existence,and


Technical be
Avas

of various

artistic schools in Greece. various materials the

skill in I

Avorkingof
in Greece

already to

found, if
of the gave

itself, among

highlycivilised nations

East ; and the imitation of imported products probably But those Avho first the first impulse to artistic progress.
processes

the A^arious practised they learnt their craft

from

in Greece, Avhether sculpture masters or taught themselves foreign

of

by
of We
"

the observation and inventors, have


seen

of
are

models, had foreign


handed

at

home

all the

prestige
accepted

-doAvn-rig'"ucE by Greek
are

tradition.

that the stories of inventions


-

not

to be

Alon. Inst. ix. 18.

Overbeck, Gesch.

d. gr. Plastik

(4th ed.),Fig. 64.

THE

RISE

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE"

600-480

B.C.

211

as

true literally

in most

cases

; but

to

the theories of later times these


is
now

about

they teach of the origin


been with

us

good deal

as

Greek
upon

sculpture ;
evidence

and which
of

theories
lost.

must

often
as

have
was

based

And

it

in sculpture

the earliest

days

of Greek
means.

the technical processes also Avith art, so it was We


saw

the types

by represented
many

their

in the

previous

chapterthat
common

of the types of decorative art, the groups so at least of native origin, in early reliefs, Avere, if not

remote | preservedby artistic tradition on Greek soil from a more in the round, antiquity. But the simpletypes of earlysculpture rather of pose, seem with but little variety figures mostly single models than to have of foreign to have l)een adopted in imitation either invented been or developed from any native origin. is mainly concerned of the rise of Greek The sculpture history Avith the modification and improvement of these types, as they taken up and studied by different local more Avere especially

schools.

The
as

process

is

sIoav and

gradual one,

and

affects

modelling of knees, hands, or feet,or the folds of drapery,before it delicate finish of conventional more to alter the general or ventures composition proportions ; even until the very end of the archaic period the traditional types so are never completely done aAvay with, though they become flexible as to be easily adapted to the particular purpose ; they the observer, but they can do not obtrude themselves on ahvays be discovered by the student Avho has followed their development. characteristic of We have seen how special types Avere most of Argos and schools how the sculptors Sicyon, for special of to the representation example, devoted themselves especially and consequentlycarried the study of the modelling athletes, and' proportions of the body and its muscles to a high pitchof Avhile the Attic artists Avere more occupiedAvith the perfection, graceful arrangement and renderingof drapery,and with giving also seen We have more general expression to the face. extent distinctions of style,Avhich are, doubtless, to some least the at dependent on this choice of subjects ; they are Thus the early conditions. result of similar tendencies and Avhose Greek of Asia Minor and the adjacent islands, sculptors the north of the Aegean to Thessaly influence spreads across and general and Attica,seem about the composition to care more in detail ; even effect than their modelling about accuracy than often more intended to reproduce the appearance appears
such details, the
"

212

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the

actual

form make the

;
an

while
exact

the and

Dorian

artists of the

Pelopounese
as

prefer to
Of
course

in especially

detailed copy of nature of the human and muscles proportions


cannot

it is,

body

these and
wc

distinctions
may

be

every

case,

often
seem

notice

strictly appliedin exceptionson either side.


too

But, in the main, they


of the monuments, whom
The
a

in accordance

both with the evidence of the

and

the historical character

people to
have taken

they apply.
rich and
too

luxurious

lonians,who

seem

to

prominentpart
to

in the

earliest

periodof
what

Greek

reduced

great straits in the


Persian reached

succeedingyears
; but
was

were sculpture, ments encroachthe by

of the survived and

Empire
its

best in their work in

development highest
and
accurate

Attica,where

it attained time the

the
severer

greatest refinement
and
more

delicacy. At the same of the Peloponnese art

and spread its influence ; until,at the steadily grew of the fifth century, it assisted the reaction of Attic
"

beginning
sculpture

without escaping towards a entirely stronger style, and its harder Attic of influence some countervailing grace upon

simplerand

less flexible character. The Persian


us

invasion, which
its

closes

this

period,has

also

for preserved

products. The clearest and most conspicuous Xerxes When at Athens. of this preservation occurs instance of Athens, it is evident that he and Acropolis sacked the town but also broke and not only destroyedall Avails and temples,
threw down
all the
statues

which

surrounded

them.

Some

he

; carried off to Persia, like the famous group of the Tyrannicides their of ruins returned the to Athenians they the city, but when

must

and other dedications sculpture their Acropolislying in fragments decorated had once which the ground. A people in the full vigour of artistic upon trouble to the collection to give much not likely was production of or restoration of such relics. A few, of peculiar sanctity or have been set up again; but the associations, interesting may Fortunatelyfor us, simply put out of the way. majoritywere being mortar was requiredfor the buildingswhich were no
have

found

the bulk

of the

erected
so

to

take the

placeof
of

those that had marble

been

destroyed ;

and

sculptureand architecture buried to help in filling and were up the escaped the lime-kiln, Avith thus preserved of the Acropolis.They were terraced area but little damage, beyond what they had suffered from the
all these

fragments

CHAPTER

III

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

480-400

B.C.

29.

The
we

Persian have
most

Wars had

and
to

their refer
to

Results.
"

In

the
wars

last
as

chapter forming
Greek

often

the

Persian

the

art, and
we

prominent landmark the most as affording


assignto
technical rather

in the

historyof early
limit
to

suitable

the
the

periodwhich
rudest
we

the rise of Greek

sculpturefrom

models been

towards concerned
in
mere

perfection.So far,however,
their material what
must

have

with

and results, have seemed


us a

with
at
most

the way the time valuable

which
waste

they have, by
and

destruction, preservedfor
of Greek
art
now

record We
to

of the attainments
must

early in beginning

the fifth century. the future,not to of


a new

look at them
see

in their relation the

the

past, and

in them

epoch in

Here, too, the


Persian
return

and literature. Gi'eek art, as well as in history is by no means material side of their influence
many
was

In insignificant. invader found and the


case

Greek

towns

the the

ruin

made
on

by

the

complete,and
thrown

inhabitants the

their

all

their

temples destroyed and


down and

sculpture,
This

vases,
was

other
most

dedications

broken.

an notably in Athens : and the result was in which painter, statesman, architect, activity, impulse to new those splendidmonuments sculptorjoined to replaceby more

of which much

the

scattered
the
art

and the

buried

about

of

fragmentshave taughtus so precedingperiod. In many cases,


invaders

too, the
means

spoilof by which
to true

the

conquered
the this the

actuallysupplied the
were

architectural

and

monuments sculptural

erected The
even

commemorate

at

the

import of time by

victoryof the victoryseems


Greeks,
and

Greeks,
to

have

been

realised which it

the

change

CHAP.

Ill

"

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

215

brought

about

in the
as

relations between
well East
as

Europe
In

and

Asia

finds the the

its retiection in art

in
were

literature.
but

early times
known
to

great nations
Greeks
reason

of

the

vaguely
made

; but

their power,
in

and skill,

wisdom the

for that very

the

greater impression on
was a more

whose of
a

civilisation

of a people imagination primitive stage,though capable the rise of the Persians


a more

higherdevelopment.
powers
took and
at

With
once

these
a more

Oriental

definite

and

form, threatening conquest of Asia Minor, followed of Greeks to Oriental by the Ionic revolt againstthe subjection
had despotism, But Persians

their

brought Europe
of the feared and
two
more

and

Asia

into

direct

conflict. the
was

until the defeat


were

Persian hated that

invasions than first

of Greece It

and

despised.

Marathon, Salamis,
his
true

Plataea the

taught

the

Greek

Intellectual and over superiority without artistic activity form is but rarelyfound in its highest and physical a corresponding political vigour. The art of the well as national and patriotic fifth century was as essentially combined in all the greatest ideas were two religious ; the the highest and if the Zeus of Phidias was of sculpture, works ever given by the Greeks to the ideal godhead, he expression idealised personification of all that to a Greek also an was seemed And noblest in many Greek
in
man
"

"barbarian."

that

is to

say,

in

the

Greek and

nation. other

of the

sculpturesadorning temples
have
come

public buildingsthat
and

down

to

us

the

tween bestruggle

represented, though rarelyin a The direct way. between struggle lightand darkness, between freedom and Europe and Asia, is the true tyranny, between of all the battles between theme Greeks or gods and giants, and Amazons, or Lapiths and Centaurs, and all are regarded as selves themfrom which the Greeks antitypes of the great struggle had just emerged victorious. also favourable The conditions of the time were to political works. the production of monumental The common dlanger and the deliver^ had drawn the various Greek cities together, from celebrated by common that danger was to ance offerings after the crisis the same the gods. And even tinued. tendency conThe first directed againstthe Delian at confederacy, Persian power, ultimately transformed became into the Athenian the monumental devoted to were empire, and its treasures decoration of Athens. And the rapid development of a demo-

barbarian

is

216

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

cratic

combined constitution,
it
at

with

the

surrounded

Athens the

under

conditions which peculiar Pericles,offered exceptional the

for opportunities The democratic of the

production of

greatestworks

of

art.

form

people

of government idealisaencouragedthat tion without which its exploitscould be not

artistic commemoration worthy highest ; while the actual Cimon and Pericles gave the as predominance of such men originality, greatness, and continuityof designwhich a purely popular government could not attain. The artist, too, could freedom woi'k with more and confidence if, while devoting even his highest efforts to the gloryof his country and its gods, he
was

of the

assured

of This

trustworthyprotector
protectionwas
not

to

control

the

fickle
we

populace.
shall
see

as always sufficient,

even

in
may

the well

case

of

Phidias whether

himself. the

But of

without Athens

Pericles,we
would have

doubt

people

of Acropoliswith those monuments which they were so justlyproud. " 30. The Olympian Sculptures} Before the excavations at Olympia had been begun, it was expected that they would settle doubtful and points in the history of Greek sculpture, many would supply a standard of comparison to which other works of the same period might be referred. Pausanias, who describes the pediments of the temple of Zeus in considerable detail, also records the sculptors who made them Paeonius for the eastern,
" "

enriched

the

and
of

Alcamenes

for the

western

; and

as

we

information and to the style as literary the recovery of the Olympian pediments seemed to give likely us specimens of the sculpture designedby an artist who was, in the estimation of antiquity, It second only to Phidias himself. be acknowledged that these anticipations have not must at once been realised. Whatever the trustworthiness ultimate conclusion as to be our may of Pausanias' statement, and as to the artistic

possess a good deal works of Alcamenes,

value and interest of the that the


that
two

themselves,there sculptures
what

is

no

doubt

the

pediments are very similar to one western pediment is very far from
an

another
we

in

style,
the

should

expect from
eastern

associate does
not

and show

rival

of

Phidias, and

that

in its style to similarity the other recorded has of Paeonius, the Victory,which work of all these also been discovered at Olympia. The explanation puzzlesmust be reserved for the present ; it is best to begin

pediment

much

'

Olympia, vol.

iii.

in

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

217

with

of description
to
see

what it
can

has

been actually harmonised

found, and
with the

wards after-

whether

be

literary-

evidence. the represented for the chariot race between Pelops and Oenomaus. preparations all the suitors Oenomaus, so the story went, used to challenge in for the hand of his daughter Hippodamia to a chainot race which death was were to be the result of defeat; the competitors from was always outpaced by his matchless horses. The course the Isthmus the Altis at Olympia to the altar of Poseidon on of Corinth. Oenomaus used to give his competitorthe start, The
eastern
as pediment,

Pausanias

tells us,

while

he sacrificed
him

ram

on

the altar of Zeus with


a

then

he would
his spear. I

overtake

and
means

slay
to

him

thrust

from

Pelops
who
was

found said

bribe

Oenomaus' love with


of

charioteer

Myrtilus,
;

to

be with

also in the
met

Hippodamia
inflicted fell to
on

and

he

accordingly won,
Poseidon. Oenomaus
his

help
his

his

horses, the
so

gift of
many

the fate he had

Pelops. Such kingdom theme a was appropriatei" the temple of Zeus at Olympia. itself might 'be regarded as a prototype of the The contest horse-races which formed so prominent a part of the Olympian and the myth records the retribution inflicted upon festival, presumption and barbarityunder the direct sanction of Zeus Thus Pindar himself,and by a hero who enjoyed his favour. also celebrates it in his first Olympian ode ; and it is probable that in the pediment, as in the ode, the underhand methods is rather attributed and his victory adopted by Pelops are ignored, far to his own and to the favour of the gods a powers better precedentfor the games the prototype. of which it was The figures that have been recovered suffice for a complete restoration of the group, although the position of some of them be fixed with certainty. Every possiblearrangement cannot has been suggestedand discussed, that many and it is probable pointswill always remain doubtful, to afford exercise for the These open problems do not, however, ingenuityof students. interfere with of the work, either as our general appreciation regardscompositionor style. In the middle stands the majestic of Zeus, who is present to receive the sacrifice and to act figure arbiter of the race ; on cither side of him stands a pair, as man and woman hand his the and Oenomaus wife on one Sterope, the other and difficulties. on Pelops Hippodamia. Here the
others,and

daughterand

"

"

218

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

cuap.

in

begin.
of Zeus

Pausanias
;

tells
be

us

that

Oenomaus

stood
"

on on

the the

right

this
or

might
as on

interpreted cither

right hand,"
view.

the

right from
is

the

It is clear that the latter is the the head it


was

god's spectator's point of correct interpretation.^


as

Though
show

of

Zeus

lost, enough
his
"

is left of the neck

to

that

inclined

to

which right,

is also the natural

placefor
is bounded carry

the favoured side

competitor Pelops.

These

five

figures,

standingerect
on

by side,for-m-the central each side by the four-horse


in the
race. occurs

group ; this group chariot that is to

its master

This
often

is

device,here inseparable

from The throw

the

which subject, central

in

pedimentalcomposition.
on

recedingline of the
the group horses

four into

horses

either

side

seems

to

while stronger relief,

the

space

and chariot is admirably adapted to occupied by the and take up a portion of the narrowing field, tion transito form a from the standing figures in the middle to the seated or crouching figures at the sides. In front of the horses of Oenomaus crouches
his

there is no charioteer;'^

evidence

that

the

figureof Myrtilus
to his
master
or

in any way portrayed either his treachery his love to Hippodamia ; perhaps the sculptor

like Pindar, to ignore those features of the story, preferred, which certainly would have made the race bad precedent a very for the strict fairness of the Olympian games. Behind the horses each side, about whom Pausanias has two come figureson the grooms of Pelops and nothingto say except that they were Oenomaus remarkable of these is an respectively ; the most old man like of surprisingly realistic treatment and portrait^

See

for

eastern

pedimeut, Jahrbuch, 1889, Pis. 8,

0 ; and

for

western

pediment, ihid.
Here,
and The
as

1888, Pis. 5, 6. all other in almost

continued evidence

study
to he

of the extant

disputed points,I follow Treu, whose thorough fragments gives his opinion the greatestweight.
:
"

considered

is fourfold
;

(1) The (2) The


(3)
of The

of description

Pausanias

positionand working of
and other

size of the the


means

figures;
which
to side the

clamps

figures showing of fixingthem

faced outward, and


or

marks

background
as

architectural

of fitting them to one another or ; the fragments were (4) The position in which earthquake that destroyed the temple. ^ Pausanias expressly says that llyrtiluswas

frame,

found,
seated

thrown

down

by

the

in front

of the

horses be

; he

can

hardly
as an

be

here

wrong attendant

on

such of

attendants
of
one

in subordinate had in
seen

who

and

so a kneeling placed the figures of muster Sterope. She may pass among are mostly those positions. Pausanias' other mistakes described the pediments, though his interpretationis

point, and

the

girl cannot

sometimes

error.

")

A^

,A

S::s
H

\Q"

220

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

who features, the


scene

sits

on

the side of Oenomaus


as foreboding,

; he

seems were

to look
a seer

on

with

interest and

if he

who

foresaw
a

his master's

whose girl, the


extreme

fate ; behind of him is the kneelingfigure in this positionis not presence easy to explain.
corner,
on

At

Oenomaus' in the

is the reclining side, figure


corner coiTesponding on

of the

Cladeus,and river-god
side is the his
own

the other is towards

Alpheus ;
which river,

being thus
bounded
on

at

the

south

a short receiving

distance

farther
it
on

the

Olympia on waters tributary


Thus the
in

end, he the south,


of the

Cladeus, which
limits of the

bounded
scene are

the west.

geographical
the
western

as prescribed, strictly

The whole composition is almost pediment of the Parthenon. but on the other hand monotonously simple and symmetrical, it is an admirable rule that the scene example of the common the east front of the temple is a quiet one. five iThe over like almost figuresthat stand side by side in the middle seem members supporting in the architectural the

design ;
severe

the two

female

with figuresin particular,


to continue seem drapery, the grooved triglyphs.In

simple and
at

folds of their
and

the effect of the fluted columns the sides too

almost
are more

exact

the groups but the correspondence,


on

there is

advanced Avith the groom

the side of in his hand

ready
/ young

reins

for the start preparations Pelops,whose charioteer sits behind the chariot,only a horses
^

crouchingin
"

front of the charioteer old who


man

to

balance the other

the other

figure of Myrtilus. hand, correspondsto


behind him

The the

of

Pelops, on
on

seated and

again is a boy
is

kneels

side ; probably holds the

the

goad ;
one

who and

in describing him also as probably right of Pelops' and so we the maiden must interpret grooms, the other side as an at attendant of Sterope, corresponds local nymph not as a or personification. jThe figures

thus Pausanias

descend

towards

the

corners

in
to

even

their gradation,

size and

fitted positionbeing exactly chai'acteristic which also ; such thus Treu's


must
we

the

placewhich
in

they

occupy,

shall

notice is

the

western

pediment
with

restoration

throughout
that
more some

consistent

itself, though it
as

be admitted
a

that

of

Curtius, offer

restorations, pleasingvariety ; this,


the

other

however,
y The
^

is not

western

an necessarily argument for their correctness, to pediment offers the strongest contrast

This

part

of Ti'en's restoration from it follows

is

quite certain
some

from

tlie

aud this figure,

on certainty

otlicr doubtful

shape of the points.

basis of

222

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE

cuAr.

figures.Beyond these either side ; on figures knees by a Centaur who


faces his
to

comes

once a

more

first

woman,

group down pulled


a

of
on

three
to

her

holds her with

backward

bends who,*kneeling, Lapith adversary, Centaur


narrow

grasp ; he down his body


;

force the
a

also

on

to

his front which

knees

thus

there is

produced

slanting group

and reaches quite near to field, diminishing these come old either side ; first an two on figures reclining bed an attendant,who is raised on a sloping evidently woman, that her head fits into its place in the slanting line ; and at so the extreme
corner
a

admirably fills the the corner. Beyond

youthful female
or

with figure
at

bared

breast,
a or

probably
curious end

nymph

other the

local

personification.^It is
the left

fact that both

figures reclining
the old
woman

north like is is

of this

the rest of also

pediment are the sculptures ;

of Pentelic

marble, not
at

of Parian

the south she


arm,

end
rests

but the wedge-shapedbed on which Pentelic, Parian, and so is the nymph, all but her advanced These with indications, together
of

which

is Pentelic.

the softer execution


a

the
a

Pentelic
of

parts, show
the

coj^y the south end


at

they are original figures.The


that both in the

that

later Parian the

repair, ably probportions


at

offer clear evidence

figures reclining

each

eastern

if the requireeven original ments design, of the composition and the exact correspondenceto the did not sufficiently of the figures pediment in the number end

existed

prove

the fact.

will suflfice to show not only the strict symdescription metry of compositionthat reignsin each pediment, but also the in the principles observe close correspondencewhich we may of subject. In that control the two, in spiteof their contrast the reclining have the god as a central figure, both alike we figuresat the ends ; and the division of the central group of characters at seven figuresfrom the groups of subordinate of either side, of a group the sides by the interposition, on When character. diff"erent composition and we proceed to the consider the style of the more sculpture,it is once But here of the two pediments that impressesus. similarity

This

This
of

is the

the especiallyconsidering the has

it is wrong, and I do not feel conviuced interpretation, tion identificawhere the the of eastern pediment, analogy Studniczka But certain. seems fairly though disputed, river-gods, usual for

produced
ends

at the

very ingenious arguments of the western pediment are

believingthat merely Lapith women

tlie two
or

female

figures
have

slaves,who

escaped from

the melee with

their dress disordered.

Of. Olymjna, iii. text, p. 136.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

180-400

B.C.

223

question, the question be due merely to the execution whether this similarity by may for the pediments by local craftsmen of the designs made in the designs themselves, is inherent different artists, two or and pediments, so implies that the designs of the two
we are

at

once

faced

by

difficult

if

not

from

the the this

same same

hand,
school.

are

at

least
we

the
are

work in the
a

of

two

sculptorsof
to
more

Before
must

deal

with

we question,

examine

position style with


even un-

detail. It is obvious
at first

boy of Pelops in the eastern who crouches before the horses ment, pediseized the of and the drapery by or Lapith woman legs the western the rightend of towards pediment, seem a Centaur barbaric in their uncouth almost puerile or shape and appearance quality ;
such
as

sightthat pieces of work

the execution the

is of most

rightleg of

the

yet, on

the other

hand,

many

of the heads

and

much

of

the

modelling of the nude offer very fine specimens of bold and vigorous workmanship, admirably adapted to show well at a that these sculptures be remembered distance ; for it must were
about
seen

60
at

feet

above
near,

the

ground, and
in order
to

therefore

could

not

be

all from

while

appreciatethe general
it would The Zeus' distance

efiect of the be necessary

architecture
to

and
a

the

sculptural groups,
as

stand nude

considerable

modelling of
of the
east

the

male

torso,
the

away. exemplifiedin the

Apollo of the west, is correct, mannerism and remarkably free from simple, and severe, both with the dry and sinewy and exaggeration ; it contrasts the slim waists and firmlyof the Attic Tyrannicides, treatment and the heavilyknit figures of the Aeginetan sculptures, and veins of the Choiseul-Gouffier marked muscles Apollo and its replicas. It is hard to resist the inference that the Olympian athletic school as trained in an so Apollo was made by a master

pediment and

to be

able

to

render

the

nude

male

form

without

The making itself visible in his work. pediment is in many ways the best finished pieceof sculpture of the temple : the drapery of his preservedfrom the sculpture chlamys is simple and broad in treatment, and free from those observed from accidental folds or twists which, however closely the dignityof a monumental inconsistent with a model, seem
effort

any conscious Apollo of the west

work
traces

; thus

the archaic
seem

stiffness

of which

it still retains

some

does not

out

of

place;

it is the mixture

of archaism

FiQ.

46."

Apollo, from

centre

of W.

pediment at Olympla (Olympla).

CHAP.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

225

with

realism

in accidental

detail that

produces so

strange

an

effect in

some parts of the Olympian pediments. In the treatment this Apollo is of the head and face,

again
and
we

the finest have

specimen. in of lacking the delicacy


seen

The

modellingis
finish and

strong

and

severe,

play of

surface which

Every line is definite and clearly The eyelids form a pi'ojecting frame which surrounds the cut. but do not overlapat the outer is corner eye-ball, ; the mouth from the middle towards simplein shape,and tends downwards chin either corner the is full, almost heavy in its roundness. ; The hair comes low in part the modellingof conceal to so as the forehead ; but in the head of Pirithous there is a deeplythe upper cut groove separating part of the forehead from the lower the first clear recognition of this distinction between the and male female in later Greek forehead, always rendered sculpture. In the case of Pirithous the emphasis given to this line of division is partlydue to the contraction of his brows as he lifts his axe The of the forehead,to to strike. wrinkling is a device which we often meet with on express pain or effort, this pediment,both in men and Centaurs. and eyes The mouth remain less in the of more or case usually impassive, except tEe Centaurs,who are treated throughoutwith more freedom tEan the Lapiths; it seems if the impassivity of the latter as in part at least due to a desire to preserve the dignity of were the heroes, and to in some assimilate them degree to their in the beautiful Lapith patron god. Only in some cases, as to the right of Apollo, in the young woman or Lapith whose is the contraction of eyes arm being bitten by his adversary,
"

in

Attic works.

and

mouth

but with great restraint and tion, moderaexpresses, the violence of the struggle. The Centaurs, on the other contorted
so

(
'

emphasise the contrast between the Greeks and their bestial antagonists.A similar in both pediments, I realism occurs in some subordinate figures "and goes far to show that these figures preted to be interare rightly rather than heroes or personifications. as attendants The most who reexamplesare old people;the two old women striking cline next the end figures in the western pediment are, as we have ^ in different and a material, seen, copies betray in some points
^

and hand, by their open mouths and expression to their feelings,

faces,give

free

For

meeting

it at

example, the upper in an as angle,

the eyelid overlaps

under

at the

corner,

instead

of

the other

figures.
Q

226

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE ; but

CHAP.

the conventions be and


to

and

pretty
the

close

technique of a later age which copies of the originals


of
as

they must they replaced,


intended old
man

realistic type characterise them sits behind the

their

faces

is

probably
The
is almost

barbarian of

slaves.

who

horses his

Oenomaus

like

realistic

with portrait,

wrinkled

forehead the

and

the expression,

droop

of his lower

and eyelids,

pensive heavy forms

Fio.

47.

"

Aged

seer, froin

E. pediment at Olympia (Olympia).

of his features ; and heavy forms of his of flesh beneath The

the

same

character the

is continued

in

the

body,

and

deep-cutgrooves

and

folds

his chest.
it is treated is usually rendered sculpturally, and the forehead, ending in over
a

hair,when

lines on the head in wavy small spiral curls,finished with curls


are

drill ; in often

some

cases

the small

all

over

the

head.

But

the

hair

is

merely

out-

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

227

lined that

in
we

broad
must

of application factor
in

plain: there is no doubt as a preparationfor the regard such treatment to colour. This brings us a important very
masses

and

then

left

evidentlyrelied on or allowed for by the artists throughout their work, whether to bring out their modelling or to hide their shortcomings. It is possiblethat many things most which now unpleasing or inadequate in the plain appear sion, marble, would with this help produce a very different impresWe need when distance. from seen a especially every which meet such help to explainthe defects of execution us on and not all sides, contrast only with the vigour of the design in the excellence of the work but also with and composition, in the modelling of the nude male body. some parts, especially all these allowances, attribute the execution With we may of of the Olympian pediments to a school of local sculptors brought up in the athletic traditions of the varying excellence, in the treatment of the nude at home and far more Peloponnese, of draperies, male form than of female figures or though some of them strive to remedy this defect by a close and even Such realistic touches in detail. realistic study of nature
of~cblour
seem

any is

criticism

of

the

Olympian sculptures.The

use

inconsistent strangely

with

the

archaic

stiffness the

of other

parts ; the combination


and

of the two

contrasts

with

systematic

alone can of treatment regularlyevolved method in the treatment and which we see properly be called style, and of female figures drapery by Attic sculptorsof the same in the accorded treatment Olympian or by the same pei'iod Doubtless familiar. with which they were to suljjects sculptors, of must have of subordinate a school sculptors athletic subjects for statues of been created at Olympia by the regulardemand in the and these men would naturallybe employed victors, is It execution of the pediments of the temple. quite a for their design. difterent questionwho was responsible
which

The the

external

metopes
but plain,
to

over

the
over

colonnade

that

surrounded that

temple were
the

those
the

the internal columns

formed

prodomus and opisthodomus, at filled with sculptures, front and back, were representingthe labours of Heracles. Four columns imply three intercolumniaat either end.( six metopes in this position tions,and so there were At the east were (1)the Erymanthian boar, (2) the horses of Diomed, (3) Geryon, (4)Atlas and the applesof the Hesperides,
entrance

228

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

(5) the cleansingof the Augean stable,and (6) Cerberus. Some of all these were recovered cavations, exby the German fragments but only two in any approachto completeness.The

FiQ.

48."

Metope

from

temple of Zeus at Olympia ; Heracles apples of the Hespeiides (Olympia).

and

Atlas

with

the

is the preservationand in composition, and his fourth,in which Heracles stands bearing on his arms shoulders the weight of the heavens, which is conventionally him Behind represented by the upper part of the entablature.
in

finest

of

both all,

230

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

we

cannot

speak with
of
a

so man

much of

but confidence,

the work who has

bold

invented

many

admirable

dently they are eviand original imagination, though not compositions,

Fio.

49."

Metope

from

temple of Zeus

at

(Paris,Louvre

; and

Olympia ; Heracles Olympia).

and

Cretan

Bull

always in
characters To
were

strict accordance

with

the

dignityof
the
to

the

and subjects

represented. decoration of the sculptural com})lete artist added by Paeonius, the same

temple,acroteria
whom Pausanias

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

231

attributes of

the

eastern

pediment ; ^

these

were

probably figures

later for the he made which Victory similar to the one found in the German in Naupactus, and which Messenians was of the temple was excavations.^ a golden Upon the summit the dedicated shield, by the Spartans after their victoryover

Athenians

and
a

Argivesat Tanagra at
the

the end

of 457

B.C.

This been the

gives us

date when
so we

temple
an

must

have practically date for

complete, and sculpture ; for

have

approximate

though of
been the added

course

have been alreadyin position, the metopes must of the pedimentalsculptures some might have The

later. the 470

temple

is said

to

have

been

built from

spoilof

Pisatans,conqueredby the Eleans


B.C.
we

probablya
preliminary
to

little before architectural


must

Allowing some
have 460
B.C.

time
as

for the date this the

work,
what

the and

which

we

of assign the sculptui-e well with


we

the

temple ;

very

should

expect from
statement

corresponds style of the


as

work. We the
must
now

return eastern

to

the

of Pausanias

to

designof
and
two

the

Paeonius of the
may
to
a

Alcamenes

pediments being due to in style The similarity respectively.


and
western
'

pediments,both to one another and to the metopes, the actual execution be explainedby assigning sufficiently ing local school of sculptors. The question is whether, allowand for others which the
we

for this consideration such and


as

have
to

noticed,
be
seen

the distance

from

which

pediments were

of colour,it is possible to application design to these two artists. If it is not original the bound
to

attribute

their

we impossible,

are

accept
as an

the
any

statement
an

of

Pausanias, which
author
on

is

as

clear and

definite

the identification of The

passage in work extant

ancient

which

is based.

is that he made about Paeonius only other fact known the Victoryalreadymentioned of Naupactus, for the Messenians mitted be adprobably between 424 and 420 B.C.^ Though it must that in style this work is very different from the pediments,
we

must

remember
his

that

it

is from be
a

the work

artist's

own

hand,

not

only from

design.

It may

of his old
and the

age, after he had


1

fallen under

the influence

of Phidias

It has

indeed

been

suggestedthat
of Pausanias

confusion ; but

of the

acroteria and

pediments
tion introduc-

gave
2

rise to the of Alcamenes.

statement

this does

not

explain the

See below, " 43,

"

See below, " 43

232

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

Attic
not

school,and

if

so

it offers

no

sufficient

proof

that

he

may

have designedthe eastern earlymanhood pediment Alcamenes the case of the temple. With is different. He was He rival of Phidias. made dedicated statues two a pupil and by Thrasybulus after the expulsionof the thirtytyrants in
"
"

in his

403

B.C., and

even

if these

were

the

work

of his

extreme

old

not pediment at Olympia was completed age, and the western until after the building finished in 456 was B.C., we practically

shall be forced
as

to

allow of

Alcamenes of

period

of artistic

activity
must

long as
it
as

that

Ageladas or

we Sophocles. Still, as
a

admit

barely possible that Alcamenes,


Paeonius young of
man,

Lemnian,
he
may

have been known to may have assisted,as quite a

Mende,
in

that

the

design of

the

have had the design of the Olympian pediments, and may After this he western pediment especially assignedto him.
may

have have

attached

himself

to

Phidias

when

he

and

accompanied him back were only designed by


was

to Athens.

Olympia, if the pediStill, ments


came

to

Paeonius

and

Alcamenes,
is difficult
to

and
see

their execution

left to should

local have

it sculptors, needed
an

why
whole

the elder chain

master

of bare
to

be admitted
the reject its

have we possibilities a very produce together improbable case. of Pausanias


to
so

assistant ; and the must just enumerated If


we

evidence

far

as

concerns

Alcamenes,

as credibility

Paeonius is to that
us

is

weakened. seriously that Pausanias involves draw


any

Perhaps
may
so ceivably con-

the

safest be

conclusion

admit

right,but
to

his statement unable


to

many

as improbabilities

make the

inferences

from

Olympian pediments,or about the two he assigns them. to whom sculptors " 31. Calamis. We have alreadyhad occasion to mention Calamis by anticipation, in speaking of the rise of Attic sculpture
"

it either about

when But up to the time of the Persian wars. in their proper place, to consider him and his works we

we

come our

find

of any than in the case tantalising know that his other of the great artists of antiquity. We still greatlyadmired in later times works were even by those all the master-pieces who had before them of Greek sculpture in who comes in its prime and its decadence just ; and a master would be sure to before the period of highestachievement in a peculiar degree, so that his appeal to our appreciation the works, if we still possessed them, would probablybe among

knowledge perhaps

more

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

233

most

of fascinating
we

all that
not

Greek
a

art

has

produced.
which
a even

But
can

fortunately un-

do any

possess

singlework

be

identified with Calamis.^


,

reasonable

as probability

copy

after

Beyond
we

the barest

of catalogue Calamis
as

his

tion Avorks,the only informafrom certain


art

repeatedby Cicero and earlier source, tell us only what we could Quintilianfrom some already have surmised from his date,that he stillhad something of the archaic stiffness and hardness in his style, but less than Canachus such men and Gallon. as however, we Fortunately, and fruitless generalities. not left to such are Lucian, vague in one of his most ideal an interesting passages, is describing the highest excellence of all the statue, which should combine This greatest works known, and so produce a perfectwhole.
these,such
those eclectic notion may
not

possess criticisms. Some

about

is derived

of

in

itself be
more

nothing could
remember
taste.
"

possiblybe
extensive
as

very instructive and

happy
to us,

one,

but
we

when

Lucian's He writes

knowledge
:
"

excellent

critical

follows

Now
as

hand head

the statue see growing under the artist's you may he fits it together after various models. He takes the the Gnidian
not meet

only from

being nude, does


forehead,and
Praxiteles
grace,

goddess,for the rest his requirements. But


of her

of that statue, her


hair

and
as

the

lovelycurve
the

brows, he shall leave

made
too

it ; and he shall

this

and full of melting eyes, yet bright to Praxiteles' design. But keep according and

the round from


too

of the cheeks and

Alcamenes and

front part of the face he shall take the goddess of the Gardens, and the hands and the delicately wrist, shaped
same

the beautiful flow of the

and
of

shall be tapering fingers the whole face and the

after the

model. the

But the outline

of delicacy

cheeks, and the duly


the Lemnian Athena the the

shall be proportionednostril, and

suppliedby

shall supply the way master Phidias, and the same mouth is set in,and the neck, from his Amazon. Then Sosandra and Calamis shall
crown

her with
as

modest

courtesy, and
and 's,
come

her smile shall be the from And

noble

and and

unconscious order

the Sosandra

comely arrangement
the

of her

drapery

shall

Sosandra, except that she shall have her head uncovered. the measure of her age shall be as that of the Gnidian goddess let fix that us too after Praxiteles." ;
-

See note

at end

of this section.

Lucian, Imagg.

v\.

234

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Here
as names

we a

notice,
not

in

the

first

place, that
of three farther go

Calaniis of and
to

is

tioned men-

unworthy
And when Calamis

compeer
we

the

greatest
for and

in

art.

notice Phidias

what

excellences

is
no

we Praxiteles, no

find it is for skill of

preferredeven happilychosen
but

type of feature,
the "nameless

detailed
"

execution,
the have which

for

grace the

of the of

expression and the drapery. We


characteristics
on

are

two

elaborated position comdelicately ^ that these already seen most are prominent in the earlier lines very ascribed to

the

statues

the seemed

Athenian
to
a

Attic that

artists

be

and that Acropolis, along the progressing

perfectionsuch as that and grace of the find the delicacy Calamis. we Then, again, styleof Calamis contrasted by other authors with the grandeur and majesty of Phidias and Polyclitus, to illustrate the similar
would lead
to

contrast I

that the

Lysias and Isocrates. When and severity that contributes simplicity


between is part of indications
we a

we

remember the

to art

grandeur
we

of Phidias
see

Doric in the

influence

on

Attic

of which

many infer that of the

pure

may Attic

see

fifth century, it is hardly rash to the most in Calamis development perfect


we

style,as
as we

have
trace

seen

it

growing
course

in the in the

Acropolisstatues, and
over-elaboration of in the conventional So far the As
art to
we

shall

its further
at
a

Callimachus,-and

even

much

later time

have

grace of the neo-Attic reliefs.^ of rather with an appreciation been concerned than have with
no

of Calamis his
we origin

facts about

his life and there

works.
seems

certain

statement, but

of his works enough evidence in what we know the common an to justify opinion that he was to his date, our only exact information is that commission from Hiero of which Syracuse, in
467
B.C.
was

and

his school
As

Athenian. he
not

accepted a
dedicated of have
is

until after that Alexikakos dedicated

death prince's
the

statue
to

Apollo
been

by

hand

of

Calamis

is said

after the great plague in 430 B.C. which should in an artistic activity impossible
to
cover

There last

nothing long enough


at

both

dates, even
must

earlier Calamis But


the

allowing for already have been


we

the
an

fact that artist of Calamis

the

repute.

other

facts

which

know which of his

themselves Persian
1

in easily
and

the

period
2

group the follows immediately

about

wars,

the dedication

Apollo

is
3

paralleled by
gee

"

23.

See " 38.

" 77.

HI

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

235

corresponding Heracles by Ageladas of have been still living cannot at the beginArgos, who certainly ning of the Peloponnesian war have no decisive so we ; and evidence whether Calamis lived beyond the middle of the fifth active we safelyregard the most century ; in any case may
a

the

dedication

of

period
450
B.C.

of

his

life

as

between falling the list of

the

Persian

wars

and

When
once

we

turn

to

consider

his
one

works,

we

are

at

by his great versatility ; but and absent the athletic, conspicuously


"

struck

class of statue

is

gods he made Zeus Ammon Dionysus, (the last and is probably to Aphrodite, who Among
Sosandra, his
most

structi exception is inof Apollo, Hermes, statues for Pindar), Nike, Asclepius,

this

be

identified
an

with

the

famous

work.

He
with

also made
two
more

(or Fury)
and
not statues

in Athens

matched (later Alcmena


or

Erinnys by Scopas),
these,

of the heroines made


us

and

Hermione

; and

being

for the

public
bent
a

requirements,may religious
the artist's made
own

probably
Another

show

of

inclinations. the the

work
in

of his

Avas

dedication
their

by

people boys

of

Agrigentum
and

after Sicily of

victoryover
;

Phoenician of
in
presented re-

Libyan

inhabitants
in

Motye
made with

this consisted
was

Calamis

as or prayer is also said to have

and thanksgiving,
several

bronze.

horses

and for

chariots,
Hiero of of

the including

Syracuse.
horses which and in
;

Ovid
was

jockeys made He famous for his was especially and Propertiusselect this as the
two most

horses

rendering
one

thing for

he

admired.

He

worked

in

marble, in bronze,

gold and ivory,and one of his Apollos was on a colossal 45 feet high. Thus scale, we see that,although his stylewas and grace, rather probably a perfectexpositionof Attic delicacy than remarkable for originality the introduction of new and or a stronger elements, he kept in no narrow groove, but was of Greek worthy representative as it might have sculpture been, j but for the bolder conceptions and more that; tendencies severe
we see

in his
A

contemporaries.
statue
some

Note. has been

"

certain

(the so-called Apollo

on

the

Omphalos,
But the
to

see

" 43)

attributed in favour
to

by

high

authorities

to

Calamis.
on

external almost classical lead


us

evidence

of this

attribution

is admitted

all sides

be

worthless,and authorities, as to accejit it.


woidd style

it is

based of course merely a preconception, upon Avhat the style of Calamis is likely to be, that can tliercforc record
to

I may lead me

that

expect

statue

preconception as to his to extremelyunlike, in all respects,


my
own

236 tliis statue have


to

A that

HANDBOOK
has been real

OF attributed

GREEK
to

SCULPTURE
Of
course

CHAP.

Ill

him.

a as long as any neither the other. be set against Certainly may basis for any further inferences.

yieldto
one

evidence,but

it is

would oijinion of question ceptions, preconmust be used


as

this

the style of Calamis, and even reflecting Griophorus and the Sosandra, has and the gi-oundthat the Hermes at been Duhn others on rejected by von by coins to have been beardless ; and there is nothing Tanagra is shown The able, characteristic about the other figiu-e. style, being Attic,is not unsuitThe though rather too archaic to be derived from such famous works. if it be traceable to the Wilton of a Hermes House statue even Griophorus, of but little value for archaistic reproduction, is a conventional same source, style. The altar

quoted by
of his

Overbeck

as

two reproducing

works,

the Hermes

"
meet

32.
an

Myron.

"

In

Myron
was

even

more

than the rank

in

Calamis voice

we

artist who stand

declared very

by

common

of

to antiquity

in the

foremost

His

name

is

again and
reduced

and Praxiteles,Polyclitus,
case we we are

again Lysippus.

coupled with
And

sculptors. among those of Phidias,

not
no

to

quotingthe
the hand
most

in his fortunately of a Lucian. even opinion of

If

have

from original of his


our

Myron,

we so

at
we

least
are

possess copiesof some in a position to form Let take


us our

famous

works, and
his in other

follow the
start

opinionas to alreadyadopted jDrinciple


what is certain. The

styleat first hand.


cases,

and

from

Myron's Discobolus could few more a possessed accuracy ; if only we would ancient works, the field for conjecture
Lucian of he calls it for the and
"

description given by hardly be improved on for


such be down that of descriptions narrowed; greatly
into the

the
;

who disc-thrower,

is bent the

position
the

throw

turning
up
are

towards
one

hand

holds
as

disc,

all but

kneelingon

knee, he
throw."

seems

if he
one

would of the

himself straighten copiesthat many

at the

If

we

look at
our

preservedof
and
even

this statue,

pression first im-

of"^ A work incredulity. and even technical skill, such extraordinary placed in a most if to increase the difficulties presented distorted attitude,^ as well seem at first sight most unlikelyto to the artist, may was be the product of the periodof transition when sculpture is of astonishment of archaic stiff'ness, graduallyfreeingitself from the trammels was of technical skill which and approaching that perfection essential for its highestdevelopment. Yet the facts are fectly perclear
;

the

identification is before somewhat

certain

one,

and

even

the

periodof Myron,
^

uncertain,has been fixed by


"

"Distortum

et elaboratum."

Quiutil,ii. 13, 10.

238

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Acropolis,and dating from of Myron's son and pupil about 450 B.C., which bears the name Thus it is proved that Myron, as well Lycius as the sculptor.^ in the periodbetween the Persian have worked Calamis, must as
an

inscribed

basis,found

on

the.

wars

and

the middle

of the fifth century.


as

We
for

must, then, accept


an

the date of this work its character.

and look certain,


must

explanationof
that
most

In the first placewe

remember

of

copieswith which we are familiar belong to a much later the freshness and vigour of the and have toned down period, into a comparativelycommonplace character ; for style original the only trustworthycopy is that in the well as for position as Lancelotti ^ in Rome, and here we Palazzo see a dryness and
the definition of that reminds For of the muscles, in the rendering work, especially
us

most

of strongly
even

the

Attic

Tyrannicides (see
we

I 23).

the the

vigour and
same

violence of the action

may

also compare the direct

work, and thus Myron finds his placeas of Critius and successor Nesiotes,and the greatest exponent of the athletic Attic school,justas Calamis represents
what
compare
as we

may

call the

gracefulAttic
with

school.

But find

when

we

the Discobolus
as a

this earlier For the

work,

we

a contrast

well

resemblance. Harmodius

forward
a as

charge of

and the

self-contained concentrated

poiseof
within

splendid and impulsive there is substituted Aristogiton, whole which holds, figure,
power of action.
in which in

it were,

itself the

the

is alreadyin Tyrannicides
is not
moment.
so

much The

in

the

full energy choice of subject as is


in represented

The the

contrast

choice of

of
rest

Discobolus

the

moment

that
to

precedesthe throw, and every the utmost, ready to contribute


much
we we

muscle

of his

body

is strained

However earlier

may
must

admire

its part to the final effort. the impulsive vigour of the

acknowledge that Myron had a truer than the earlier artists, instinct for what is fitting to sculpture but at in that the subjecthe chose was not in violent motion He may, indeed,show rest, though the rest is but momentary.
work,
us on

the

one

hand

an

exaggeratedreaction
hand,
we see we

againstarchaic
the find in Greek

but, on stiffness,

the other

here

most^skitfii

of that preservation

which avrdpKeia

always

sculpture of

the

and self-sufficient,
^ ^

period; the statue is self-centred and its meaning does not depend on any exterior
best
AeXrtoj', 1889, p. 179. 'ApxaioXoyiKov
Palazzo Massimi alle Coloune
"

Formerly

in the

so

in earlier text-books.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

239

object, nor,
to

as

often in the next

on century and later,

its relation

the spectator. So far we have


; but
we as

been
at

concerned least
one

with other

only one
extant

of

Myron's
has

statues

have

work
a

which

been of

identified

and his,
or

tradition givesus literary less


of about trustworthy,

good

deal

information, more
He
was a

his life and frontiers of

works.

native

Eleutherae

on

the

Boeotia,but he is often called an Athenian ; he lived in Athens, to which and worked cityhis pupils also belonged.
It is stated
a

Attica and

that

Myron
of

as

well

as

pupil
a

of

such

relation

Ageladas Argos. to Ageladaswere


the The

If in

was Polyclitus of case Polyclitus i t would impossible,^ impair

Phidias

and

the

greatlythe authorityof
two

statement

in the due
to
a

case

of the other under the the


some

artists.

story may

be

compiler
to

Sicyonian or Argive influence,who of the earlyArgive school continuity


greatest artists of other
historical basis. of this influence We
on

wished and

insist

on on

its influence without the

cities.
seen

But
and

it is not

have Attic

shall

see

importance

sculptureof the
of

apart from
for
a

the story about

fifth century. But Ageladas,there is no clear evidence

personal connection
the
with originality

Myron
seem

with
to

an

Argive
colour athletic
to

master.

Though
view,
he

his athletic tendencies

lend

such

which

he

treated

the character

of his

and style,

all prefers,

stamp

the type of face and his work Attic. as essentially

subjects, which figure


His lithe

and
with

muscular

but

the solid and


similar
contrast

athlete contrasts most lightly-built strongly even and there heavy forms of a Polyclitus,
in the

is

head

between and

the the

delicate oval
square

and

pointed
massive
statues

chin

of the

Attic

master

form

and

jaw of the Argive type.


is best

written
to have

upon been
runner soon

in athletic Myron's originality exemplified by his Ladas, which, from the epigrams it and the fame it conferred on its subject, seems

one

of the
of

most

famous the

the first
and

his

day, won
the

antiquity.Ladas, long foot-race at Olympia,


Myron's
statue

of all

died

aftei from

effects.

is said

to

have

in every limb given living expression of victory, and the breathless tension effort cost of this

to the

tion eager expectaof the athlete whose


be
content
to

supreme
no more

him
work

his life.
than

We
we

must
are

know About

what
many

thus have

told. been

another

of his works

very
1

epigrams
and 41.

written,

See

"" 24

240

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

in

which, however, tell


than
once

iis

more

of the

ingenuity of
is the

the

writers

of the statue in

they

celebrate.

This

bronze

heifer,
is said

to

to Rome. Athens, and later moved and was have been marvellously life-like,

This animal
even more

famous

than We
that

the

horses of

Myron's contemporary
the other
we one

Calamis.
extant

have is
to

still to consider

Avork of

Myron
with

say, the
case

of which

possess
not
so

well authenticated

copies.
the

The

here, however, is

Discobolus.

Among

the

works the that have


vase

of

simple as it is Myron mentioned


Athena and
"

by
on

Pliny is a satyr in wonder at identical with almost certainly


the
a

flutes and of Athena

group

Marsyas

at Acropolis

Athens. and
a

We

of repetitions with relief ; ^


at
a

coin,a

vase,
a

marble
statue

this group on and w'ith the has been bronze


a

help of

these
as

marble

in the the

Lateran

Rome

identified

the

of Marsj'^as

and group,^
out

smaller

in

the British

Museum,

though worked
same

in the

styleof
the

later

period,reproduces the

myth, them invented the flutes, but threw Athena on finding away how her face ; they were they disfigured pickedup by Marsyas, had the rashness to challenge after to who, learning play them, and was flayedfor his presumption. The Apollo and his lyre, legend is a favourite one in art, as symbolisingin yet another
type.
form the contest between Greece
and

According to

barbarism.

The

moment

chosen

the

cing by Myron is characteristic. The satyr Marsyas, advanis suddenly confronted to pick up the discarded flutes, by is shown by his positionand the goddess,and his surprise muscle
as

strain of every
start
:
"

his advance

is

changed to

backward

ws

ore

Tts

re

OpaKovra

I8wv

iraXivoptros air"(rTrj.
this start that is here

It is the chosen

momentary

pause

which

follows

by Myron, just as in the Discobolus he has chosen the that Then, precedes the violent motion. momentary pause
since the motion
to
was

from
in

contain

the

action
is the
must

seemed moment within,the preceding itself ; here, since the impulse comes that shows the
that

from
most
1

without, it

succeedingmoment
we

its result is

fully. Nor
Called
Athens A

that forget formerly in


is

Marsyas

only one
now

in the
^

the Finlay vase, because National Museum.


copy, of the head de I'ecole/rangaise

historian's collection ;

better

only,
Rome,

et published in Melanges d'archeologie

d'histoire de

X.

ii.

Fio.

51.-Copy

after statue

of

Marsyas, by Myron

(Rome,

Lateran).

242

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

group ; of the compositionand balance of this group best form a notion by looking at the central group of we may formed the west pediment of the Parthenon,^ which is certainly

figureof

on recur

the

same we

lines

"

resemblance

to

which

we

shall have

to

when Of other
; but

deal with works of these Athena hand.


as

the later work.


we

Myron
are some

know

little

more

than
a

the

names

even

indication.

Except
of
no

Hecate female
arc

at

Aegina
from his

and his

in

statue

hear groups, we Statues of Apollo and


two
as a

Dionysus

among

works,
We may

well
contrast

Heracles. of Calamis

of Zeus, Athena, group and Hermione with the Alcmena

and

Myron's

choice

of

subjectsfrom

the

heroic

cycle:

his most famous works were Erechtheus, Heracles,and among Perseus. The Erechtheus, in particular, is quoted by Pausanias
as

the

most

remarkable does
not

of all mention We well

enough,he
where from
he

Myron's works, though, curiously of Athens, it in his description


hear also of several athlete
as

says

it stood. ^
a

statues

his

hand,

dog

as

the

famous

and heifer,
so

certain
and
so

of pristae,^

which

the

that we can plausible Finally, Myron was one of the most and pieces of plate chiselled by of Roman The material
*

are interpretations only ignore them as

various

evidence
toreutae

for his art. of

famous him
Avere

antiquity, noisseurs prized by the con-

times. used
;

by Myron
and

bronze exclusively composition,not


must most

been almost to have appears he is recorded to have used the Delian

the

allow

for this fact in

Aeginetan,preferredby our! his style. For style, considering

Polyclitus. We

trustworthyevidence is to be found in the best copiesof! and the Marsyas, which agree very well with one! the Discobolus another. But also quote the opinions of classical we may with based on a wider acquaintance authorities, Myron's works. which tell us that they were To pass over mere platitudes, all] advanced! far archaic that but free from so hardness, or they were
^

As

in

Carrey'sdrawing
varies, and
of tlie and would it be
one

and

otlier

evidence.
to decide

The
liow

Athena

on

the

various! another!

copiesof
^

this group

it is hard

she

was

placed. originally

Unless of
a

statue it
were ^

Pandion,
different been

Eponymi, i. 5, 2. probably have

Pansanias mentioned

there mentions

Myron's Erechtheus, ifl players at


Perseus in
see-saw.
a

work. translated

It

has

sea-beasts,sawyers,
associated with the

and infant

Asj

carpenters they
Pausanias'
*

have

been

emend Others to imply a statue of him. seems description this For only apparent exception is a ^oavov of Hecate. Introduction (b). Perhaps it was gold and ivory ; cf. S. Q, 539, note. The

; group to "pyctas.'

butj
see|

word

Ill

THE
"

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

243

hesitate to call them beautiful," or mere of his name Avith those of other artists such as conjunctions
otic

that

need

not

and Lysippus, rhidias, Praxiteles, we Polyclitus, life of his statues is what all the
most

find that the

later winters. impressed

epigramson he animas ferarumque aere paene hominum comprehenderat." criticism The quotedby Plinyis fuller; he says Myron was in realism;the first to attain variety he was versatile in more his art, Polyclitus studious of symmetry. more Yet Myron concerned himself only with the body, and did not express
"

the

keynoteof

This is his heifer ; Petronius says


"

mental

In feelings.
on

the

of hair, too, he rendering

made

no

archaic models."^ cobolus Quintilian, too, quotes the Disof art Avork to be as a admired for the originality chiefly and difficulty of the subject, and adds that any one who found fault with its studied contortion would thereby himself stultify
as

advance

an

art

critic.
of these criticismsare

Most

borne fully

Myron
t he

Avhich

Ave

possess.

In the treatment

the Avorks of of hair, for example,


out

by

head of the Lancelotti Discobolus shoAvs a conventional archaic treatment. Even the statement that he did not express mental is not inconsistent Avith the life-like and reality feelings vigour of his works. The contrast implied is with the subtle expressions
i

nf

or passion

emotion that mark

those great embodiments of an Phidias and Polyclitus. The distinguishing feature of Myron's work is the fulness of physical and its varied, sometimes life, In him Ave see complete the but material the mastery is not yet so easy mastery ; to become unconscious ; it is rather insisted as on, and sometimes the difficulty of the task is purposely even that the increased, skillto overcome it may also be emphasised.Such a tendency in a late stage of artistic development be disastrous a may
even over

the fourth century,or eveji Avith ideal character that Avere due to

in bronze. exaggerated, expression

earlyperiodit merelyshows the first exuberance of freedom from the trammels of archaic stiffness, Avhen every neAV artistic attainment is a trophyto celebrate the o f skill over the stubborn material with victory the sculptor's Avhich he has to contend.
symptom;
et in

but

in this

Note, on Plin. xxxiv. 58 (.S". Q. 533) mimerosior in arte "" The symmetria diligentior. of this interpretation
"

quam much

Polyclitus disputed

'

See note at end

ol section.

244

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the translation of the word "numerodepends on two things firstly, and the whether to ment statewe secondly, astonishing accept try explain of studious of the MS. that was more reading symmetry tlian Myron emend make the to it or so as mean Polyclitus, opposite. The iirst exactly second. of these also depends to some the extent on passage sior" ;
"

It is very difficult for any who one which all Polyclitus, uphold symmetry
to believe

lias read
as

the
most

ancient

criticisms

on

his

one

that

in

conventional the
same

criticism

like

teristic, characdistinguishing there is this of Pliny's

opinion. If so, the easiest emendation is to omit et insertion by a scribe is easy to explain. Then made ad the who his works of Polyclitus, paene accordance is contrasted with This is in of exemplum," Myron's variety pose. M'ith Pliny's elsewhere. The very comparison of the word use numerosus numerosior" artist in to an occurs xxxv. diligentior 130, referring quam who much work but few sjient pictures. upon anything but
of repetition with Sillig : its rigid symmetry
a
" "
"

"

33.

Pythagoras is

sculptorof
form

whose
any

style and
estimate. Nor have

ments attainWe
on

it is possess no the other and

difficult to peculiarly

exact

certain copy of any work hand, so clear indications


as

of his.^ of his

we,

artistic
nor are so

associations

tendencies

in of
not

the

case

of

Calamis,
Yet
we

suggestive
that

of descriptions
at

any

his Avorks.

told
a

he

surpassedMyron,but Delphi,
aim
at
"

also in

only by a certain statue of the rendering of hair, and


muscles
; and

pancratiast
care

in

the

execution
to
Ave

of veins and

that he

was

the first artist


statements
some

rhythm

and

symmetry."

Beyond

these

little to go upon except the list of his works and information his master and his nationality.This to as have
been point has fortunately at Olympia on the base which

last

cleared
of
one

up

by

an

found inscription famous

of his Thus

most

works,

in

he calls himself

Samian.

the mistake

is corrected

by

which
a

Plinyand

others

Pythagoras of Ehegium distinguish


same name.

ably family was probto the Samian exiles who came Ehegium and among after 496 B.C., and he seems Messina soon throughout his career scribed to have to call himself a Samian, though he is depreferred is said His master authorities. of Ehegium by most as
from Samian artist of the
His
to

have

been

Clearchus
accounts
^

of
;

Ehegium, of
but the
most

Avhom

we

have

somewhat this Avork


of

inconsistent Clearchus
^

probableattaches
his
;
see

to

the
have

Spartan school,and
some

only
note

recorded (a)
at

Tliough we

not

improbable

ones

end

this

section.
^

to

See note [b)at end of this section,on artistic contests. with Clearchus See " 24. was merely an invention Possiblythe connection with into relation the earlyRhegiue famous master bring the most Eheginc

sculptor.

246

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
at

chap.

if

we

are

to

identify Pj^thagoras'lame
"

man

seems

to

make
with

even

those

that the

see

him
" -

feel the

who Syracuse, pain of his

wound,"

the

subjectof

epigram

' '

Ulysses' foe, peer, beyond all Greeks my The sculptor that recalls me to my pain ;
After In the cave, bronze lasting the sore, the weary woe. I suffer all again."

The

identification, however, though probable, is


gems absence
to

not
a

certain ; still less can two Philoctetes be taken, in the

that

represent
notion

quite limping

of all other

monumental

of Pythaground our goras' of style. only representation any god by Pythagoras of which we have record is an the Apollo ti^ansfixing This very serpent with his arrows." subject appears upon coins of Croton about half a century later, the god and the snake being placed one each side of a large tripod which on takes up the centre of the field. But althoughwe allow may that the coin engraver may have had in his mind the group by his artistic would treatment be pendent indePythagoras, practically the would be composition prescribedby the shape of ; the field and here also by the prominent coin-type, the tripod, while the execution would be that of the coin engraver's own day.
as a on

evidence,

basis

which

The

"

Such
as same

are

the meagre of whose

results of

our

criticism of the evidence

to

Pythagoras. Indeed, there


eminence
to

is know

hardly
so

Avork

we

any artist of little. It would

the be

amplifythis little by conjectures; but it seems more deduce it from to what to do know profitable try of we really this sculptor. It seems have already as we clear, a contemporary, seen, that he was perhaps a rather older contemporary, of Calamis and Myron. Yet he seems advanced to have beyond them in The list of his works shows most prominently some that ways. he was above all a sculptor of athletes ; and this fact tends to confirm the view that he fell under the Peloponnesian influence home at Rhegium, instead of clinging to prevalentin his new
easy the Ionic traditions
to

of his

native

island

of

Samos.

But

he

certainly seems,
which The
we

judge from
to

possess,

have

the scanty criticisms of his work been an artist of marked originality. attributed
to

technical

improvements

him

seem

to

indicate

,Ti

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

247
traces

him

as

more

than

any

other the

man

to remove to

the last

of

archaic stiftness and


most

convention, and
Greek
even

prepare
and

productsof perfect
seems

sculpture ;
see

the way for the his " lame man,

who

to

make hoAv

those that

him

feel the

pain of

his

the power of expression. completelyhe possessed and o-u/A/xeTpta that are attributed the pu^/xos Finally, careful explanation. Symmetry, a to his work require more and relations of different parts careful study of the proportions of athletes ; suitable to a sculptor of the body, seems peculiarly but rhythm is a word of which it is not easy to catch the exact meaning.^ I think its nearest Englishequivalentin this

wound," shows

"

"

sense

is,a
the

usage of the word ; that another and to of all parts, in relation to one treatment In the definite and harmonious system. whole, after some
is
"

in style,"

the

more

technical

advance and

from

archaic
the

stiffness and

convention

to

the

freedom

of perfection One external


had

his share. in the

had

each artist period, nearly to approachedmore finest had

had

contributed
to nature

truth

forms, another
refined the

filled the whole

body

with

had of the face, another expression have to studied grace of detail and of composition. It seems and of Pythagoras to harmonise function the especial been geneity unite all these improvements, and so to give a unity and homooften have of style to the whole work, such as may with one too closely aspect of occupied escaped those who were artistic development.

another life,

Note itself I have


rest to
so

{a).
"

One

identification conjectural
so

of

work but

of
as

probableand
hesitated

consistent
to

^vith external it in than the


"

evidence
;

Pythagoras is in to his stylethat


to

whether

insert

the

text

it seemed The

be

cluded ex-

by
on

the rule I have


more

tried to follow,of
kno^vn

admittingnothing tliat does


available.

not

some

definite evidence

is here

attribution

have numerous by Pythagoras of a statue Athens at the (the Omx^halos" Apollo on survived, includingthe so-called does not belong) and the "Choiseul-Gouffier" Omphalos found near it certainly (see" 43), and the identification of it as the Apollo in the British Museum boxer Euthynnis,was suggestedby Dr. AValdstein,J. H. S. i. p. 168. Note with. between

copies of it that

(6).
"

The
are

Some the

stories of artistic competitions are somewhat based on rhetorical fictions, doubtless mere

difficult to
the

deal

comparisons

styleof the artists concerned made by later critics ; thus they are between Homer contest tale of tlic poetical value than the absurd of no more like those actual artistic the other and Hesiod. hand, But, on competitions, in be not work is to are that arc often held still when performed, any great evidence that the best and have themselves we they possible improbable ;
were

held, since

Paeonius

of Mende

chronicles,upon

the

of pedestal

his

Victory.

'

See note

(c)at

end

of section.

248 his

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE acroteria.

chap.

victory in the competitionof designs for to this reference to Myron and Pythagoras,we for a statue and Alcamenes of Phidias

temple
have of

In addition the
petition com-

among

others

Athena,
may
case

of Alcamenes

and

Agoracritusin
in

making
Amazon

an

Aphrodite, and Ephesus.


must

the

contest

of various

making

an

for

Some

of these in each

upon if no

fact ; but

the evidence

be

weighed

sculptors possiblybe based separately. Even


in
a more or

competitiontook rhetorical form the judgment


so
are

the place,

often preserve stories may of ancient critics as to works

less

we

have

lost,and

of value
on (c),

to us.

Note

irpwTOv has to sculpture,

doKovvTa

in the passage the meaning of the word "Ilvdayipav pvd/xbs /cat earoxdaOat." Rhythm, as here applied avp^fjLeTplas pvd/j.ou
"

usually been

usage

of the

metaphor
different

word to express is transferred from


the usage

explained as in some regularand harmonious


one

derived from the way But when motion. a under totally considerably. It is far with other things more
a

art

to

another, exercised

conditions, the

possibleapplications \a.rj
of the word Avord is in here connection
we

safer to observe of

comparable to easily
cup, style. The
a

sculptiu'e ; and
same

at

once

find
we can

clue.

Of

clothes,
it

the of letters,

used,

where

only

translate that

members

meaning is a system or of art or any series of connected of any work the whole. with all the others, and with harmonises
first to aim
at consciously
a

tendency,carried

out

in all the

parts or
each the

so objects,

Pythagoras was

consistent

style.
best
to

34.

Phidias.

"

It

will

be

state

at

once our even

that
museums

the

I greatestof all Greek

in is not represented sculptors his


own

;by any certain adequate copy


other

from original

hand,

nor

by
on

an

hand,
in
;

works. of any of his well-known his life and to information as our vague
or

But,
works

the
siderable con-

is

though often quantity,


we all,

in contradictoiy works which

its

nature

and, above

still possess his immediate

many

were

i executed certainly

under

I have some his designs ; and thus we those great statues in reconstructing

if not after supervision, material to aid our tion imaginawhich


were

acknowledgedto
We do
not

be the

of products highest
exact

Greek

universally sculpture.
birth,but the

know

the

year

of Phidias'

periodof
a

his artistic old have his

bald-headed
must

with the fact that he was activity, together to show in 438 B.C. seem man (seebelow),
been

that he

born

about

the

beginningof

the fifth

century.
events

Thus
two

of the
the

remember later
at

news

up with the stirring Persian invasions ; he would be old enough to of the victory at Marathon ; and ten years

youth would

be taken

he, like Aeschylus, may


and
Plataea

well have
he
was

taken

part in the battles


to

Salamis The

of which
career

later
we

celebrate
any

the

issue.

first fact in his


the

of which
^

have

record similar
end of

is that he became
1

pupilof Ageladas
he
was

of

Argos.

The

As

to the

statement

that

also

pupil of Hegias, see

note

(a) at

this section.

Ill

TIIK

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

249

stories about

the

relation

of

Myron,

and

even

Polyclitus/to

in any case it Ageladas may cast doubt on this statement ; but probably represents a trustworthytradition as to the influence of Argive art upon Attic in the fifth century. We also are told that Phidias was at first a painter perhaps ; and we may the influence of his earlytraining in the admirable trace pictorial compositionshown by many of the works of which he superintended

the Some
attributed
was

design.
attributed
to

of the works
to

Phidias

may

be

confidently

made

his earlier years. An Athena of gold and ivory for Pellene in Achaea before his activity in Athens At

and

Plataea.

Delphi
the Phidias
see

was

hand, dedicated
of 438 been

by
Now

Athenians
was

of statues from group from the tithe of the

his

spoil

Marathon. B.C.,
as we

still in full artistic vigour in


so

shall

below;

he

is not

which employed upon a commission eminence fiftyyears earlier. It has been conjectured with that this Delphian trophy was erected by great probability Cimon
to commemorate
seems

have to likely impliesacknowledged

Miltiades Athena Such


been

to

have

his father's prowess at Marathon, for been the central figure ; with him stood heroes of legendary of statues, we know aggregations
ten

and groups,

and Apollo,
or

of the

Athens.^
to have

rather

of the school of Argos upon customary productions


so we

similar the time of his

and occasions, before Phidias

had It is

well attribute may freed himself from

this work the

to

tradition
works

Argive school.
he made

for the which

probably the earliest of the Athenians during the period of His best began about 470 B.C.
of

which

Cimon's
known

dominance prework in

of this time

was

the colossal Athena^


at Acropolis statue

bronze The
was

which

stood

the

open

on

the

Athens.

only artistic

fact

recorded

about
with

this

is that its shield of

later embossed

by Mys
work
1

the battle
;

of Parrhasius designs

Lapiths and Centaurs after the of Phidias' earlier perhaps the severity
who
were

the

seemed,
Robert

to those
that

familiar with
not

the

rich

decoraSee

contends

could Polyclitus

have

been

Ageladas'pupil.
It has been
saw

"

41.
^

Only

seven were

of these

are

"eponymous"
the three later

tribe

heroes.

suggested
in their

that three

replaced by

kings whom
must

Pausanias

places.
sou's
^

In confirmation
soon

of the above

date, it

be remembered

that the disgrace

of Miltiades

and

made such a group impossibleuntil time and his of Atlienians. only las glory in the memory The title "promachos" sometimes given to it rests only on poor authority, is likelyto give rise to a misconception, if it does not itself arise from one. influence had left

after Marathon

250

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

tion of his later statues, to the exact We do not know views


it
was

require some
dimensions

additional of the

ornament.

statue, but

the that the of


off

of the

coins seem to show on represented Acropolis large enough to stand up conspicuously among surrounded the
it ; Pausanias

buildingsthat
the helmet and Sunium
; and

point

of the

spear

says that the could be seen

crest

from

shows of this statement althoughthe exaggeration it in no way his failure to realise the geographical conditions, and size of the statue impairsthe inference as to the position have stood upThe goddessmust familiar. with which he was right, which the of the her right arm point resting on spear, this know But beyond her head.^ we no details, shone above there sufficient data for the identification of a copy of are nor \ This Athena, like works. extant this colossal Athena among been have to at the group Delphi, is said by Pausanias from the tithe of the spoils of Marathon dedicated ; other authorities state in any
if
our case

that

it

was

memorial

of the
some

Persian

wars

it cannot
as

have

been

erected until

years later, established. Athens also be

inferences
was

to the date

of Phidias' birth the artist the

are

It
to

natural

enough
a

that

employed by
should

commemorate

her victories
to make statue

over

Persians

commissioned from
we

of Athena

Areia for the At

their have

share

of

the

seen,

Phidias

spoilsof Marathon. had already made an

Plataeans, Pellene, as
of

Athena

gold

and

of ivory,and in this Plataean work he had an opportunity of his patron making yet another study for his final embodiment this time he was working on a colossal scale, goddess ; and
1

at

probablethat this statue was Constantinople. If so, it may


It is

later removed well be

to the

Forum the

of Constantine bronze statue


a.d.

identical

with
the mob in S.

described
H. Stuart

by Nicetas, who

records

its destruction 101

by
;

in 1203

(see

Q.) This statue to the feet,was 30 feet high ; its robe reached gathered togetherin several was with It and had gorgon's head on the a an was aegis tightly girded. places, of and and was a breast ; the neck surpassingdelight. sight was long exposed, and whole frame stood and the The well-jointed.The veins was supple out, beneath it showed the forehead the back fastened and at hair was on ; plaited the hand left The rendered. and the supported was beautifully helmet, the towards the the stretched folds of dress south, kept the right, gathered ; of her gaze. direction also the and turned in the same head direction, slightly
Jones, Selected Passages, etc., No.
not The spear Otherwise and the shield must

have

been

left behind The main set up

when

the

statue

was

moved.
the

description
is that been
us

identification is said
to

the the

may Athena

apply.
by

in difficulty in the Forum

accepting

Phidias

of Constantine

have

mistake, it makes
first-rate evidence

Q. 690). Though this may be a gold and ivory one (.S'. as hesitate in acceptingthe description given by Nicetas
one

concerning

of the

best

known

works

of Phidias.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"
content

480-400

B.C.

251

though
was

he

was

obligedto
of with the

himself
;

with

cheaper sub- j
Athena
"

stitutes for of
The
we

the richest

all materials
face and

the

Plataean

gildedwood, earlycareer
not

hands

of Pentelic
to

marble.

'

of Phidias

is

not

difficult
But
more

trace, though
as

do

years our And before


to

it. details about many fuller and is at once information


know
we once

to

his later

contradictory.
far
as

consider

the works
as

of this
to

time, it will be best


so life,

disposeat

of the evidence of his


that
two

his

it

cerns con-

facts

the sequence for certain


"

greatest statues.
for
some

We time

know
at

three

he

worked

Olympia,
;

where
had

he made

the

great statue
his

of the

Olympian

Zeus

that he
under
^

at Athens the chief direction of all the artistic activity


was

who Pericles, he made his Parthenos Athens

other
that

and that duringthis time friend, personal work, the Athena great chryselephantine

\
^

; and

he fell into

more

or

less serious trouble

at

owing to accusations made and political opponents, of peculation


himself
are

against him
of So

by

Pericles'

in representing sacrilege

and

Pericles

on

Athena's

shield.

far all documents

accord ; but when we try to establish the chronology, met of these various events, we are absolute and relative, by a
in
mass

of confusions Three orders evidence

and

contradictions. have
in been

of sequence
to

maintained, and there


of each.

is

some

be

quoted
was

favour
in

It may
438

be
B.C.,

supposed (1) that


when
to

Phidias Parthenos

worked

Athens

until he the
to

the

Athena and

dedicated,that
B.C.

then

went

Olympia the Olympian Zeus,


was

devoted
and

438-432 that in in

to

making
Plutarch
he

statue

of

432

he

returned

Athens,
^

put

on

and trial,

died

as prison,

says ;
was

or

(2)
to at

that

he worked
to

in Athens

till 438
or

B.C., that
statue to went

tried and himself

condemned

banishment,
that he then others
^

voluntarilyexiled
the of

Olympia, and Olympia, or,


work
1

made
was

Zeus, and died


there
on a

as

say,

put
he

death
to

charge
his
446

of embezzlement under
So K.
This

or

(3)

that

Olympia
from

after

Cimon

at

Athens, stayed there


version is

until about

0. Miiller.
350 is
B.C.

Plutarch's

probably derived

Ephorus, who

lived about
^

the story given by the Scholiast to Aristophanes, Pax, 605, practically restored is convincingly by SchoU, (280 B.C.). This Scholium Munich [leg. 1888, i. p. 20 ; he punctuates before iirl ZKvdodiJopov Sitzttngsberichte, consists of two Then the whole : (1) quotationsfrom Philochorus Tlvdoddipov]. from Philochonis

438
in

B.C.

Dedication Then

of the

decree,etc.

connectingthe

two,

exile ; (2) 432 statue ; Phidias' trial and B.C. Megariau Scholiast that Aristophaneswas wrong goes on to remark them. six years' interval between since there was

252

HANDBOOK

OE

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

hi

B.C., when

he

was

recalled he
never

to

and Pericles, Between little

that

charge of the left Athens again,but


of these

take

work

under

died

there,
is

perhaps in prisonafter
the
so difference,
a

his arrest.^

first and far


man as

second
we are

there possibilities concerned ; though it seems clear himself


one

improbable that
of embezzlement would well We
at statue

who

failed to

of

charge
ivory
of the

and
once aware

in sacrilege

making

gold

and

be

might

be

employed to make of the purely political nature


they, far
a

another, the Eleans


from

charge.
)ecial

know, however, that


studio
as

disgracing

^hidias, preserved his


to privileges

his

preciousrelic,and gave descendants, who were employed as


great
on

to ipai8pvvTal

look

after his insists


438

statue.

But

the

argument
the

of the

who Scholiast, Phidias


in

the

long

interval between

trial of
432
seems no

B.C., and
to

in the Megarian decree B.C., and from Philochorus, bases his assertion on quotations all other evidence. third There

outweigh
statue
us was

is, however,

historical

objectionagainstthe
made before for

Olympian
evidence that likely

the

that the hypothesis, Athenian if direct ; only,


seems

fail

it the priority of either, deciding


artist would

less

the Athenian the

have

been

called to

for all Greece


common

conceptionof highest

the national

embody god in the

conspicuoussuccess ideal representation of her patron in giving to his native city an such proof of goddess. It would probablyhave requiredsome be he would all other sculptorsbefore his superiority over chosen at a preponderance of PeloOlympia, where there was
shrine of the nation
over ponnesian we

until after his

have
a

no

Attic influence ; and before the Athena evidence that Phidias had produced any We will works
as

Parthenos,
work which

made

great impressionoutside Athens.


the Athenian before the
to

accordingly
but without

mention
any

Olympian,
entrusted who
were

dogmatic assertion
Phidias,as
we

the sequence
was

of the two.

have

alreadyseen,
of the
most

by

Pericles

with
to

the

generaldirection
with and

artists

employed
of

beautifyAthens

the

architecture

few years that were sculpture of the highest glory of the city. Of these works, which may of Phidias' the products less directly all be reckoned more or as genius,we shall have to speak in the followingsections ; here
we ai-e

magnificent set up during the

monuments

concerned

with
^

those statues

of which
Tod, etc.

he

himself

under-

So

Loeschcke, Phidias'

254

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULrTURE

CHAT'.

took
as

the the

execution,and which
chief

were

in

ancient

times

regarded

have the

that they examples of his art, though, now we are compelled to infer their character from perished, of the minor works made undeihis

survivingremains

supervision.

Fio.

53.-

"

Lenormant

Phidias, found

after the Athena ParUionos statuette," unfinished copy in Athens (Athens, National Musenni).

by

I
'

stands the Athena these statues Parthenos, among the Parthenon served to which the great gold and ivory statue less have many Of this Athena or more we copies, a shrine. as Foremost
remote ;

fixed by Phidias as indeed, the type of the goddess,

in

be said to predominate this statue, may throughoutall later art. the best evidence is afforded and accessories, But as to position

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

255

by
the

two

with from their correspondence copies which evidently, intended to reproduce in all of Pausanias, are description
'

details

the

Athena both

of

the

Parthenon. thei-e. devoid the

Both The

were

found

in
as

Athens, and
the
may

still remain

smaller,known
of

Lenormant

statuette, is not
some

of artistic merit, and the

give

us

notion and slight

of

general character

original ;

it is very the leaves much to

sketchy,and its unfinished state known, from the imagination.The larger,

fully statuette, is wonderplacewhere it was found, as the Varvakeion of traces of colour,and to the preservation even perfect, of detail that has it gives all the accessories with a precision for all many settled once points. But, on the other hand, disputed it is perhaps the most extreme example of the base mechanical lose all times could utterly a copyist of Koman way in which while reproducing its the grandeurand beauty of his original, relation to Phidias' statue details correctly. It bears the same
as

the
to

coarsest

German

oleographafter
it afl'ects
us

the

Sistine

Madonna this
of

bears

the

picturewhich
use

to

rei)roduce. With

it is of reservation, Phidias' The


Athena

to

for

an

imaginaryreconstruction
of all the

great statue.
Parthenos
was

the embodiment

highest

of the Attic aspirations


as

religion.The

of this conception of

it found

at worthy expression

the hands

Phidias,is
the

characteristic of
to

Athens, justas the Panhellenic


is not the
to

all Greece.

This
the

place to
Athenian

trace

goddess, ally especiZeus belongs mythological

development of
that
are

type, or
To

the distinguish

different elements fifth century


therefore

blended
was

in it.

the her

of the

Athena
in war,

the

guardian of
skill and

city peculiar ; strong


rather
than brute
; to

but

by

energy

])rotectressof civilisation against barbarism


the invention
of all the
arts

force ; the her Avas due

of literature and of the


Attic
seems

art.

the inspiration peace, and In her the quicknessand versatility of


war

and

mind,
to
more

the

purity
its
most

and

brilliance

of

intellectual

temper,
contrast

find

characteristic

in expression,

to

the

solid virtues

of the

rest

of Greece.

The

simpler aspect of Athena as the protectress of Athens had been polis embodied by Phidias in his colossal bronze statue on the Acromore presented by the famous peaceful side was ; her
Lemnian Parthenos
^

Athena,
was

to

which

we

must

later with

recur.

The

Athena

indeed
otlier

fullyarmed,

her spear,
Athena

helmet, aegis,

For

copiessee Schreiber,Die

Parthenos.

256

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

and and
was

shield ; but these are the profuse decoration covered


seems

rather passive with which

than every

active

attributes,
surface

available

emphasise the impression that they are symbolic of a potential energy rather than prepared for actual The spear and shield, use. too, merely rest on the ground, and and the Nike are supported by the left hand of the goddess, who stands on her righthand, and forms her most conspicuous
to

has reference in earlier times to the A'ictories of peace attribute, than war," to athletic, less renowned no musical,and artistic emulation in her honour ; though, doubtless, the notion of
"

over victory

the enemies

of Greek

culture
to

and
to

civilisation
more

was

here

as

elsewhere
meet
a a

included.

Here,

descend

technical copy,
from
as

we details,

disputedpoint.
now a

In

the Varvakeion

well

as

in

relief find

in Berlin

derived evidently

the

Parthenos, we

goddess on which an expedient has by many incredulity


yet the evidence actuallyexisted
as

supporting the right hand of the the Nike stands. The discovery of so clumsy been received with astonishment or naturally
who
too
a

column

have

studied
to

the works

of Phidias
a

seems

strong
best

that reject,
statue

such the

column

part of the
The

when

copies in
to

question were
the statue
at
a as

made. Phidias
time
some

explanationseems

be

that

later

it had no such support, but that designed damage or defect in the complicated
to not

mechanism add
a

it necessary statue ^ made chryselephantine did unsightly in itself, support which, however

of

work.^ necessitate any tamperingwith the original Another attribute was the Erichthonius snake which itself inside head
to

curled the

the

shield the

and
was

the whole decorated

statue

from
a

above

beneath
as

feet

with

profusion of
seem sive, exces-

such designs but and

might under
here
was

different circumstances in

which

harmony
On
carry
a

with

the

rich materials
were a

colossal size of the Avork.


two

the helmet the

of Athena

sphinx and
these,over
On also the

gryphons
of her the the

to

the

forehead,was
shield

row was

outside

crest ; and beneath triple of horses. of the foreparts the Gorgoneion, which was

repeated on

Gorgoneion on
^
2

aegisthat covered her shield was in represented

breast ; round this relief the battle of

See Introduction
Dr. Waldstein

(b).
maintains
to

that
; but

the

column

is

simply
an

support introduced
form

in

the

translation

marble

it is at least

unusual

for such

support to take.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

257

the

Greeks

and

Amazons. the of figures accusation

It

was

in

this and

scene

that

Phidias
were

had introduced made


a

Pericles

himself,which

him. said that And it was against his own contrived he had so portraitthat it could not be of the statue. without removed looseningthe whole structure the copy of the shield be recognised These two on figures may

of subject

in the British

Museum,

known

as man

the

and shield,^ Strangford


is identified
as

the

bald-headed
not

but

vigorous old

who

Phidias

only offers valuable evidence about his age at the time, but of a is of the highestinterest as the only instance we possess artist by himself. On the inside of the of a Greek portrait the of the gods and giants. Even shield was the fight same
sandals had of
most
a

thick

sole which Centaurs


ornament

offered

field in which introduced.

the But

test con-

Lapiths and

could
was

be

the

extensive

field-for

offered

by

the of

of pedestal

this was the scene the statue; on in which Athena played a most the new-created
and
woman,

of

the "Birth

Pandora,"
to

important part, giving life

deckingher

her teaching

woman's

with clothes and ornaments, handicraft. It is easy to see the

which such a myth might receive at the hands of significance a fifth-century sculptor working in the service of Athena. of the artist, in giving his great the wish It was evidently this richness of decoration,not merely to produce an, statue but also to eff"ectsuitable to the size and material of his subject, associate the goddess in this her most perfectrepresentation with had all the
taken

greatest events, human


to especially

and

divine,in

which

she

part, and
over

ascribe to her all the victories

of Athens
in the arts

barbarian

the

statue

of peace ; to all on which Athens the life


statue

all her magnificent attainments foes, in the accessories of summarise, in fact,


in the

herself, just as
who
was

the

is lost, no original the position and


infer
as

prided patron goddess and" inspiration the of city. Now that the beyond copy can give us a notion of anything
most

fifth century the

itself embodied

accessories of the work. and shall be

As

to

what

we

may

to

its artistic character Phidias' other

its influence able


to

upon

the

we historyof sculpture, we

better

judge when

have Before

considered

great work, the Olympian

Zeus.
this it will be

Phidias which

fall most
1

dispose of other works of into the periodof his activity naturally


to
Z. 1865, PI. cxcvi. S

best

A.

258

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK
at

SCULPTURE

CHAr.

at

Athens, under
of these dedicated
sent out
was

Pericles the

or

an

earlier time.
so

The

best those

known who
were

Lemnian

Athena,
447
the
"

called from

it,probably the Attic colonists in Lemnos, who


between 451

and
as

B.C.^
most

This

statue

is

one

of

the

two

selected from

by

Lucian

beautiful of Phidias' outline of the whole the fair

works, and
face and the nose."

it he would

choose

the

the

of delicacy We know

the cheeks

and

proportionof
about this

nothing more

for

certain

to statue, but Lucian's selection seems imply that beauty of feature was its chief characteristic ; the other models he chooses,

except Phidias' Amazon,


A passage of

are

all, probably, types of Aphrodite.

represent
with
a

Himerius, who says that Phidias did not always Athena the Virgin Goddess, armed, but "decked
upon her cheek
to
serve

blush

instead of

helmet with

to

veil her Lemnian

beauty,"has
Athena, and

been

brought into
to

connection

this

that the goddess was prove without her helmet on, in a type not unknown about represented this period. But the passage, even if it be referred to any particular Parthenos, is too obviously statue, other than the Athena
to

used

rhetorical be
content

be of any
to

value
in

remain

details of fact ; and we must ignorancehow Phidias represented


as

to

Athena works.^ Of

in what

many
statue

considered

the

most

beautiful

of all his

another know been


one

at

Athens
but

by Phidias,the Apollo
name.

Parnosaid for

pius, we
to

nothing
of four of

the

Phidias

is also in

have

artists who Amazon


;

competed
; the

making
three

a Ephesus a Polyclitus Cresilas,and

statue

wounded

other

were

Phradmon

was Polyclitus

awarded
statues

the first place, and of Amazons


; but

Phidias been
we

the second.

Certain

extant

have

brought
can

into connection either


the

with

this

petition com-

before

discuss

of probability Amazons have


some

the

or story itself,

the

attribution
must

of the various wait until


we

to

their
notion
so

we respective sculptors,
as

to

the

and styleof chi'onology


must

this Amazon also

be reserved

the other artists ; and for the present. It is referred

to

by

Lucian

in the

from

it for his model

passage " the statue

just quoted,where
of setting-in

he selects and

the mouth

the neck."
^ ^

See

ii. p. 538. Busolt, Griechisclie Geschichte, that

It is clear of

when

we

have
a

no practically

data

for

it is identification,

at

least out

place in the text of


among

handbook

like this to mention See note

fications conjectural identiend


of this section.

of this statue

extant

works.

(6)at

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY
to

"

480-400

B.C.

259

We

must

now

go
at

on

what

was

regarded by generally
of

as antiquity gold and ivory Zeus

the greatestof all the works

Phidias,the colossal
statue

Olympia.
about

The

monumental

evidence
case

this

is

even

less
we

than satisfactory

in the
a

of the
copy,

Athena however

Parthenos.

For

have

not
to

even

well-attested

inferior in

tion, execu-

guide
"

us.

Apart
the

from

the
us

Pausanias

which, however,
than about

tells
statue

of very full description about the much more


"

accessories

literary have imagination help our references, we in the fact lies here The difficulty late coins. chiefly but some created by Phidias was so new that the type as adopted and of representation fitting universallyrecognised as the most Zeus that it was constantlyreproduced with small variations :

itselfto

and

other

nothing definite

"-

Fia. from

54."
a

Olympian
coin of Elis.

Zeus,

Fig.

55."

Head
a

of coin

Olympian
of Elis.

Zeus, from

and
we

the

Olympian
derived

statue

had

no

distinct accessories
a

by
more

which

might identifyany
from The

that has copy the original.

claim

to

be

mediatel im-

in throne which seated upon a Olympian Zeus was itself offered perhaps the most splendidcollection of decorative produced. On his extended right sculpturethat Greece ever and hand stood a statue of Victory; his left arm was raised, rested on a by an eagle. His chest was sceptre surmounted bare ; but a mantle enveloped his legs and the lower part of This his left shoulder. his body, and hung in rich folds over

mantle
or can

was

decorated
;

with

animals

and such

either embossed flowers,

damascened
now

of the
to
some

eff"ect of
extent

work the

judge
at

from

drapery we sculpturesmade by
on

the

Damophon

which, though Lycosura,^


1

in

marble, reproduce

See " 52.

260

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the

effects of in

worked
mere

gold and ivory technique. gold,ebony, and ivory, and


of the

The

throne

itself
stones.

was

enumeration
as

it,such
throne
were

that

subjects which given by Pausanias, suffices


was

A precious were representedupon


to

show

how

every

available

space

served, like
and sphinxes,

by
The and size and
so

group

figures. For the legs of the of Victory ; the arms Caryatids, figures each of the uprights at "the back was mounted surthe Graces and the Hours. of three figures,
filled with the
statue

weight of

necessitated
bore

which pillars, each side

probably
the
a

the

supports, greater part of the


the the

extra

were weight,

placed between
Avas

seat

at

legs. Along the edge of of the slayingof representation


Artemis;
and

Niobids which

by Apollo
ran

and

along
battle

the of

cross-bars,
Greeks
and
; on

Amazons,
front this Pausanias
to

leg to extendingover
same saw

from

leg, was
the
two statues

the

sides and

the

back

the

cross-bar bore them


and

seven {aydXiiara),

when
seem

formerly eightin number,


of
the

which

have
one a

some represented

For with

these,which the young fillet,


of

athletic contests. principal a youth binding his head represented athlete Pantarces, victor in the boy's
;

match wrestling
if so,
at
we

have
was

B.C., is said to have served as a model further indication that the date of Phidias' work of 436
later than
were

Olympia
other

his work

in Athens.

While

most

of

the

decorations

probably in
seem

friezes of
been

these relief,
in

the front cross-bar on figures from round ; they were seen festival agonistic athletes appear had been open of which beneath beneath

to

have

statues

the

the
was

front,and
the
on vases

Zeus

the great typified of patron ; thus figures also.^ If the throne of

his throne the


have
was

seat, its
had
a

complicated structure

legsand
a a

would pillars
A
screen

most

appearance.

therefore into
up the
more

scafFold-like unsightly which prevented provided,

spectator from

seeing
side. In

interior,while

it off"ered structural all four

background
the

which

threw

clearly the
went

lines of

nearest

This

screen was

round

and painted dark plain, blue to give a good background to the gold drapery of the great statue, and to the small statues, of gold and ivory,that sides of the throne. front it stood
on

the cross-bar.
the

On

the other

where sides,

the decorated offered


an

cross-bars and
^

divided pillars

it into
and

panelsthat

Overbeck, Kunstmythologie,PI. i. 9

16.

Cf. Gerhard, Auserl.

Vusenb,

i. 7.

262

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the footstool
to

in

front

of the

throne.

The
affixed

height of
was

the slabs ft. 5 in.

which

the

golden figureswere

black ("73 m.); their material was used for a precisely similar purpose

Eleusinian

stone, like that


frieze
in
at not

in the Erechtheum

Athens, where, however, the


in white
must

reliefs

affixed were
cases

but gold,

Pentelic thrown
screen ar

marble.
the

In

both

the dark

have blue

bright figuresinto
served
to
as a

background relief, just as the


the
statue
us

dark

panel above
As information.

background to
tells that notion

decoration
we

of the throne.
no

the

size of the

itself its of

have

certain
were

Pausanias gave
was so no

measurements

recorded,but
But
we

adequate

its
not

majestic size.
arise from

hear it without

his throne
we

largethat Zeus could puttinghis head through the


of the and
we temple,^ seven

roof,and
can

hence, as
that

know
was

the dimensions
between

infer

the
35

statue

about or life-size, But these after all


far
as we

of the high (exclusive of detail or estimates descriptions


no

feet

eighttimes pedestal).
of dimensions For
so this,

give us
can

notion

of

the

statue
at

itself.

learn
or

anything
Greek

definite

direct references,
a

in indirect,

reduced to we are all, classical authors, and to such


as one

notion general
to

of the

type of Zeus
own

may

gather
asked

by looking at
tale claims

the

sheets

of Overbeck's

KunstmythoJogie. One
he
was

record

Phidias'

reply when
type he
to

by
his

his collaborator

Panaenus
Zeus
; he

in what is said

woiild

embody
Homer's

conception of
lines
"

have

quoted

famous

iir 6(ppvcn vevae ?lKOI Kvaverjcnv Kpoi'iiov 8' dpa "xo-^to.leweppwcravTO dvaKTOS CLfx^poffLai Kparbs dw' dOavdroio, jiuyav 8' iXeXi^ev"OXv/JiTrov.

This

story, if
the

not

true, is
to

at

least characteristic.
in his

Phidias

less doubt-

endeavoured
than

embody

work

the
"

rather poetical

which idea Greek


power

the aspect under purely mythological aspect of Zeus he was worshipped by all Greeks who had risen to the of a god who, while remaining essentially the god of the people,included in himself all that was noblest of divine and perfection, and anthrohuman pomorphic but after a distinctly model. But the work
it
was

of Phidias

also

reacted

upon

the
^

religion by
See

which

inspired. Quintilian says of the


13, etc.
to little go
room

size,Adler
statue

Olympia, ii. 7\. There


case

PI. xi. ; Text, p.


seems no reason

far

Dorpfeld takes 8 times beyond the minimum.


to spare.

life The

iu any

would

have

bad

very

til

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

26-3

cuius pulchritudeadjecissealiquid etiam Olympia deum videtur ; adeo majestas operis aequavit." receptae religion! other references, mostly rhetorical in their nature, Numerous

Zeus

at

"

vie with
and

one

another

in their endeavours that


a

impressive way
that
on

it

was

the had

express in greatestwork of
to
a

some

new

art

in the

world, and
influence

such
saw

work it.

all who

To
the

image
form

of

Zeus

himself Zeus

; to

and ennobling religious the express the people it was the philosopherit represented
if he

in which
to

would

appear,

should

choose

to

reveal

himself
the

mortal

eyes.

accessories of the

of

gods and shaking


divine

men

was

quotation and show us that the King and Father statue as ful, benignant but all-powerrepresented
Both Phidias' Homeric the nod
that

heaven

with

granted a

prayer

; and

of of divine manifestations even justice, power in mystery, were is shrouded the justice which by no means and destruction of the the left out of sight. The Theban sphinxes also contests children of Niobe were conspicuous. There were in which, by the favour of Zeus, his people had triumphed over with the Amazons, barbarism ; labours of Heracles, and the fight with all also surrounded the god was twice repeated. And adminishis benefits are those lesser divinities through which ^

that

tered, the
birth of

Hours

and

Graces We

and well

on

the

was pedestal

the these

Aphrodite.
that

may

believe

that

all

his on symbolic representation throne found also their most perfectexpressionin the face of that the original the god himself ; but of that expression, now is lost, cannot we hope to form any exact or adequate conception. work made Another Olympia was the statue by Phidias near of gold and ivory. We of Aphrodite Urania at Elis,which was know nothing of the statue, but that the goddess rested one of Aphrodite statue tortoise. foot on a a Scopas later made also one There Pandemus was to match, riding on a goat. athlete by Phidias at Olympia, a boy portrait statue of an motive was repeated binding his head with a fillet. The same the throne of Zeus ; perhaps of the athlete statues in one on this athlete statue Phidias made as a study for the other ; but difi"erent statue at Olympia of it must be confused with not a resembled. the boy on the throne is said to have Pantarces,whom work which can have already seen, there is no extant As we approximate notion of the great works of give us any even different elements found
i

Phidias

"

those

which

were

in

the

mind

of

any

Greek

who

264

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

spoke of him sculpture. We


his
more or

witli
must

reverence

as

the

greatest

master

of ideal under
we are

deal

less direct
with
statues

with works separately influence. or supervision


like the
we

made Here

concerned

Athena

Parthenos

and

the

Olympian
are
a

Zeus
us we

and
may

when

realise how
some seem

lost

to

well he
in their

excused

study which
But
on

may,

absence,
hand
more

hopelesslythese discouragementin lack its highest to


loss makes
we a

theme.

the

other

this very

tematic sys-

and

careful

study

the

indispensable.If

still

we masterpiecesof Greek sculpture, might their to perhaps prefer contemplating beauty studying their But another. we can now historyand relation to one very often form idea of a great statue an only by observing the links still remain, and of which some series to which it belongs, or by observing its influence upon other contemporary works

possessedall the

or

upon

later

the appreciate ideal statues his


own

period. of position
is
to

In

this way it is not the He was Phidias.


not

to impossible

first to

make

; that

say,

that he

Greeks that he

imaginationor fancy, what the most of the gods,but as perfectrepresentations and consecrated by tradition as took the type prescribed

created,purely after were accepted by the

filled it with a new life and a belonging to this or that deity, conceptionsof by the religious higher meaning, while inspired them above such notions he worked, but raising those for whom as were commonly received ; in fact,we may almost put in his mouth the words
an

of another

who of

turned

to

new

and

higher

meaning
therefore
art

accepted element

Athenian

"whom religion,

worship,him declare I unto you." The ye ignorantly of the fifth century is still essentially sequently, religious ; and, conthe reaction of When
were was religion upon works like the Athena

art

at

this

period
and

extremely strong.
the Zeus
as

Parthenos
common

of the

Phidias

set

up

in
or

such the

places of
Altis the
at

resort

Acropolis at
but

Athens
not

they

could

not

influence

only

Olympia, sculptural type

that but the aspect under which deitythey represented, deity was worshipped by the people. As Dio Chrysostom puts of the

it,no

one

who

had

seen

Phidias' statue
any

at

Olympia

could

easily
be
a

conceive

of Zeus
was

under
an

other

form.

Phidias,it must
therefore
the
most,

remembered,

intimate

friend of
men a

and Pericles,

companion
thinkers

of the

most

cultured He lived
at

and time

advanced

of his time.

when

the old

religious

in

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

265

doctrines

were

beginning to
of Homer,
to
no

be
mere

criticised. abstract
his

said,the Zeus
which he which spirit
influence

it was, conceptionof
;

But

as

he

deity,
new

tried

embody
infused
it would

in

great
the

statue

and
a

the

he thus

into be

old forms

had

religious
extent

of which

difficult to

exaggerate the

and

the
Note

gravity.
(a)." The
statement Phidias found
rests

in

all

handbooks

that

Hegias

was

the
an

first master emendation agree

authorities

due to of on poor authority ; it is simply All be I believe which to erroneous. by K. 0. Miiller, the of Phidias in mentioning Ageladas as the master

;_

only apparent exception


well-known

is Dio

sculptor
and the

was

the

examples of pupil of ..."


HPIOT Dio is

tration Chrysostom, who, in quoting as an illusthe "as Phidias and master pupil,says, Here the is MSS. here have HHOT
or

IimOT,
the

emendation

irreproachable.But palaeographically

clearlyreferring to the Chrysostom Phidias' know that which to we Ageladas was acceptedversion,according this he that wrote name here, far probably Is it not more master. probable of the three letters AAA AAOT ? The similarity form HPEA in the quasi-Attic MS. and the thus reading is explained without would explain the loss, objectionto
it is that
recourse

to

Note identified of

conjecturein ih),The Lemnian


a

favour

of which
"

we

have

no

other

evidence.
to

Athena. in works

Professor form

Furtwangler claims
works. basis of is the If
our
we

have his

copiesof
as

this

statue

certain
must

extant

accept

identification
art

these certain,
one

the

study of the
of far either of with is of
at
a

Pliidias ; for than any merit higher it or regardit reject

of them, others which deals

the
we

Bologna head,
possess.
cannot
on If,

clearlya coi)y other hand, we


in the rather
text

as

it only possible,

be

included
facts

handbook

like

this, which

with

established

than

probableor improbableconjectures.But tlie identification in this case to be entirelyignored. too great an import for the historyof sculpture
There
are a a

headless

statue

and

statue

of
of

bareheaded the Dresden

Athena

Dresden,
made in
a

and

head,

cf similar the the

stylebut
head of

far
one

finer

execution, which
statues

is at
was

Bologna. Curiouslyenough,
and separatejpiece, head
not

Bologna
a

head

fits the socket. exactly

The

Bologna originare
has influence The Lemnian is
a

is
so

a clearly

from copy clear in the Dresden about statues

bronze
statues. ; but
was

original signs of this ; the The drapery of the statues


we

something

Phidian

its character of Athena

must

remember

that

the

of Phidias' of the

great

paramount
on

in later representations that the


not

goddess. of the identification probability


Athena
was

rests

mainly

the statement which Phidias her arms, did but

bareheaded.
one

highly rhetorical
Zeus,
a

mould
art

nor

always
deities
over

only passage " in Himerius, who says : with Athena make in bronze
The

from

this is inferred

always

he let his

render

other blush

pouring
of

her Now

decked the Maiden and also, cheek, that her beauty might it is

Goddess
be veiled
"

(Parthenos),
by it instead
refers to
"

by
was

helmet." the

by

no

means

certain
to

that and
a

the Lemnia this in that the the

; the statue
name

of Athena know
to

referred that the

is called

this passage the Parthenos but

and

appliedto especially
We referred in this
at

the

gold
had
must to

ivory statue
on

that
to

stood
state

Parthenon.
statue
was

statue

helmet

Lemnia

bareheaded, and
a

passage time same the

be the Lemnia

because passage
as

the the

quote
was

this

for the only authority

statement

that

Lemnia

bareheaded, is

like

arguingin

circle.

But

it is very

doubtful

whether

anything at

very all can

266

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

hi

be

inferred in
as

from her her


more

this

passage

except character,

tliat in tlie
arms

Phidias "the colossal


were

sometimes

represented
for

Atliena well
"

peaceful
warlike
was

Parthenos,"
bronze treated the Lemnia
was

example,
Of
as course

as

in

more

character

in the

statue.

tlie

Parthenos" In doubtful of

armed,
case

but

rather is
at

passive
least is
an

attributes.

any
one.

the

inference
even

about if the the Lemnia

extremely
identification

Nor,

bareheaded,
statue

the

the of

Bologna
Athena
cannot

head without

and
a

Dresden both with the


on

beyond
and Such attractive

doubt.
vases,
an
are

Representations
not rare,

helmet,

reliefs

and
as

they
that in

all

be

associated

Lemnia. however

tification idenand Above

proposed
cannot

by
he
most

Professor made
a

Furtwiingler,
basis for further in the

interesting all,
such the
most

itself,
be
as

comparisons.
section be head is that and be
on

it
a

cannot

given
tiiis
;

the and

prominent
must,
from
at

place
its very The of lield of Greek

Phidias

in either the been vary


as

book

it
or

importance, Bologna

given
among have

most

prominent
and
us,
nor

place

none

all.

beautiful to

fascinating
the
can

examples
liitherto in the

sculpture
its

preserved considerably,
established.

but

opinions
its

about

style
yet

period regarded

place

history

sculpture

INDEX

OF

SCULPTOES
Critius, 183-186,

Ageladas,

169,

187, 192-194,
265

232,

189, 190, 193, 238

239, 248, 249,

Cyclopes, 65,
248

66

Agoracritus,248
Alcamenes, Alcmaeon,

216, 231, 232, 233,


180

Alxeiior, 122, 130, 142, 149

65, 66 Daedalids, 17, 22, 75 Daedalns, 16, 79, 80, 97, 98,
Dactytj, 102,

100,

Amyclaeus, 153 Auaxagoras, 199 Angelion, 82, 153,


Antenor, Archermus, 125, 180
Aristocles

103, 154,

180 259

Damoplion, 8, 20,
198

180-183

Dipoenus, 16, 22, 82, 97, 98, 99, 101, 103, 133, 134, 141, 152, 153, 154,
198

Arcesilaus, 33

101, 116, 118, 122,

123,

Diyllus,
Dontas,

153 152

Aristocles
199

(of Athens), 179, 180, 207 (of Sicyou), 193, 194-195,


199

Doryclidas, 152
180 Eleutherus, Endoeus, 98, 99, 102, 180, 181

Aristonous,
A scams,

195
102

Epeius,
Eucheir, Euenor,

100 154

Athenis, 101,
Bathtcles,

180
2

78, 79, 134, 153


102.

Euphranor, Euthycles,
Gitiadas,

Boethiis, 26 Bupalus, 101,


Butades, Calamis,
100

Eutelidas, 192
180

79, 153,
199

198

169, 195, 232-236, 238, 240, 242, 244, 245, 246 Callimachus, 22, 234
Calliteles Gallon 199

Glaucias,

Gorgias, 180
Hegias,
180, 183, 189, 198, 248, 265
152

(of Aegina), 153, 180, 189, 198,

Hegylus,
Laphaes,

Gallon

200, 207, 233 (of Ells),154


199

195
180

Calynthus,

Canacliiis,193-195, 198, 233 Ghionis, 153

Leobius, Lycius, 238 Lysippus, 2, 33, 43, 236, 243

Chirisophus, 153
Clirysothemis, 192 Glearchus, 24, 102, 154, 244 Cresilas,258

Lysistratus,33
Melas, 22, 97, 101, 103 154 Menaechmus,

268

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

Micciades, 101, 116, 118 Myrmecides, 100 Myron, 24, 187, 192, 193, 200, 236244, 245, 246, 248, 249 Mys, 249 Nesiotes, 183-186, 189, 190, 193, 31 Nicicas,
238

Praxiteles,8, 10, 20, 27, 31, 43, 89, 199, 233, 234, 236, 243 Pythagoras, 70, 154, 200, 203, 244248

Rhoecus, 23, 97, 100, 101, 151, 197


Scopas, 11, 36, 40, 43, 263 16, 22, 82, 97, 98, 99, 101, Scyllis, 103, 133, 134, 141, 152, 153, 154,
198

Onatas, 82, 180, 198-200, 206, 207


Paeonius, 8, 216, 230, 231, 232, Panaenus, 261, 262 PaiThasius, 249 Pasiteles, 2, 14, 33, 197 Phidias, 11, 13, 18, 43, 82, 89, 193, 194, 215, 216, 232, 234, 239, 243, 248-266 Philo, 180 Pliradmon, 258 2, 24, 25, 27, 43, 190, F'olyclitus, 195, 234, 236, 239, 242, 243, 249, 258
154 I'olystratiis,

Silanion,32
247 Simmias,
99 99

Simon, Smilis,98, 99, 100, 197 Soidas, 154

187, 236,

Tectaeus,

82, 153, 198 Telchines,65, 66 Telecles,100 Thehades, 180

193, 244,

Theocles,152
Theocosmus, 18 Theodorus, 23, 97, 100, 101, 107, 114, 151, 180, 197

THE

END

Printed

by

R.

". R. Clark,

Limited,

Edinhur^h.

268

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the metopes and some especially sculpture, of execution,but not only inequalities frieze, of

portionsof
amount

the

actual differences
of

styleand

such design, the other

as

imply
various

considerable individual

freedom

in the work

of the

ployed. sculptorsem-

But,
whole

on

hand, there is a character about


more
"

the

and sculpture,
"

parts of it
artists and which
we

such critics

as as

the about especially the pediments which

possess, and We of all sculptors. with which The


no

conspicuous has impressedall from everything else essentially differing as worthy of attribution to the greatest
are

informed

that Phidias

was

entrusted

the

of supervision general

the wonderful

artistic

activity
state.
can

marked

crowning
doubt in the

of Pericles in the Athenian the supremacy There the Parthenon. of all was work
was

be of

that it

intended of her and

not

only as

the

worthy shrine
also
as

Athena

midst up

chosen

but city,

the

ment monu-

that summed

contained

in itself all the

gloryof
of life of

Athens, and all the beauty,moderation, and wisdom


her made should which

people.

gold and ivory statue within the temple was that he It is hardly conceivable by Phidias himself. of the sculptures to others the design have left entirely for they were decorated the building, clearly part of one
The

harmonious and embodiment


to

whole, intended
lead of the up
to

to

the

of the specthe mind tator, prepare the of final contemplation perfect

goddessherself.^ Doubtless the great size of the sculptural number and figureswhich decorated every of the temple precludedthe possibility available space upon remember when we hand, especially their execution by a single was that the whole ready for dedication within eight building of the Avork, Some its commencement. portions years from left to the have been the separate metopes, may especially conditions as who undertook them, after some general sculptors of had been laid down and treatment by the designer to subject
the whole. and But
western

the

great and

harmonious the

eastern

pediments,and
have
; and
we can

designs of the continuous composition


tion crea-

of the of have
1

must frieze,
a

the been, in all essential features,

artist single any


not

hardly imaginethis
himself.

artist

to

been
We

other than
be shaken

Phidias

opinion by the analogy of Olympia. Phidias of the temple was decoration completed ; and did not go there until the sculptural the colla of the within although he and his associates designed all accessories he found them. as temple,he had to leave the external sculptures
need
in this

rii

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

269

Even and
most

after the

I'emoval of the

or

destruction into
to

of the
a

great statue,

the conversion of its external the


was

Parthenon

Christian remained

sculpture appears
the

have

church, intact,

with which
was

exceptionof
until
the

destroyedin

group of the east pediment, It the apse of the church. building central

not

disastrous

explosion of

the

Turkish

powder

in 1687, that a completerdestruction magazine within the cella, followed more by the even began ; and the explosion was disastrous
carry
cannon

attempt
as

of the
some

victorious

Veneto-German the

army

to

off

booty

portions of
Thus

sculpturethat
and

their of

had
in

Athena

already damaged. the west pediment

the chariot

horses

clumsy attempt to lower them remained exposed to weather, vandalism, or


in 1801-1802, Elgin,

have to perished in a appear left from their place. What was leave until Lord neglect, carry it off to England.
may
not

obtained

to

Though
have

it is

possiblethat
care

his

agents

in

every

case was

shown

all the is
no we

and

discretion of which
on

their task
was

worthy, there
well

doubt
owe

that the work


to

the whole
the

very

done, that

it,in

great

measure,

degreeof
that Lord
censure,
^

in preservation
action Elgin's

which

the

still remain, and sculptures rather gratitude, than


"

deserves learnt

the
to

the

of all who It must


off

have

appreciatethe
at

Elgin Marbles."
he carried them

be remembered
were

that

the time

when

only neglectedby those who had chargeof in constant them, but were danger of being carried off piecemeal and that soon afterwards,in the by less scrupulous traA^ellers, sieged beof Greek war repeatedly independence,the Acropoliswas suflfered severely. He and bombarded, and its buildings of the sculpture removed for the most part only such portions their positionin the building, were exposed to the as, from they
not

weather
was

or

to other

risks.
even

perhaps
^

carried

Indeed, his discretion in this matter realise by too far,as we easily may
with

comparingwhat
The
and
"

is stillleft in situ in its present state


the abuse
showered
are now
"

the

absurd others

and misrepresentations have had undue and

on

Lord

Elgin by
by
all gated investi-

Byron

influence.

Tliey
as

discredited who have

authorities the

French, German,
In
now

Italian, as well

English
marbles value
are

matter.

view

of the the

back

to

Greece,
of

that

Greeks be

suggestion that these appreciate their


that

ought
and
are

to be

given
of in not

capable

taking care a placewhere


be

them, they are


the

it must

remembered

they
were

now

safely housed
it
were

replaced

in

accessible. If they easily which from building they were to


see

returned, they could


unless in
a museum

taken

entirely

restored

; and

it is hard

what

would

be

gained by placingthem

in Athens.

270

HANDBOOK

OF
at

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

casts

which
to

he

had

made

the time of this

of all that

he left behind.
now

Owing
British others

his

action,the bulk
;
a

sculpture is
the

in the
a

Museum have been

few

pieces are
elsewhere
two

in

Louvre, and
on

few A

taken

by

earlier marauders.

at good deal, especially

itself. The various

the ^

ends,still remains
the

ing the build-

fields to which

decoration sculptured described


in

of

the

temple was
of the

have already been assigned


in
"

the

section

Introduction

concerning architectural
execution frieze.
"

will be best to describe them the order and of their

sculpture (c). It the order which is probably also (1) the metopes, (2) the pediments,

(3) the

the sculpturedall round (1) The Metopes. These were and 14 on each of the fronts. each of the sides, 32 on building, to offer of the south side alone are preservedsufficiently Those
any

material

for and

our

study ; the

rest have

suffered which

the weather

from

the vicissitudes

their undergone, that we can only conjecture form hardly any opinion as to their style. It
eastern

from severely the building has and can subjects,


so

front contained

scenes

from

appears the battle between Greeks

that the

gods and
;

and giants,
on

the

the western, combats the northern side even side the twelve^

between

und Amazons On

subject is
at

doubtful. end
at

the

southern

metopes
the

either

represent the
the bridal of Centaurs
scenes

assault of the Centaurs

upon

Lapith women
battle between

Pirithous, and

the

consequent

and of

Lapiths. This singlecombat.


detached
fact

subject is naturally broken


relief is very the ground, and are The

up" into

from

almost are high ; the figures in the round, a practically

for the completeness with Avhich so Avhich may account of the metopes have been destroyed. The best preserved many the most ; nearly all in the British Museum metopes are
western

metope

of

the
an

south

side

is still in

situ

on

the effect
seen

Parthenon, and affords


of the

the for appreciating opportunity of the

high relief
vary

and

vigorous design
frame

metopes,
were

as

in the massive

architectural
in

for which than


any

they

designed.
part of the
we see

The

metopes

style more

other

In some decoration of the Parthenon. sculptural and lifeless design, a comparativelytame or, if in conception, more yet the pose of the vigorous
1

cases

the

combat

is

combatants
may well

is

Only
same

eleven
scene.

at the

east

end

have

Centaurs;

but

the

twelfth

belong

to the

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

271

awkward
are

or

strained

; some

of the

metopes,

on

the

other

hand,

unsurpassedin all art for the admirable balance of their the perfect and, above composition, adaptationof designto field,
life and conflict whether beauty of the figures, still
over

for the wonderful all,

engaged
a

in

the

fallen foe The

(Fig.56),or exultingin triumph (Fig.57). Nor is there less varietyin the

execution.

drapery

is sometimes

stiff and

archaic

in

Fio.

56."

Metope

of Partlienon

(British Mu.seum).

character, sometimes
which
we see

it

approachesthat

unrivalled

treatment

in the is
can

absent, or entirely
in other
vacant
cases we

pediments and treated merely as


see

frieze ; sometimes it is a subordinate accessory ;


use

alreadythat tendency to

it

to

fill

effect characteristic spaces in the field with the rich decorative of later Attic relief. The modelling of the figures

varies earlier

also,from
Attic

hard

and

dry

treatment

like that
a

of the

sculptors of

athletic

subjects,to
from

mastery, free alike from

softness and

perfect exaggeration.The

272

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

type

of the

heads

is

lightand
eyes and

Attic, and
the

usually shows
The in bestial

an

archaic character of the Centaurs their make

in the
are

hair.

faces

not

reallymore
wrinkles
"

advanced and
a

deep
them

and

distorted

their

though style, grimaces of pain


which
we

a[)pear less conventional

contrast

have

Fio.

57."

Metope

of Parthenon

(British Museum).

noticed
nature

also

at

Olympia.

The
its

treatment
acme

of the

semi-bestial The

of the Centaur

reaches

human
one

body joinedat

the waist

to

these metopes. the horse's neck is,in devised

in

itself,
it

of the worst

of the mixed
so

forms

since by fancy, How may

of impliesa duplication unnatural be


seen

and

of the essential organs. unconvincingsuch a combination appears


many

by

glance at

its unskilful

for example rendering,

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

273

on

the relief attained

at

Assos.
one

Success

iii
see

so

difficult

an

attempt

was

not

at

leap;

we

at elsewhere, particularly
a more

Olympia, the
but
it is in

various advances the Parthenon

towards that
one

harmonious

effect ;

is principle

graspedand

carried out ; this is the consistently familiar device of archaic art, by which the breast is seen facing, these So in the lower part of the body in profile. metopes the either from is always seen human upper part of the Centaurs face ; while the equine body is seen the front or three-quarter in profile thus gained for the upper part, and the ; the breadth subtle
seen curves

fully adoption of a
first

of the transition from

the

one

form

to

the

other,

only in front,and impliedat


to make

the

and back, help to justify combination. that

almost We

credible the monstrous


reason

have

doubtless

alreadyseen supervisingthe

to

believe

Phidias,while
leave
to

whole

design,was
it need
more

obligedto
not

and details to his assistants, many find that these assistants worked
case

surpriseus

in independently

the

to

the metopes had structural necessity, of the metopes. From the outer be in their place before the cornice was put over therefore before the erection of the

colonnade, and
At

pediments.

so earlya stage of the work, it may well be supposed that and that he Phidias had not yet a trained body of assistants, was more dependent on the Attic artists of earlier schools for

help in
of
some

the execution of the

designs. The of metopes recalls the style


of his remembered
went

hard

and

dry
a

work

Critius and founded

Nesiotes,
school of

and

it is to

be

that
on

Critius for

athletic

generations.^ many of these scholars and some Myron too groups, with their ; even poise of combat and their choice of a momentary pause
sculpture which
had

motion, are worthy of Myron himself. Others again,in their violent contortions,their tricks of the to seem school,their ungainlyand unstable position, wrestling betray the hand of pupilsor imitators who, in their admiration
in the midst
of

violent

for the

and apparentlyreckless originality

varietyof
sense

the

tor sculp-

of the

Discobolus,failed
restraint. There

to catch

his fine

of

ateness appropri-

and
more

the

and originality of the sculpture

is,in the details of the metopes, in of finish than elsewhere less perfection
art
see more may and less of the of the period, we

Parthenon.

In

them

of
trolling con-

the exuberance

of Attic Phidias

genius of

himself.
1

See p. 190.

274

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap,

in

are (2) The pediments of the Parthenon sanias only in the most manner : summary the pediment as one the temple," he enters

described
"

by
sees

Pauon

What
"

one

concerned

with

the

strife of Poseidon left

says, while at the birth of Athena ; for the land." against Athena and description,
to

is

entirely
is the
were we

back If

only

to this meagre

the

scanty, though

should have considerable remains that still survive, we precious notion of the composition in getting difficulty any satisfactory
as a

whole. the

For
case.

the

eastern

or

front

pediment, this
the

is

happily un-

Though
in

the French

who artist, Carrey,

visited

the

Parthenon

1674, shortly before


of the
saw

destroyedthe
eastern

middle

made building,

explosionwhich a drawing of the


even

pediment as
seen

he then

he could record it,

less than With

may the

still be
western

in the

of galleries

the British Museum.

pediment
may

it is otherwise.

Carrey'sdrawing, in
in the

minor spiteof some of the figures, which their record


westera

errors

in the intervals and well have been

position

shifted

is evidently an place,^ original of what he


saw

accurate
us

from slightly and intelligent the

; and

it shows

the

compositionof

pediment
this and

deal first with British Museum of the eastern. The land

to complete. It is best, therefore, pediment, though its actual remains, in the

almost

at

Athens,

are

even

more

scanty than those


Poseidon for the be

story of the
has
;
a

contest

of

Athena

and

of Attica here

which mythological significance


two centre
were

cannot

discussed which
was

the

reconciled

in

the really

of the old state had


was

Erechtheum, of Athens, religion


the her

though even
But

there Poseidon Athena

to

take

subordinate and

in the Parthenon

supreme,

Poseidon, as recorded
of the unrivalled form of the

in the western her


in

gloryof

pediment, was worship in her chosen


;

position. over victory symbolical city. The


to

story varied
the both

details the

that which
as

adopted by
and Poseidon

of designer

pediment is
to

appears follows. of the

be

don Posei-

Athena

laid claim

the

land

Attica, and

as (OdXaa-a-a) produced a salt-spring

symbol

or

pledge of
symbols
^

his

occupation,Athena

the

olive within

were

preservedand
of

revered
exact

these tree ; both of the precincts

For
a

tlie sake the


Ant.

ascertuiniugthe
of and field of

made

detailed sketch
on

all indications the

of

Dr. Sauer has of the figures, position maining clamps, sockets,weathering, etc.,re;
see

base

pediments

MiUh.

Ath., 1891,

p.

59,

Taf. iii., and

Lenhndler

T. 58. (Berlin),

276

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the Erechtheum.

Zeus

referred

Cecrops and
another

other

heroes

quarrel to the decision of to of the Attic land, or, according


the of of The central group

version,to the tAvelve gods ; they decided in favour


retired in wrath.

Athena, and Poseidon


the

pediment,which is divided from the subordinate groups at and the left, the sides by the chariot and horses of Athena on consists of two probably by those of Poseidon on the right, Each moves with the whole Athena and Poseidon. figures only, whicli impulseof body and limbs away from the central point, each slightly overlaps;but each has the head turned back the centre. Their paths seem towards to cross, and there is an in the midst of impetuousaction opposingbalance of momentum and at once is peculiarly which gives happy in this position, tectural archithe combination essential to and variety, of symmetry so which be traced also through all the sculpture, may subordinate parts of the composition. The exact motive of the has given rise to that compose this central group two figures which clear from Carrey's discussions. It seems draAving, many that is confirmed by the extant fragments of the two figures, and is suddenlystarting Poseidon has been advancing, back,
cos

Sre ris

re

airiaTij, SpaKovra idCov iraXlvopaos

as

in Lloyd has aptlyquoted. His resemblance and we positionto Myron's Marsyas is obvious at first glance, a similar motive can ; indeed, we hardlybe wrong in assigning its character in this that central group perhapsacknowledge may and subject and have been influenced by Myron's Athena may don that PoseiMarsyas. However that may be, we must suppose back not only before Athena's is starting advance, but also from that object some object at which he is startled. What but there is other evidence infer from the legend, we was may Mr. Watkiss also to take into account. is
a

The

contest art ; and

of Athena in
a some

and
cases

Poseidon
we

frequent subjectin minor either this central recognise


from the Parthenon

may

group,

or

imitated

Athenian pediment. derived of Athena coins 1 we probably recognisea figure may is the other this pediment; though turned from as way, natural enough in the die-sinker's art, she resembles very
^

part of On some

it,directly

See

Imhoof

and

Gardner, Numismatic

Commentary
other coins

on

Pausanias,
a

pi.

Z.

Some

confusion

is caused

by

the fact that

represent

quitedifferent

treatment

of the theme.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

277

strongly the
almost would all

goddess as
we see

cases

In sketch. in Carrey's represented which beside Athena, in a position


centre

correspondto

the

of

the

pediment,
when Another

an

olive

a tree, usually with is present, this snake

snake
seems a vase

twined
to

round;
him.
at

Poseidon valuable

attack found

piece of
this
same

evidence
contest

is

Kertch, representing
Here

of Athena that

and in the

Poseidon.^

the

figure

of Athena there
in is
no

resembles

pediment,but
retreat
so

in Poseidon

sign

of the
;

sudden the

clearlyindicated
an

Carrey's sketch
coiled round floats

between

two

is

olive

tree ;

snake

its trunk
a

its branches Athena. little in It may


or vase

againstPoseidon, and Victory, bringingher garland to


rises
are figures

amidst
crown

Several
common

subordinate with how

present, but

they have

the subordinate far

be doubted
as

material

for the

the pediment. on figures in using either coins are we justified restoration of the Parthenon ment. pedibetween them and their
we

The
can original

direct relation
in
no case was

supposed
must
member re-

be
on

proved decisively ; and


the another Acropolis the

that the

there
same

group
seems

senting repre-

subject as
the

pediment.

It

likely,

however, that, as
on

sea-creatures

visible (perhapsdolphins)

Carrey's drawing of the pediment behind Poseidon represent the rival symbol his symbol, the salt-spring, too the olive, so of the she claimed of Athena, in right of which possession this symbol finds its have been land, must represented ; and fitting placein the middle of the pediment ; its sudden appearance
may back, and well be the

portent

from advance

which

Poseidon

starts

Athena's

triumphant

suifices to indicate her

victory.
selves; by thembehind Athena was her chariot, driven probably by Victory, her constant attendant ; the chariot of Poseidon is also held in by a female charioteer, who may well be identified as his consort Amphitrite. His chariot and its team were destroyed before Carrey's sketch was Another made. figurestands just in front of the charioteer on either side, male on Athena's side, a draped a nude The
two

central

stand,as figures

it were,

in

space

female may but

on

that

of Poseidon and
sent Iris,

; it has

been

suggestedthat

these
;

be Hermes

to declare the result of the contest

its decision is alreadyso this appears when superfluous, obvious. subordinate The figuresbehind the charioteers on
1

Cwnple Rendu,

St.

1872 Petersburg,

; /. E.

S.

1882, p. 245.

278

HANDBOOK met

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

either side have been and

many writers to discuss them, if we

with

as

identifications reckon

as

there

have

all the combinations

of permutationswhich have been devised by the ingenuity interpreters.The fact is that Carrey'ssketches afford just but not enough material for conjecture, enough to lead us to It has,for example, been much disputed any certain conclusion. whether the nude figure seated on the knees of a draped woman in the middle of the right side is male or female, and varying have been made either hypothesis.^The on conjectures only under such circumstances would guide us safely be the recognition of some of the figures or as groups of figures definite other with a on a meaning monuments, type, reproduced that The
can woman

clue that could

be

identified ; but seated with two the

this has

not

hitherto

been

done. the

children behind

or Amphitrite,

child between

and the seated one behind woman standing Athena's chariot, at first sight to offer a clue ; but a glance seems the long list of varying identifications given in Michaelis' at Parthenon suffices to show how

inadequate it

is.

Apart

from

isolated guesses about different systems of

intended to sculptor were actually present at the contest special heroes and local divinities

we figures, may say that three explanation are possible. Either the represent those,either gods or heroes,who

individual

symbolisedthe triumph of their goddess ;


presence,
a positions

interest
or

representedthose of Attica who, by their of the Attic people in the


;
or

he

else he added

in the subordinate

series of

indicate
are

the

involved.

intended to purely local personifications, of the action in which the principal scene figures first be the it theory urged that Against may

to the legend, present gods or heroes,if present, were, according of And is of character there the as judges judges. nothing

about

the

assistant
can we

are they certainly figures; as a

not

the

twelve

body of Attic representative and be a set of dignified heroes,who would, from all analogy, present as aged men ; it has been suggestedthat they were borne out either side,but this againdoes not seem on partisans gods, nor
them regai'd

by
and the

the character third

of the

hypotheseswe

figures. In a combination of probably find the truth may


some

the second
;

probably
it was,
knee p. 80.

had sculptor

in his mind

definite

or mythological graphica topo-

for each signification


^

figure ; but, whatever


this

it
and

Dr.

Saner

claims have

to

liave

settled

breast which

must

belonged to this

questionby finding a male figure. Mitthcil. Alh. 1S91,

til

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

279

is

now

and lost,
be found
a

we

cannot

recover

it unless

some

new or

evidence
two

should

to

show

his

meaning.
is

As

to

one

figures
been
"

perhaps

more

definite

agreedto generally Cephisusand probably


ends, who
an on

possible ; and 62) a river-god (Fig. recognise


conclusion Callirhoe
"

it has
a

in the recumbent

nymph at the figures

of the scene, boundaries give the topographical in close analogy with that of the similar figures interpretation plained exthe east pediment at Olympia, which were traditionally the identification in the time of Pausanias as ; and river-gods ling is confirmed by the wonderfullysoft and flowingmodelcalled llissus) of the body and limbs of the Cephisus (often ;

thus

than a century of the Eurotas, made in a statue more similarly of the body was the texture later by Eutychides,i praised of The on more position the figures as liquidthan water." at Olympia,with the actual local also coincides, the building as conditions. Cephisus, probably accompanied by an attendant beside and Callirhoe, river, nymph,2 is on the side of his own
"

whom
man,

is
near

llissus,is towards
the left
arm,

her

spring.
neck

The the

seated

bearded
him

end, round
a

whose
a

girl beside

puts her

This largesnake behind him. either Cecrops and one has been quoted to prove the figures are of his daughters, or Asclepiusand Hygieia; neither theory is as proved. yet convincingly has coil of

pediment is irretrievably group of the eastern have been rendered lost ; a discussion as to how it may belongs rather to the provinceof mythography than of sculpture. The
The central birth of Athena with
an axe on

from

the

head

of

Zeus, with the help of


or

blow

given by

Prometheus

like a early Attic vases, where of her father's littlearmed doll, actually emerging from the crown of the It is difficult to imagine how such a treatment head. by Phidias into a theme fit subjectcan have been modified even that he discarded for monumental likely sculpture ; it is more and representedAthena this conventional as type altogether, in the legend,full-grown as standingbeside her father,already, such as Prometheus and armed, while the attendant figures, who had assisted in the safe with his axe, and the Ilithyiae

subject

Hephaestus,is a the goddess is seen

common

448, " 62. figureis not present on Carrey'sdrawing, but there the block Sauer, I.e., suggests that she must have fallen when carried away was by a falling pieceof the cornice.
See p.
-

This

is
on

space for her ; which she rested

280

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

sufficed to indicate that her birth had just taken place. delivery, is the renderingof the subject on Such marble a puteal (or in Madrid, where Victoryalso floats to crown border of a well) ^ and this putealmay the new-born reproducethe theme goddess; of this eastern of figures resemblance
western

pediment.
and of the the

It must the
two
vase

be

that acknowledged
a

the

Athena

Victoryon
same

puteal bear
; and

remarkable the

to those

perhaps from figures,


while and this both
vase

pediment, on
is in favour from
to
a common

Kertch

blance resem-

of the view
source

that in the

puteal are
well may resemblance

derived hesitate between

Parthenon, Ave
so

admit

the

of probability of the

strong

pediments. However the ground of the pediment and this may on in that there was the supports provided seem to show no figure the centre of the pediment, but that here, as in the west ment, pediformed the Athena central two on figuresonly group, and Zeus, seated on his throne and facingher, on the the right,
groups be, the indications central
two

the

left. The subordinate


measure

of figures

the eastern

pediment

are

still in

preserved,and are, perhaps,the most perfect that exist. Just as, in the west of sculpture works pediment, of contest, which is provided for the scene took a local setting is framed with place in Attica, so here the birth of Athena is in heaven, the time appropriate circumstance ; the scene
great

sunrise,and
chariot
^

so,

while

Selene, the
of the

Moon,

descends

with

her

pediment,Helios rises with the sea its left corner. his team at from Facing the rising known horses of the Sun is the noble reclining figure familiarly that has little beyond its familiarity to as Theseus, a name
at

the

rightcorner

commend

it. the

Here

too

the true Brunn

identification has that the

been

much

disputed;
Mount

suggestionof

Olympus, illuminated by the rays of in its the locality, has much to indicate more definitely serving Such reclining favour. as fications personifiguresare not uncommon is thoroughlyin the suggestion of mountains ; and
harmony
of
1
^ on a

figure represents the rising sun, and

with

the conventions

of Greek this

art.

The is
as

identification

the

remaining figuresin

pediment

problematic

Baiimeister,Fig. 172.
One horse is in the ; the

the

pediment

British Museum, and suggestions that Selene

the
was

remains

of

three
one

others

are

still

riding on

horse, or driving

pair,must

therefore be set aside.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

281

as

in the

western

though

we are

can

still
;

study

the

originals,
also
as

their

distinctive
are

attributes may

systems

possible;we

gone either
at

but

here

two

regard them
the
or

strictly
as

more event, mythologicalpersonages, present it Avere, a cosmic to give it, less fanciful personifications as or would ever, local surroundings suffice. Here, howsince no setting,

the
west

two

systems

are

not

mutually

exclusive

as

in

the

that the two seated pediment ; thus Brunn's suggestion the Horae, to whom the gate of his Olympus are next figures Iris is hastening out to Olympus is entrusted,and past whom find their place in either. to the world, may bear the message

Corresponding to
restore
news

Iris, on

the

other

side,

most

authorities the

another of the

figurein rapid motion, sent to which birth of Athena ; this figure,


not

tell abroad
may

be

Victory

does (NtKT/), but her her


seems

is

head

Iris to the left, as right forward.^ Next to rather to be advancing straight sketch shows, turned seated figure, who, as Carrey's toward of the pediment. She may the middle or however hasten
to

the

not may between

form her

part of
and the

singlegroup
One other

with sits

the
on

two

that end her

are

Selene.

of these is reclined

the

of

couch, along which

leaningon
such

panion's com-

lap.
Attic Horae
can

The

three have

been of

called the

Fates,^or the three


identification

; in the absence

no attributes,

fanciful meaning,^ a more suggested and richness of the drapery, drawn from the marvellous delicacy and of the reclining as interpret them figure,^ especially be

proved :

others have

not personifications,

indeed

of

places or

but rivers,

of nature

in

more

But

it

63). general aspect (Fig. is time to turn from the meaning

of the artist to the

composition of the groups, and the execution by which their splendidconceptionhas found a worthy expression. We have already noticed the subtlety in the balance of composition shown pediment; as to the by the central group of the western we we can can eastern, unfortunately, say but little. Here
^

Sauer's

have investigations

proved

that

this

in the middle suggested,be Victory crowning Athena ^ It is true the Fates are present in the Madrid and sncli subordinate resemblance to these figures,

figure cannot, as had been of the pediment. puteal ; but they have no
additions which
were

often

made

in

decorative drawn.
^

work

from

otlier

sources

than-tliat

from

the

main

subject was
Thalassa

Thus

Brunn

calls of Gaia

them

clouds

Professor

Waldstein

suggests

(Sea) in the

lap

(Earth).

282

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

best

realise

the

great

attainment
a

of

the

comparison with field. In the east pediment at Olympia there is in the same also a balance,but of simpleand even monotonous rest ; in the western Olympian pediment there is motion enough,and motion balanced ; but it is motion either directly towards symmetrically from colossal figure the centre, where a single or directly away amidst the offers a fixed mass strugglingfigures, piignae abolition of this central figurein The nodumque mm-amque.
Parthenon

sculpturesby

designer of the his predecessors

the Parthenon
more more

pediments makes
And in the
in elasticity

the

balance

more

delicate and there is


an

subtlyfelt. variety and


still

subordinate the
be

figurestoo sightof.
their

symmetry
lost

which, in
The

architectural sides

can composition,

never

two

correspond,figure to
Thus

figure; but
Fates
"

varies in detail.
to correspond

the three
in figures

"

of the eastern

grouping pediment

three

side of the the

same

companion

very similar attitudes on the left pediment ; but while the reclining figureand in whose lap she rests form a closely-united

is slightly separated, group, from which the other seated figure other side the the two seated figures are on united,and closely the male reclining obvious be traced from figure is separated
instance

them. of

This

is

simple and
may

of

refinement

that composition attendant

the throughout. Again,_though

figures

which all present _as_spectators of the^central action, on are their interest is fixed, itjwith^a_ they do7npOlEIlLrjQ:Jtowards almost seem may had in his desire to avoid this iteration, artistV
monotonous
some turning

It iterationT/

at

first

as

if the far in

gone

too

figures away
each

from

the

scene

witness.

But

it is the moment case;

justafter
the need

they are present to the culminatingevent


of it
seems

that is rendered^in
to

and_a^ consciousness
for further the

pervadethe
either

whole

without the

concentration
led

of attention.^ Thus from

of perception

in travelling spectator,
on

extremitytowards the centre, is not strain,but is, as it were, -increasing continually


succession remains of much waves.^So
are we can so

by
on

a a

borne the

that

left; but, when

guess much

from
is

scanty
must

lost,it
have

always
To

be difficult to realise

adequatelywhat
Parthenon
it the

must

been

the effect of the whole.

study

the

execution of

of the

pediments is

the

liberal education It is

to imitate artists,

despairof sculptors.
;

to speak of impossible

it here

except in the briefest way

284

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

by

Morosini's

secretary,and
which and
its

so

there is every
some

external the

probability
Parthenon its

in favour

of its

belonging to
chin, we
can

figurefrom

pediments,to
restored
nose

seems style

appropriate.In spiteof

recognisein this head a noble and of modelling, and intellectual type, a breadth simplicity delicate play of surface,and perfect coupled with the most be matched which of marble, by can skill in the treatment only the in that the draped similar qualities we recognise may of which it must to one probably belong. figures,

Pio.

61.

"

"Theseus,"

from

E.

pediment

of Parthenon

(British Museum).

For Theseus surface

the

modelling of the nude male form we have again the and the Cephisus. The wonderfullysoft and flowing The Theseus of the latter has alreadybeen referred to.
the other hand

(Fig.61) on
that Greek

presents, as it

were,

the

sum

of all

of the had hitherto attained in the rendering sculpture male figure.There is nothing about him of the dry and somewhat forms that characterise the athletic art of earlymasters, meagre chosen by of that unduly square and massive build that was nor the

sculptorsof the Peloponnese. It is

an

absolute

freedom

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

285

from

of

of any sort exaggeration technique. His sculptural

that

marks
are as

in him

muscles

perfection correctlyfelt and


suggest that there
and the skin ; his

the

indicated, yet not in such a way closely is no interposing layerof flesh between well as in every detail, shows as figux-e
the most

to

them in its

powerful build and


a

the

heightof

character, general condition physical ;


that of
a

yet it

is that of

man perfectly-developed

rather than

successful athlete.
of grace and

Above

we dignity, feelingfor beauty of composition and pleasantnessof effect, excellence of other the more while acquiring vigorousand severe of the draped female figure But it is in the treatment schools.

in his pose, with its combination all, that Attic art has lost none of its see

(Fig. 63) that the

art

of

Athens

reaches

the

most

marvellous

Fig.

62.

"

from Cephisus (Ilissus),

W.

pedinient

of

I'artlienon

(British Mu.seum).

attainments the
most

of

its

prime, as
is

it had

devoted

to

the

same

subject
Here the the forget The the and

quaint and careful devotion


over

of its
to

youth.
make
us

mastery
slow and

the material
process

so

as perfect

laborious

by
the

which
texture

it has of

been the

attained.

marvellous almost

renderingof

drapery

of its folds does not obscure or even multiplicity but modify the dignityand breadth of the whole conception, this seems and grace. And to only adds to it a new delicacy be mainly due to two causes the perfect harmony of the drapery

infinite

"

with

the

forms

which

it covers,

and

the studied
every

and

elaborate

system

of

the

in drapery itself,
or even

which

fold, however
a

accidental apparently
in clearly

realistic in
can
"

has itself,

relation

to

the effect of the whole. the group

We

see

those

characteristics

most

of the

three

in the Fates," especially

286

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

which, perhaps more reclining figure,


these Parthenon into marble breadth the
to
are

shows sculptures, of flesh and in of

than any other,even the most marvellous

among translation

drapery.
due

The

and nobility of proportions


art

of

course are

great measure

to the

which figure, realise this


one

very different from has only to contrast which


we

those of later Greek them


see

with the

those
most

of

the

Aphrodite of Praxiteles,^in
of the expression female form.
more

perfect
these with
than

usual, perhaps more


is

human, ideal of the

nothing hard or unwomanly about Parthenon of grace figures ; only in their combination to majesty they seem imply a higher ideal of womanhood

There

FiQ.

63."

"The

Fates," from

E.

pediment

of Parthenon

(British Museum).

we

find elsewhere

in Greek

art.

The

drapery reveals, by
which
own

its

and by modelling
to

the flow of its

the limbs folds,


so
as

it

seems

hide ; yet it never its character. And

clings

to them

to

lose its
in

essential

folds,however
one

minute

themselves, are
save

alwaysdivided
the
carve

into clear and confusion


a

crumpled
so

definite masses, in an often sees

which

it from

attempt

delicate

texture.

Compare

the

Aphrodite of Melos, where these broad masses the sculptor, in his desire to escape from his own time and the styleof the fifth century, not daring to add recover
multitudinous the detail which breadth
1

paint or di'apery of the only are given,


to to

the
mar

here, and here alone, does


of the
See p. 361,

not

and simplicity

impressionproduced.

For

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

287

different effect, a
we

study of

the bold

curves

of

wind-swept drapery,
Here
the

may

turn

to

the Iris of the east

pediment.

drapery,
fall into is such But of of

stretched such that the the "the

by

the

rapidmotion
as

does not of the goddess,


rest ; the contrast

minute
some

folds
have

in the

at figures

seen

in it the work
to

of

different artist.

is rather explanation simplerDoric chiton Fates" With the Iris

be

sought in

the thicker material the

worn

by Iris,while
of folds and

drapery

is Ionic in its richness


we

fineness

of texture.

again
the

Niobid,i the Chiaramonti compare for realism in floating drapery. There is unsurpassed figure of detail to the effect of subordination more more
may

system,

whole, than

in the later work.

Of

course

we

cannot

fail to

like these,transcends his in works recognisethat the sculptor, and restraint of his predeconventions cessors surroundings ; yet the and their elaborate study of systems of drapery which
we see

in

the earlier works


even on

of Attic

art, are

not

without

their it

influence
were,
a

the artists of the without

as Parthenon, and afford,

solid framework of

which

all this

spontaneous

beauty of sculptural perfection. Many other things call for notice which must modellingof mentioned; for example the spirited
exuberance of Helios and distended

might well have

exceeded

the strict limits

be the

briefly
horses

Selene,and their contrast;

"

his horses inhale with

nostrils the air of the

the sea, and hers,tired with their the goal. This mettle as they near
we

morning as they spring from their course, stillshow nightly


need
not
us surprise even more

when famous

Myron and Calamis of animals than of for their sculpture the the Acropolis show horses from
remember that
artists in this in line,
contrast
to

were

men,

and

that of

series of

studies

earlier Attic horses

the

tame comparatively

of

Olympia.
It has often been
as

remarked

that these
as

sculptures pedimental
in

are

finished almost

behind carefully the


to

front,and this has


artist for his work where be
we

been in

quoted
be

to

show

love

of the Greek it beautiful

and his wish itself,


seen.

make

even

it could

never more

Perhaps
and
was more never

another

explanationmay
with

found,
know for of
no

reasonable

in accordance

what

Greek

art, which
We

purpose.
'

know
Of
course

that

given to spending labour Greek vase-painterlike a


"

modern
a

See
a

p. 424.

allowance

must

be made

for this Niobid

being

copy,

though

good

copy.

288

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

artist
"

was

in the habit of

drawing the

whole

of

of figure

which

the greater part was concealed behind another, in order to make that the relations of the visible parts were sure drawn, correctly and afterwards of erasingor the concealed. omitting parts

imaginethat the artists who made these pedimental had their sculptural instinct so strongly that figures developed them in the round sculptured to like a figure only in front was drawn of which only some a figure portionsshowed, and that in May
we

not

order

to

assure

themselves

of the correctness

they felt it necessary to complete the whole the rough ? The labour thus expended offers no less strong a and their determination testimonyto the devotion of -the sculptors that might add to the perfection to leave nothingundone
of their and
more-

of the visible parts, at least in figures,

work, and

it

seems

to

proceed from

less sentimental

rational motive. these


so

In

speakingof
assumed

of sculptures far that

the Parthenon
are a

pediments,
Attic
art
can

it has been and

they
we a

product of
so

the evidence

in favour How

of this view far

is

strong
them
to

that it
to

hardlybe contested.
work the of Phidias
case

himself

it is

may difficult matter


to

consider

be the In
siderable con-

decide. that
a

of the metopes we saw reason of latitude in matters amount been left to his of the
scenes

believe

of detail and if he

execution

must

have

even assistants,

superintended

the distribution

general design. But in the pediments,which were doubtless regarded the culmination as of the sculptural decoration,we cannot imaginehim to have left other hand. It would the design to any indeed have been
impossiblefor
many

and

their

Phidias

to

have

carved

with

his

own

hand

so

in marble large figures


was

duringthe short time


a

in which he had well


as

the
to to

Parthenon make

completed,
"

time

too

during which
of

the colossal

gold and ivory statue


that he

Athena,

as

superintendthe
we

whole

artistic administration

of Pericles. execution

But of the

may

well

suppose

supervised the
even as

pediments
some

in person, that he and that he had portions, of whom sculptors that We their hand
may thus

touch to gave a finishing his assistants in this work a trained


so

band

he

had

methods his
own.

could
best

hardly be
we

completely in his from distinguished

understand

excellence varieties in
uneven

in execution
in style,

which

even wonderfully in spite of some recognise,

the

the

pediments,as
which
we see

qualityof

work

the very in the metopes, and some

contrasted

with

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

289

the direct personal And, without of Phidias,it is almost influence and supervision impossibleto times also
in the

frieze.

understand execution
see as

the well them

marvellous
as

excellence

of

the

pediments
which

in
we

in

and design, almost

the vast

interval

between

and

other

contemporary
consists of the of
a

examples of
band of low the

architectural

sculpture^
the

(3)

The

frieze of

Parthenon^ the outside

relief, going

all round is about 3

cella, within
the

peristyle ; it
relief averages

ft. 4 in.
an

high, and
a

depth
on

of the

only about
now on

inch and

half.

The

greaterpart
the
are

of the frieze is

in

the

British

Museum

; that

west

end

is still in sihi
;

the also

Athens

there

are

and a few other building, some fragments in the

slabs Louvre

in and

elsewhere. The
most
were

subjectof

the frieze is the

Panathenaic

processjon^the

of the _^reat Panathenaic brilliant ceremony games, which^j held every fourth ^gar in honour of Athena. This procession, which led beasts for sacrifice to the sacred
matrons

carried the

Peplos or
Athenian best and

robe and

of the

and Acropolis, for woven goddess,


was

also her

by
the for the

chosen
was

maids,
men

all that

noblest

in the Athenian

of the city, bands of magistrates their dignity and beauty, maidens

of representative state and society ; and youths chosen noblest

of the

families,

of allied and tributary states, the resident representatives aliens in the city, all had their place in the festal procession, escorted by chariots and by the Athenian which was knights in military pomp. Such chosen to a subject was fittingly adorn the temple,as the most brilliant and characteristic act of worship in which Athena was honoured by her chosen city. On the western end of the cella, the columns of the opisthoover domus, are representedthe knights equipping themselves and the festal parade. On their horses for^ either side, north and

south,we
of them
an

see

the
are

towards processionadvancing
in riding knights,
a

the

eastern

front. front and

At the bacTc
come

the the

in 64), throng(Fig.
a

each chariots,
as (apobates)

accompanied by
well
as

marshal

armed

warrior

the charioteer.

In front

of them and

again come
musicians

bands
;

of men, ants and, on the north side attendin approaching the east front are nearest

thejbeasts Jor sacrifice, cows

only on
side

the
we

south
see

side,cows
the head

and of the

sheep on

the north.
^

On

the east

For

its position in the

see building,

p. 41.

290

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK
at

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

procession turningthe
maidens
meet
a

corner

either and

extremity ;

here

are

the

with group

sacrificial vessels of men, who


are

implements,advancingto proBabTythe nine" ai-chons and


in

Other

high functionaries.
the main
in

Then,
of entrance
as

the

centre

of the

eastern
see

side,over

door

of the of

temple, we
at

the

gods,

seated

assembly
are

guests
into
two

Athena groups.

her

high
the

festival.

They

divided

ITearest

Fio.

6-1." Slab

from

N.

frieze of Tartlienon

(Athens, Acropolis Museum).

her come Hephaestus, right ; next group is Athena Poseidon, Dionysus, Demeter (Fig.65), and Aphrodite,^ with Eros leaningagainsther knee. On the other side the place of

centre, in the

by Zeus, and beyond him Iris, Ares, Artemis, Apollo,and Hermes.


separated by a space in which expect to be, in meaning as
'

honour

is held

are

Hera, attended
Zeus and Athena
one

by
are

is

represented what

would

in

position,the

central

point

This

list of

gods

is not

the possible diflerences cannot be afforded.

beyond disputeas to some be profitably discussed

iu the

of the identifications ; but here that can space

292

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

for paration and


we

may

the great ceremony perhaps find a more

rather

than

in its

performance ;
this

of explanation probable be
to make

central group if we suppose the the old peplos of Athena away which
was

to priest

brought her. Thus quate peplosis implied by the foldingup of the old one, and an adeis provided for the group the east door; motive over why the new peplos is not though it is still hard to explain represented anywhere on the frieze.^ The group of gods on and and priestess, the priest their backs either side turn on
to

be

folding up and putting one place for the new of the new the offering

fix their attention

on

the
-

which procession,

advances

towards

them

from

either side.

at once by its unicy and^ its distinguished in the procession of design. Each element occupies a variety the long enough portionof the field to attract and to satisfy

The

frieze is

attention walks

spectatorwho sees alongthe building; yet no


of
a

it between
two

the columns

as

he
a

are figures
"

and aljke;

of principle repose of the of the

contrasts

marks

gods and
and
the

feature, the slow


men,

the majestic different parts their subtle characterisation in pose and and maidens of the advance stately the

and the

impetuous
and

rush

of the
ease

cavalry, again

of the riders. perfect by the circumstances to treatment ""In adaptation of technical careful shows so and position probably no work of sculpture calculation as this frieze again a proof of its unity of design, moderated
seat graceful
"

under

the control of of the

one

excellence

master, amidst supervising and styleof the execution


Parthenon
was

all variations in details.

So

little is this sometimes the be frieze of the Set

understood, that it has been stated

that
not

placed where

it could
narrow

seen.

in the outer

wall of the

in the cella,

the it and the entablature over space between difficult to see, and its have relief would been would
came

high peristyle,
deep
the white shadows

have

lighting.For preventeda satisfactory


below, reflected from
of explanation
is cut

lighting
marble

entirely from
This
to
"

the

pavement.

is the
say

the fact that the relief is


"

higher
the
1

that is than

in

deeper
The

slabs

in

the

lower.^

part of upper lightcoming from below,


in

the

The
Their

peplos was
to do with

carriecl
the
custom

as

the

sail

of

ship

in

late

times

but

this

has

nothing
2

of the time the of Brit. Mus. iu.

of Phidias.

depth is given in
an

Catalogue as 1^

in. at

the

bottom, 2^

at the

top, with

average

1|

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

293

and consequently it necessary to avoid deep deep cutting, the lower the other hand, shadows, in the lower part ; and, on made
contours

of

the with

are figures a

often
cut

cut

more

and clearly, make


in

even

surrounded

groove

into
are

the

ground,to
"

them
some

show, while the upper


cases cause now as

contours

weaker

so

weak

to

be

almost

invisible when

lit from

above, and
execution

to

confusion
seen

in

some

of the finest blocks All these of would


meant

of the
in

frieze when
must

in

museum. a

details

proceed from
view

consideration

the
not

lighting.The
explainall of
seen

point of
them
; and
narrower

of the spectator below the frieze was not of course

to be

from

the

where the advance of but from outside it, passage of the peristyle, the columns, would give between the moving procession, seen as
a one

lifelike appearance peculiarly after

as

its

scenes

opened themselves,
characteristic of the

another, to

the

view.

-Another

wonderfully skilful manipulationof the low relief, and to the figures, to give an so as impression of roundness of to show them, apparently one behind another, in masses even with the troops the case considerable depth ; this is especially result is obtained of cavalry. The partlyby extraordinary of in the skill and delicacy modelling the surface of marble, a in a Attic virtue of which we some saw anticipation peculiarly work like the stela of Aristocles, partlyby another device,also another in other Attic reliefs. Where known one overlaps figure at one side,and is in its turn overlappedby another, apparently in front of it, the surface of this intermediate figureis not, as surface of the to the normal it appears to be, a plane parallel
frieze is the inclined to it. This inclination is so slight but is slightly relief, and consequentlythe three figures, though not to be visible, as the into all perhaps cut an marble, appear to be equal depth
one

behind

another
most

in

three

different

planes.*in

style the

frieze is the
"

perfectexample
"

more as

human

ment grace and refineand less exalted in conceptionthan the pediments, of Attic the ideal honour

befits its

of the Avhose

people of
birth

subject it embodies Athens, unitingin the

representation
the

of

goddess

and

groups, and the master, conceptionwhich


seems

celebrated in those more spicuous conwere exploits -in design it is not unworthy of the same unity of decorative effect as well as of religious all distinguishes
as

the

of sculpture
we

the

non Partheknow
to
at

to

claim

its author

Phidias,whom
artistic

have

been

in control of the whole

of activity

Athens

294

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the time.

And all have


was

the assistants that


were equally skilful,

helpedhim
such
a

in the band

execution,
as

though

not

Phidias and
so

alone could successful

trained their in

and

influenced.

So the
as

complete
the
most

co-operationthat
a

sculptureof

the

Parthenon

stands of the
art

connected
"
"

series

perfect

example
"
36.

of Greece.

Sculptures Theseum,Erechtheum, Temple If the sculpturesof the Parthenon etc. of Wingless Victory, of supreme are importance to us, as showing the work done in under Athens the direct supervisionof Phidias himself,those structiv which ornamented other Athenian temples are hardly less inof them Though some probably belong to a time
"

Other Athenian

removed considerably
must

from

that

of

his artistic

they activity,
school
may

all of them he
was

which
us

the

regardedas the products of the of them acknowledged head ; some


be of that
we

of

show become

the

character

school
can

before still trace and


we

his

genius
also have

had

predoiflinant ; in others disappearancefrom the


here and there with the other associate

his influence after his


can we

scene;

distinguish
reason

characteristics

which

to

In the Parthenon the Attic school


an

leadingAttic sculptorsand their pupils. of indeed see the highest attainment we may must we supplement our study of its ; but
of the remains of other Attic buildings, of the varied artistic form
a

by sculpture
if
we

observation

would

complete notion

which marked the Athens activity Second only to the Parthenon of its the

of the fifth century. in the styleand preservation removed discuss from here the it
"

sculpture though
"

long way

comes

Theseum. the of
B.C.

It is Theseum

whether bones
469

impossibleto the temple built is actually


Cimon

question
the

to hold

Theseus, which
Some valid

brought back
have been

from adduced

Scyros in
against

arguments

this identification ; the strongestare those which point to the forms at such both of architecture and sculpture as impossible
a

date.

But

on

the other hand

no

other

identification

can

be

less much regarded as attaininga high degree of probability, these circumstances certainty.Under nothing is gained by giving up the accepted tradition ; but in retainingit,though have which we readilyassociates itself advantage of a name with actual
must

the

we sculpture,

must

not

draw

any

inference the

as

to

the

date of the architecture rather

and

of sculpture
it is the

but temple,
it cannot

acknowledge that, if

Theseum,

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

295

have

been bones

completed
of Theseus with
most
we

until
from

some

time

after Cimon's

bringing

the

contemporary
Theseum which The
ten

shows
were,
as

Scyros. It appears to be nearly the sculptureof the the Parthenon ; and with the metopes of that building, affinity
seen,

have

among

its earlier Theseum of and the

portions.
to

external

of sculpture
east

the

is confined

the

the metopes on adjoiningmetopes on all.


The
rest

front north

the

of the

metopes

were were

impossibleto
There
are

tell whether

they

also

said to be indications
but this has
now

contained The
that

sculpture ;
are

temple, and the four south sides eighteenin never sculptured ; it is decorated with painting. that the pediments once completelydisappeared.
"

metopes

in Parian
to
a

marble,
time the

not

Pentelic the

"

an

indication

they belong
had in

before native

Parthenon

indicated

sculptureas well as unfortunatelysuffered so severelyfrom the it is barely cases possibleto make out many towards made : Stuart's composition drawings,

highestuse

completion of the material as worthy of the architecture. They have


weather the the
a

that

in

subjectand
end of the

last century before the damage had gone so in this. The ten metopes of the east front of the between labours
two

are far, are

great help
to

devoted

nine

of

Heracles,that againstGeryon being divided


in
a

metopes

singlecomposition
"

probably
"

unique and not very successful experiment; those omitted are the the stables of Augeas,and the bull the Stymphalian birds, of their adequate of the difficulty first two doubtless because its subject is practically the third because representation, labours of Theseus, which the eight are repeated among sented repreon

the

metopes of the north and


a

south

sides.

Of these
also

Stuart's suffered and


the

drawings giveus
much since his robbers various

fair

notion,though they
The
contests

have

day.
or

between

Theseus

showed of the

whom he fought against him as a skilled athlete, making use of all the devices in his struggles saries with the brute force of his adverpalaestra for example,to compare (Fig.66). It is most instructive,
monsters

in which the skilful way bull (Fig. 67) with the

Theseus
treatment

here masters

the Marathonian

of the similar

Olympian metope, where Heracles it. The execution seems against the bull's and overpowers hard the dry and somewhat to have technique that we have learnt to associate with the schools of Critius and of Myron, and

subjectin the simply throws his weight

296

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

which and

we

in recognised

some

of the

Parthenon

metopes also

the Theseum of the

metopes
Parthenon

resemble

the less advanced

metopes

in their almost

among extraordinaryboldness bounds

the
of

sometimes composition,
fitness sculptural

the transgressing

of

in the

pursuitof
the

life and Theseum

vigour.
are over

The domus

continuous and

friezes of

the

profrieze

within opisthodomus, the

the

in the peristyle,

position
in

occupiedby
of the relief. The

of the continuous corresponding portions

Parthenon;
western,

but, unlike
which

that

frieze,they

are

high

stretches

only

across

the

breadth

Fio.

66."

Metope

of Theseum

; Thesens

and

Cercyon (after Mm.

Inst.,X. xliv. 2).

of

the

temple,
of

not

that

of

the

also, represents peristyle


The

combat frieze is

Greeks

and
to

centaurs.
an

composition
to the

of

this

due obviously

artist who

is used

designing
of
two

of metopes, and who repeats the concentrated combatants adapted to the metope form, only

groups

connectingthem
seem

loosely by
to

the aid of additional the action. Here

who figures

often

again
; it is

the

resemblance

superfluous the to
to

Parthenon

metopes
some

is obvious

not, however, necessary


frieze
was

infer,as
imitation
we

have

done, that the Theseum

made

in

if of those metopes ; it seems a sufficient explanation, to have drawn store on a conventional suppose the sculptor

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

297

of

adapted to subjects

treatment

in the

metope

form.

In

some a

cases,

however, he introduces a type unsuited to so Caeneus, half buried field ; for instance, the invulnerable
the

limited

by
him,

huge
a

stones

which

centaur

on

either side
his

pilesover
the

while in

other
manner

Lapiths,advancing
more

to

extend relief,
treatment.

scene

adaptedto
we

continuous
across

The
as

eastern
as

frieze stretches have

the breadth
^

of

peristyle
the

well

and cella, conditions

already noticed

how

tectural archi-

thus

producedhave

influenced

the

composi-

Fio.

67." Metope

of Tlieseuin

; Theseus

and

Bull

(after Mon.

Inst.,X. xliii. 2).

tion of the each member


over

a seated group frieze,

of divinities

of the

antae,
a

as

if to

continue

being placedover upwards the supporting


Outside these groups,

by
the
as

solid and

restful effect. group


a

such

is a peristyle, the binding of


a

comparatively gentleaction, portion prisoner ; while in the middle


in

of the frieze is

wild hurl

scene

of

combat, Greek

warriors

fighting

opponents
cannot

who

huge
with

stones

be

identified
as

The combat against them. probable suggestion certainty ; a


the

identifies it inhabitants

the

between fight

Athenians the
in

and

the
as

wild
the hero

of Pallene.

If so, both

well as friezes, which the


Attic

metopes, would

represent combats
1

P.

41.

298

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

Theseus

see distinguished.Here again we and distorted, action vigorous,almost exaggerated was


"

the
that it
as

same

acterises charthe

all the

of sculpture school of

the

Theseum, and marks


artists

product of
devoted
see are

that

Attic

which

was

especially
we

to

bold

subjects ; but in especially foreshortenings,


in the

athletic

in this eastern

frieze

also

the

fallen
on

which figures, frieze of the

avoided the

Parthenon, but

recur

the

temple of
The

WinglessVictory.
this little

frieze of
to

temple

has

some

resemblance

in

subjectalso
rebuilt On the

the west
in

frieze of the Theseum.


some

It is less than
are

inches eighteen

height ;
were an

blocks

of it Lord

in situ in the

temple ;
east

others

broughtby

Elgin to England.

sides south last

assembly of gods, on the other three battle scenes, Greeks against Persians on the north and sides,and Greeks against Greeks on the west; in this
front is
most

scene

authorities the

see

a were

reference

to

the

battle

of the the

Plataea,in which
Thebans and is not

Athenians Greek

engaged mostly with


Persia.
it is

other

allies of but

The

age

of

temple
removed
seems

exactly known,
the

in date from rather

later,with
spaces stands
on

probably not far of the sculptures Parthenon; the style of floating its effective use drapery
a

to fillthe

vacant

of the field. little

platform,around which was placed a balustrade,probably,to judge from the styleof the not long before the end of the fifth which ornament it, sculptures
The

temple

century.
was a

On

each of the three

sides principal

of this balustrade

of Athena, and the rest of the field is occupied figure who with winged Victories, are mostly employed in erecting to sacrifice, or and decking trophies, performing leading cows Those of their mistress. other tasks in honour figuresare and in attitude ; but it is in proportions wonderfully graceful seated
above

all in

almost

study of the texture clingingto transparent drapery, now


the marvellous the

and the

folds of beautiful

the field in rich folds across now Victories, floating that the character of the work is seen of the relief, G8). (Fig. skill and delicacywith which the perfect We have already seen of figures

pediments : here and however has gone even the sculptor beyond that perfection, wonder his skill and at the beauty of the at much we may the in his work he has made, we can perhaps recognise figures
such

drapery was

rendered

in the

Parthenon

germs

of

that

over

-elaboration

and

even

affectation

in

the

300

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK ornament

SCULPTURE not

ouap.

refinement

of its architectural Two kinds Ionic


of

we

are were

here

cerned. con-

sculpturaldecoration
over

on

it, in
in the

the

frieze

the

north

and

east

employed porticoes,
a

and

which Caryatids The in the

carried the Pandroseum

in its southwestern curious


are a a

corner.

frieze is

as mainly interesting

experiment
carved

techniqueof relief.
relief in Pentelic Eleusinian

The

which figures, thus served

in moderate

marble, were
often used

affixed to
as

background
substitute
a

of black

stone, which

for the

coloured

ground

in reliefs.

As

their result, are though many of the figures preserved, order and arrangement are lost, and even the subjectthat they
can represented no

natural

longerbe
know

identified.

We

do not
was

know

their

exact
was

date left in
409

;
an

all we

is that the Erechtheum

begun,and

unfinished it
was

year

B.C.

state for many years ; and that in the againtaken in hand and completed. The

Caryatids 69), or, as they are called in the (Fig. of the Erechtheum the Maidens, inscriptions,
example in for a figure
Greek column architecture
as

official terminology
are

the best-known of the human

of the substitution of
an

the

support

entablature, which,
the

omission of the however, specially lightened by that the burden not too so frieze, heavy for its may appear bearers. The the weakest neck, too, which is in appearance

is here

portion of
bands heads of of

is strengthened by closely-fittin figure, basket-like capital is placed upon the hair,and a light, the figures.These maidens like Canephori, are really had
a

the

human

who basket-bearers,

in jolace

the sacrificialprocession, and alike


to

in the task that delighted the goddess. Their to

did rich

honour festal

themselves the

and

drapery and

simple
the

severitywith

which

it is treated the

fit them

for peculiarly

placethey occupy impression that


to stability

; and

their

of their pose obviates the elasticity burden is heavy,and gives an apparent each has the knee
an

the whole

as composition,

nearest

to the middle

of the structure thrust

bent, and
One

thus there is
can

rent appa-

inward value

of this arrangement the right side to on the left.


; the rest
"

throughout. if one imaginesany


change
of these of

at

once one

realise the of the

placeswith

the

Caryatids corresponding
"

on figure

One
some

Museum

is now in the British Caryatids in a fragmentary them state are The

in situ in the
^

restored
was

Pandroseum.^
greatly damaged

questionwhether
1827.

it
The

The

Erechtheum
was

during the siege of

Pandroseum

restored to its present state in 1845.

in

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

301

is

to fitting

substitute
to

human

figure for

an

architectural

support is open
of

diff"erence
no

opinion;
eff'ect

but

there is

doubt the

that,

if it is
on

done,
the

depends
and the the

artistic with

skill

feeling
figure is
tion modifica-

which

treated, and
of
the

architectural harmonise

surroundings to
with the
new

conditions.. In

this respect the Caryatids Erechtheum of the pare commost

other

favourablywith examples,ancient and


the
same

modern, of
The

bold

experiment.
ings buildgreat public executed administration and of the under of the Pericles

artistic direction
must

Phidias

have

gathered togethera great


body
of artists and
in

men craftsand
we

Athens

; not

find their work

only in
so

great

public
we

monuments

like those

have in

far
state

considered, but
documents which
at

and this

inscriptions,

period are
with
a

often furnished relief and


even on

bolical sym-

at

their

head,
set

minor memorials

tions dedica-

and up Of
and

by privateindividuals. these last the largest class most interesting


of the which funeral will be
Fio.
60."

consists

Ereclitheum Caryati'l,from (British JIuseum).

monuments,
considered

later, since

they mostly belong

to

the

fourth

302

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

Ill

wide -spread show all combine how to was its highestexpression the artistic influence Avhich found of Athens. in the sculpture the publicbuildings decorating

century.^ But

Thus,

if the

recorded inscription

treaty between

Saraos

Fig. to."

"

Mouruiiig Athena"

(Athens, Acropolis llusemnl.

and

deities of Athens,the tutelary were Atheiia, one represented greeting

the

two

slates, Hera
be

and

another

in the relief at the

Numerous Among the most

top.

examplesof

such

symbolismcould

quoted.

of these minor reliefsis one (Fig. interesting found built into a wall on the Acropolis, which 70) recently Athena with her head bent down, and leanrepresents standing
1

See " 51.

il

Fio.

71."

Relief

from

Bleusis

(Athens,

National

Museum).

304

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

ing on

her

spear,

as

if in

mourning, wliile
which been
a

in front of her
or a

is

plain slab

like

on stela,

decree

list of

names

might be
of
some

inscribed.

that the

suggestedwith much goddessis representedas mourning over


warriors who have the

It has

bility plausia

list The the

of her chosen

fallen in battle.

period of this relief is probably about Its severe and Peloponnesianwar. style
of the lower

beginningof

the stiffness of the folds

earlier. But we part of the draperymay seem must always expect such productionsof minor art to be behind the attainments There of the same of the greater masters age. and directness about this figure and its apparent simplicity fail to impressand to delight all who see which rarely significance it. Another 71),perhaps the most noble of all dedicatory (Fig. is a great relief from the great Eleusis, representing tablets, and Persephone, with a boy, probably goddesses Demeter of this relief perhaps style Triptolemus. The simpleand severe that it is as earlyas the middle of the fifth century,but implies is
a

it may

well

be

somewhat

later.

So

much

restraint

and

in the treatment of drapery, show us how especially simplicity, the graceful and ornate tendency,which we saw in completel}^ again in a work like earlyAttic art, and which we recognised

the balustrade
a

of the
a

was Victories,

sometimes

overpowered by

reaction

towards leads
we see

severer
us

and
a

nobler

two
mean

extremes

to

better

style. A studyof these of that golden appreciation


in the sculptureof the all,

which

above realised,

Parthenon.

"

37.

Scholars
"

of
have

Phidias

"

Theocosmus, Colotes, Agoracritus,

Alcamenes.

We

alreadyseen
were

somethingof
under than the

ral the architectu-

which sculptures and Phidias,


us some

executed
serve

which

now

better

supervisionof anything else to give


are

notion

of his
or

style. The

Avorks which writers


are

attributed
most

to his associates

pupils by

ancient

for the

different nature, and resemble Phidias' own could hand, of which we

part of
from
some was

from the great statues only infer the character resemblance the find
a

inadequate copies or
cases

descriptions.The
been
we as more so

in

appears

to

have

close that than


once

attribution
statue
corded re-

and disputed, actually

by

some

authorities

the work

of

one

of the

pupilsof
himself. favourite

to the hand Phidias,by others assigned

of the master been the

of Agoracritus pupil of Phidias.

Paros His

is said fame

to

have

on depended chiefly

his

reputed

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

305

authorship
of

of

the

great marble
statues
are

Nemesis

at

Ehamnus,
some

one

the best-known incredible

in the ancient

world.

Many strange
of which
criticism.

and
need It

stories

told while

about others

this

workj

only be mentioned,
said that
to

require careful
them from
a

was

the

Persians

brought with
to

block
a

of

Parian

marble

Marathon,
from

in order

make

it

trophy
as a

for their the

victoryover
made

the Athenians
this

; and
a

that after the battle of

Athenians

block

statue

Nemesis,

warning against the "pride that goeth before a fall." The and the obvious approprito Ehamnus, proximity of Marathon ateness of this story, are for its invention probably responsible seeker after a subjectfor an epigram. An even more by some absurd story is that the statue was in by Agorasent originally critus in a competition with Alcamenes for the statue of Aphrodite
in the Gardens
at

Athens, and

that

after his defeat

he

Nemesis. We must as disposedof it to Ehamnus give more weight to the statement, quoted from Antigonus of Carystus, that the inscription inscribed on was 'AyopaKyotros IlapiosiTrotrycre to the statue, though Pausanias, who a tablet attached givesa detailed description of the Nemesis, knows nothing of this, and Phidias himself. Nor to simply attributes the statue can we ignore the tradition,repeated on sides, that many Phidias reallymade the statue, but conceded to his favourite the credit of its design. The ference pupil Agoracritus simplestinis that

adhered Agoracritus

so

to closely

the

manner

of his master, and ancient critics had

copied his stylewith so great success, that in distinguishing his work great difficulty from that of Phidias himself. It is,indeed, probable enough that Phidias have assisted his pupil in the design of so may recorded great a work ; but the inscription by Antigonus can be and would hardly apocryphal, imply that the certainly statue officials at was really made by Agoracritus. The
Ehamnus
may

well have
to

in their wish
statue

claim

destroyedor concealed such a record, for the more distinguished authorship


pride of
their town.
less

that

was

the chief

this statue, from of chance material,had more

Although

the

precious

nature most

of its of the

preservationthan
and his
some

other

great works
the in the British

of Phidias

it has been associates,

with destroyed,
now

exception of
1

insignificant fragments
remains
p. 64.

Museum,^ and the


Mittheil. Ath.

of the relief which

1890,

306

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

decorated We
of
are

in the National Museum at Athens.^ now pedestal, therefore again mainly dependent on the description
its

Pausanias.

The

goddess was
15

as represented on

of standing,
was a crown

colossal decorated

size, about
with what

feet

high ;

her
as

head

Pausanias

describes

small Victories

and

stags
"

of evidently representations

the oriental

winged Artemis,
was

holding stags
identified
In

in her

hands

as

TroTvta

O^jpm;"who
the
of

ably prob-

by

the she

Greeks holds
a

with branch

goddess of

Rhamnus.

a apple,in her right bowl wrought with figuresof Ethiopians. On the pedestal was representeda subject from the myth of Helen, who was said to be the daughter of Nemesis, Leda being only her fosterthese three,surrounded mother ; the principal were by figures The style of Tyndareus and various heroes of the Trojan war. the portionsof this relief which have been found shows a grace of execution not unworthy of the highest of designand delicacy and to lack the breadth period of Attic art ; but they seem which the sculpture of the Parthenon. simplicity distinguish Another work attributed to authorities, Agoracritus by some the statue of the Mother of the Gods at Athens, was by others This statue apparently established the assignedto Phidias. which the goddess was worshipped, at least at type under Athens ; she was seated,with a cymbal in her hand, and lions

her

left hand

beneath
cannot

her

throne much

; but

late
of

which reliefs,^ the


statue.

repeat this type,


Another work
set

give
common was as

notion

of
up

in bronze, was Agoracritus, in the this identified also


statue

the statue

of Athena

Itonia

of the meeting-place
a

Boeotians

at Coronea
as

described

by

Pausanias

side ; beZeus, but

Hades knows

and Colofes was he


was

is apparentlybetter informed, by Strabo, who of some for the association. mysticalreason of the most
an

another

intimate

associates of Phidias

apparentlynot

originwas disputed. the making great statue of the Olympian a table of gold and ivory at Olympia, on
the victors used
to

He

Athenian, though the country of his in is said to have assisted Phidias


Zeus. which He also made for the wreaths with

be laid ; this table

was

decorated

reliefs

" ^

Jahrb.

1894, PI.
to the

i.-vii.

p.

According 106, n. 102.


"*

(Pallat). ingeniousexplanationof
Verrall,Mythology
and

Diimmler
Monuments

in

Studniczka, KjTene,

See

Harrison

and

of

Ancient

Athens,

pp.

45-48.

308

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

the great dedication offered by the Spartans and their defeat of Athens allies at Delphi after the crushing at Aegosto make

potami

in 405

B.C.

His

in colleagues his share


was was

this work the statue


steersman to

belongedto
of

the
a

school of

and Polyclitus, inveterate him


to

Hermon,
which

naturalised

Megarian, who
abandon

the

of

Lysander's
had

ship. The compelled

enmity

of Athens

Megara,
the

the

completionof

his chief

work,

well have led to his later association with may in the Peloponnese. of sculpture

rival school

the reputed Alcamenes, who occupiesthe first place among of Phidias,has been reserved to the end, partly because pupils he appears to have been amongst the youngest of them, partly because
as

his relation
some

to

Phidias And

is not

quite so

clear and

direct

that of

others.

and

fame independent of sculptures


we

in any case, his artistic eminence It entitle him to a separate treatment.

must, however, be
of the
at

admitted the West

that,with

say in or a original copy, any '^ ancient him to so writers, by assigned either in the his
case

Olympia,

cannot

possibleexception of the temple of Zeus Pediment with certaintythat we possess,


of the statues that
we are

the

that

are

reduced

in

also,
from

as

in

those

of

Calamis

and any

Pythagoras, to
attempt
the
to

inferences his

the

evidence, in literary
and his

mate esti-

artistic

character have there

positionin
in

of history

sculpture. We pediments,that
the
statement

alreadyseen,
are

of Pausanias

the Olympian discussing difficulties in the way of accepting that they were made by Paeonius

if we do not regard these respectively ; and even difficultiesas insuperable, they are so serious that it is wiser to keep the pediments separate,and not to make them the starting point in our study of the works of the two artists to whom they to some are accounts, a assigned. Alcamenes was, according and Alcamenes

Lemnian, but
with

he worked

the Parian
a was

preferredto
famous work
to

mostly in Athens, and he is actually said Agoracritus, by his fellow-Athenians. foreigner


the

in
to

contest

have His
was

been
most

Aphrodite in
its

the

Gardens,
one

which

said

by

some

have
was

received reckoned
; in

touches finishing
as

from

Phidias beautiful

and himself,
statues
^

by
the

many

of the most

in the world
was

passage
an

of

Lucian, quoted in full


be

It

only
to

to be

exf"cted that
; but
on no

attempt would
can

made

to

assigncertain
as

extant

works at end

Alcamenes

identification

be

regarded

certain.

See note

of this section

the

Aphrodite in the Garde^is.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

309

under

Calaiuis,^this Aphrodite suppliesto


the critic "the
"

the

ideal and

statue

imagined by
view of the of the

round hands

of
too

the and

cheeks the

front
flow

face," and
the
same

the

beautiful

wrist, and
statues

-shaped delicately
model."
were

and

tapering fingers
that
were

shall be after the other

When under

we

remember

the the

which

laid

contribution

realise that, we of Calamis, Phidias,and Praxiteles, masterpieces have been unsurmust Alcamenes least for these features, at detailed description [)assed.Unfortunately we have no more in identifyto help us ing of the posture or attributes of this statue enough copiesof it among extant works, though it is likely exist of so famous that copiesmay a statue.^ Alcamenes known
is
to
us

is said from
so

to

have

many

the type of Hecate originated in which the goddess reproductions,


to

by represented

three

threefold aspect. It not a modified and figures


but

figuresset back is probable that we


softened

back, typifying her

in such recognise may survival from primitive idols,

rather

one

distinction
next

of
:

refinements mythological shall meet such as we personalities of those

in the with be
up

subtle in the runner forethe

century
of

Alcamenes, in this way,

seems

to

the
on

bastion

set Scopas. The statue of Hecate was beside the temple of the WinglessVictory.

Alcamenes One
was

also made the the

several other well-known

statues
was

in Athens. in the

that in gold and ivory, Dionysus,

temple close temple

by

great theatre.

The

foundations
are

both
;

of the and

and

of the basis of the statue the

still extant

figureupon coins show that the god was in one hand and a sceptre or seated on a throne, holding a cup thyrsusin the other.^ Of a statue of Ares made by Alcamenes know we nothing but that it stood in a temple of the god. His Hephaestus, also in Athens, is selected for praise by Cicero ; both feet, the god was and, with the as on represented "standing indicated,yet slightly help of the drapery,his lameness was to not so as give the impressionof deformity." It is natural this statue with the limping Philoctetes of Pythato compare goras, whose pain seemed itself felt by those that saw to make
him. The
contrast

of reproductions as represented

gives us
reserve
1

the

essential difference the associates of

between

the moderation

and

that mark
P. 233.
ou on

Phidias,

See note

at end
^

of this section
Num. Com.

the

Aphrodite in
1-4.

the Oardens,

Paus., CC.

310

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

and

the

powerful and

even

painful vigourof
of freedom limits of

the earlier archaic

sculptors,
trammels,
and

who, in the first exuberance


sometimes

from

transgress the
statue at

artistic reticence

sobriety.
Another
a

of

god by
;

Alcamenes
a

was

an

in Asclepius,

temple
a

Mantinea

he

also made
up

colossal Athena

and

Heracles
as

of Pentelic of his

marble,^set

by Thrasybulusat Thebes,
that

memorial

from starting This last

city on

the

expedition
the

which

terminated
B.C.

in successfully

tyrants in 403
date in the
career

expulsionof commission gives us


the and shows
us

thirty
still he
a

the latest
was

of Alcamenes,
at
even

that he

in full artistic vigour


was

the
a

end

of the fifth

century.^ If
been
a

also

pupil
we we

and

rival of
must

Phidias,according to
have

his tradition, widely-spread

career

long one,
our sideration, con-

for

even

if

exclude
must

the

Olympian
that

pediments from
he had

still allow the

already
the

attained

an war.

eminent

positionbefore
of

beginningof
Alcamenes

Peloponnesian
mentioned He
in

Two

statues

goddessesby
an

are

connection
to have

with
an

stories of

artistic

competition.

is said

to that sent preferred Aphroditewhich was of his the partiality rather from in by his rival Agoracritus, We of his work. than the superiority from fellow- Athenians of this the sequel have alreadyseen, in considering Agoracritus, of disposed same story, which tells how the defeated competitor

made

his statue the the


was

as
"

Nemesis.

Whether
"

the
or

was Aphrodite in question

goddess
the
one

of the Gardens
seems

not

there is
we

no

evidence that

; but

identification work

when probable,

consider been made

this the

of Alcamenes

said to have

with

help of Phidias,and
same

that the Nemesis

also had

the credit of the

assistance. record
a

Thus

to

contest

be its worth, seems the story, whatever between two pupilsof Phidias,each of them
master.

helped by
a

their

common

There and

is

yet another

story of

between competition
1

Alcamenes
the

Phidias

himself,recorded
^Trt
tvttov

Perhaps
It has

if relief, the

we

accept
that

simple emendation,

\i6ov

rod

UevT"\ri"Ttv ; but
'

readingis doubtful.
this fact

of the employment precludesthe possibility have in he must But the Olympian any case of Alcamenes on pediments. old he if as were as he worked for Thrasybulus ; Sophocles when been an old man still be possible, though of that poet produced the Philocletes, it would when improbable, that he might have been employed sixty years before at course Olympia. been

maintained

1,1

THE

FIFTH

CENTUR'S"

480-400

B.C.

311

hy Tzetzes,
commission columns Idfty
i;iaceful

on was

what for

authoritywe
two

cannot

tell.
to

In this be
set

case

the
upon

statues

of

Athena,

up

;^ and

it is said that the work

of

Alcamenes, being
were

and

delicate, pleasedbest before the

two

mounted

and

had calculated all his effects and but Phidias position, to be seen, and for the height at Avhich they were proportions therefore,though his statue, with its parted lipsand distended look well close, it testified the skill of the did not nostrils, it was set up at a height. Though artist by its fine effect when for this story, that there is any historical foundation it is unlikely due originally it embodies probably a valuable pieceof criticism, in
to some one

who

was

familiar
with

with
we

the works know of

of

both

artists.

It, is well in accordance


statues ("(jlossal

what

Phidias,in whose

of geometry and of principles application is praisedelsewhere was indispensable ; while Alcamenes optics of his work in detail. for the delicacy Besides these statues of divinities, only one athlete is ascribed the
to
'

Alcamenes, ncrinomenos, a
It

bronze

"

who pentathlus," the


exact

was

called hard

the
to

word

of which
mean
"

"being "entering a have and an for qualification examined so represented may ; to but in display standingso as action, athlete,presumably not himself to the best advantage. Being a competitor in the "all-round" be an athlete, evenly pentathlum," he would and such a subject might developed in all parts of his body ; ideal renderingof the athletic well offer an opportunityfor an development. If we figure in its finest proportions and it to it would be interesting this figure^ l)0ssessed compare of similar intent, with the Doryphorus of Polyclitus, a statue We with which it is probably about contemporary. can hardly
catch.-

should

meaning is contest," or

'"

Statues

set

most and of

tempting
even

columns on up "aliove to translate


"

"

were

not

usual

the
two

columns,"
Athenas
set

i.e.

to refer this story to the

in
as

the

Parthenon.

But

this

is best

aside

times, and it is pediments of a temple, the east and west pediments but not profitable a possible,
until in the

Roman

have but little if the story did refer to these two, it would speculation. Even rhetorical character. in real their being clearly weight as to authorship, rendered to imply in German It is commonly seems mustergaltig, which other the In "chosen translation tense. model," ignoring as a present ;i cases, such seem as always to anadyomene, etc., such present participles apoxyomenos, this and the subject is undergoing in the representation, refer to some process followed here. be should if analogy possible "* It has been suggested that we recognise it in a figure of a pentathlus, may he is evidently preparing for the left hand. But with the discus in his standing before throw, not merely standing judges (seeOverbeck, 3rd edition, I. p. 276).
-

312

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULFTrKE

chap.

would be by Alcameues and more much as lighter opposed to the massive and graceful, Xor is this contrast powerful form preferredby Polyolitus. drawn between the same inconsistent with another two tors sculphere who by Quintilian, couplesPhidias with Alcamenes in He for the beauty and laborihis criticism. ous praises Polyclitus of confinish of his work, yet says it lacks that nobility ception type
1

doubt

that

the

athletic

chosen

which

we

find in Phidias

and Alcamenes.
was

All' we
the

learn
verv

from

other

criticisms is that Alcamenes


some

placed in

rank highest He
seems

to

: by sculptors among have been the most and original

second

only
most

to

Phidias.
vei-satile and

the

among

his

Being fellow-pupils.
by
the
many

the

youngest

of them,

his master surviving great degreefrom


case,

years, he probablyescaped to a overshadowinginfluence which, in their


in absorbed being practically in gold and ivory, in marble,

Jk

led

to

their fame worked

rhar and

of in

Phidias. bronze
;

He

but, with the exception of the athlete just mentioned.


represent gods,and
been
a

his works
to

largeproportion of
fact
seems

them

seem

have

temple statues.

This

to

us justifv

in

the following

tradition of ancient writers, and

Alcamenes classing

the pupilsof Phidias. among In the fifth century the old

images of the gods, which had of worship, hitherto been the chief objects to be considered came because the old mythological and more more partly inadequate, longer the more enlightened conceptionsfailed to satisfy any
the

of aspirations contrasted
too

people,partly because
the wealth of In this crisis the have

the

primitive idols
came sculpture

with crtidely them.

sculptural offerings
of the incalof
""

that surrounded
to

art

the assistance of

religion."We

alreadyseen
and Athena

culable influence in

of works

like the Zeus

Phidias, "_'

the religious and ennobling conceptionsof the many, raising thev might the few to the old forms which and in reconciling else have various of the the
meet
so

been

inclined

to

reject. The
demanded

numerous

temples
such

and

divinities of Greece

many
a

embodiments

to conceptionbelonging religious

shrine,and particular
to especially

pupilsof

Phidias In

seem

to

have

set

themselves
followed
was

the need. that closely

doing this they

often

their

master

their separate

existence

almost
but the

: forgotten

'

that

It may seem strange to transKite jM"ndug in this way, is in .acconlance be the nieauiug.which this must

contrast

shows
use

with

the

Latin

of

etc gravitas,

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

313

but
a

it

was

no

small

achievement which
were

for them deemed

to

have

produced
of attribution

series of
to

great

statues

worthy

sculptors. If Phidias founded no beyond the lifetime of those who with him, this was had actuallyworked chieflybecause his influence was more personal in character, and imparted lofty noble ideals and conceptions of the gods, rather than any skill in particular kinds of or systems of styleand proportion, technique. But here and there in later times we shall come their inspiration to draw other artists who seem across directly
the greatest of Greek definite school which extended
from

Phidias ; and
serve

though
to

we

cannot

class them power retained


even

also his

as

his

pupils,they
and rem.'iiued, the
reverence

show

that

the

of

that his great statues and affection of Greece, turned aside to follow
new

their after

example positionin
the
art

of

had sculpture aims.


}\ole, vn, delicate and in several called Venus into relation the

methods

and

different

Aphroflltein
the the best

the

Gardens. in
a

"

A
in

statue

of

Aphrodite, of
It is

very

refined

clothed style, known

transparent,clingingdrapery,exists
the Louvre.

copies ;
with the thus

is that

generally

Genetrix, because
statue

have been brought it appears coins which on Arcesilans for the Julian made by family (see earlier
"

" 78).

But
"

tyj^e occurs

for

example

in

terra-cottas

from

Asia

Minor,

and

adopted types

like his contemporary that Arcesilaus, it appears Pasiteles, from earlier artists, which he reproduced in their general

the impres.s of his own and executo them manner tion. without refusing to assign this work to legitimate, earlier statue which he reproduced. Arcesilaus, to look for the famous others the Gardens and it the in of Aphrodite as identify Furtwangler The identification is a tempting one, but lacks definite evidence. Alcamenes. The statue is just what would to be like, one imagine the work of Alcamenes identification w ell be else. In fact this stands it something yet may perfectly the the of the the much attribution on same ground as "Apollo on Omphalos" and as an indication of to Pythagoras ; it is worth as a conjecture, recording the impression evidence, but cannot be inserted as a produced by the literary It is therefore

character,while adding

pieceof here, as

verified information. in the


case

More of

detailed

consideration the

is therefore

reserved

of the works the extant

for Pasiteles, derived.

section

concerning the

from sculptor

whom

are copies

of Calamis and Myron, and other Attic Sculptors. Praxias the Athenian, a pupil of Calamis, began the sculpture in the pedimentsof the temple of Apollo at Delphi,which were We know completed after his death by Androsthenes. nothing of this sculpture except its subject Apollo,Artemis, and Leto, with the Muses, in the eastern pediment, and Dionysus and the Here we of see Thyiadesin the western. again the principle the contrast, which we have already noticed elsewhere,between
38.
" "

"

Scholars

314

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

quiet and
rout

stately subject on
at

the front of the And the

temple,and
on

the
one

of bacchantes

the

back.

sun setting

pediment, presumably balanced by the rising chariot of the recalls the risingsun at the oppositecorner, and setting moon in the eastern moon pediment of the Parthenon, and may even have the extremities suggested that splendid device for filling and at the same time givingappropriate of the triangular field, to the central subject. Unfortunatelythe French surroundings
excavations these have
not

led

to

the

pediments,which
It
seems

must

of any remains of recovery have been entirely destroyedor


to connect

removed.
Attic

natural

the

employment

of

artists upon the temple at Delphi with its rebuilding by the Attic family of the Alcmaeonidae, who of front a supplied marble added when also

they only
the

contracted

for stone

that adorned sculptui'e it hardly seems In any case metopes. have been Calamis would employed to that of Delphi, after the pre-eminence of worked
must

they may have the pediments and likelythat a pupil of decorate a temple like
;

Phidias

and

those
so

that
Ave

under

him

at Athens

had

been

acknoAv]

edged; and

these pediments to the firsthalf of the fifth probably assign the pediments and the metopes, Avhich contained century. Both from and of Heracles scenes a exploits gigantomachy

and does when

Perseus, are
not

referred

to

in the Ion

of

Euripides. But
been credit have

this

imply necessarily play


their
to
son was

that

they had

recentlyerected
Athens induced

the

gained by
an

brought out ; though the presentationto the temple may


dwell and upon His them.
seems

Attic poet the Lycius, the basis

pupil of Myron,
date of

to

have
an

followed

in his father's
on

steps.

is established

by

inscription
the
Pausanias

crowning one

the

two

buttresses Athens.

that form

extremities
saw

the
a

wings of statues equestrian

of the

the
that

Propylaea at
stood
on

these
them

buttresses, but,
with the
sons

by
of

connected strange misunderstanding,

Xenophon. His mistake was explained by the discovery made of the inscription, which records a dedication by the Athenian knights from the spoil of their enemy in a victory the not gained under the leadershipof Xenophon (of course historian ^) and others ; the name had evidentlycaught the eye of it without reading the of Pausanias, and he had made note a
'

It is

tempting
as a

to

suggest that

it

was

his

grandfather;

if so, the

taleut

of

Xenophon

cavalrygeneralwould

be

hereditarj'.

316

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE
at

chap.

which time

representeda

slave

and entrails, roasting his breath. of This

the

same

blowing up
identified

the
as a

fire with favourite

last slave

is

further workmen
a

employed on that heightand was injuredso seriously

of the skilled one Pericles, the buildings fell from at Athens, who his life was

despaired
told him
a

of, until Athena


to make
use

appearedin
not

dream

to
as

and Pericles,
a

of the herb

Parthenium^

remedy.
statue

As

thank-

there was set up offering Hygieia by Pyrrhus, of


situ in front of
a one

only the
the

bronze

of Athena

which

of the

columns

in basis may still be seen of the Propylaea,but also

described. of the slave himself,in the attitude already portrait made It seems likelythat two examples of so curious a subject, the same at about time, by Lycius and Styppax respectively
must

have

had

some

relation to

one

another

; but
was.

it would

be
more

futile to

exactlywhat conjecture
to
note

that relation

It is

instructive bronze but not

the

characteristics
a
"

statues, which

belong to

of this little group of class which has been quaintly

termed inappropriately religious genre." The subjects intended to not were interest, evidently only for their own sake, but also for the opportunity which they gave for the displayof the artist's skill, yet they are dedicated to religious is actually for a deliverance. a thank-offering purposes, and one

Perhaps, in this case, the nature of the subject was a device to the setting the sacred to a slave within justify up of a statue of the previous century, a somewhat precinct, as, at the end
similar had difficulty of vindicated Harmodius for her
a

been and
statue

met

in the

case

of

Leaena, the
her

panion com-

When Aristogiton.
on

fortitude

which seemed to Acropolis, be precluded by her profession, Amphicrates had symbolically recorded her heroism, by representingher in the guiseof a
the

the beast whose name lioness, have rendered this slave, under the sacred
^

she the

bore. of guise

So too
a

Styppax may
attending

minister

fire
we

on

the altar.^
Parthenium,
in

Not

what for

call

but

plant

common

on

still used
vento
^

healing puriioses (soHeldreich).


suggestion that
the

the

Levant

; it is called

the Acropolis, and erba di or dfe/xoxopro

Tlie

this slave

was

as rejiresented

actuallycrouching before

tenable. Pyrrhns, and blowing wp the fire on her altar,is unThe distance altar of Athena is in front at some a one Hygieia large of the statue ; and the statue of the goddess is a dedication,not an object of have Tlie which that the slave it is stood, worship. long basis,on suggested may These facts are is obviouslyan addition of much later date. incorrectlystated

the

feet of

Athena

of

in almost

all books

on

the

subject.

in

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

317

Cresilas of

Cydonia was
of
to

Cretan, but
some

his association famous

with in

and the presence Pericles,

of his

most

works

Athens, make

it natural

class him

among

the Attic artists.

Fir.. 72."

Portrait

of

Pericles, prubably after Cresilas

(British Museum).

The
recent

basis of his

of Pericles has been found portrait excavations the Acropolisat Athens, and on the from original which
are

during the
the work
extant

is

doubtless

derived

several

of them one copies, by its simple and

in the British Museum


severe

treatment,

72).This portrait, (Fig. in the modelling especially

318

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

of eyes and at the same make


"

beard, shows
time the

the character

and nobility the words


est

of the fifth century ; and of the face ideal treatment


to Pliny applied

one

understand
in hac
arte
an

of

this

work,
of
pression ex-

miramque
so

quod

nobiles viros nobiliores fecit."^ and


up

It is not Pericles

much
we

accurate

presentment of the features


us,
as an

that of

have

before

embodiment who summed


in

himself

the

of the man personality of glory and artistic activity the


is
no

in

Athens

the

fifth

century
more

; there

attempt

to

catch

the minor
in

details and

accidental
statue

traits of the

as individual,

later

portraits.
;'" Pericles,
B.C.

The

is dated
no

by

the

to about inscription

440-430 face of

yet it shows
who is

signof

manhood. in as represented which has given rise to much statue Another by Cresilas, wounded and described by Pliny as is one a man discussion, little^ life is left." This feel how in whom one can fainting, statue identified with a bronze on is by generalconsent work the Acropolis at Athens, described by Pausanias, representing
"

advancing age of the full perfection

in the

the

Athenian
on

wounded Diitrephes,^ general, the

with

arrows

;
son

basis found

recordingHermolycus Acropolis,

the

of

must Diitrephesas the dedicator,and Cresilas as the artist, almost certainly belongto this statue, and dates from about the

middle square unusual and


an

of the 5th century. holes in it, lying in


must

The
one

basis is square, and has two the for fixing of its diagonals, been

statue, which

therefore

have
a

representedin
with pierced and it has
same

some

position.A

of figure his feet about this

warrior

arrows,
on jectured^ con-

with staggering, Attic lecythusof that which it may

some

distance

apart, is found
been of this

period ;

represent the death


a

phes, DiitreAthens caution


on

caused evidently in

good deal
Of of
course a

of sensation

at

from

its

circumstances. peculiar
a copy recognising

considerable

is necessary
'

contemporary
i] rixv]
marvel
as

statue

Perhaps

translated

from

au

epigram, aXK
"

Kal of

tovto

Oavud^uv
is,that
it

Tovs tx"* added has

nohilis in
artist "has
-

evyeveh erev^ev to the nobility of Pliny usually means


added
to the

i.e. "the evyevearipovs, noble


men
"

this art Jones the

but,
"

H. it may

Stuart
mean

remarks,
skill of the

only

famous

so

fame

of famous

men," by making their portraits.

AeXr.'Apx. 1889,
See Not H. S.

^
*

Jones,

p. 36. No. 148, note.

vii. 29

who is mentioned Pausanias by Thucydides as supposed, the Diitrephes of the same earlier man but an perhaps the father of name, (413 B.C.), 75, etc.). So Furtwiingler,Masterpiexes, Nicostratus (iii. p. 123. ^ 124. loc. cit., See Furtwiingler, p.

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

319

vase

of this
are

period ;
to

such

a we

thing
do

is very If

unusual, but
these

the

coincidences of pieces
to have
vase
"

strange if
the

not

suppose
we see

various
statue

evidence

be connected.

imagine the
in the
on

been
as

in much

positionwe
the

on figure

the
was

is

from probable

indications

the

basis

"

it

in bronze technique a tour-de-force certainly ; and in of a man and its representation distorted attitude, the

its curiously
to fighting

and of Myron's Discobolus us verge of death, it reminds that Cresilas fell strongly under show to Ladas, and seems

Myron's
but the
one

influence.
; two

Of other works
more

of Cresilas

we

know
with

nothing

names

bases have been

found

Athens, belonging to a statue of Athena, Chthonia ; he is also said Hermione, from a statue of Demeter
at to

his name, another at

have in him

made the
as

Doryphorus^
artist

and

wounded

Amazon

"

one

of

those
mark

famous
an

Ephesian competition. These of considerable varietyas well


artist of considerable but little. One fame

suffice to
as

of

high

ideals and

technical skill.
and

is another Strongijlion

variety,
which
is

of whose

works
to

we

know

of them

often referred wooden


out

in bronze, a represented,

colossal

horse The

of

Troy, with
appears

some

of the Greek

of the figure heroes looking


on

of it.
at

basis of this horse has been


to

found

polis the Acro-

Athens, and

date from

414

B.C., when

it is referred

to

year not longbefore in the Birds of Aristophanes:


a

is Strongylion

said to have

been

famous

for his

sculptureof
a

it has been bulls ; whence the horse on the dedicated near bull,

horses and

that conjectured
was Acropolis,

bronze

also

by

him.

As to another He made
a

work
statue

of his of
at

we

have

more

Artemis

Soteira The

information. satisfactory at Megara, of which a


towns

was replica an

set

up

Pagae.

coins of these two

show

in a temple and of Artemis, at Pagae actually figure be the statue made a on by Stroiigybasis; this must certainly lion.^ It was of bronze, and the coins show us that the goddess as was holding two torches, and in rapid motion. represented round the waist and barelyreaching She wears a short chiton, girt the regular dress of the to the knee, and high hunting boots" in late Greek art ; indeed, it seems Artemis huntress likely the creation of attribute to Strongylion enough that we must identical
^

So

only by
and

probable emendation
unknown.

Pliny'sMSS.
PI. A. 1.

ascribe

the

work

to

Ctesilaus otherwise
-

Imhoof

Gardner, Num.

Com.

on

Pans.,

320

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chak

this

type, one
may
we

of the most
not

familiar in Greek

mythology.
copy

though we
at

be able to
see

identify any
or

If so, of his Artemis reflection in


a

Megara,
on a

may

her

more

less remote

many

well-known small

statues.

Other

works

were by Strongylion

boy

Brutus,an
shin"^
statues

felt for it by for the admiration scale,famous Amazon, who was called Eucnemus,or "of the beautiful

(notone
of

of those in the
on

and Ephesian competition), From these few facts


we

three
can

Muses

Helicon.

infer neither the about both the time Athens

nor origin

the school of

of the

Peloponnesianwar,
cannot to have
seems
a

Strongylion ; he lived for and as he worked


with

and

Megara, we
He

him assign worked

certainty
in the

to any

influence.

almost

exclusively
influence among

in

bronze, and

created

later art; excessive affectations of Roman Callimachus with is


an

type which was admiration of his


amateurs.

of wide work
was

Calamis,as an in contrast sculpture,


and the

seen coupled already of Attic example of the graceful subtlety of Phidias to the grandeur and breadth we

artist whom

have

Polyclitus.He, indeed, represents more direct succession of purelyAttic art, which


in Calamis before the reaction
to

than
we a

other any traced to its

culmination
severer

stronger and
is said far
as even

styleunder
carried

Doric

influence. and

Callimachus
so delicacy

to
a

have

this refinement

to

be

fault ; he his art away with satisfy which

is called
on

who frittered the man catatexitechnus, and is said to have been so difficult to details, work that the excessive and laborious finish

his

own

have seen, its beauty. In him some he gave it destroyed of those over-refined and the originator without not reason, the Neo-Attic affected works which a reliefs, as later, occupied

prominent placein
Plataea,we
some

decorative

art.

Besides of

statue

of Hera

at

learn of

only one
at

dancingLaconian
festival of Artemis
not

sculpture by Callimachus, maidens, probably those who danced at


work

the

Caryae,and
with the

were

called

these must in later

be confused Such be

in architecture.^ and may reliefs, We

later figures not are dancingfigures

Caryatids ; called Caryatids


uncommon

by
^

Callimachus.

hear

derived from the statues ultimately but also of him not only as a sculptor,

She
him is

was

with There
-

;
no

These

presumably also on a small scale,since Nero had her carried about but perhaps the eccentricities of that Emperor are beyond calculation. Amazon with this statue. sufficient ground for identifying any extant architectural figures were simply called Kopai, in the fifth century.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

.B.C.

321

as

skilled

in other the

branches
in the

of decorative

and

mechanical
burned
as

art ;

thus he made year and

lamp
a

Erechtheum, which
serve

all the

round, and had


he
"

golden palm-tree to
the
as

chimney;
Corinthian

is

credited

with

invention

of

the

capital perhaps
at

in error,

it is

already found

in the

temple

have used there the invention of Ictinus may ; but his fellow- Athenian. He is also said to have first used the drill that is to say, probably, the running drill for cutting the folds of drapery and other deep lines of modelling. In fact,
in marble
"

Bassae

his influence inventions

on

later

art

and

his mechanical his actual

and

technical
in

him distinguish
Attic

beyond

attainment

sculpture.

"
of

39.

The outside Athens; Fhigalia." influence

temple

of the one was Apollo Epicurius at Bassae, near Phigalia, in the Peloponnese,^ famous alike for the magnificence of most its position, and the beauty of its architectural forms and its decoration. It was built by the people of Phigalia sculptural in thanks to Apollo,to whom they attinbuted their immunity from a plaguethat ravagedthe surrounding country during the It has been disputed whether this was the Peloponnesianwar. but said by great plague of 430 B.C., described by Thucydides, him to have spared the Peloponnese, or another plagueten years later. Architectural and sculptural forms combine to confirm the attribution of the temple to this period. The temple is of peculiardesign, and shows us the freedom with which a great architect like Ictinus, who was employed on this temple as well as the Parthenon and the Hall of at Athens the Mysteries at Eleusis,dealt with the conventional plan of a Greek temple. At first glance the temple appears to be of the usual form, with and opisthodomus and surrounded pronaos with a peristyle, except that it faces north and south instead of
east

and

west.

But

the interior of the

deviates strangely building


a

from south

the normal

arrangement;

it consists of

small

cella

at

the

end, openingtoward

the east doubtless

by
was

door in the the

side of the usual. all the To


rest

temple; here
the north of the

long eastern statue, facingeast as


court,

of this cella is

an

open

taking up
Ionic
in

and building,
one

surrounded

by
the

attached

columns, varied
middle
^

by
space
it
was

Corinthian,the earliest known,


the
to

the

of

the
says

between
second

cella and
the

court.
Alea at

Over
Tegca,

Pausanias
was

which

built

only by Scopas (see" 49).

temple

of

Atlieua

322

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

CHAP.

these

columns

ran

the

continuous

frieze of the

temple, round
the friezes that
was

the interior of the

oblongcourt.
the outside the of

Hence,
a

unlike

usuallysurround
from
one

it building,
at

all visible

point. Over
to

pronaos,

the

north

end,

in

the metopes at Olympia. were in high relief" Of these only comparatively metopes, sculptured insignificant These, as well as fragmentshave been recovered.

similar position

that

occupiedby

the
now

which frieze, in the


in

British

excavated

marble,^ are Peloponnesian fine-grained The sculptureswere Phigalian of 1811, by a party explorers, includingthe
a

is in

Museum.

architect Cockerell ; and


in 1814.
our

were

purchased by
to

the British Government

Being

added

the

Elgin marbles, they make


for the

national

collection

unrivalled

study

of

tectural archi-

of sculptures

the fifth century.

Fig.

73."

Slab

from

Pliigalian frieze

; Heracles

(British Museum).

The

subjectof fbe
Amazons

fri^yp.

wag

l]]^ battle

parts,a ed_into_two
slab

battle

of JjxeeM_and

and

oTLapitErJiii^niJent
over,
to

the former the


exact

latter order

occupyingtwo the rest filling

sides ot the of the


a

court, and one other two sides. deal of

As

the

of the slabs there is

good

but uncertainty,
to

it
a

seems

clear that each of

of the short

north and south, had sides,


a

group The

to interest, especial

aff'ord

centre

the

position. com-

battle with To in
a
'

the this

corner.

west probablybegan at the southsubject belongsthe group of Apollo and

Centaurs

Artemis

chariot; she
From the

drives, while

he

bends

his

bow

quarries of Doliaiia,near

Tegea.

324

HANDBOOK to show

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

seem together, as we

that the the

designis

due

to

should

expect from
Parthenon. of
see

employment
as

artist, of Ictinus, the


an

Attic

architect
to

of the work
we

But

the frieze does the

not

appear

be

the which

the
on

same

hands the

decorative

tures sculpAthens

various and

buildings of
mannerisms

itself. in
treatment

Some

of

their

excellences male it

defects, their superiority


in

rendering the
of

form, the

the

drapery,make
of
an

were ponnesian training

that local artists of likely employed in the execution, under


master.

Pelothe

direction general

explain the

obvious

this way best we can affinities in design to works of the Attic

Attic

In

school ; while the pictorial and decorative elements, especially in the treatment of drapery,were either exaggerated naturally
or were

mastered inadequately unfamiliar. confirmed


a

by
the

the

local artisans evidence and


so we

to

whom

they by
with the

Here

internal

offered the
meet

styleis
somewhat

by literary authority ;
clue
to

Phigalian
a

sculpturesoffer

guide
in
^

us

when

similar
^

character in Asia

other

sculpturesboth
out

in the

Peloponnese
as

and

Minor.
names

Two " 40. Polyditus.^" of representative the

stand

beyond
"

all others

those of of the fifth century sculpture Phidias and Polyclitus. So far we have considered either works artists the influence of Phidias in which is predominant,or whom the But she it is natural
most to associate with not

the school of which the

he

was

if figure, distinguished

acknowledged head.
artistic exclusiveness
;

Athens
seems

in the fifth century shows no for herself rather,in claiming in the


arts

pre-eminenceamong
to
a

the Greeks
extent

of peace, to have become absorbed into and to have representative,


was

certain much
to

herself

of what

best in the work


own

of her

neighboursin
We have

addition
in

her continuing

particular, of how the monuments to a strong accession testify Peloponnesianinfluence in the Attic art of the earlier part of
seen,

earlier traditions.

the fifth century, and how of the master to two a as The who
1

tradition

Ageladasof Argos assigns


artists at this

greatestof Attic

time.

third

accorded j)upil him


as

to

succeeded
See p. 339.
The the Greek

the

Ageladasby tradition is Polyclitus, head of the Argive school recognised


2

gg^ p_ 345^

EoXy/cXeiros
But

hence

French

the Polyclete,

by English scholars.
familiar to

English readers.

by Cicero and Quintilian, Polycletus used sometimes and the form Polyklet, is form more used the by Pliny, probably Polyclitus, KXeirox in Shakespeare. Cf. Clitus
is transliterated German
=

fll

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY

"

480-400

B.C.

326

of athletic

sculpture.
in the
case

The

relation

has

in

all three

cases

been

disputed. Although
artistic connections difficultiesdue here
so

we

of

challenged might have expected it to pass unwhose Argive originand Polyclitus,

seem

to

vouch

for its historical the


to two

truth, the

to the

serious

that

dates of respective they have led many


we

are sculptors it as impossible. reject mission com-

If, however,
as

admit

that is

Ageladas accepteda
in difficulty

there no supposing B.C.,^ far as falls entirely, artistic activity so that Polyclitus whose we know, within the last fortyyears of the fifth century may his veteran have worked as a boy under predecessor. However this may be, he certainly acceptedthe tradition of the Argive handed down school as it had been by earlier sculptorsand consolidated during the long life of Ageladas; and though he was regardedby later time as the first to introduce a system of it is of proportions, and to establish a canon athletic sculpture, of this he owed to his predecessors. difficult to tell how much late
as

455

"

"

But
a

his great creative temple statue second technical skill


"

which imagination,

enabled

him

to

make

only to

those of he
was

ful Phidias,and his wonderconsidered


"

in which

by

many

to
a

stand

first among

all the

sculptorsof antiquity, gave


of the

him

above position

all previous masters

Argive school.
the schools

What,
ideal of

however,
of

was

generally regardedas
statue

the most

characteristic work

the was Polyclitus as bodily perfection, Peloponnese in their it


as was

in which

he embodied athletic
statue

conceived earlier
a

by the period a
"

of the

which

served, as
the

intended, for
influence
on

model the

to

all later

and exercised artists,

much

Zeus So

of Phidias

exercised been

as bodily type of Greek sculpture i deals. its on religious

far,it has
was an

assumed This

without

discussion which

that
on

clitus Polythe

Argive.

statement,

rests

would require no comment highestauthorities, schools assertion that he was a Sicyonian, The united Sicyonseem always to have been closely that their
common

but for of

Pliny's Argos and


the fact in the

; and

centre

was

transferred

to

Sicyon

for the confusion. fourth century suffices to account If,as we have seen to suppose, Polyclitus reason was ture employed on sculpknow as early as the middle of the fifth century, we

nothing
devoted

of

the

work

of

himself

during

earlier years. Presumably he that knowledge this time to acquiring his


1

See p. 192.

326

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

of the athletic human

form
to

which

was

the chief tradition of the


statues

Argive school, and


formed
a

making

the His

of

athletes

that
is

its

commonest

product.

earliest recorded

work

who won in the boys' Olympian victor Cyniscus, 440 B.C.^ Other to about boxing match ; this may be assigned bases of athletic statues of Polyclitus have bearing the name been found at artists of this two Olympia ; but there were and the younger is probablythe one and less famous to name,
statue

of the

whom works various

these

must inscriptions

be both

of the athletic
"

type
not

"

The two assigned.'^ greatest of which are preserved to us in


as

copies were but rather athletes,


should is be. The
one a as represented

intended

statues

as

ideal

embodiments
as

of any of what

individual
an

athlete he

is known victor in the the wreath

the

Diadumenus,

because

the filletover the

which

about his brow games, binding is to be placed; the other as

Doryphorus, because he holds in his left hand a spear This Doryphorus was also known as slopedover his shoulder. in it not had embodied the Canon, because Polyclitus only his perfect development, conceptionof the male form in its most which he adopted as normal. but also the system of proportions treatise which went wrote a Indeed, he actually by the same the statue, and the two as name were mutually illustrative of each other. this statue,like all others that can Unfortunately, is only preservedto us in copies of be attributed to Polyclitus, Roman period,which not only fail to enable us to realise the but do not even beauty of their original, preserve accurately in the Doryphorus. The the system of proportion embodied
copies we
that than a more gather general notion of the proportions adopted by the sculptor; of the characteristics, while, on the other hand, they exaggerate some and the massive heavy build,so as to proespecially duce which of clumsiness cannot we an readily appearance We of Polyclitushimself. accept as belongingto the work the best of the evidence we must, however, make possess, while especially making due allowance for its inadequacy. It must
us

vary it is difficult for

possess

to

some

extent

to

among from them

so themselves,

be remembered into marble


a

how

much of

is lost in the translation


an

from

bronze

of the work

artist who, in the

art

of finishing

bronze

statue, is said to have


himself.
1

not surpassedall others,

ing except-

Phidias

Loewy,

50.

See

"

41.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

827

The

Doryphorus, or
the

Canon, is preserved to

us

in

several

copies ;
museum

and

can

in which

in the Naples completestis that from Pompeii,now however, a heavy and mechanical copy, (Fig.74). It is, style, give us but littlenotion of the finish of Polyclitus' the head of A bronze his chief excellence lay. copy
^ at Apollonius so

by

the

Attic artist and original,

least

the reproduces

material

of the

expected to follow its technique; Avork of the Augustan age, and is hardly but it is a conventional their defects, whatever But all the copies, to be trusted. more can safelyinfer from them the physical agree so far that we both for body and for face,and also type chosen by the artist,
may

be

the pose
a

and
man

generalcharacter
in

of the

statue.

It represents

prime of athletic condition, but rather for massive remarkable strength than for agility. All thing his muscles are strongly though we must allow somedeveloped, is of the late copyist here for the exaggeration ; his head and of the total height, about one-seventh largein proportion, of skull and rather heavy jaw imply that his its squareness
young

the

very

athletic prowess
than
to

is due
or

rather to obstinate

power

of endurance

quickness

Doryphorus shows
the

any

versatility. Not that the Polyclitan marks which sometimes of that brutality

professionalathlete of later Greece ; he represents a formed type; and the dethoroughly healthy and evenly-developed in Apollonius' boxer's ear,"so conspicuous and swollen cation and is probably a modifihead, does not appear in other copies, introduced by the later artist. Some faint reflection of the inimitable bronze technique of be traced in extant copies of his best-known Polyclitus may work. Perhaps the most accurate in this respect is the torso
"

in

the

Pourtales

collection of the

at

Berlin,which
of the
if
we

shows

able remark-

treatment

muscles understand

marble, but
to

easier to

in body, unintelligible imagine it transferred is

bronze.

Here, though the relief of the various muscles


than
are more

less accentuated between them

in other

the lines of demarcation copies, indicated ; there and definitely clearly

the whole on which and shade over play of light of the evenly-curved marble work depends for its effect ; more in a metal statue which in definite lines, surfaces, intersecting reflect the lightand bring out all the delicacies of the modelis less of that
1 2

I. Fig. 252. Collignon, ^fon. de I' Art, I. PI.

Rayet,

29,

p. 2.

Fio.

74.-Doryphorus, after Polyclitus (Naples^

CHAP.

Ill

THE

FIFTH

CENTURY"

480-400

B.C.

829

ling.
well
over

As

to

the

treatment

of the
to

hair, all copiesare


the
over on

pretty
low short stand bronze

agreement ; it lies close the forehead,and is divided


in
as

scalp, coming down


its surface
into

all

waving tresses, which seem out separately in relief ;


hair of later art, the best copy of than the

if drawn

it,but
with the

never

it contrasts

alike

the

from out freely standing


'^ in Myron's Discobolus,

head, and that in which the hair,rather


a

separate tresses, is outlined


is subdivided

in

harder

line

over

the

forehead, and
close but The
not

into

more

minute

curls,clinging

waving, all
of
is also

over

the head. famous athletic statues, the

other

two Polyclitus'

Diadumenus,
Until Vaison bronze
a

the recently,
in
statuette

preservedto us only in inadequatecopies. most trustworthyof these were a statue from


in the British Museum To
these may

France, now
in

75),and (Fig.
now

the Louvre." the


a

be added and
on

head

recentlyacquired by
the is
as

British
statue

Museum,
discovered Diadumenus

placed
Delos,

beside which

Vaison

statue, and
in the which the
arms

perhaps the
a

finest of all.

The

victor
over

sacred The and

fillet

binding about games, the judge was to place the


is much

is sented reprehis head the wreath.


statues

positionof
statuettes

the

same

as

in many

in which

later

to represent sculptorsdelighted

Aphroditebindingher

hair ; and the motive of the artist is the in both cases excellent same opportunity for ; it affords an the symmetry and proportion of the arms and chest. displaying Unlike the is

Doryphorus, who

standingstill;

body here also is borne is different poise of the figure


the

the Diadumenus slowly advancing, and thus, though the weight of the the mainly by the advanced rightleg,
; the centre
on

is

of the

gravityis

behind ing advanc-

foot,instead right

of above

it and

point of

beyond
and whole
in

it.

It is

in evidently

subtle

distinctions

like and

this,
the
;
on a

the
pose

consequent modification

of all the muscles

of the statue, that the art of comparison of the two works is the best the monotony
1
-

excelled Polyclitus possiblecomment critics. Even

complained of by

some

ancient

in

See The

p. 237. Faniese for

Diadumeiuis the
:

in the

British Museum

is from

clearly so

far modified

as

to
same

be

useless remark in the

style,though ultimatelyderived
terra-cotta the statuette Museum whether modification copy is the

appliesto
British doubted

statue ; the Polyclitus' in /. //. PI. Ixi., "S'., published


case an

also

in this work of

is

Praxitelean,though
or

it may artist.

be

the

ancient

of

modern

B"io. 76."

Diadunienus

from

Vaison, afler

Polyclitus (Britisli

Museum).

332

HANDBOOK

OF

GREEK

SCULPTURE

chap.

immediatelyafter
422
B.C.

the

fire which

consumed

the

Heraeum

in

As

to

other

statues

of

we gods by Polyclitus,

know

nothing
"

for certain the


418

beyond
made have

the
"

names

they
;
^

were

Zeus
a

Meilichius
massacre

god

of atonement

at

Argos, set
marble
a

up

after

in

B.C., and
must to

of white been
an

Hermes elsewhere

in
;

Lysimachia,
a

which moved

moved

from

Heracles,

Rome, and
up
cases,
as

tripodset
most

after the

Aphrodite at Amyclae, supportinga battle of Aegospotami (405 B.C.). In


in
some

of these

others,there

is the
to

possibility
or a on case

of doubt

whether

the work

should

be attributed

the elder of

exists in the the younger Polyclitus ; a similar doubt of marble, representing Apollo, Artemis, and group Mount
not

Leto,

if

we

find

evidently Argos.^ The two artists were Lycone near another in from one antiquity ; and, clearlydistinguished should to help us, we had not the evidence of inscriptions it very difficult to keep them apart.
to

As
more

another

work

of

his Amazon, Polyclitus, well


to

we
a

have brief

evidence; and
of the
set

it will be

include
to which

here it

notice

of statues

of Amazons

they are
to whom

best treated
one

of them

is the and Polyclitus together, is attributed by a generalconsensus

belongs ; artist only


of

cated dedicertain Amazons opinion. Pliny says that there were said to have at Ephesus, a town in the temple of Artemis ent These were been founded by sculptorsof differby Amazons. periods; but, in a competition of merit, decided by the Phidias second, was themselves, Polyclitus placedfirst, little else is of whom Cresilas third,and Phradmon, an Argive, known, fourth.^ Among statues of Amazons, of which many artists
are

preservedin
the

our

museum