Olympic Victor Monuments and Greek Athletic Art
Date: 2020-04-08T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Sculpture; Greek; Sports -- Greece; Olympics

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Olympic Victor Monuments and Greek Athletic Art

This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Olympic Victor Monuments and Greek Athletic Art

Author: Walter Woodburn Hyde

Release date: April 8, 2020 [eBook #61792]
Most recently updated: October 17, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS AND GREEK ATHLETIC ART ***

MARBLE HEAD FROM OLYMPIA MUSEUM AT OLYMPIA

OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS
AND
GREEK ATHLETIC ART

BY
WALTER WOODBURN HYDE

Published by the Carnegie Institution of Washington
Washington, 1921

CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON
Publication No. 268

PRESS OF GIBSON BROTHERS, INC.
WASHINGTON, D. C.

PREFACE.

The purpose of the present work is to study what is known of one of the most important genres of Greek sculpture—the monuments erected at Olympia and elsewhere in the Greek world in honor of victorious athletes at the Olympic games. Since only meagre remnants of these monuments have survived, the work is in the main concerned with the attempt to reconstruct their various types and poses.

The source-material on which the attempt is based has been indicated fully in the text; it is of two kinds, literary and archæological. To the former belong the explanatory inscriptions on the bases of victor statues found at Olympia and elsewhere, many of which agree verbally with epigrams preserved in the Greek Anthologies; the incidental statements of various kinds and value found in the classical writers and their scholiasts; and, above all, the detailed works of the two imperial writers, the elder Pliny and Pausanias. Pliny’s account of the Greek artists, which is inserted into his Historia Naturalis as a digression (Books XXXIV-XXXVI)—being artificially joined to the history of mineralogy on the pretext of the materials used—is, despite its uncritical and often untrustworthy character, one of our chief mines of information about Greek sculptors and painters. The portions of Pausanias’ Description of Greece which deal with Elis and the monuments of Olympia (Books V-VI), although they also evince little real understanding of art, are of far more direct importance to our subject, since they include a descriptive catalogue, doubtless based upon personal observation, of the greater part of the athlete monuments set up in the Altis at Olympia, the reconstruction of which is the chief purpose of the present work.

To the archæological sources, on the other hand, belong, first and foremost, the remnants of victor statues in stone and metal which have long been garnered in modern museums or have come to light during the excavation of the Altis. To this small number I hope I have added at least one marble fragment found at Olympia, the head of a statue by Lysippos, the last great sculptor of Greece (Frontispiece and Fig. 69). To this second kind of sources belong also the statue bases just mentioned, on many of which the extant footmarks enable us to determine the poses of the statues themselves which once stood upon them. Furthermore, an intimate knowledge of Greek athletic sculpture in all its periods and phases is, of course, essential in treating a problem of this nature. Here, as in the study of Greek sculpture in general, where the destruction of original masterpieces, apart from the few well-known but splendid exceptions, has been complete, we are almost entirely dependent upon second-hand evidence furnished by the numerous existing antique copies and adaptations of lost originals executed in marble and bronze by more or less skilled workmen for the Roman market.

Finally, not only are the innumerable statuettes and small bronzes surviving from antiquity of great value in any attempt to reconstruct the pose of a given athlete statue, but also the representations of various athlete figures on every sort of sculptured and painted work—vase-paintings, wall-paintings, reliefs, gems, coins, etc.

By using all such sources of information, it is possible to attain tolerable certainty in reconstructing the various types and poses of these lost monuments, and in identifying schools of athletic sculpture, masters, and even individual statues. But it must be stated at the outset that such identifications, from the very nature of the problem, are at best tentative in character. The attempt to see in Roman copies certain statues of athletes has often been made by archæologists. However probable such identifications may seem, we must not forget the simple fact that up to the present time not a single Roman copy has been conclusively proved to be that of an Olympic victor statue. Only as our knowledge of Greek sculpture is gradually extended by discoveries of additional works of art, and by future researches, will it be possible to attain an ever greater degree of probability. The further identification of these important monuments, as that of masterpieces of Greek sculpture generally, will thus remain one of the chief problems for the future archæologist. In the present book, where the body of material drawn upon is so immense and the scientific writings involved are so voluminous, manifestly the author can lay no claim to an exhaustive treatment. With due consciousness of the defects and shortcomings of the work, he can claim only to have made a small selection of such works of art as will best illustrate the various types of monuments under discussion.

The plan of the book is easily seen by a glance at the table of contents. After a preliminary chapter on the origin and development of Greek athletic games in general and on the custom of conferring athletic prizes on victors, the more specific subject of the work is introduced in Chapter II by brief discussions of the more general characteristics common to Olympic victor statues—their size, nudity, and hair-fashion, their portrait or non-portrait features, and the standard of beauty reached by some of them at least, as shown by the æsthetic judgments of certain ancient writers and by the fragmentary originals which have survived. The enumeration of these characteristics is followed by a brief account of the various canons of proportion assumed to have been used and taught by different schools of sculptors. The chapter ends with a more extended account of the little-known but important subject of the assimilation of this class of monuments to athlete types of gods and heroes.

In Chapters III and IV, which are the most important in developing the problem of reconstruction, a division has been made into two great statuary groups: those in which the victor was represented at rest, where the particular contest was indicated, if indicated at all, by very general motives or by particular athletic attributes; and those in which the victor was represented in movement, i. e., in the characteristic pose of the contest in which he won his victory.

Chapter V relates chiefly to the monuments of hippodrome victors, those in the various chariot-races and horse-races, and ends with a very brief notice of non-athlete victor dedications—those of musicians.

Chapter VI gives a stylistic analysis of what are conceived to be two original marble heads from lost victor statues, one of which is ascribed to Lysippos, the great bronze-founder and art-reformer of the fourth century B. C., while the other is regarded as an early Hellenistic work of eclectic tendencies. The publication of these marble heads and of the oldest-dated victor statue, which is also of marble and which is discussed in Chapter VII, reinforced by other evidence adduced in the latter chapter, overthrows the belief that all victor statues were uniformly made of bronze. The publication of the Olympia head also controverts the usual assumption of archæologists that Lysippos worked only in metal. The last chapter is concerned with a topographical study of the original positions in the Altis of the various athlete monuments discussed, and with a list of all the victor monuments known to have been erected outside Olympia in various cities of the ancient world. These last three chapters are based on papers which have already appeared in the American Journal of Archæology (Chapters VI, VII, and the first half of VIII) and in the Transactions of the American Philological Association (the last half of Chapter VIII). Permission to use them in the present book has been kindly granted to the author by Dr. James A. Paton, former editor-in-chief of the American Journal of Archæology, and by Professor Clarence P. Bill, the secretary of the American Philological Association.

Although it has been my aim throughout to present my own views in regard to the various works of art under discussion, I must, of course, acknowledge that the book is largely based upon the work and conclusions of preceding scholars who have treated various phases of the same subject. It would, however, be unnecessary and even impossible here to acknowledge all the works laid directly or indirectly under contribution in the composition of the book. Most of these have been recorded in the footnotes.

But I wish here to express, in a more general way, my indebtedness to the standard histories of Greek sculpture, by Brunn, Collignon, Gardiner, Lechat, Murray, Overbeck, Richardson, and others, which must form the foundation of the knowledge of any one who writes on any phase of the subject. Among these, two have been found especially valuable: Bulle’s Der schoene Mensch im Altertum, which is justly noted for its comprehensive views and sound judgments; and Furtwaengler’s Die Meisterwerke der griechischen Plastik, which, although it has been known to English readers in its enlarged edition by Miss Eugénie Sellers for over a quarter of a century, is still prized for its extensive firsthand knowledge of the monuments and for its brilliant inductions, even if the latter at times are carried too far.

Perhaps my greatest debt has been to the excellent volume entitled Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals, by E. Norman Gardiner, M. A., a scholar whose practical knowledge of modern athletic sports and wide familiarity with the ancient source material, both literary and monumental, has well fitted him to deal afresh with the subject treated so learnedly over three quarters of a century ago in Krause’s Die Gymnastik und Agonistik der Hellenen. I have also constantly drawn upon Gardiner’s collection of vase-paintings which illustrate athletic scenes.

I should also note here several other works which have been of great assistance in writing this book, such as Juethner’s Ueber antike Turngeraethe and edition of Philostratos’ de Arte gymnastica, Reisch’s Griechische Weihgeschenke, Rouse’s Greek Votive Offerings, and Foerster’s Die Sieger in den Olympischen Spielen. The chronological list of victors in the latter compilation was, in large part, the foundation of my earlier work de olympionicarum Statuis.

I have also received most valuable help from the standard catalogues of modern museums, e. g., those by Amelung, Dickins, Helbig, Kabbadias, Lechat, Richter, de Ridder, Staïs, Svoronos, and especially the admirable ones of the classical collections in the British Museum. I regret that, owing to the recent war, some of the latest catalogues, those especially of the smaller foreign museums, have not been available.

For illustrative matter, I have made no effort to reproduce merely striking works of art, but have, for the most part, presented well-known works which readily illustrate the problems treated in the text. I have availed myself of collections of photographs kindly placed at my disposal by Professors Herbert E. Everett of the School of Fine Arts of the University of Pennsylvania, D. M. Robinson of the Johns Hopkins University, A. S. Cooley of the Moravian College at Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and Dr. Mary H. Swindler of Bryn Mawr College. The various collections of plates and the books and journals from which I have taken illustrations are duly noted in the List of Illustrations.

In addition, I wish to thank the following corporations and individuals for permission to reproduce plates and text-cuts from the works cited: the Council of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies, of London, for the use of four plates appearing in the Journal of Hellenic Studies (Figs. 44, 54, 55, and 59); the Trustees of the British Museum in London for seven plates from Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum (Pls. 7A, 17, 19; Figs. 14, 28, 31, and 35); Professor E. A. Gardiner and his publishers, Duckworth and Co., of London, for two plates from Six Greek Sculptors (Pl. 30; Fig. 71); Mr. H. R. Hall, of the British Museum, and his publisher, Philip Lee Warner, of London, for one from Aegean Archæology (Fig. 1); Professor Allan Marquand, of Princeton University, for one text-cut from the American Journal of Archæology (Fig. 49), and Dr. J. M. Paton, former editor-in-chief, for three other text-cuts from the same journal (Figs. 70, 72, 79).

To the following I am also indebted for individual photographs: Dr. J. N. Svoronos, Director of the Numismatic Museum, Athens, Greece, for one of the oldest-dated statues of an Olympic victor (Fig. 79), which has already appeared in the American Journal of Archæology; Dr. A. Fairbanks, of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, for those of the statue of a Charioteer(?) and of the fragmentary head of the Oil-pourer (Pl. 27; Fig. 23); Dr. Edward Robinson, of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, for those of the fine Kresilæan and Praxitelian heads (Pls. 15, 20), and of the bronze statuette of a diskobolos (Fig. 46); Prof. Alice Walton, of Wellesley College, for one of the Polykleitan athlete (Pl. 13); the Director of the Fogg Art Museum of Cambridge, Mass., for that of the so-called Meleager (Fig. 77); Dr. S. B. Luce, recently of the Museum of the University of Pennsylvania, for photographs of two vase-paintings showing athletic scenes (Figs. 50, 56), and Dr. Eleanor F. Rambo, formerly of the same Museum, for a copy of the Knossos wall-painting (Pl. 1).

A word might be added as to the spelling of Greek proper names. Since consistency in this matter seems unattainable, I have adopted the method outlined in the British School Annual (XV, 1908–09, p. 402), whereby the names of persons, places, buildings, festivals, etc., are transliterated from the Greek forms, except those which have become a part of the English language. But even here I have sometimes deviated from the practice of using familiar English forms.

In abbreviations of the names of journals (see pages XVI-XIX) I have largely conformed with the usage long recommended by the American Journal of Archæology.

For convenience in identifying the many works of art, discussed or mentioned in the text and foot-notes, I have constantly referred to well-known collections of plates, such as those of Brunn-Bruckmann, Bulle, Rayet, and von Mach. For further convenience, I have also in most cases referred to the outline drawings of statues in Reinach’s Répertoire de la statuaire grecque et romaine, and in some cases to the older ones found in Clarac’s Musée de sculpture antique et moderne, and in Mueller and Wieseler’s Denkmaeler der alten Kunst.

In closing, I have the pleasant duty of thanking generally the many friends who have given me valuable suggestions and assistance, especially Professor Lane Cooper, of Cornell University, for reading the proof-sheets of the entire work, and Professor Alfred Emerson, now of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, my former teacher, for revising the list of Corrigenda.

Walter Woodburn Hyde.

University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia, October, 1921.

CONTENTS.

Chapter I.
PAGE
Early Greek Games and Prizes | 1-42
Sports in Crete | 1
Athletics in Homer | 7
Origin of Greek Games in the Cult of the Dead | 9
Early History of the Four National Games | 14
Early Prizes for Athletes | 18
Dedication of Athlete Prizes | 21
Dedication of Statues at Olympia and Elsewhere | 24
Honors Paid to Victors by their Native Cities | 32
Votive Character of Victor Dedications | 37
Miscellaneous Memorials to Victors | 40
Honorary Statues | 41
Chapter II.
General Characteristics of Victor Statues at Olympia | 43-98
Size of Victor Statues | 45
Nudity of Victor Statues | 47
The Athletic Hair-fashion | 50
Iconic and Aniconic Statues | 54
Portrait Statues | 55
Aniconic Statues | 58
Aesthetic Judgments of Classical Writers | 58
Greek Originals of Victor Statues | 62
Canons of Proportion | 65

Assimilation of Olympic Victor Statues to Types of Gods and Heroes

71

Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Hermes | 75
Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Apollo | 88
Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Herakles | 93
Athletes Represented as the Dioskouroi | 96
Chapter III.
Victor Statues Represented at Rest | 99-172
The Apollo Type | 100
The Affiliated Schools of Argos and Sikyon | 109
The School of Argos | 109
The School of Sikyon | 118
Aeginetan Sculptors | 122
Attic Sculptors | 126
General Motives of Statues at Rest | 130
Adoration and Prayer | 130
Anointing | 133
Oil-scraping | 135
Libation-pouring | 138
Resting after the Contest | 144
Attributes of Victor Statues | 147
Primary Attributes of Victor Statues | 148
The Victor Fillet | 148
Fillet-binders | 150
The Crown of Wild Olive | 155
The Palm-branch | 160
Secondary Attributes of Victor Statues | 161
Hoplitodromoi | 161
Pentathletes | 164
Boxers | 165
Wrestlers | 165
Caps for Boxers, Pancratiasts, and Wrestlers | 165
The Swollen Ear | 167
Chapter IV.
Victor Statues Represented in Motion | 173-256
The Tyrannicides | 173
Antiquity of Motion Statues in Greece | 176
Pythagoras and Myron | 178
Motion Statues representing Victors in Various Contests | 188
Runners: Stadiodromoi, Diaulodromoi, Dolichodromoi | 190
The Statue of the Runner Ladas | 196
Statues of Boy Runners | 200
Hoplitodromoi | 203
Pentathletes | 210
Jumpers | 214
Diskoboloi | 218
Akontistai | 222
Wrestlers | 228
Boxers | 234
Pancratiasts | 246
Chapter V.
Monuments of Hippodrome and Musical Victors | 257-285
Programme of Hippodrome Events | 259
Representations of the Chariot-race | 262
Chariot-groups at Olympia | 264
Remains of Chariot-groups | 269
The Apobates Chariot-race | 272
Statues of Charioteers | 274
Dedications of Victors in the Horse-race at Olympia and Elsewhere | 278
Monuments Illustrating the Horse-race | 280
The Apobates Horse-race | 282
Dedications of Musical Victors at Olympia and Elsewhere | 283
Chapter VI.
Two Marble Heads from Victor Statues | 286-320
The Group of Daochos at Delphi, and Lysippos | 286
The Apoxyomenos of the Vatican, and Lysippos | 288
The Agios and the Apoxyomenos compared, and the Style of Lysippos | 289
The Head from Olympia | 293
The Olympia Head and that of the Agias | 294
Identification of the Olympia Head | 298
The Dates of Philandridas and Lysippos | 300
Lysippos as a Worker in Marble, and Statue “Doubles” | 302
The Head of a Statue of a Boy from Sparta, and the Art of Skopas | 303
Comparison of the Tegea Heads and the Head from Sparta | 308
The Styles of Skopas and Lysippos Compared | 311
The Sparta Head Compared with that of the Philandridas | 316
The Sparta Head an Eclectic Work and an Example of Assimilation | 318
Chapter VII.

The Materials of Olympic Victor Monuments, and the Oldest-dated Victor Statue

321-338

The Case for Bronze | 321
The Case for Stone | 323
The Statue of Arrhachion at Phigalia | 326
Egyptian Influence on Early Greek Sculpture | 328
Early Victor Statues and the “Apollo” Type | 334
Chapter VIII.

Positions of Victor Statues in the Altis; Olympic Victor Monuments Erected Outside Olympia; Statistics of Olympic Victor Statuaries

339-375

Statues Mentioned by Pausanias | 339
The First Ephodos of Pausanias | 341
The Second Ephodos of Pausanias | 348
Summary of Results | 352
Statues not Mentioned by Pausanias, but known from Recovered Bases | 353
Olympic Victor Monuments Erected Outside Olympia | 361
Summary of Results | 374
Statistics of Olympic Victor Statuaries | 375

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

PLATES. | FACING PAGE

Marble Head, from Olympia. Front view. Museum of Olympia. After Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LIV, 3

Frontispiece.

1. Bull-grappling Scene. Wall-painting, from Knossos. Museum of Candia. After Photograph from copy in watercolor by Gilliéron in the Museum of Liverpool

2

2. Marble Statue of a Girl Runner. Vatican Museum, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

50

3. Bronze Head of an Olympic Victor. Glyptothek, Munich. After B. B., No. 8

62

4. Statue of the Doryphoros, from Pompeii, after Polykleitos. Museum of Naples. After Photograph by Alinari

70

5. Statue of Hermes, from Andros. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph by Rhomaïdes

72

6. Statue of the Standing Diskobolos, after Naukydes (?). Vatican Museum, Rome. After Photograph

76

7 A and B. Statues of so-called Apollos. A. The Apollo Choiseul-Gouffier. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. III B. The Apollo-on-the-Omphalos. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph by Merlin

90

8 A and B. Statues of so-called Apollos. A. The Apollo of Tenea. Glyptothek, Munich. After Photograph by Bruckmann. B. Argive Apollo, from Delphi. Museum of Delphi. After Fouilles de Delphes, IV, 1904, Pl. I

102

9. Statue of an Athlete, by Stephanos. Villa Albani, Rome. After Photograph

114

10. Bronze statue of the Praying Boy. Museum of Berlin. After Photograph

132

11. Statue of so-called Oil-pourer. Glyptothek, Munich. After Photograph by Bruckmann

134

12. Statue of an Apoxyomenos. Uffizi Gallery, Florence. After B. B., No. 523

136

13. Statue of an Athlete, after Polykleitos. Farnsworth Museum, Wellesley College, U. S. A. After Photograph

138

14. Bronze Statue known as the Idolino. Museo Archeologico, Florence. After B. B., No. 274

142

15. Marble Head of an Athlete, after Kresilas (?). Metropolitan Museum, New York. After Photograph

144

16. Bronze Statue of the Seated Boxer. Museo delle Terme, Rome. After Ant. Denkm., I, I, 1886, Pl. IV

146

17. Statue known as the Farnese Diadoumenos. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. VI

150

18. Statue of the Diadoumenos, from Delos. After Polykleitos. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph by Alinari

152

19. Statue known as the Westmacott Athlete. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. XXII

156

20. Head of an Athlete, School of Praxiteles. Metropolitan Museum, New York. After Photograph

168

21. Statue of Diomedes with the Palladion. Glyptothek, Munich. After Photograph

170

22. Statue of the Diskobolos, from Castel Porziano, after Myron. Museo delle Terme, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

184

23. Statue of the Diskobolos, after Myron. A bronzed Cast from the Statue in the Vatican and Head from the Statue in the Palazzo Lancellotti, Rome. After B. B., No. 566

186

24. Statue of a Kneeling Youth, from Subiaco. Museo delle Terme, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

196

25. Marble Group of Pancratiasts. Uffizi Gallery, Florence. After Photo, by Alinari

252

26. Racing Chariot and Horses. From an archaic b.-f. Hydria. Museum of Berlin. After Gerhard, IV, Pls. CCXLIX-CCL

262

27. Statue of a Charioteer (?). Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. After Photo. by Coolidge

276

28. Statue of the Pancratiast Agias, from Delphi. Museum of Delphi. After Fouilles de Delphes, IV, Pl. LXIII

286

29. Statue of the Apoxyomenos. After Lysippos or his School. Vatican Museum, Rome. After B. B., No. 381

288

30. Statue of Herakles. Lansdowne House, London. After Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LVI

298

PLANS.

FACING
PAGE

A. The Altis at Olympia in the Greek Period (Third Century B. C.). After Doerpfeld, in Ergebnisse von Olympia, Karten und Plaene, No. III

376

B. The Altis at Olympia in the Roman Period (Second Century A. D.). After Doerpfeld, in Ergebnisse von Olympia, Karten und Plaene, No. IV

376

TEXT-FIGURES. | PAGE

1. So-called Boxer Vase, from Hagia Triada. From a Cast (with handle restored) in the Museum of Candia. After H. R. Hall, Aegean Archæology, Pl. XVI

6

2. Bronze Statuette of a Victor, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. After Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. VIII, No. 57

28

3. Bronze Head of an Olympic Victor, from Beneventum. Louvre, Paris. After Photograph

64

4. Bronze Head of an Olympic Victor, from Herculaneum. Museum of Naples. After B. B., No. 323 (Right)

65

5. Bronze Portrait-statue of a Hellenistic Prince. Museo delle Terme, Rome. After Photograph by Alinari

73

6. Bronze Statuette of Hermes-Diskobolos, found in the Sea off Antikythera. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph by Rhomaïdes

79

7. Bronze Statue of a Youth, found in the Sea off Antikythera. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph by Rhomaïdes

80

8. Statue of the so-called Jason (Sandal-binder). Louvre, Paris. After Photograph by Giraudon

86

9. Statue of so-called Apollo of Thera. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph

101

10. Statue of so-called Apollo of Orchomenos. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph

102

11. Statue of so-called Apollo, from Mount Ptoion, Bœotia. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph

102

12. Statue of so-called Apollo of Melos. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph

103

13. Statues of so-called Apollos, from Mount Ptoion. National Museum, Athens. After Photograph

104

14. Statue known as the Strangford Apollo. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. II

105

15. Bronze Statuette of a Palæstra Victor, from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. After Photograph

108

16. Bronze Statuette, from Ligourió. Museum of Berlin. After 50stes Berliner Winckelmannsprogramm, 1890, Pl. I (Center and Left)

112

17. Statue of an Ephebe, from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. After Photograph

115

18. Head of an Ephebe, from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. After Photograph by Rhomaïdes

116

19. Bronze Statuette of Apollo, found in the Sea off Piombino. Louvre, Paris. After Photograph by Giraudon

119

20. Figure, from the East Pediment of the Temple on Aegina. Glypothek, Munich. After Photograph by Bruckmann

124

21. Two Figures, from the West Pediment of the Temple on Aegina. Glyptothek, Munich. After Photograph by Bruckmann

125

22. Archaic Marble Head of a Youth. Jacobsen Collection, Ny-Carlsberg Museum, Copenhagen. After Arndt, La Glyplothèque Ny-Carlsberg, 1896, Pl. I

128

23. Head of so-called Oil-pourer. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. After Photograph

134

24. Bronze Statuette of an Athlete. Louvre, Paris. After Furtwaengler, Masterpieces, Pl. XIII

139

25. Bronze Head of an Athlete, from Herculaneum. Museum of Naples. After B. B., No. 339 (Left)

140

26. Marble Statue of an Athlete (?). National Museum, Athens. After Photograph

143

27. Head from Statue of the Seated Boxer (Pl. 16). Museo delle Terme, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

146

28. Statue of the Diadoumenos, from Vaison, after Polykleitos. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. IV

153

29. Head of the Diadoumenos, after Polykleitos. Albertinum, Dresden. After Furtwaengler, Masterpieces, Pl. X

154

30. Marble Heads of two Hoplitodromoi, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. After Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. VI, 1–2 and 9–10

162

31. Head of Herakles, from Genzano. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. XXI

170

32. Statue of Harmodios. Museum of Naples. After B. B., No. 327

174

33. Head of an Athlete, from Perinthos. Albertinum, Dresden. After B. B., No. 542 (Right)

180

34. Statue of the Diskobolos, after Myron. Vatican Museum, Rome. After Photograph

185

35. Statue of the Diskobolos, after Myron. British Museum, London. After Marbles and Bronzes in the British Museum, Pl. XLVII

186

36. A and B. Athletic Scenes from a Bacchic Amphora in Rome. A. Stadiodromoi and Leaper. B. Diskobolos and Akontistai. After Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLIX

192

37. Athletic Scenes from a Sixth-century B. C. Panathenaic Amphora. Stadiodromoi (Left) and Dolichodromoi (Right). After Mon. d. I., I, 1829–33, Pl. XXII, 6 b, 7 b

193

38. Statue of a Runner. Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

198

39. Statue of a Runner. Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

198

40. Statue of the so-called Thorn-puller (the Spinario). Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome. After B. B., No. 321

200

41. Hoplitodromes. Scenes from a r.-f. Kylix. Museum of Berlin. After Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLXI

205

42. Bronze Statuette of a Hoplitodrome (?). University Museum, Tuebingen. After Jb., I, 1886, Pl. IX (Right)

206

43. Statue of the so-called Borghese Warrior. Louvre, Paris. After Photograph

208

44. Pentathletes. Scene from a Panathenaic Amphora in the British Museum, London. After J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, Pl. XVIII

211

45. Statue of a Boy Victor (the Dresden Boy). Albertinum, Dresden. After Furtwaengler, Masterpieces, Pl. XII

213

46. Bronze Statuette of a Diskobolos. Metropolitan Museum, New York. After Photograph

220

47. Bust of the Doryphoros, after Polykleitos, by Apollonios. Museum of Naples. After Photograph by Alinari

224

48. Statue of the Doryphoros, after Polykleitos. Vatican Museum, Rome. After Photograph by Anderson

225

49. Wrestling Scenes. From Obverse of an Amphora, by Andokides. Museum of Berlin. After A. J. A., XI, 1896, P. 11, Fig. 9

230

50. Wrestling and Boxing Scenes. From a r.-f. Kylix. University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. After Photograph

231

51. Bronze Statues of Wrestlers. Museum of Naples. After B. B., No. 354

232

52. Bronze Arm of Statue of a Boxer, found in the Sea off Antikythera. National Museum, Athens. After Svoronos, Pl. V, No. 4

237

53. Forearm with Glove. From the Statue of the Seated Boxer (Pl. 16). Museo delle Terme, Rome. After Juethner, Fig. 62

238

54. Boxing Scenes. From a r.-f. Kylix by Douris. British Museum, London. After J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, Pl. XII

240

55. Boxing and Pankration Scenes. From a r.-f. Kylix. British Museum, London. After J. H. S., XXVI, Pl. XIII

241

56. Boxing Scene. From a b.-f. Panathenaic Panel-amphora. University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. After Photograph

242

57. Statue of a Boxer, from Sorrento. By Koblanos of Aphrodisias. Museum of Naples. After B. B., No. 614

242

58. Statue known as Pollux. Louvre, Paris. After Photograph by Giraudon

245

59. Pankration Scene. From a Panathenaic Amphora by Kittos. British Museum, London. After J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, Pl. III

248

60. Bronze Statuette of a Pancratiast (?), from Autun, France. Louvre, Paris. After Bulle, Pl. 96 (Right)

250

61. Bronze Head of a Boxer(?), from Olympia. A (Profile); B (Front). National Museum, Athens. After Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. II, 2a and 2

254

62. Bronze Foot of a Victor Statue, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. After Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. III, 3

253

63. Charioteer Mounting a Chariot. Bas-relief from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. After Photograph

270

64. Apobates and Chariot. Relief from the North Frieze of the Parthenon, Athens. After Photograph

273

65. Charioteer. Relief from the small Frieze of the Mausoleion, Halikarnassos. British Museum, London. After Photograph

274

66. Bronze Statue of the Delphi Charioteer. Museum of Delphi. After Fouilles de Delphes, IV, Pl. L

277

67. Horse-racer. From a Sixth-century B. C. b.-f. Panathenaic Vase. British Museum, London. After Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLVII (Bottom).

280

68. Head from the Statue of Agias (Pl. 28). Museum of Delphi. After Fouilles de Delphes, IV, Pl. LXIV

287

69. Marble Head, from Olympia. Three-quarters Front View (Cf. Frontispiece). Museum of Olympia. After Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LIV, 4

293

70. Profile Drawings of the Heads of the Agias and the Philandridas. After A. J. A., XI, 1907, p. 403, Fig. 6

295

71. Head of the Statue of Herakles (Pl. 30). Lansdowne House, London. After Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LVII

298

72. Marble Head of a Boy, found near the Akropolis, Sparta. In Private Possession in Philadelphia, U. S. A. After Photograph

305

73. So-called Head of Herakles from Tegea, by Skopas. National Museum, Athens. After B. C. H., XXV, 1901, Pl. VII

307

74. Attic Grave-relief, found in the Bed of the Ilissos, Athens. National Museum, Athens. After A. Conze, Attische Grabreliefs, Pl. CCXI

312

75. Statue of the so-called Meleager. Vatican Museum, Rome. After Photograph

313

76. Head of the so-called Meleager. Villa Medici, Rome. After Ant. Denkm., I, Pl. XI, 2a

314

77. Torso of the so-called Meleager. Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, Mass. After Photograph

315

78. Small Marble Torso of a Boy Victor, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. After Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 2

325

79. Stone Statue of the Olympic Victor, Arrhachion, from Phigalia. In the Guards’ House at Bassai (Phigalia). After Photograph

327

80. Statues of Ra-nefer and Tepemankh, from Sakkarah. Museum of Cairo. After Bulle, Pl. 5

331

THE MOST COMMON ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE NOTES.

A. A.

Archaeologischer Anzeiger, Beiblatt zum Jahrbuch, 1889-.

Afr.

S. Iulii Africani Ὀλυμπιάδων ἀναγραφή, apud Euseb., Chron., ed. A. Schoene, I, pp. 194–220. Berlin, 1875. See also Rutgers.

A. G.

Anthologia Graeca, cur. F. Jacobs, I-III. Leipsic, 1813–1817.

A. Pl.

Anthologia Planudea, in A. G., II, 1814.

A. J. A.

American Journal of Archæology, 1st series, 1885–1896; 2d series, 1897-.

A. M.

Mitteilungen des kaiserlich deutschen archaeologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung. Athens, 1876-.

Amelung, Fuehrer

W. Amelung, Fuehrer durch die Antiken in Florenz. Munich, 1897.

Amelung, Vat.

W. Amelung, Die Skulpturen des Vatikanischen Museums, Textbd., I-II: Tafelbd., I-II. Berlin, 1903, 1908.

Annali

Annali dell’ Instituto di Corrispondenza archeologica. Rome, 1829–1885.

Ant. Denkm.

Antike Denkmaeler, herausgegeben vom kaiserlich deutschen archaeologischen Institut. Berlin, 1886-.

Arch. Eph.

Ἀρχαιολογικὴ Ἐφημερίς. Athens, 3d Per., 1883-. (The title before 1910 was Ἐφημερὶς Ἀρχαιολογική.)

Arndt-Amelung

Photographische Einzelaufnahmen antiker Skulpturen (with text). Munich, 1893–1902. Cited in German publications as Einzelverkauf.

A. Z.

Archaeologische Zeitung. Berlin, 1843–1885.

Baum.

A. Baumeister, Denkmaeler des klassischen Altertums, I-III. Munich and Leipsic, 1889.

B. B.

Brunn-Bruckmann, Denkmaeler griechischer und roemischer Skulptur. Munich, 1888. Text from No. 500 (1897-) by F. Arndt. (Plates cited by number).

B. C. H.

Bulletin de Correspondance hellénique. Paris, 1877-.

Bildw. v. Ol.

Olympia, Die Ergebnisse, Text- und Tafelbd., III, Die Bildwerke von Olympia in Stein und Thon. By G. Treu. Berlin, 1897.

B. M. Bronz.

Catalogue of the Bronzes, Greek, Roman, and Etruscan, in the British Museum. By H. B. Walters. London, 1899.

B. M. Sculpt.

Catalogue of Sculpture in the British Museum, I-III. By A. H. Smith. London, 1892–1904.

B. M. Vases

Catalogue of the Greek and Etruscan Vases in the British Museum. I, 2, II, IV, by H. B. Walters; III, by C. H. Smith. London, 1893–1912.

Boeckh

A. Boeckh, Pindari Opera, II, Scholia. Leipsic, 1819.

Bronz. v. Ol.

Olympia, Die Ergebnisse, Text- und Tafelbd., IV, Die Bronzen und die uebrigen kleineren Funde von Olympia. By A. Furtwaengler. Berlin, 1890.

Brunn

H. Brunn, Geschichte der griechischen Kuenstler, I (Bildhauer). Brunswick, 1853. (Reprinted, Stuttgart, 1889).

B. S. A.

Annual of the British School at Athens. London, 1894–1895-.

Bulle

H. Bulle, Der schoene Mensch im Altertum. Second edition, Munich and Leipsic, 1912. (= Vol. I of G. Hirth’s Der Stil.)

B. Com. Rom.

Bulletino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma. Rome, 1872-.

Bull. d. Inst.

Bulletino dell’ Instituto di Corrispondenza archeologica. Rome, 1829–1885.

C. I. A.

Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, I-IV. Berlin, 1873–1897. (I, ed. A. Kirchhoff; II, Pts. 1–4, and IV, Pts. 1–2, ed. U. Koehler; III, Pts. 1–2, ed. W. Dittenberger).

C. I. G.

Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, I-IV. Berlin, 1828–1877. (I-II, ed. A. Boeckh; III, ed. J. Franz: IV, ed. E. Curtius and A. Kirchhoff.)

Clarac

F. de Clarac, Musée de sculpture antique et moderne. Text, I-VI: Plates, I-VI. Paris, 1826–1853. See also Reinach, Rép.

Collignon

M. Collignon, Histoire de la sculpture grecque, I-II. Paris, 1892, 1897.

C. R. Acad. Inscr.

Comptes-Rendus de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Paris, 1857-.

Dar.-Sagl.

C. Daremberg, E. Saglio, et E. Pottier, Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Paris, 1877–1918.

Dickins

G. Dickins, Catalogue of the Akropolis Museum, I (Archaic Sculpture). Cambridge, 1912.

Duetschke

H. Duetschke, Antike Bildwerke in Oberitalien, I-IV. Leipsic, 1874–1880. (Works of art cited by number.)

F. H. G.

Fragmenta historiorum Graecorum, coll. C. Muellerus, I-IV. Paris, 1841–1851.

Foerster

H. Foerster, Die Sieger in den Olympischen Spielen. Wissenschaftliche Beilage zum Programm des Gymnasiums zu Zwickau, 1891, 1892. (The numbers refer to victors in chronological order.)

Frazer

Sir J. G. Frazer, Pausanias’s Description of Greece, I-VI. London, 1898.

Froehner, Notice

W. Froehner, Notice de la sculpture ant. du musée impérial du Louvre. Paris, 1869.

Furtw., Mp.

A. Furtwaengler, Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture. Translated and enlarged from the following work, by Miss Eugénie Sellers (now Mrs. Strong). London, 1895.

Furtw., Mw.

A. Furtwaengler, Meisterwerke der griechischen Plastik. Leipsic and Berlin, 1893.

F. W.

C. Friederichs, Bausteine zur Geschichte d. griech.-roem. Plastik, 1868. Revised edition, entitled Die Gipsabguesse antiker Bildwerke, by P. Wolters. Berlin, 1885.

Gardiner

E. Norman Gardiner, Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals. London, 1910.

Gardner, Hbk.

E. A. Gardner, A Handbook of Greek Sculpture. Second edition revised. London, 1915.

Gardner, Sculpt.

E. A. Gardner, Six Greek Sculptors. London, 1910.

Gaz. arch.

Gazette archéologique. Paris, 1875—.

Gaz. B.-A.

Gazette des Beaux-Arts. Paris, Pér. I, 1859–1868; II, 1869–1888; III, 1889—.

Gerhard

E. Gerhard, Auserlesene Vasenbilder, Vol. IV (Alltagsleben). Berlin, 1840.

Helbig, Fuehrer

W. Helbig, and others, Fuehrer durch die oeffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertuemer in Rom. Third edition, I-II. Leipsic, 1912, 1913.

Helbig, Guide

Guide to the Public Collections of Classical Antiquities in Rome. Translation from the preceding work (1st ed.) by J. F. and F. Muirhead, I-II. Leipsic, 1895, 1896.

Hitz.-Bluemn.

H. Hitzig et H. Bluemner, Pausaniae Graeciae Descriptio. I-III (Each in 2 Parts). Leipsic, 1896–1907.

Hyde

Gualterus (= Walter Woodburn) Hyde, de olympionicarum Statuis a Pausania commemoratis. Halle, 1902; enlarged, 1903. Numbers cited refer to victors in the order given by Pausanias.

I. G.

Inscriptiones Graecae (for contents and numbering of volumes, see A. J. A., IX, 1905, pp. 96–97).

I. G. A.

Inscriptiones Graecae antiquissimae praeter Atticas in Attica repertas. Ed. H. Roehl. Berlin, 1882.

I. G. B.

Inschriften griechischer Bildhauer. Ed. E. Loewy. Leipsic, 1885.

Inschr. v. Ol.

Olympia, Die Ergebnisse, Textbd., V, Die Inschriften von Olympia. By W. Dittenberger and K. Purgold. Berlin, 1896.

Jb.

Jahrbuch des kaiserlich deutschen archaeologischen Instituts. Berlin, 1886—.

Jex-Blake

K. Jex-Blake and E. Sellers, The Elder Pliny’s Chapters on the History of Art (chiefly Bks. XXXIV-XXXVI of the Historia Naturalis, cited as H. N.). London and New York, 1896.

Jh. oest. arch. Inst.

Jahreshefte des oesterreichischen archaeologischen Institutes in Wien. Vienna, 1898—.

J. H. S.

Journal of Hellenic Studies. London, 1880—.

Joubin

A. Joubin, La Sculpture grecque entre les Guerres Médiques et l’Époque de Périclès. Paris, 1901.

Juethner

J. Juethner, Ueber antike Turngeraethe. Vienna, 1896.

Juethner, Ph.

J. Juethner, Philostratos ueber Gymnastik. Leipsic and Berlin, 1909.

Kabbadias

P. Kabbadias, Γλυπτὰ τοῦ Ἐθνικοῦ Μουσείου. Athens, 1890–1892.

Klein

W. Klein, Geschichte der griechischen Kunst, I-III. Leipsic, 1904–1907.

Krause

J. H. Krause, Die Gymnastik und Agonistik der Hellenen, I-II. Leipsic, 1841.

Lechat

H. Lechat, La Sculpture attique avant Phidias. Paris, 1904.

Lechat, Au Musée

H. Lechat, Au Musée de l’Acropole d’Athènes. Lyon, 1903.

Mach, von

E. von Mach, A Handbook of Greek and Roman Sculpture, I-II (Text and University Prints). Boston, 1914.

M. D.

F. Matz and F. von Duhn, Antike Bildwerke in Rom., I-III. Leipsic, 1881–1882.

Michaelis

A. Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Britain. Translated from the German by C. A. M. Fennell. Cambridge, 1882.

Mon. d. I.

Monumenti inediti dell’ Instituto di Corrispondenza archeologica. Rome, 1829–1885.

Mon. ant.

Monumenti antichi publicati per cura della Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Rome, 1889—.

Mon. gr.

Monuments grecs publiés par l’Association pour l’Encouragement des Études grecques en France, 1872—. (Vol. I, containing reprints of articles from 1872, appeared in 1881).

Mon. Piot.

Monuments et Mémoires publiés par l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres. Fondation Eugène Piot. Paris, 1894—.

Murray

A. S. Murray, A History of Greek Sculpture. Second edition, I-II. London, 1890.

Museum Marbles

A Description of the Ancient Marbles in the British Museum, Pts. I-XI. London, 1812–1861.

M. W.

K. O. Mueller and F. Wieseler, Denkmaeler der alten Kunst. Goettingen, 1854–1877.

Not. Scav.

Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità comunicate alla Reale Accademia dei Lincei. Rome, 1876—.

Overbeck

J. Overbeck, Geschichte der griech. Plastik. Fourth edition, I-II. Leipsic, 1893–1898.

Oxy. Pap.

The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, ed. by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, II, pp. 22 f. London, 1899.

P.

Pausaniae Graeciae descriptio, rec. F. Spiro, I-III. Leipsic, 1903.

Pauly-Wissowa

G. Wissowa and W. Kroll, Pauly’s Real-encyclopaedie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft. Stuttgart, 1894—.

Perrot-Chipiez

G. Perrot and Ch. Chipiez, Histoire de l’art dans l’antiquité: VI (La Grèce primitive); VIII, La Grèce archaïque. Paris, 1894, 1903.

Ph.

Philostratos, de Arte gymnastica, ed. Juethner, 1909 (see Juethner, Ph.).

Pliny, H. N.

See Jex-Blake.

P. l. G.

Poetae lyrici Graeci, rec. Th. Bergk. Fourth edition, I-III. Leipsic, 1878–1882. I, Pt. 1 = ed. 5, rec. O. Schroeder, 1900.

Rayet

O. Rayet, ed. Monuments de l’Art antique, I-II. Paris, 1884.

Reinach, Rép.

S. Reinach, Répertoire de la statuaire grecque et romaine, I, second edition; II, Pts. 1, 2, second edition; 111-IV, first edition. Paris 1904–1910. I = Reprint of Clarac = Clarac de poche.

Reinach, Têtes

S. Reinach, Recueil de têtes antiques ideales et idealisées. Paris, 1903.

Reisch

E. Reisch, Griechische Weihgeschenke. Vienna, 1890.

R. Arch.

Revue Archéologique. Paris, Sér. 1, 1844–1860; II, 1860–1882; III, 1883–1902; IV, 1903—.

R. Ét. Gr.

Revue des Études grecques. Paris, 1888—.

Richardson

R. B. Richardson, A History of Greek Sculpture. New York, 1911.

Ridder, de

A. de Ridder, Catalogue des bronzes trouves sur l’acropole d’Athenes. Paris, 1896.

R. M.

Mitteilungen des kaiserlich deutschen archaeologischen Instituts, Roemische Abteilung. Rome, 1886—.

Robert, O. S.

C. Robert, Die Ordnung der Olympischen Spiele und die Sieger der 75.-83. Olympiade: Hermes, XXXV, 1900, pp. 141 f.

Roscher, Lex.

W. H. Roscher, Lexikon der griechischen und roemischen Mythologie. Leipsic, 1884—.

Rouse

W. D. Rouse, Greek Votive Offerings. Cambridge, 1902.

Rutgers

J. R. Rutgers, S. Julii Africani Ὀλυμπιάδων ἀναγραφή. Leyden, 1862.

Scherer

Chr. Scherer, de olympionicarum Statuis, Diss. inaug., Goettingen, 1885.

Sitzb. Muen. Akad.

Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-philologischen und der historischen Klasse der koeniglich Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Muenchen. Munich, 1871—.

Specimens

Specimens of Ancient Sculpture ... Selected from different Collections in Great Britain by the Society of Dilettanti, I-III. London, 1809–1835.

Springer-Michaelis

A. Springer and A. Michaelis, Handbuch der Kunstgeschichte, I. Das Altertum. Ninth edition. Leipsic, 1911.

S. Q.

Die Antiken Schriftquellen zur Geschichte der bildenden Kuenste bei den Griechen, ed. J. Overbeck. Leipsic, 1868.

Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes

V. Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes du Musée National d’Athènes. Second edition. Athens, 1910.

Svoronos

J. N. Svoronos, Das Athener National Museum. Text and Plates, I-III. Athens, 1908–1911.

Other abbreviations will be readily understood.

CORRIGENDA.

Besides the following, there are a few other corrections which are so obvious that they scarcely need to be listed.

Page     2,

note 1, for ragmentary read fragmentary.

10,

line 2, (and Index), for Archermoros read Archemoros.

14,

note 2, after 202f. add Dar.-Sagl., IV, i, pp. 194 f., list 34 local Olympia.

15,

line 6, for Dorian Eleans read Dorian allies, the Eleans.

24,

line 27, for 173 A. D. read 173 or 174 A. D.

26,

line 27, for archaistic read archaic.

31,

lines 8–9, for Papyrus read Papyri; line 20, for Aigira read Aigeira.

46,

note 1, line 2, add The Solonian cubit of 444 mm. gives 17.53 inches, the finger .73 inch, which makes Diagoros’ statue 6 feet 1.75 inches tall.

58,

note 2, for statues of all read statues by all.

60,

note 1, for Vespes read Vespae; note 5, for Koponios read Coponius.

77,

line 18, for staute read statue; note 3, line 11, for Encrinomenos read Encrinomenus.

82,

lines 14–15, for in and not outside read outside and not inside.

83,

line 15, for Svonoros read Svoronos.

84,

line 2 (and Index, s. v. Ball-playing), for φανίνδα read φαινίνδα.

96,

note 1, line 6, for Hermes read Herakles.

110,

line 20, and note 1, line 9 (and Index), for Argeidas read Argeiadas.

128,

note 4, for Glyptothek read Glyptothèque.

131,

line 12 (and Index, s. v. Praxiteles), for ψελιομένη read ψελιουμένη.

149,

note 2, for ξωστήρ read ζωστήρ.

153,

line 3, for arms read hands.

166,

line 17, for Stronganoff read Stroganoff.

185,

lines 4 and 8, and 186, line 3, for Lancelotti read Lancellotti.

188,

note 8, line 3, for Perseus read Akrisios.

189,

note 1, for Papyrus read Papyri; for Beilage read Beilag.

191,

line 21, for eponymous read eponymus.

196,

line 25, and 197, note 2, for Θῦμον read Θυμόν.

210,

line 5, for αλμα read ἅλμα.

235,

note 1, line 2, omit as.

253,

line 27, for 1202 read 1204.

265,

line 14, for Paunasias read Pausanias.

268,

line 26 (and Index, s. v. Nikomachos and Victoria), for sublimine read sublime.

288,

line 10 (and Index), for Tenerari read Tenerani.

321,

line 29, for inventors read so-called inventors.

327,

line 3, for stautes read statues.

341,

line 33, last word of line should be δεξιᾷ.

348,

line 28, for prothusis read prothysis.

CHAPTER I.
EARLY GREEK GAMES AND PRIZES.

Plate 1 and Figures 1 and 2.

Before attempting to trace historically the development of monuments of victors in the gymnic and hippic contests at Olympia, and before attempting to reconstruct their different types, it will be useful to devote a preliminary chapter to the early history of Greek athletics and victor prizes in general.

It is a truism that the origin of Greek athletics is not to be found in the recently discovered Aegean civilization of Crete, nor in the latest phase of the same culture on Mycenæan sites of the mainland of Greece. Their origin is not to be sought in the indigenous Mediterranean stock which produced that culture, but rather among the northern invaders of Greece, the fair-haired Achæans of the Homeric poems, and especially among the later Dorians in the Peloponnesus. It was to the physical vigor of these strangers rather than to the more artistic nature of the Mediterraneans that the later Greeks owed their interest in sports. As these invaders settled themselves most firmly in the Peloponnesus, Greek athletics may be said to be chiefly the product of South Greece. It was here that three of the four national festivals grew up—at Olympia, Nemea, and on the Corinthian Isthmus. It was in the schools of Argos and Sikyon that athletic sculpture flourished best and in later Greek history physical exercise was most fully developed among the Dorian Spartans.1

SPORTS IN CRETE.

Centuries before the Achæan civilization of Greece had bloomed, there developed among the Minoans of Crete a passion for certain acrobatic performances and for gymnastics. These Cretans, though strongly influenced by Egypt and the East, did not borrow their love of sport from outside any more than did the later Achæans. On the walls of the tombs of Beni-Hasan on the Nile are pictured many athletic sports, including a series of several hundred wrestling groups,2 but these sports did not influence, so far as we know, Cretan athletics. At Knossos bull-grappling seems to have been the national sport, as we see from the frescoes on the palace walls. In the absence of the horse, which did not appear in early Aegean times in Crete, it is not difficult to understand the development of gymnastic sports with bulls. At Knossos a seal has been found which shows the rude drawing of a vessel with rowers seated under a canopy, superimposed on which is drawn the greater portion of a huge horse. In this design, dating from about 1600 B. C. and synchronizing with the earlier part of the eighteenth Egyptian dynasty, we doubtless see a graphic way of indicating the cargo, and consequently a contemporary record, it may be, of the first importation of horses from Libya into Crete.3

The Cretan bull seems to have been a much larger animal than the species found upon the island to-day.4 Bull-grappling at Knossos was the sport of female as well as male toreadors. A fragmentary rectangular fresco, dating from about 1500 B. C. (Pl. 1), was discovered there by Sir Arthur Evans in 1901 and is now in the Candia museum. It is executed with extraordinary spirit and shows a huge bull rushing forward with lowered head and tail straight out. A man is in the act of turning a somersault on its back, his legs in the air, his arms grasping the bull’s body and his head raised, looking back to the rear of the animal, where a cowgirl is standing, holding out her arms to catch his flying figure as soon as his feat is concluded. Another cowgirl, at the extreme left, seems to be suspended from the bull’s horns, which pass under her armpits, while she catches hold further up. However, she is not being tossed, but is taking position preliminary to leaping over the bull’s back. Both the man and the women wear striped boots and bracelets; the women are apparently distinguished by their white skin, short drawers, yellow sashes embroidered with red, and the red-and-blue diadems around their brows.[5] On the opposite wall a similar scene was pictured; among its stucco fragments was found the representation of the arm and shoulder of a woman grasping a bull by the horns. The fragmentary representation of another woman and man was also found.

PLATE 1

Bull-grappling Scene. Wall-painting from Knossos. Museum of Candia.

A very similar scene has long been known from a fresco painting from Tiryns, now in Athens.6 A bull is represented galloping to the left, while a man7 clings to its horns with his right hand and is swept along with one foot lightly touching the bull’s back and the other swung aloft. Most early writers interpreted this scene as a bull-hunt, the artist having drawn the hunter above the bull through ignorance of perspective. The execution is very inferior, three attempts of the bungling painter being visible in the painting of the tail and the front legs. Others saw in it the representation of an acrobat showing his dexterity by leaping upon the back of an animal in full career, recalling the description of such a trick in the Iliad, where Ajax is represented as rushing over the plain like a man who, while driving four horses, leaps from horse to horse.8 But this figure must take its place side by side with the one from Knossos just described as another bull-grappling scene. That such sports were not held in the open air, but in an enclosed courtyard, is shown by the seal from Praisos now in the Candia Museum, which depicts a man vaulting on the back of a gigantic ox within a paved enclosure.9 Doubtless the theatral areas discovered at Phaistos by the Italian Archæological Mission10 and at Knossos by Sir Arthur Evans in 190311 were not large enough for bull scenes and were used merely for ceremonial dancing and perhaps for the boxing matches to be described.12 Similar acrobats are doubtless to be recognized in the two beautiful ivory statuettes, only 11.5 inches in height, of so-called leapers, found by Dr. Evans at Knossos in 1901.13 These masterpieces of the late Minoan II period represent acrobats (one is probably a woman) darting through the air. “The life, the freedom, the élan of these figures is nothing short of marvellous,” writes Dr. Evans, who calls attention to the careful physical training shown in their slender legs and in the muscles, even the veins on the back of the hands and the finger-nails being plainly indicated as well as the details of the skinfolds at the joints. They doubtless formed a part of an ivory model of the bull-ring and are meant for miniature toreadors, who were hung in the air by fine gold wires14 over the backs of ivory bulls who stood on the solid ground. The heads of the figures are thrown backwards, a posture suitable for such vaulters, but not for leapers or divers. Minoan art culminated in these statuettes and in certain stucco figures in half relief found also at Knossos. Only a few fragments of these reliefs have survived, most of which were decorative or architectonic in character, though among them were also found human disjecta membra in high relief, such as the fragment of a left forearm holding a horn, and not a pointed vase, as Dr. Evans thought. Here the muscles are well indicated, though the veins are exaggerated.15 This fragment may well be a part of the same bull-grappling scenes as those in the frescoes, as also the life-like image of a bull, the details of whose head, mouth, eyes, and nostrils are full of expression, and whose muscles are perfectly indicated.

When compared with the monuments described, the similarity of details on the design of the Vapheio cups ornamented in repoussé, the “most splendid specimens known of the work of the Minoan goldsmith,”16 never again equalled until the Italian Renaissance, makes it more than possible that here again we have scenes of bull-grappling rather than of bull-hunting. On one cup is represented a quiet pastoral scene—a man tying the legs of a bull with a rope, while two other bulls stand near, amicably licking one another, and a third is quietly grazing. On the other, however, are represented scenes of a very different character. In the centre is a furious bull entangled in a net, which is fastened to a tree; to the left a figure, doubtless a woman, is holding on to a bull’s head, while a man has fallen on his head beside the animal, both man and woman being dressed in the Cretan fashion. A third bull rushes furiously by to the right. Most commentators have seen bull-hunting scenes on both these cups. Thus, on the first cup were represented three scenes in the drama of trapping a bull by means of a tame decoy cow; to the right the bull is starting to go to the rendezvous, while in the center the bull stands by the cow’s side and to the left he is finally trapped and tied.17 On the other cup the furious animal at the left was supposed to have thrown one hunter and to have caught another on its horns. But Mosso’s interpretation of this design seems to be the right one.18 The two persons struggling with the bull have no lasso and so can hardly be hunters; besides, if the bull had impaled a hunter with its horns, the hunter would have been represented with his head up and not down. The figure is, however, uninjured and holds on with its knee bent over one horn and its shoulder against the other; it is merely, therefore, intended for a woman acrobat. The net shown in the centre was never used for hunting wild bulls; more probably it was intended as an obstacle in racing. The fallen man has been standing on the netted bull, which, with the gymnast on its back, was expected to have leaped over the net, but has not succeeded; consequently, the acrobat has been tumbled over the bull’s head.

This ancient Cretan sport seems to have been similar to that known in Thessaly and elsewhere in historical days as τὰ ταυροκαθάψια.19 A survival of it still persists to our day in certain parts of Italy, as, e. g., in the province of Viterbo.20

Acrobatic feats of various sorts were attractive to the later Greeks from the time of Homer down. We have already mentioned one passage from the Iliad in which a driver of four horses leaps from horse to horse in motion. On the shield of Achilles tumblers appeared among the dancers on the dancing-place.21 Patroklos ironically remarks over the body of Kebriones, as the charioteer falls headlong like a diver from his chariot when hit by a missile, that there are tumblers also among the Trojans.22 In later centuries the Athenians evinced a great attraction to acrobatic feats. The story told of Hippokleides23 reveals that high-born Athenians did not disdain to practice them. They appear to have formed a sort of side-show attraction at the Panathenaic festival, as such scenes occur frequently on Attic vases. Thus on an early (imitation?) Panathenaic vase from Kameiros in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris,24 there is represented behind the driver a man standing on the back of a horse, armed with a helmet and two shields, while in front another appears to be balancing himself on a pole.

But such acrobatic scenes as those of Crete and later Greece can not properly be classed as athletic. They betoken more the love of excitement than of true sport. The only form of real athletics represented on Minoan monuments, one which was classed in later Greece as one of the national sports, was that of boxing, which seems to have been the favorite gymnastic contest of the Cretans, as it always was of the later Greeks. Boxing scenes appear on seals,25 on a steatite fragment of a pyxis found in 1901 at Knossos and, in conjunction with a bull-grappling Fig. 1.—So-called Boxer Vase, from Hagia Triada (Cast). Museum of Candia. scene, on the so-called Boxer Vase found by the Italians at Hagia Triada (Fig. 1). The vase is a cone-shaped rhyton of steatite, 18 inches high, originally overlaid with gold foil. It belongs to the best period of Cretan art, late Minoan I.26 This vase alone, if no other monumental evidence were at hand, would suffice to show the physical prowess and love of sport of the Minoans. Because of its scenes of boxing and bull-grappling Mosso calls it “the most complete monument that we have of gymnastic exercise in the Mediterranean civilization.”27 The later Greek tradition of the high degree of physical development attained by the Cretans is proved by this monument.28

The reliefs are arranged in four horizontal zones.29 One of these, the second from the top, represents a bull-grappling scene, showing two racing bulls, upon the head and horns of one of which a gymnast has vaulted (not being tossed and helpless, as most interpreters think).30 The other three represent boxers in all attitudes of the prize-ring, hitting, guarding, falling, and even kicking, as in the later Greek pankration. Some are victorious, the left arm being extended on guard and the right drawn back to strike; one (in the top zone) is ready to spring, just as Hector was ready to spring on Achilles;31 others are prostrate on the ground with their feet in the air. The violence of the action recalls the boast of Epeios in the famous match in the Iliad that he will break his adversary’s bones.32

The method of attack by the right arm and defense by the left is the same as that formerly used by English pugilists. In the topmost zone the combatants wear helmets with visors, cheek-pieces, and horse-hair plumes, and also shoes; in the third zone down the pugilists also wear helmets, though of a different pattern, while the bottom zone shows figures, perhaps youths, with bare heads. Some of the boxers appear to wear boxing-gloves. In the lowest zone we see the well-known feat of swinging the antagonist up by the legs and throwing him—if we may so conclude from the contorted position of the vanquished, whose legs are in the air.

A similar figure appears in relief on the fragment of a pyxis found at Knossos.33 A youth with clenched fists stands with left arm extended as if to ward off a blow, while his right arm is drawn back and rests on his hip; below we see the bent knee of a prostrate figure, evidently that of his vanquished opponent. The boxer has a wasp-like waist and wears a metal girdle. His left leg is well modeled, the muscles not being exaggerated.

ATHLETICS IN HOMER.

We have evidence, therefore, that the love of sport existed in Crete as it has existed in all countries since. But the comparatively unathletic character of the Aegean culture is shown by the complete absence of athletic representations—apart from bull-grappling scenes—in the art of its last phase at Mycenæ and Tiryns on the mainland. This is an independent argument for the view that the civilization of the mainland was chiefly the product of the old Mediterranean stock, which was finally conquered by the invading Achæans, who are represented in Homer as skilled gymnasts. In Homer we are immediately conscious of being in another world, for here we are in an atmosphere of true athletics, which are fully developed and quite secular in character.34 They are, however, wholly spontaneous, for there are as yet neither meets nor organized training, neither stadia, gymnasia, nor palæstræ; for such an organization of athletics did not exist until the sixth century B. C. But Homer’s account of the funeral games of Patroklos is pervaded by a spirit of true athletics and has a perennial attraction for every lover of sport. Walter Leaf says of the chariot-race, which is the culminating feature of the description, that it is “a piece of narrative as truthful in its characters as it is dramatic and masterly in description.”35 Such a description could have been composed only by a poet who belonged to a people long acquainted with athletics and intensely interested in them. Nestor often speaks of a remoter past, when the gods and heroes contended. Odysseus says he could not have fought with Herakles nor Eurytos, heroes of the olden time, “who contended with the immortal gods.” The Homeric warrior was distinguished from the merchant by his knowledge of sport. Thus Euryalos of the Phaiakians says in no complimentary tone to Odysseus: “No truly, stranger, nor do I think thee at all like one that is skilled in games ... rather art thou such an one as comes and goes in a benched ship, a master of sailors that are merchantmen, one with a memory for his freight, or that hath charge of a cargo homeward bound, and of greedily gotten gains.”36 It is beside the point whether the chief passages in the poems which relate to sports are late in origin or not, even if they are later than 776 B. C., the traditional first Olympiad. In any case the later poet merely followed an older tradition. At the funeral games of Patroklos all the events are practical in character, the natural amusements of men chiefly interested in war. They are, however, not merely military, but are truly athletic. The oldest and most aristocratic of all the events described is the chariot-race—in which the war-chariot is used—the monopoly of the nobles then, as it was always later the sport of kings and the rich.37 Boxing and wrestling come next in importance, already occupying the position of preëminence which they hold in the poems of Pindar. The foot-race between Ajax, the son of Oileus, and Odysseus follows. Of the last four events, three—the single combat between Ajax and Diomedes, the throwing of the solos, and the contest in archery—are admitted to be late additions. The last event of all, the casting of the spear, may be earlier, but we know little about it, as the contest did not take place, Achilles yielding the first prize to Agamemnon. Most of these later events are described in a lifeless manner and have not the vim and compelling interest of the earlier ones. Indeed the contest in archery seems to be treated with a certain amount of ridicule, which shows the contempt of the great nobles for so plebeian a sport. The armed contest, though it is pictured in art certainly as early as the sixth century B. C.,38 never had a place in the later Greek games.39 Jumping, an important part of the later pentathlon, is mentioned but once in the poems, as a feature of the sports of the Phaiakians. But the later pentathlon, as Gardiner says, is certainly not suggested in Homer’s account, though many have assumed it,40 merely because Nestor mentions his former contests at Bouprasion in boxing, in running, in hurling the spear, and in the chariot-race.41 This, however, is not the combination of contests known much later as the pentathlon, in which the same contestants had to compete in the series of events—running, jumping, wrestling, diskos-throwing, and javelin-throwing.

ORIGIN OF GREEK GAMES IN THE CULT OF THE DEAD.

In these games described in the Iliad we see an example of the origin of the later athletic festivals in the cult of the dead. Homer knows only of funeral games42 and there is no trace in the poems of the later athletic meetings held in honor of a god.43 However, the association of the later games with religious festivals held at stated times can be traced to the games with which the funeral of the Homeric chief was celebrated. The oldest example of periodic funeral games in Greece of which we have knowledge were those held in Arkadia in honor of the dead Azan, the father of Kleitor and son of Arkas, at which prizes were offered at least for horse-racing.44

Though the origin of the four national religious festivals in Greece—at Olympia, Delphi, Nemea, and on the Isthmus—is buried in a mass of conflicting legend, certain writers agree in saying that all of them were founded on funeral games, though they were later dedicated to gods.45 Thus the Isthmian were instituted in honor of the dead Melikertes,46 the Nemean in honor of Opheltes or Archemoros,47 the Pythian in honor of the slain Python,48 the Olympian in honor of the hero Pelops.49 To both Pindar and Bacchylides the Olympian games were associated with the tomb of Pelops; Pausanias, on the other hand, records that the ancient Elean writers ascribed their origin to the Idæan Herakles of Crete.50 It was a common tradition that Herakles founded the games, some writers saying that it was the Cretan, others that it was the Greek hero, the son of Zeus and Alkmena.51

Despite the variation in legends relative to the institution of the four national games, we should not doubt the universal tradition that all were funerary in origin. The tradition is confirmed by many lines of argument: by the survival of funeral customs in their later rituals, by the later custom of instituting funeral games in honor of dead warriors both in antiquity and in modern times, and by the testimony of early athletic art in Greece.52 We shall now briefly consider these arguments.

As an example of the survival of funeral customs in later ritual, Pausanias says that the annual officers at Olympia, even in his day, sacrificed a black ram to Pelops.53 The fact that a black victim was offered over a trench instead of on an altar proves that Pelops was still worshipped as a hero and not as a god. The scholiast on Pindar, Ol., I, 146, says that all Peloponnesian lads each year lashed themselves on the grave of Pelops until the blood ran down their backs as a libation to the hero. Furthermore, all the contestants at Olympia sacrificed first to Pelops and then to Zeus.54

Funeral games were held in honor of departed warriors and eminent men all over the Greek world and at all periods, from the legendary games of Patroklos and Pelias and others to those celebrated at Thessalonika in Valerian’s time.55 Thus Miltiades was honored by games on the Thracian Chersonesus,56 Leonidas and Pausanias at Sparta,57 Brasidas at Amphipolis,58 Timoleon at Syracuse,59 and Mausolos at Halikarnassos.60 Alexander instituted games in honor of the dead Hephaistion61 and the conqueror himself was honored in a similar way.62 The Eleutheria were celebrated at Platæa at stated times in honor of the soldiers who fell there against the Medes in 479 B. C.,63 and in the Academy a festival was held under the direction of the polemarch in honor of the Athenian soldiers who had died for their country and were buried in the Kerameikos.64 Funeral games were also common in Italy. We find athletic scenes decorating Etruscan tombs—including boxing, wrestling, horse-racing, and chariot-racing.65 The Romans borrowed their funeral games from Etruria as well as their gladiatorial shows, which were doubtless also funerary in origin.66 Frazer cites examples of the custom of instituting games in honor of dead warriors among many modern peoples, Circassians, Chewsurs of the Caucasus, Siamese, Kirghiz, in India, and among the North American Indian tribes. Gardiner notes the Irish fairs in honor of a departed chief, which existed from pagan days down to the last century.67

The testimony of early Greek athletic art also points to the same funerary origin of the games. The funeral games of Pelias and those held by Akastos in honor of his father were depicted respectively on the two most famous monuments of early Greek decorative art, on the chest of Kypselos dedicated in the Heraion at Olympia and on the throne of Apollo at Amyklai in Lakonia, the latter being the work of the Ionian sculptor Bathykles. Though both these works are lost, the description of one of them at least, that of the chest, by Pausanias,68 is so detailed and precise that the scenes represented upon it have been paralleled figure for figure on early Ionian (especially Chalkidian) and Corinthian vases, contemporary or later, and on Corinthian and Argive decorative bronze reliefs. Many attempts have been made, therefore, to restore the chest, and as more monuments become known, which throw light on the composition and types, these attempts are constantly growing in certainty, even though conjecture may continue to enter in.69

The figures were wrought in relief, partly in ivory and gold and partly in the cedar wood itself, deployed on its surface in a series of bands, such as we commonly see on early vases. This use of gold and ivory is the first example in Greek art of the custom employed by Pheidias and other sculptors of the great age of Greek sculpture. We have already noted its use in the ivory acrobats from Crete, which were made, perhaps, a thousand years before the chest.70 Out of the thirty-three scenes depicted on its surface all but two or three were mythological, and among these were scenes from the funeral games of Pelias, including a two-horse chariot-race (P., §9), a boxing and wrestling match (§10), a foot-race, quoit-throwing, and a victor represented as being crowned (§10), and prize tripods (§11).

The most valuable parallel to some of the scenes described by Pausanias is found on the Amphiaraos vase in Berlin,71 dating from the sixth century B. C., on which the wrestling match and chariot-race correspond surprisingly well with the descriptions of Pausanias, despite certain differences in detail. Another archaic vase depicts a two-horse chariot-race and the parting of Amphiaraos and Eriphyle.72 The scenes on this latter vase appear to have been copied from those on the chest, and it is possible that the scenes on the Berlin vase had the same origin.

Funeral games are commonly pictured on early vases. Thus on a proto-Attic amphora, discovered by the British School of Athens in excavating the Gymnasion of Kynosarges, there are groups of wrestlers and chariot-racers. The wrestling bout here, however, seems to be to the death, as the victor has his adversary by the throat with both hands. It may be a mythological scene, perhaps representing the bout between Herakles and Antaios. A still earlier representation of funeral games is shown by a Dipylon geometric vase from the Akropolis now in Copenhagen, dating back possibly to the eighth century B. C.73 On one side two nude men, who have grasped each other by the arms, are ready to stab one another with swords. This may represent, however, as Gardiner suggests, only a mimic contest. On the other side are two boxers standing between groups of warriors and dancers. A similar scene in repoussé appears on a Cypriote silver vase from Etruria now in the Uffizi in Florence.74 We should also, in this connection, note again the reliefs representing funeral games, which appear on the sixth-century sarcophagus from Klazomenai already mentioned.75 Here is represented a combat of armed men; amid chariots stand groups of men armed with helmets, shields, and spears, while flute-players stand between them; at either end is a pillar with a prize vase upon it; against one leans a naked man with a staff, doubtless intended to represent the spirit of the deceased in whose honor the games are being held.

Games in honor of the dead tended to become periodic. The tomb of the honored warriors became a rallying-point for neighboring people, who would convene to see the games. While some of these games were destined never to transcend local importance, others developed into the Panhellenic festivals. As the worship of ancestors became metamorphosed into that of heroes, the games became part of hero cults, which antedated those of the Olympian gods. But as the gods gradually superseded the heroes in the popular religion, they usurped the sanctuaries and the games held there, which had long been a part of the earlier worship. We are not here concerned, however, with the difficult question of the origin of funeral games. They may have taken the place of earlier human sacrifices, which would explain the armed fight at the games of Patroklos and its appearance on archaic vases and sarcophagi; or they may have commemorated early contests of succession, which would explain many mythical contests like the chariot-race between Pelops and Oinomaos for Hippodameia, or the wrestling match between Zeus and Kronos. In any case such games would never have attained the importance which they did attain in Greece, if it had not been for the athletic spirit and love of competition so characteristic of the Hellenic race. Whatever their origin, therefore, there is little doubt that out of them developed the great games of historic Greece. The constant relationship between Greek religion and Greek athletics can be explained in no other way.76

EARLY HISTORY OF THE FOUR NATIONAL GAMES.

By the beginning of the sixth century B. C. the athletic spirit displayed in the Homeric poems had given rise to the four national festivals—at Olympia, Delphi, Nemea, and on the Isthmus. On these four, many lesser games were modeled.77 The origin of all these, as we have already remarked, is lost in a mass of legend. The myths of the origin of Olympia are particularly conflicting. We are practically certain, however, that Olympia as a sanctuary preceded the advent of the Achæans into the Peloponnesus, and that the foundation of the games preceded the coming of the Dorians, but was probably later than that of the Achæans. The importance of the games dates from the time after the Dorian invasion of the Peloponnesus, when the warring peoples finally became pacified.78 For centuries Olympia was overshadowed by Delphi and the Ionian festival on Delos. The importance of the latter festival in the eighth and seventh centuries B. C. is shown by the Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo. Only by the beginning of the seventh century had Olympia begun to gain its prestige. The pre-Dorian Pisatai, in whose territory the sanctuary was situated, probably controlled it early. The Dorian allies, the Eleans, whom legend had King Oxylos lead into the Peloponnesus from Aitolia,79 tried to wrest this control from the Pisatai, who, however, aided by religious reverence for the sanctuary, were able to maintain their rights. On account of the conflict the games languished, until finally a truce was made by the two factions and the games were re-established under their common management. This work was ascribed to Iphitos and Kleosthenes, kings respectively of Elis and Pisa, and to Lykourgos of Sparta.80 The dual control was not successful, as the jealous Pisatai constantly tried to regain their old honor; but the Eleans, supported by the Spartans, prevailed and finally, after the Persian wars, destroyed Pisa and the other revolting cities of Triphylia and henceforth remained in sole control. The restoration of the games under Iphitos and his colleagues took place in 776 B. C., from which date the festival was celebrated every fourth year, until it was finally abolished by the Roman emperor Theodosius at the end of the fourth century A. D. In 776 Koroibos of Elis won the foot-race and this was the first dated Olympiad in the Olympian register,81 and from it, as Pausanias says,82 the unbroken tradition of the Olympiads began. This history of Olympia is very different from the orthodox mythical story told by Pausanias and Strabo and based on the “ancient writings of the Eleans.”83 According to it the games were originally instituted by the Eleans under Oxylos and refounded by Iphitos, his descendant, together with Lykourgos, still under the management of the Eleans. In Ol. 8 the Pisatans invoked the aid of the Argive king Pheidon and dispossessed the Eleans, but they lost the control of Olympia in the next Olympiad. In Ol. 28 Elis, during a war with Dyme, allowed the Pisatans to celebrate the games. Six Olympiads later the king of Pisa came to Olympia with an army and took charge. The story leaves the Pisatans in control from about Olympiads 30 to 51, but some time between Ols. 48 and 52 the Eleans defeated Pisa and destroyed it, and henceforth controlled the games. Such a story was manifestly a contrivance by the later priests of Elis to justify their control of the games through a prior claim. It is contradicted by all the evidence.84 The antiquity of Olympia is known to us from the results of excavations and from its religious history. The latest excavations on the site have disclosed the remains of six prehistoric buildings with apsidal endings, below the geometric stratum, upon the site of what used to be considered the remnants of the great altar of Zeus.85 Such an inference is borne out by many primitive features in the religious history of the sanctuary. The altar of Kronos on the hill to the north of the Altis was earlier than that of Zeus; an earth altar antedated that of Zeus, while a survival of the earlier worship of the powers of the underworld is seen in the custom, lasting through later centuries, of allowing only one woman, the priestess of Demeter Chamyne, to witness the games. We also know that the worship of the Pelasgian Hera antedated that of the Hellenic Zeus; her temple, the Heraion, is the most ancient of which the foundations still stand, a temple built of stone, wood, and sun-dried bricks, whose origin is to be referred to the tenth, if not to the eleventh, century B. C.86 We have already remarked that the worship of the hero Pelops preceded that of the god Zeus.87 All such indications attest the high antiquity of Olympia. That it is not mentioned in Homer, while Delphi and Dodona are, only proves that in the poet’s time it was still merely a local shrine. Not until the beginning of the sixth century B. C. did it attain the distinction, which it retained ever afterwards, of being the foremost national festival of Hellas.88

The periodical celebration of the three other national festivals was not dated—except in legend—before the early years of the sixth century B. C., though local festivals must have existed also on these sites long before.89 The old music festival at Delphi, which finally was held every eight years,90 was changed in 586 B. C., in consequence of the Sacred War,91 into a Panhellenic festival celebrated thereafter every four years (pentaëteris). It was under the presidency of the Amphiktyonic League, which introduced athletic and equestrian events copied from those at Olympia92 and replaced the older money prizes with the simple bay wreath. About the same time the Nemean and Isthmian games were instituted. The local games at Nemea, said to have been founded by Adrastos in honor of a child, were reorganized some time before 573 B. C., the first Nemead.93 Thereafter they were celebrated every two years, in the second and fourth of the corresponding Olympiads.94 They were administered in honor of Zeus by the small town of Kleonai under Argive influence. The games were transferred to Argos some time between 460 B. C. and the close of the third century B. C. Centuries later, Hadrian revived the prestige of the games at Argos. The games held on the Isthmus also originated as an old local festival, which was revived in 586 or 582 B. C. We are not sure whether they were refounded in Poseidon’s honor by Periandros or after the death of Psammetichos in commemoration of the ending of the tyranny at Corinth. The geographical location of Corinth, the meeting-place of East and West, involved it in many wars, and therefore the Isthmian games never attained the prestige of the other national festivals; they were held every two years in the spring of the second and fourth years of the corresponding Olympiads and were administered by Corinth.95

Besides the four national games, many Greek cities had purely local ones, some of which originated in prehistoric days in honor of hero cults, while others were founded at historical dates. Athens was particularly favored in having many such local festivals. The most important of these were the Panathenaic games in honor of Athena, which developed from earlier annual Athenaia or Panathenaia. The festival was remodeled, or perhaps founded, just before Peisistratos seized the tyranny (561–560 B. C.), possibly by Solon, who died 560–559 B. C. The name certainly points to the unity of Athens promoted by Solon, if not to the earlier unification of the village communities of Attika ascribed to Theseus. In any case, under Peisistratos it became something more than a local festival, as the recitation of Homer became a feature of it. Following the games at Delphi and Olympia, the Great Panathenaia were held every four years (the third year of each Olympiad) in the month of Hekatombaion (July), while the more ancient annual festival continued yearly under the name of the Little Panathenaia. There were musical, literary, and athletic contests. The central feature of the festival was the procession which ascended from the lower city to the Parthenon on the Akropolis to offer the goddess a robe woven by noble Athenian maidens and matrons.96 This procession is known to us in detail from the great Parthenon frieze. The Theseia exemplify a festival whose origin can be definitely dated. Kimon, the son of the hero of Marathon, in 469 B. C., discovered the supposed bones of the national hero Theseus on the island of Skyros. The Delphic oracle counseled the Athenians to place them in an honorable resting-place. Perhaps there was a legend that the hero was buried on Skyros; in any case a grave was found there which contained the corpse of a warrior of great size, and this was brought back to Athens as the actual remains of Theseus. Thereafter an annual festival was celebrated by the Athenian epheboi, comprising military contests and athletic events—stade, dolichos, and diaulos running races, wrestling, boxing, pankration, hoplite running, etc. It began on the sixth of Pyanepsion (October), and was followed by the Epitaphia, a funeral festival in honor of national heroes and youths who had fallen fighting for Athens.97 Athletic games were held at the Herakleia in honor of Herakles at Marathon in the month of Metageitnion, and had attained great popularity by the time of Pindar.98 The Eleusinia, in honor of Demeter, took place annually in Athens in the month of Boëdromion, when horse-races and musical and other contests were held. This Attic festival claimed a greater antiquity even than Olympia. The great national festivals encouraged these smaller local ones, so that they attracted competitors from the whole Greek world.

EARLY PRIZES FOR ATHLETES.

The prizes which were offered at the early games in Greece were uniformly articles of value. Their value, however, was regarded not so much in the light of rewards to the victors as proofs of the generous spirit of the holders of the games, who thereby celebrated the dead in whose honor the contest was held. In Homer’s account of the funeral games of Patroklos, each contestant, whether victorious or not, received a prize. In one case a prize was given where the contest was not held. In the chariot-race five prizes were offered: for the winner a slave girl and a tripod; for the second best a six-year-old mare in foal; for the third a cauldron; for the fourth two talents of gold; and for the last a two-handled cup.99 For the wrestling match the winner received a tripod worth twelve oxen, while the vanquished received a skilled slave woman worth four oxen.100 For the boxing match a mule was the first prize and a two-handled cup the second.101 For the foot-race a silver bowl of Sidonian make, an ox, and half a talent of gold were the prizes.102

Hesiod records his winning a tripod for a victory gained in singing at the games of Amphidamas at Chalkis.103 Tripods were the commonest prizes at all early games and it was not till later that they became connected especially with Apollo’s worship. They were presented for all sorts of contests, for chariot-racing,104 horse-racing,105 the foot-race,106 boxing,107 and wrestling.108 They were presented at various games in honor of different gods and heroes: e. g., those in honor of Apollo at the Triopia109 and Panionia of Mykale;110 of Dionysos at Athens and Rhodes;111 of Herakles at the Herakleia of Thebes and elsewhere;112 of Pelias;113 of Patroklos.114 They were kept in temples dedicated to various gods: e. g., in those of Apollo at Delphi, at Amyklai,115 and on Delos,116 at the Ptoian sanctuary117 and in the Ismenion at Thebes;118 in the temples of Zeus at Olympia and Dodona;119 of Herakles at Thebes;120 at the Hierothesion in Messene,121 etc. Later, because it served the Pythian priestess, the tripod became a part of the Apolline cult and the special attribute of that god.122 Gold and silver vessels and articles of bronze were everywhere used as prizes. In early days bronze was very valuable. Pindar proves this for games held in Achaia and Arkadia;123 and it continued to be used in later times, as, e. g., at the Panathenaia, where a hydria of bronze was a prize in the torch-race.124 At the lesser games all sorts of articles were offered, merely for their value. Thus a shield was offered at the Argive Heraia,125 a bowl at the games in honor of Aiakos on Aegina,126 silver cups at the Marathonian Herakleia127 and at the Sikyonian Pythia,128 a cloak at Pellene,129 apparently a cuirass at Argos,130 and jars of oil from sacred trees at the Panathenaia.131 A kettle is mentioned in the Anthology;132 an inscribed cauldron from Cumae, which was a prize at the games there in honor of Onomastos, is in the British Museum,133 while measures of barley and corn were prizes at the Eleusinia.134 While presents of value continued to be given at the local games,135 a simple wreath of leaves gradually came to be the prize offered the victor at the great national festivals. Pausanias136 says that this was composed of wild olive (κότινος) at Olympia, of laurel (δάφνη) at Delphi, of pine (πίτυς) at the Isthmus, and of celery (σέλινον) at Nemea. Phlegon says that the olive wreath was first used by Iphitos in Ol. 7 ( = 752 B. C.), when it was given to the Messenian runner Daïkles,137 and that for the preceding Olympiads there was no crown.138 Probably before that date tripods and other articles of value were the prizes at Olympia, as we know they were elsewhere. Pausanias says that the wild olive came from the land of the Hyperboreans.139 Pindar calls it merely olive (ἐλαία), and not wild olive.140 The Athenian tradition was that the olive which Herakles planted at Olympia was a shoot of a sacred tree which grew on the banks of the Ilissos in Attica.141 Phlegon also says that the first crown came from Attika. In later days the Olympic wreaths were cut from the “Olive of the Faircrown”;142 its branches were cut with a golden sickle by a boy whose parents must be living;143 it grew at Olympia in a spot near the so-called Pantheion,144 which was probably a grove behind the temple of Zeus.145 The laurel prize at the Pythian games replaced the older articles of value or money in 582 B. C.146 It came from Tempe and was plucked by a boy whose parents must be living.147 The wreath is seen on late Delphian coins of the imperial age.148 Lucian also states that apples were given as prizes at Delphi.149 Wild celery was the prize at the Isthmus in the time of Pindar.150 It was dried or withered to differentiate it from the fresh celery used at Nemea.151 Later writers say that the wreath was of the leaves of the pine,152 which was the tree sacred to Poseidon. Probably pine leaves composed the older wreath, a practice certainly revived again in later Roman imperial days;153 for while on coins of Augustus and Nero celery is represented, those of Antoninus Pius and Lucius Verus show pine.154 A row of pine trees lined the approach to Poseidon’s sanctuary.155 The prize at Nemea was celery and not parsley, as many wrongly interpret the wreath appearing on Selinuntian coins.156 Pausanias also states that at most Greek games a palm wreath was placed in the victor’s right hand.157 The palm as a symbol of victory occurs first toward the end of the fifth century B. C.158

DEDICATION OF ATHLETE PRIZES.

Just as soldiers on returning from successful campaigns might dedicate their spoils of victory, victors in athletic contests might consecrate to the gods their prizes. In the Homeric poems we have no certain evidence of such a custom. A Delphic tripod was ascribed to Diomedes and possibly this was a prize won at the funeral games in honor of Patroklos.159 The first literary example of such a dedication of which we are certain is the prize tripod dedicated to the Helikonian Muses by Hesiod.160 Frequently such dedications were tripods; thus a Pythian tripod was dedicated to Herakles at Thebes by the Arkadian musician Echembrotos in 586 B. C.;161 a tripod was dedicated in the sixth century B. C. or perhaps earlier at Athens for some acrobatic or juggling trick;162 a victorious boxer dedicated one at Thebes.163 It became customary by the fifth century B. C. for victors at the Triopia to offer prize tripods to Apollo.164 Tripods or fragments of them have been found at Olympia165 and elsewhere. Many other objects were also offered.166 Sometimes a victor would dedicate the object by which he won his victory instead of his prize, just as a soldier might dedicate his arms instead of his spoils of war. Certain types of victors, e. g., those especially in running, the race in armor, singing, etc., would be excluded from making such dedications owing to the nature of the contest. Pausanias167 tells us, for instance, that twenty-five bronze shields were kept in the temple of Zeus at Olympia for the use of hoplite runners, which shows that these runners did not use all at least of their own armor. In some cases diskoi were lent to pentathletes. Pausanias168 says that three quoits were kept in the treasury of the Sikyonians at Olympia for use in the pentathlon. There are, however, as we shall see, instances of quoits being dedicated by victors. The pentathlete might consecrate either his diskos, javelin, or jumping-weights.169 Perhaps the huge red-sandstone block of the sixth century B. C., weighing 315 pounds and inscribed with the name and feat of Bybon, may have been such an ex voto,170 since Pausanias says the contestants at Olympia originally used stones for quoits.171 A stone, weighing 480 kilograms (about 1,056 pounds), was found on Thera, inscribed “Eumastos raised me from the ground.”172 Poplios (Publius) Asklepiades, who won the pentathlon at Olympia in the third century A. D.,173 dedicated a bronze diskos to Zeus, showing the old custom was kept up till late. Many bronze diskoi have been found in the excavations of the Altis.174 We have instances of the dedication of jumping-weights (ἁλτῆρες).175 Examples of dedicated strigils have been found at Olympia.176 Torches were dedicated at Athens.177 Actors dedicated their masks,178 while some of the ivory lyres and plectra conserved in the Parthenon were probably offerings of musical victors at the Panathenaic games.179 Equestrian victors dedicated their chariots, or models of them, and their horses. These models might be large or small. We have notices of large chariot-groups at Olympia of Kleosthenes,180 Gelo,181 and Hiero of Syracuse;182 of small ones of Euagoras,183 Glaukon,184 Kyniska,185 and Polypeithes.186 A large number of miniature models of chariots and horses in bronze and terra cotta have been found at Olympia,187 some of which have no wheels. Many very thin foil wheels have also been found.188 Furtwaengler189 believes that these wheels are conventional reductions of whole chariots. Some of them are cast190 and they are generally four-spoked, but two mule-car wheels are five-spoked.191 These various models are so common and of so little value, however, that they may have had nothing to do with chariot-races.192

Many great artists, e. g., Kalamis,193 Euphranor,194 and Lysippos,195 are known to have made chariot-groups and it is reasonable to assume that some of these were votive in character. Besides dedications of chariot victors, we find at Olympia also those of horse-racers. These were similarly both large and small, with and without jockeys. Thus jockeys on horseback by Kalamis stood on either side of Hiero’s chariot.196 Krokon of Eretria, who won the horse-race at the end of the sixth century B. C.,197 dedicated a small bronze horse at Olympia.198 The monument of the sons of Pheidolas of Corinth,199 representing a horse on the top of a column, must have been small. Pausanias, in mentioning the two statues of the Spartan chariot victor Lykinos by Myron,200 says that one of the horses which the victor brought to Olympia was not allowed to enter the foal-race, and therefore was entered in the horse-race. This story was probably told Pausanias by the Olympia guides and may have arisen from the smallness of one of the horses in the monument.201 The sculptors Kalamis,202 Kanachos,203 and Hegias204 are known to have made groups representing horse-victors, and Pliny derives the whole genre of equestrian monuments from the Greeks.205 Great numbers of small figures of horses and riders have been excavated at Olympia206 and elsewhere.207 Equestrian groups of various kinds were also known outside Olympia. Thus Arkesilas IV of Kyrene offered a chariot model at Delphi for a victory in 466 B. C;208 the base found on the Akropolis of Athens and inscribed with the name Onatas probably upheld such a group;209 the equestrian statue of Isokrates on the Akropolis was also probably a dedication for a victory in horse-racing.210

DEDICATION OF STATUES AT OLYMPIA AND ELSEWHERE.

Not only did equestrian contests and the pentathlon give the victor an opportunity to represent the means by which he gained his prize, but any victorious athlete could set up a statue of himself in his own honor, which might either represent him in the characteristic attitude of his contest (perhaps with its distinguishing attributes) or might be a simple monument showing neither action nor attribute. This brings us to the main subject of the present work—the discussion of the different types of victor statues at Olympia.

Of all the national games of Hellas, our knowledge of Olympia is fullest, both because of the detailed account of its monuments by Pausanias, who visited Elis in 173 or 174 A. D., and because of the systematic excavation of the Altis by the German government in the seventies of the last century. We shall not be concerned, except incidentally, with monuments set up at the other national games, which are known to us in no such degree as those of Olympia. The interest of Pausanias in Delphi was almost entirely of a religious nature, and the lesser renown of both Nemea and the Isthmus caused him to treat their topography and monuments in a most summary manner. Though the Pythia as a festival were second only to the Olympia, as an athletic meet they scarcely equalled the Nemea or the Isthmia. From the earliest days music was the chief competition at Delphi; the oldest and most important event in the musical programme there all through Greek history was the Hymn to Apollo, sung with the accompaniment of the lyre, in which was celebrated the victory of the god over the Python. By 582 B. C. singing to the flute (αὐλῳδία) was also added, but was almost immediately discontinued. In the same year a flute solo was also inaugurated.211 In 558 B. C. lyre-playing was introduced. Under the Roman Empire poetic and dramatic competitions were prominent, but the date of their introduction is not known. Pliny mentions contests in painting.212 After music the equestrian contests were the most important, even rivalling those of Olympia. By 586 B. C., as we have seen, athletic events were inaugurated. The athletic importance of the games on the Isthmus was inferior to that of Olympia and its religious character to that of Delphi, though these games were the most frequented of all the great national ones, because of the accessibility of the place and its nearness to Corinth.213 The inferiority of the athletics here may be judged by the fact that Solon assigned only 100 drachmæ to an Isthmian victor, while 500 were given to one from Olympia.214 We have little knowledge of these games through the great period of Greek history, only a reference here and there to a victor.215 We know much more of them under the Romans, when the prosperity of Corinth was revived; at that time, however, there was little true interest in athletics. Corinth then spent great sums in procuring wild animals for the arena.216 Excavations have added little to our knowledge of these games.217 The interest at Nemea in athletics was second only to that of Olympia.218 While music was the most important feature at Delphi, and the Isthmian games were attended chiefly for the attractions of the neighboring Corinth, there was nothing but the games themselves to attract people to the retired valley of Nemea. Athletic contests were the only feature here until late times and great attention was paid to those of boys.219 The records of the victors at these games are very scanty.220

At all these three games victor monuments were set up, though in no such profusion as at Olympia.

Of those set up at Delphi, Pausanias shows his disdain by these words: “As to the athletes and musical competitors who have attracted no notice from the majority of mankind, I hold them hardly worthy of attention; and the athletes who have made themselves a name have already been set forth by me in my account of Elis.”221 He mentions the statue of only one victor, that of Phaÿllos, who won at Delphi twice in the pentathlon and once in running. A score or more of inscriptions in honor of these men whom Pausanias treats so contemptuously have been recovered. Some of them record offerings dedicated for victories, though most of them record decrees passed by the Delphians, who voted the victors not only wreaths of laurel, but seats of honor at the games and other privileges.222 Victor statues seem to have stood outside the sacred precinct at Delphi and not within it, as at Olympia, since Pausanias mentions the sanctuary after mentioning the statue of Phaÿllos.223 Other Greek and Roman writers give us stray hints of these statues. Thus, Pliny mentions a statue at Delphi of a pancratiastes by Pythagoras of Rhegion224 and says that Myron made Delphicos pentathlos, pancratiastas.225 A scholion on Pindar226 mentions the helmeted statue of the hoplite runner Telisikrates as standing in the precinct. Justin, in speaking of the Gallic invasion of Delphi, mentions statuasque cum quadrigis, quarum ingens copia procul visebatur, thus referring to large chariot-groups, which would be very sightly on the slope of the precinct.227 An idea of the beauty of such groups may be gathered from the remnant of one, the bronze Charioteer discovered by the French excavators, which is one of the most important archaic sculptures from antiquity (Fig. 66).228

We know from the words of Pausanias229 that victor statues also stood on the Isthmus, and we should assume the same for Nemea, though in both places they must have been few in number. At the various local games it was customary for victors to erect statues of themselves. Thus we know of such dedications at the Bœotian games in Thebes,230 at the Didymaion,231 and at the Lykaia in Arkadia.232 Many such victor statues decorated different localities of Athens. Thus, on the Akropolis, we know of the statues of the hoplite runner Epicharinos,233 of the pancratiast Hermolykos,234 of a helmeted man by the sculptor Kleoitas,235 of a παῖς κελητίζων representing Isokrates;236 in the Prytaneion, of the statue of the pancratiast Autolykos.237 Lykourgos, the rhetor, mentions victor statues in the agora of Athens.238 Some of these Athenian statues may have been those of Olympic victors;239 and of victors certainly Olympic we know of the statues of Kallias the pancratiast,240 of the charioteer Hermokrates,241 and of the bronze mares of Kimon.242 Of the statues of Nemean victors at Athens we know of that of Hegestratos, victor in an unknown contest.243 Of Isthmian victors there we know of that of the pancratiast Diophanes,244 and of other examples.245 We have inscriptional record of the statues at Athens of a boy victor at the Panathenaia and the Thargelia in chariot-racing,246 of a victor at the Pythia, Isthmia, Nemea, and the Panathenaia,247 of one at the Nemea and Herakleia at Thebes,248 of one at the Eleusinia,249 of one at the Panathenaia and Dionysia,250 and of others at several games.251

The erection of a statue in the Altis at Olympia was an honor which the Elean officers in charge of the games252 gave to victors to glorify their victory.253 Pliny, in a well-known passage of the Historia Naturalis,254 says it was customary for all victors to set up statues, while Pausanias255 says not all athletes did this, for “some of those who specially distinguished themselves in the games ... have had no statues.” This apparent contradiction in the statements of the two writers is to be explained, as Dittenberger256 and others have pointed out, on the ground that Pliny states the general privilege extended to the victor, while Pausanias states its practical working out, since the setting up of a statue was an undertaking which would be limited by the early death, poverty, or some other disability of the victorious athlete. The cost of making, transporting, and setting up a statue was considerable, and very often a victor must have been too poor to do it. In such a case he would often be contented to set up merely a statuette or small figure in bronze or marble. Several such bronze figures have been unearthed at Olympia,257 one of which we reproduce in Fig. 2, and we have many examples found outside the Altis: e. g., a group of wrestlers,258 Fig. 2.—Bronze Statuette of a Victor, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. a boxer,259 and the arm of a quoit-thrower260 from the Athenian Akropolis, an archaic girl runner from Dodona,261 an archaic statuette from Delphi with a loin-cloth,262 a bronze quoit-thrower dedicated in the Kabeirion,263 the Tuebingen bronze hoplite runner264 (Fig. 42), and the statuette of a παῖς κέλης from Dodona.265 We should also mention the great number of statuettes of diskos-throwers in modern museums.266 Boy victors especially would use the less expensive marble for such statuettes and we have the remnants of many such found in the excavations of the Altis.267 Pausanias mentions several monuments which were less than life-size, e. g., a horse among the offerings of Phormis, which he says was “much inferior in size and shape to all other statues of horses in the Altis,”268 and the equestrian monuments already discussed. Even reliefs and paintings, in some cases, were offered in lieu of larger monuments, not only for reasons of economy, but also because they gave a better representation of the contest. This custom was common at the lesser games, especially at the Panathenaia.269 Pausanias mentions painted iconic reliefs vowed by girl runners at the games in honor of Hera at Olympia.270 On an Attic vase in Munich a victor is represented as holding an iconic votive pinax in his hands.271 Pausanias speaks of a painting by Timainetos at Athens, which represented a boy carrying hydriæ,272 and one of a wrestler by the same artist in the Pinakotheke on the Akropolis. Pliny mentions paintings, the works of great masters, representing victors: thus the currentes quadrigae by the elder Aristeides of Thebes,273 a victor certamine gymnico palmam tenens by Eupompos,274 an athlete by Zeuxis,275 the victor Aratos with a trophy by Leontiskos,276 an athlete by Protogenes,277 two hoplite runners by Parrhasios,278 a luctator tubicenque by Antidotos and a warrior by the same artist, in Athens,279 which represented a man fighting with a shield, and a man anointing himself, the work of the painter Theoros.280

Apparently the Hellanodikai allowed but one statue for each victory. Aischines the Elean had two victories and two statues.281 Dikon of Kaulonia and Syracuse had three victories and three statues.282 The Spartan Lykinos had two victories and two statues by Myron, but we have already said that the second statue was probably that of his charioteer, the two forming part of an equestrian group.283 Kapros of Elis won two victories and had as many statues.284 On the other hand Troilos of Elis, who won in two events, had only one statue.285 Similarly Arkesilaos of Sparta had two victories in the chariot-race and only one statue.286 Xenombrotos of Cos, who appears to have won once only, had, however, two monuments, one mentioned by Pausanias and the other known to us from the recovered inscription.287 But this last case seems to be the only known exception.

When the victor was unable to set up his monument, whether because of youth, poverty, early death, or other reason, sometimes the privilege was utilized by a relative, a friend, or by his native city. In any case it was a private affair with which the Elean officials had no concern. We have examples, consequently, of the statue being set up by the son,288 father (especially in recovered inscriptions after the time of Augustus),289 mother,290 and brother;291 also several examples of statues reared in honor of athletes by fellow citizens.292 There are cases in which the trainer set up the statue.293 Frequently the native city performed the duty, dedicating the statue either at Olympia or in the victor’s city. Thus Oibotas, who won the stade-race in Ol. 6 ( = 756 B. C.), had a statue at Olympia which was erected by the Achæan state out of deference to a command of the Delphian oracle in Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.).294 The statue of Agenor, by Polykleitos the Younger, a boy wrestler from Thebes, was dedicated by the confederacy of Phokis, because his father was a public friend of the nation.295 The boy runner Herodotos of Klazomenai had a statue erected by his native town at Olympia because he was the first victor from there.296 Philinos of Kos had a statue set up by the people of Kos at Olympia “because of glory won,” for he was victor five times in running at Olympia, four at Delphi, four at Nemea, and eleven at the Isthmus.297 Hermesianax of Kolophon had a statue at Olympia erected by his city.298 The pancratiast Promachos of Pellene had two statues erected to him by his fellow citizens, one at Olympia, the other in Pellene.299 We know of three state dedications of statues at Olympia from inscriptions, those of Aristophon of Athens,300 of Epitherses of Erythrai,301 and of Polyxenos by the people of Zakynthos.302 Lichas of Sparta, at a date when the Spartans were excluded from the games, entered his chariot in the name of the Theban people, and Pausanias says that his victory was so entered on the Elean register.303 We learn from the OxyrhynchusPapyri that the public horse of the Argives won at Olympia in Ol. 75 ( = 480 B. C.) and the public chariot in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.).304 In these latter two cases the public was directly interested, and had there been monuments erected to commemorate the victories they would naturally have been set up by the state.

It has been wrongly assumed that monuments of boy victors were dedicated in the name of their parents or relatives.305 On the contrary, we have examples dating back to the fifth century B. C. of boys setting up statues at Olympia. Thus the inscription from the base of the statue of Tellon, who won in the boys’ boxing match in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.), states that he dedicated his own statue.306 Pausanias says that the Eleans allowed the boy wrestler Kratinos from Aigeira to erect a statue of his trainer.307 Of course the boy might need assistance in the undertaking, but this again was no concern of the Elean officials, who granted the privilege to the victor and not to his relatives. Usually the statue of a victor was erected soon after the victory. We have some examples of the statue being erected immediately after the victory, especially in the case of men victors. Thus Pausanias says that the victor Eubotas of Kyrene, in consequence of a Libyan oracle foretelling his victory in the foot-race, had his statue made before coming to Olympia and erected it “the very day on which he was proclaimed victor.”308 The famous Milo of Kroton spectacularly carried his statue into the Altis on his back before he entered the contest.309 There are also examples of statues being erected long after the victory, sometimes centuries later. We have already mentioned that a statue was erected to Oibotas in Ol. 80, though his victory was won in Ol. 6. Chionis, who won in running races in Ols. 28–31 ( = 668–656 B. C.) had a statue by Myron erected to his memory Ol. 77 or 78 ( = 472 or 468 B. C.).310 Cheilon of Patrai, twice victor in wrestling between Ols. (?) 103 and 115 ( = 368 and 320 B. C.), had his statue set up after his death.311 Polydamas of Skotoussa won his victory in the pankration in Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C.), but his statue by Lysippos could not have been erected until many years later.312 Glaukos, who won the boys’ boxing-match in Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.), had a statue by the Aeginetan sculptor Glaukias much later.313 In the case of boy victors, the time between boyhood and coming of age was often so short that in many cases we may assume that the statue was set up some time after the victory.314

HONORS PAID TO VICTORS BY THEIR NATIVE CITIES.

Since the victor was deemed the representative of the state, he often received a more substantial reward than a statue erected at the cost of his fellow citizens. The herald, in proclaiming his victory, proclaimed also the name of his town, which thus shared in his success. At Athens it was customary for a victor at the great games to receive a reward of money. To encourage an interest in athletics there, Solon established money prizes for victorious athletes. We have already said that 100 drachmæ were given to a victor at the Isthmus, while 500 were allotted to one at Olympia. Solon further ordained that victors should eat at the Prytaneion at the public expense.315 Probably other Greek states followed the Athenian custom. We know from an inscription that the Panathenaic victors in the stade-race received 50 amphoræ of oil, the pancratiast 40, and others 30.316 Later, in Rome, victors had special privileges granted them, including maintenance at the public expense, a privilege which Mæcenas advised the emperor Augustus to limit to victors at Olympia, Delphi, and Rome.317 Augustus in other ways enlarged the privileges of athletes.318 When we consider the intimate connection between religion and athletics and the Panhellenic fame of a victor at the great games, we can easily understand the indignation of the native town when its athletes did anything dishonorable. Sometimes a victor was bribed to appear as the citizen of some other state. Thus Astylos of Kroton, who won in running races in Ols. 73–76 ( = 488–476 B. C.), had himself proclaimed in his last two contests a Syracusan to please King Hiero. The citizens of his native town burned his house and pulled down his statue, which had been placed there in the temple of Hera.319 The Cretan Sotades, who won the long running race in Ol. 99 ( = 384 B. C.), was bribed at the next Olympiad by the city of Ephesos to proclaim himself an Ephesian, and was in consequence exiled.320 Dikon, a victor in running races at the beginning of the fourth century B. C., proclaimed himself first a citizen of Kaulonia, but later, “for a sum of money,” entered the men’s contest as a Syracusan.321 Sometimes such attempts at bribery proved unsuccessful. Thus the father of the boy boxer Antipatros of Miletos, who won in Ol. 98 ( = 388 B. C.), accepted a bribe from some Syracusans, who were bringing an offering to Olympia from Dionysios, to let the boy be proclaimed a Syracusan. But the boy himself refused the bribe and had inscribed on his statue by the younger Polykleitos that he was a Milesian, the first Ionian to dedicate a statue at Olympia.322 The Spartan chariot victor Lichas has already been mentioned as having entered his chariot in the name of Thebes. The reason was that at the time the Spartans were excluded from entering the games at Olympia. He won, and in his excitement tied a ribbon on his charioteer with his own hands, thereby showing that the horses belonged to him and not to Thebes. For this infraction of the rules he, though an aged man, was punished by the umpires by scourging.323 A more disgraceful act was selling out, of which we have two examples at Olympia. The Thessalian Eupolos bribed his three adversaries in boxing to let him win. All four were fined and from the money six bronze statues of Zeus, known as Zanes, were erected at the entrance to the stadion, inscribed with elegiac verses which warned future athletes against repeating such attempts.324 More than fifty years later Kallippos, a pentathlete of Athens, bribed his opponents and, being detected, all were fined and from the money, finally collected from the recalcitrant Athenians through the influence of the oracle at Delphi, six more Zanes were erected.325 Straton (or Stratonikos), of Alexandria, won in wrestling and the pankration on the same day in Ol. 178 ( = 68 B. C.). In the wrestling match he had two adversaries, Eudelos and Philostratos of Rhodes. The latter had bribed Eudelos to sell out and, being detected, had to pay a fine. Out of this money another Zan was set up and still another at the cost of the Rhodians.326 In Ol. 192 ( = 12 B. C.) and in Ol. 226 ( = 125 A. D.), we hear of fines for such corruption out of which additional Zanes were erected.327 In Ol. 201 ( = 25 A. D.) Sarapion, a pancratiast from Alexandria, became so afraid of his antagonist that he fled the day before the contest and was fined—the only case recorded of an athlete being fined for cowardice at Olympia.328 In Ol. 218 ( = 93 A. D.) another Alexandrine, named Apollonios, was fined for arriving too late for the games at Olympia. His excuse of being detained by winds was found to be false, and it was discovered that he had been making money on the games in Ionia.329

Cases of bribery were known at other games. A third-century B. C. inscription from Epidauros records how three athletes were fined one thousand staters each διὰ τὸ φθείρειν τοὺς ἀγῶνας.330 The venality of Isthmian victors is shown by the account of a competitor who promised a rival three thousand drachmæ to let him win and then, on winning on his merits, refused to pay, though the defeated contestant swore on the altar of Poseidon that he had been promised the amount.331 The emperor Nero, in order to win in singing at the Isthmus, had to resort to force. A certain Epeirote singer refused to withdraw unless he received ten talents. Nero, to save himself from defeat, sent a band of men who pummelled his antagonist so that he could not sing.332

Often the home-coming of a victor at one of the national games was the occasion for a public celebration. Sometimes the whole city turned out to meet the hero.333 The victory was recorded on pillars, and poets composed songs in its honor which were sung by choruses of girls and boys. Sometimes a statue was set up in the agora or on the Akropolis. In the cities of Magna Græcia and Sicily such adulation of Olympic victors became at times very extravagant. Thus Exainetos of Akragas, who won the stade-race in Ols. 91 and 92 ( = 416–412 B. C.), was brought into the city in a four-horse chariot drawn by his fellow-citizens, and was escorted by 300 men in two-horse chariots drawn by white horses.334 It is also in the West that we first hear of victors being worshipped as heroes or gods, though the custom soon took root in Greece. It was but natural to account for the great strength of famous athletes by assigning to them divine origin and by worshipping them after death.335 Philippos of Kroton, who won in an unknown contest about Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.), had a heroön erected in his honor by the people of Egesta in Sicily on account of his beauty, in which he surpassed all his contemporaries, and he was worshipped after his death as a hero.336 The famous boxer Euthymos of Lokroi Epizephyrioi, who won in Ols. 74, 76, 77 ( = 484, 476, 472 B. C.), was worshipped even before his death and was looked upon as the son of no earthly father, but of the river-god Kaikinos.337 Fabulous feats were ascribed to him, e. g., the expulsion of the Black Spirit from Temessa.338 During and after his lifetime sacrifices were offered in his honor.339 The equally famed boxer and pancratiast Theagenes of Thasos, the opponent of Euthymos, who won in Ols. 75 and 76 ( = 480 and 476 B. C.), was heroized after his death.340 The Thasians maintained that his father was Herakles.341 The boxer Kleomedes of Astypalaia, who won in Ol. 71 ( = 496 B. C.), was honored as a hero after death.342 Having killed Ikkos, his opponent, he became crazed with grief. Pausanias recounts his curious death.343 The worship of such athletes was supposed to bestow physical strength on their adorers and consequently statues were erected to them in many places and were thought to be able to cure illnesses.344 The life of a successful athlete was looked upon as especially happy. In Aristophanes’ Plutus, Hermes deserts the gods and serves Plutus “the presider over contests,” thinking no service more profitable to the god of wealth than holding contests in music and athletics.345 Plato thought an Olympic victor’s life was the most blessed of all from a material point of view.346 In the myth of Er the soul of Atalanta chooses the body of an athlete, on seeing “the great rewards bestowed on an athlete.”347 The great Rhodian pancratiast Dorieus, who won in Ols. 87, 88, 89 ( = 432–424 B. C.), was taken prisoner by Athens during the Peloponnesian war, but was freed because of his exploits at Olympia.348 The honor in which a victor was held may also be judged by the story of the Spartan ephor Cheilon, who died of joy while embracing his victorious son Damagetos.349 To quote from Ernest Gardner: “The extraordinary, almost superhuman honours paid to the victors at the great national contests made them a theme for the sculptor hardly less noble than gods and heroes, and more adapted for the display of his skill, as trained by the observation of those exercises which led to the victory.”350 Some of the greatest artists were employed, and great poets from Simonides of Keos down, including such names as Bacchylides and Pindar, were employed in singing their praises. Although it must be confessed that the majority of the artists of victor statues at Olympia are little known or wholly unknown masters, Pausanias mentions among them such renowned names as Hagelaïdas, Pythagoras, Kalamis, Myron, Polykleitos, Lysippos, and possibly Pheidias. Certain other great names, however, are absent from his lists, e. g., Euphranor, Kresilas, Praxiteles, and Skopas. Such extravagant reverence of Olympic and other victors as we have outlined met, of course, with violent protests all through Greek history, just as the excessive popularity of athletics has in our time. The philosopher Xenophanes of Kolophon, who died 480 B. C., was scandalized at the offering of divine honors to athletes.351 While he denounced the popularity of athletics, Euripides later denounced the professionalism which had begun to creep in after the middle of the fifth century B. C.352 Plato, though a strong advocate of practical physical training for war, was opposed to the vain spirit of competition in the athletics of his day. He complained that professional athletes paid excessive attention to diet, slept their lives away, and were in danger of becoming brutalized.353 The last attack on professional athletics in point of time was made in the second century A. D. by Galen, in his Exhortation to the Arts.354 In this essay the eminent physician contended that the athlete was a benefit neither to himself nor to the state. When we study the brutal portraits of prize-fighters on the contemporary mosaics of the Baths of Caracalla at Rome, we can see to what depths the old athletic ideal had sunk, and the justness of his rebuke.355

VOTIVE CHARACTER OF VICTOR DEDICATIONS.

That chariot and hippic monuments were votive in character can scarcely be doubted. Pausanias distinguishes between gymnic victors and equestrian ones.356 All authorities agree that equestrian monuments were different in origin and character from those of other victors.357 Gardiner believes that if the Olympic games developed out of a single event, it was not the stade-race, but the chariot-race or heavy-armed-race. He shows that the custom of making the stade runner eponymous for the Olympiad is not earlier than the third century B. C., and did not arise from the importance of that event, but from the accident of its coming first on the program and first on the list of victors.358 Equestrian monuments were dedicated at Olympia all through antiquity, from the sixth century B. C. to the second A. D. The oldest was that of the Spartan Euagoras already mentioned, who won in the chariot-race three times in Ols. (?) 58–60 ( = 548–540 B. C.).359 The latest dated example is that of L. Minicius Natalis of Rome, who won in Ol. 227 ( = 129 A. D.).360 Some of the inscriptions pertaining to equestrian groups are in verse,361 while others are in prose.362 Most of them have the usual dedicatory word ἀνέθηκε,363 or the formula Διὶ Ὀλυμπίῳ,364 while others have the word ἔστησε365 and a few have no dedicatory word at all.366

The question arises, then, whether ordinary victor monuments in the Altis were votive in the sense that these equestrian ones were, or merely honors granted to the victors. The crown of wild olive was merely a temporary reward suiting the occasion of the victory. The privilege of setting up a statue was granted in order to perpetuate the fame of that occasion. In a well-known passage Pausanias makes a sweeping generalization about monuments at Athens and Olympia.367 He says that all objects on the Akropolis—including statues—were ἀναθήματα or votive offerings, while some of those at Olympia were dedicated to the god, but that the statues of athletes were mere prizes of victory. In another passage368 also, in distinguishing the various sorts of monuments at Olympia, he expressly says that the statues of athletes were not devoted to Zeus, but were marks of honor (ἐν ἄθλου λόγῳ) bestowed on the victors. These statements of the Periegete have given rise to a good deal of fruitless discussion. Furtwaengler follows Pausanias in saying that the right of setting up statues was ein wesentlicher Theil des Siegespreises.369 That such erections at Olympia were considered as high honors is implied by the wording of many of the inscriptions which have been recovered from the bases of the statues. Thus on that of the boxer Euthymos are the words εἰκόνα δ’ ἔστησεν τήνδε βροτοῖς ἐσορᾶν.370 Furtwaengler, therefore, has promulgated the theory that the victor statues at Olympia were in no sense votive, though they were considered to be the property of the god in whose grove they stood. He cites the fact that the inscribed bases of such monuments down to the first century B. C., with the exception of a few metrical epigrams, make no mention of dedications, and that in these exceptions the word ἀνέθηκε was added for metrical reasons,371 while during the same centuries regular votive offerings (ἀναθῆματα) invariably have the word ἀνέθηκε.372 One inscription, that from the base of the statue of Euthymos of Lokroi, is both metrical and in prose;373 but it seems to have been changed later in two places, the second line originally ending in a pentameter, and the third line, with ἀνέθηκε, being added afterwards.374 Also the prose inscription375 referred by Roehl to the statue of the wrestler Milo is rejected by Dittenberger. The oldest prose inscription which makes a votive offering out of a victor statue at Olympia is that of Thaliarchos, who won his second victory in boxing some time between 40 and 30 B. C.376 Then follow certain prose inscriptions of imperial times.377 Dittenberger concludes that for four hundred years there is no case of such a dedication.378 From the evidence of the inscriptions from statue bases, therefore, it is clear that the distinction made by Pausanias between honor and victor statues did not hold good in his day, since the words ἀνάθημα and ἀνέθηκε were then used on victor monuments at Olympia, as the inscriptions of the imperial age just cited show, but that it did hold good for centuries before the Roman period. Pausanias must have based his statement, therefore, not on observation, but on the words of some earlier writer.379 Furtwaengler’s reasoning has been followed pretty generally by archæologists.380 While some, however, leave the question in doubt,381 others are opposed to the idea that these statues were not votive. Thus R. Schoell believes that the victor monuments were as truly ἀναθήματα as the olive crowns.382 Reisch, who has discussed the question at length,383 believes, in opposition to the earlier view of Furtwaengler, that everything within the Altis must always ipso facto have been regarded as dedications to the god. This would explain the frequent omission of the name of the god, which would be superfluous, the victor being content with inscribing his own name and the contest in which he was victorious. Even the name of the contest does not always appear.384 Reisch explains the omission of the formula ἀνέθηκε in earlier inscriptions on the ground of epigrammatic brevity.385

The truth must lie somewhere between the extremes represented by the views of Furtwaengler and Reisch. Some athlete statues may have been votive, while others were not. Thus Rouse argues386 that originally all victor statues at Olympia were as truly votive as equestrian groups, and as truly as those athlete statues continued to be, which were dedicated in the victors’ native towns. Those inscribed with ἀνέθηκε at Olympia must have been votive, for we should take the dedicator at his word, instead of believing the formula to be added merely to make the verse scan.387 There is no reason why an athlete should not dedicate a statue of himself, representing himself as forever standing in the presence of the god, as well as a diskos or jumping-weights; for it was customary to make votive offerings representative of the events, and this could be done best by presenting the athlete in a statue which showed the characteristic attitude or the appropriate attributes. Rouse furthermore believes that a change was slowly wrought in the course of centuries, by which the original votive offering became a means of self-glorification. Equestrian victors owed their victories not to themselves, but to their horses, cars, drivers, and jockeys; in such cases the group was a thing apart from the owner. Only seldom did such victors dedicate statues of themselves alone. Even when the victor added a statue of himself to the group, still it was the chariot and not the statue which was emphasized.388 On the other hand the ordinary gymnic victor relied on himself—on his strength, endurance, courage, and other qualities; and in representing the contest the victor himself had to be represented. Consequently, by the fifth century B. C., if not earlier, the statues of athletes had become memorials of personal glory.

MISCELLANEOUS MEMORIALS TO VICTORS.

A statue was not the only memorial erected in honor of an Olympic victor, though it was by far the commonest. We have already mentioned the bronze inscribed diskos dedicated by the pentathlete P. Asklepiades in the third century A. D.389 A green stone leaping-weight inscribed with the name Κῳδίας appears to have been dedicated by a victor.390 In two cases stelæ were set up in honor of victors.391 A curious dedication was a bronze chapel, which the Sikyonian tyrant Myron dedicated to Apollo at Olympia.392 In later days it became part of the treasury of the Sikyonians.393 Outside Olympia various monuments commemorating Olympic victors were set up. These will be discussed in Chapter VIII.

HONORARY STATUES.

At Olympia, as elsewhere in Greece, statues were set up to men honoris causa. Such statues would be dedicated by admirers, either individuals or states. They were in no sense intended to honor the god, though at Olympia they might be classed as ἀναθήματα, just as victor statues, merely because they were erected in the sacred precinct. They were granted to individuals not as a privilege, as victor statues were, but as free gifts. Dio Chrysostom gives the difference between victor statues—which he classes as ἀναθήματα—and such honor statues in these words: ταῦτα (i. e., victor statues) γάρ ἐστιν ἀναθήματα· αἱ δ’ εἰκόνες τιμαί· κἀκεῖνα (victor statues) δέδοται τοῖς θεοῖς, ταῦτα δὲ (honor statues) τοῖς ἀγαθοῖς ἀνδράσιν οἵπερ εἰσὶν ἔγγιστα αὐτῶν.394 Pliny records that the Athenians inaugurated the custom of a state setting up statues in honor of men at the public expense with the statues of the tyrannicides Harmodios and Aristogeiton by the sculptor Antenor, which were erected in 509 B. C., the year in which the tyrants were expelled.395 He adds that a “refined ambition” led to a universal adoption of the custom and that statues began to adorn public places everywhere and later on even private houses. The custom grew apace in the later history of Greece. Demetrios of Phaleron is said to have had over three hundred statues erected in his honor during his short régime of about a year in Athens. The Diadochoi and the Roman emperors enthusiastically took over the custom. Pliny gives several Roman examples of it.396

At Olympia Pausanias mentions honorary statues erected to thirty-five men for various reasons.397 To several of these men more than one statue was erected.398 The greater number of these statues were erected to kings and princes, to those of Sparta,399 Athens,400 Epeiros,401 Sicily,402 Macedonia, and Alexander’s Empire.403 One was erected in honor of the philosopher Aristotle,404 one in honor of the rhetorician Gorgias of Leontini,405 one in honor of a hunter,406 another in honor of a flute-player,407 and many others in honor of public and private men. These statues were set up for various reasons. Archidamas III of Sparta had his statues erected to his memory because he was the only Spartan king who died abroad and did not receive a formal burial. Kylon had a statue erected by the Aitolians because he freed the Eleans from the tyranny of Aristotimos.408 Pythes of Abdera was thus honored by his soldiers because of his military prowess.409 Philonides of Crete was, as we learn from the recovered inscription on his statue base, the courier of Alexander the Great.410 Pythokritos was honored for his flute-playing, though he does not appear to have been a victor.411 The Palaians of Kephallenia honored Timoptolis of Elis,412 and the Aitolians honored the Elean Olaidas413 for unknown reasons. At least seven, if not eight, of those thus honored with statues were Eleans. Some of the men who had honor statues were also victors at Olympia, a fact which would appear on the inscribed base. Thus Aratos, the son of Kleinias of Sikyon, the statesman, had a statue erected to him by the Corinthians. This was doubtless an honor statue, though Pausanias also says he was a chariot-victor.414 On the other hand, the statue erected in honor of the pentathlete Stomios was probably a victor monument, though Pausanias says that its inscription records that he was an Elean cavalry general who challenged the enemy to a duel, in which he was slain.415 In some cases it is hard to decide whether the statue is honorary or victor in character. In the course of time honor statues multiplied, while those of athletes decreased. The recovered inscriptions on the latter decrease steadily in the fourth and third centuries B. C., revive again in the second and first, and decrease in the first Christian century. They cease almost entirely after the middle of the second century A. D.

CHAPTER II.
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF VICTOR STATUES AT OLYMPIA.

Plates 2–7 and Figures 3–8.

Only a few insignificant remnants of the forest of victor statues which once stood in the Altis at Olympia were unearthed by the German excavators. Most of these statues already in antiquity had been carried off to Italy,416 while those which escaped the spoliation of the Roman masters of Greece were destroyed at the hands of the invading hordes of barbarians in the early Dark Ages. Consequently only here and there in modern museums can isolated fragments of these originals be discovered, which have accidentally survived the ravages of time and man.

In the almost complete absence of originals, therefore, we depend for our knowledge of them on a variety of sources. In attempting to reconstruct them we have two main sources of information to aid us, the literary and the archæological. To the former belong the many inscriptions found on the statue bases recovered at Olympia, which contain the name and native city of the victor, the athletic contest in which his victory was won, and frequently some account of his former athletic history; epigrams preserved in the Greek anthologies and elsewhere, some of which agree with those inscribed on the statue bases; more or less definite statements of scholiasts and the classical writers in general, especially the detailed account of the monuments of Olympia contained in the fifth and sixth books of the Ἑλλάδος περιήγησις of Pausanias, who visited the Altis during the reign of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus,417 and also the somewhat systematic treatment of Greek sculptors and their works in the elder Pliny’s chapters on the History of Art.418 To the latter source belong the remnants of statues in bronze and marble found at Olympia, as well as the recovered bases, on many of which the extant footmarks enable us to recover the pose of the statues which formerly stood upon them. Finally, in reconstructing these athlete statues, an intimate knowledge of Greek sculpture in all its phases and periods is essential. Here, as in the general study of Greek sculpture, where the destruction of originals has been almost complete, we are largely dependent on Roman copies which were executed by more or less skilled workmen, chiefly for wealthy Roman patrons of art who wished to use them to decorate the public buildings, baths, palaces, and villas of Rome and other Italian cities. A careful study of these copies has evolved a series of groups, which have been assigned with more or less probability to this or that artist.419 Representations of the various poses of the athlete statues of Olympia and elsewhere are found also on every sort of sculptured and painted works—reliefs, vases, coins, gems—which are, therefore, valuable in any attempt to reconstruct the attitude of a given statue.

Taking into account all these sources of knowledge, it has been possible to reach tolerable certainty in reconstructing the main types of these victor monuments, and in identifying schools, masters, and individual works. This identification of athlete statues, especially those belonging to the fifth and fourth centuries B. C., among the countless Roman works which people modern museums, has already been achieved in many cases by archælogical investigations. The work of many masters of the archaic period and of the most important bronze sculptors of the great period of Greek art has been illustrated by such ascriptions; especially that of Myron, who represented figures in rhythmic action full of life and vigor; of the elder Polykleitos, who was a master in representing standing figures at rest fashioned according to a mathematical system of proportions; of Lysippos, who introduced a new canon of proportions in opposition to that of his predecessor Polykleitos, and who inaugurated the naturalistic tendency in Greek art, which was destined to he carried to such unbecoming lengths in succeeding centuries. The further identification of such statues, as our knowledge of the tendencies and traditions of the schools of Greek sculpture and our sources of information about athletic art become more and more extended, will be one of the most important tasks of the archæologist in the future.

Before discussing the appearance of individual types of these monuments, we shall consider certain general characteristics common to all of them. Long ago K. O. Mueller420 summed up the common features of victor statues in these words: Kurzgelocktes Haar, tuechtige Glieder, eine kraeftige Ausbildung der Gestalt und verhaeltnissmaessig kleine Koepfe characterisiren die ganze Gattung von Figuren; die zerschlagenen Ohren und die hervorgetriebenen Muskeln insbesondere die Faustkaempfer und Pankratiasten. Though in the main this excellent summary still holds good, we are now in a position to correct it in part and to add other equally characteristic features to it. We shall briefly discuss, therefore, in the light of recent investigations, certain of the characteristics common to this genre of sculpture—the material and size of these statues, their nudity and fashion of wearing the hair, their twofold division into iconic and aniconic, their proportions, and, lastly, the assimilation of their appearance to well-known types of hero or god.

SIZE OF VICTOR STATUES.

In another section421 we show that the overwhelming majority of the statues in the Altis were of bronze, though other materials, stone and wood, were also used in some cases. As to the size of these statues, no hard and fast rule seems to have been followed, but we may assume from the evidence at hand that they were in general life-size.422 Lucian would have us believe that the Hellanodikai did not allow victors to set up statues larger than life.423 We know, however, that there were exceptions to such a rule. In all probability the statue of Polydamas of Skotoussa by Lysippos, which Pausanias says stood on a high pedestal, was larger than life-size, if we may conjecture from its elevated position and the probable source of Pausanias’ remark that he “was the tallest of men, if we except the so-called heroes and the mortal race which preceded the heroes.”424 The traces of footprints on the recovered pedestal of the statue of the Athenian pancratiast Kallias by the sculptor Mikon show that the statue was larger than life-size.425 The footprints on the base of the statue of the Rhodian boxer Eukles by the Argive Naukydes are about 33 cm. long, and so the statue was slightly over life-size.426 We know the actual size of at least two of these Olympic statues. The scholiast on Pindar, Ol. VII, Argum., on the basis of a fragment from Aristotle’s lost work on the Olympic victors and one from the little-known writer Apollas Ponticus,427 says that the statue of the Rhodian boxer Diagoras was 4 cubits and 5 fingers tall,428 i. e., about 6 feet 4.5 inches, somewhat over life-size.429 From the same scholiast we learn that the statue of the son of Diagoras, the pancratiast Damagetos, was 4 cubits high, or less than that of the father by 5 fingers, and consequently just under 6 feet.430 The footprints on the base of the statue of the boxer Aristion by the elder Polykleitos are 29 cm. long, and so the statue was just life-size.431 There are several examples of such life-size statues,432 while others are slightly below life-size.433 The Polykleitan statue of a boxer in Kassel is under life-size.434 The marble head of a statue found at Olympia, which we ascribe to Philandridas, the Akarnanian pancratiast, by Lysippos, (Frontispiece and Fig. 69) is also under life-size,435 as is also that of the pancratiast Agias found at Delphi (Pl. 27 and Fig. 68). These two are in harmony with Pliny’s statement that Lysippos made the heads of his statues relatively small.436 Perhaps this statement of Pliny was the basis of the opinion of Mueller recorded above that “comparatively small heads” characterize the whole genre of victor statues. We have in the preceding chapter mentioned the marble fragments of the statues of boy victors, two-fifths to two-thirds life-size, found at Olympia.437 The two marble helmeted heads of the archaic period found there, which we shall later ascribe to hoplite victors (Fig. 30), are exactly life-size.438 Of the bronze fragments recovered at Olympia,439 the head of a boxer of the fourth century B. C. (Fig. 61, A and B) is life-size,440 while the extraordinarily beautifully sculptured right arm ascribed to a boy victor by Furtwaengler441 is a little under life-size.

NUDITY OF VICTOR STATUES.

Most of the victor statues at Olympia were nude.442 In the early period all athletes wore the loin-cloth. Cretan frescoes show it was the custom in the early Mediterranean world. The athletes of Homer girded themselves on entering the games of Patroklos,443 and the girdle appears in the earliest athletic scenes on vases.444 Throughout the historic period, however, the Greeks entered their contests in complete nudity, and this nudity naturally was carried over into athletic sculpture. Pliny’s445 statement, Graeca res nihil velare, is, therefore, correct, despite another of Philostratos to the effect that at Delphi, at the Isthmus, and everywhere except at Olympia, the athlete wore the coarse mantle.446 The beginning of the change from wearing the loin-cloth to complete nudity was ascribed to an accident. The Megarian runner Orsippos in the 15th Ol. ( = 720 B. C.) dropped his loin-cloth while running, either accidentally or because it impeded him.447 The story was commemorated by an epigram, perhaps by Simonides, which was inscribed on his tomb at Megara.448 A copy of this epigram in the Megarian dialect, executed in late Roman or Byzantine times, when the original had become illegible, was discovered at Megara in 1769 and shows that its original was the source of Pausanias’ remarks.449 Philostratos says that athletes contended nude at Olympia, either because of the summer heat or a mishap which befell the woman Pherenike of Rhodes. She accompanied her son, the boy boxer Peisirhodos, to Olympia disguised as a trainer, and in her joy at his victory she leaped over the barrier and disclosed her sex.450 The practice does not appear to have become universal with all athletes in all the competitions at Olympia until some time after Orsippos’ day, since Thukydides says the abandonment of the girdle took place shortly before his time and that in his day it was still retained by certain foreigners, notably Asiatics, in boxing and wrestling matches.451 The change is not illustrated in sculpture. The earliest victor statues, i. e., those of the “Apollo” type, are all nude. The nudity of this type shows an essential difference between Greek and foreigner and also between the later Greek and his rude ancestor. Plato gives the use of the loin-cloth as an example of convention, by which what seems peculiar to one generation becomes usual to another.452 We see the change, however, in vase-paintings. The loin-cloth is common on seventh-century vases, but is gradually left off in later ones.

There were exceptions to the rule of nudity. Statues of charioteers were usually partly or wholly dressed in the long chiton, a custom explained in various ways.453 The Delphi bronze Charioteer (Fig. 66) is a good example of a draped one. Another auriga almost nude is shown on a decadrachm of Akragas in the British Museum, dating from the end of the fifth century B. C.454 There are also several examples of nude charioteers.455 The Olympic runners and athletes generally were also bareheaded and barefoot. The only exceptions were the hoplite-runners, who wore helmets, and possibly charioteers, who wore sandals.456 Statues of women victors also were draped. Though Ionian women could witness games,457 and Spartan girls took part in athletic contests with boys,458 women were rigorously excluded from crossing the Alpheios during the festival at Olympia.459 They were allowed, however, to enter horses for the chariot-race and, if victorious, to set up monuments.460 Only one woman was allowed to witness the games, the priestess of the old earth cult of Demeter Chamyne, who could sit at the altar in the stadion during the contests.461 Pausanias notes but one exception of a woman infringing the rule of admission, Pherenike, the mother of the Rhodian victor Peisirhodos already mentioned. She was pardoned because her father, brothers, and son were victors, but the umpires passed a law that thereafter even trainers should be nude.462 While excluded from the games proper, women had their own festival at Olympia in honor of Hera, which was known as the Heraia. These games occurred every four years463 and included a foot-race between virgins, in which the course was one-sixth less than the stadion. The victress received an olive crown and also a share of the cow sacrificed to Hera, and was allowed to set up a painted picture of herself in the Heraion.464 It has been generally assumed that the statue of a girl runner in the Galleria dei Candelabri of the Vatican represents one of these victresses (Plate 2),465 since Pausanias says they ran with their hair down and wore a tunic which reached to just above the knees, leaving the right shoulder bare to the breast. That the statue represents a girl runner seems certain,466 but that it can be referred to one of the Olympic girl victresses is doubtful. The description of Pausanias fits it in many respects, except that the chiton of the statue is too short, and he does not mention the girdle just below the bosom. Furthermore, he does not mention statues of girl victresses, but only pictures. Nothing can be argued from the palm-branch on the tree-stump, except that the Roman copyist thought it the statue of a victress. It does not necessarily refer to a victress at Olympia, for Pausanias elsewhere says that the palm-branch was given at many contests.467 The statue represents a young girl leaning forward awaiting the signal to start,468 but it is impossible to say to what games we should refer it. There were girls’ contests in and out of Greece—such as at the Dionysia in Sparta469 and in her colony Kyrene.470 Such games were also held in the stadion of Domitian at Rome.471 In fact the Palatine estate of the Barberini, from whom the Vatican acquired the statue, embraced the area of the old stadion of Domitian on the Palatine. It is probably of Doric workmanship, as it certainly represents a Dorian victress, though not necessarily by a Peloponnesian sculptor.472

THE ATHLETIC HAIR-FASHION.

PLATE 2

Marble Statue of a Girl Runner. Vatican Museum, Rome.

The assumption long held that short hair was always characteristic of the athlete is incorrect.473 It is controverted equally by literary evidence and by the monuments. The Homeric Greek took pride in his long hair,474 and doubtless the contestants at the games of Patroklos in the Iliad had long hair. Long hair was worn by some Athenians throughout Athenian history. From the end of the fifth century B. C., long hair was regarded as a mark of effeminacy475 and was regularly worn only by the knights.476 Short hair was worn as a sign of mourning in Athens from early days down.477 Only the slaves regularly wore very short hair in the fifth century B. C.478 The change to short hair in Athens was certainly due to the influence of the palæstra and to athletics in general.479 We see just the opposite custom in vogue in Sparta. There, according to the code of Lykourgos,480 men were compelled to wear long hair and children short hair. Thus the heroes of Leonidas entered the battle of Thermopylæ after combing their long locks.481 After the Persian wars only children and men with laconizing or aristocratic sympathies482 wore their hair long at Athens. When boys arrived at the age of ἔφηβοι, they had their hair cut at the feast of the οἰνιστήρια483 and dedicated it to a god.484 Soon after the Persian war period, athletes wore their hair short. Before that time, the wearing of long hair had already been discarded for obvious reasons in wrestling.485 Similarly, in boxing and the pankration long hair was in the way, and was therefore early braided into two long plaits which were wound around the head in a peculiar way and tied into a knot at the top, the so-called Attic κρωβύλος, the oftenest mentioned manner of dressing the hair in Greek literature.486 The oldest notice of this style of wearing the hair is found in a fragment of Asios.487 Herakleides Ponticus488 says it was used up to the time of the Persian wars. The locus classicus is in Thukydides, who says it was worn in his day by old people only.489 Earlier young men wore it,490 but it went out of fashion between 470 and 460 B. C. In this connection we should mention that the professional athlete under the Roman Empire wore his hair uncut and tied up in an unsightly topknot known as the cirrus.491

The monumental evidence bears out the literary. Thus, on old Corinthian clay tablets freemen are represented with long hair, while slaves have short hair.492 Hydrias from Caere (Cerveteri) and paintings from Klazomenai show that the Ionians wore their hair short for the first time in the sixth century B. C., the custom not becoming general until the fifth. Older Spartan monuments represent the hair long.493 Attic vases show long hair on men until the second half of the sixth century B. C., when the black-figured vase masters began to represent them with short hair, a custom becoming general in the first half of the fifth. In statuary the Diskobolos of Myron (Pls. 21, 26, and Figs. 34, 35) has short hair, and most statues of athletes before it have long hair, while most after it have short. Before the time of the Diskobolos, b.-f. and early r.-f. vase-painters often represented athletes with braided hair in the fashion of the warriors on the Aegina pediments. When short hair began to be used on athlete statues, these older braids were often replaced by victor bands.494 We may roughly summarize by saying that statues before the date of the Diskobolos which do not have long hair are probably those of athletes and not of gods, and, in any case, if they have braids bound up in the fashion of the κρωβύλος, they are almost always statues of athletes.495 As for short hair on representations of gods, Furtwaengler has shown that it appears only after the middle of the fifth century B. C.496 Prior to that date the hair of divinities fell over the neck and shoulders in curls, as in the statue of the Olympian Zeus by Pheidias. By the time of Perikles, however, short curly hair reached only to the nape of the neck on statues of Zeus, and this style frequently appears on figures of the god on Attic vases of that period. Dionysos has short hair for the first time on the Parthenon frieze.497 Furtwaengler has shown that Pheidias did not invent the short bound-up hair for goddess types, as we see it in the Lemnian Athena, but that he borrowed it from works already in existence.498 Though the style was unknown in the archaic period, it appears on helmeted heads of Athena of the early fifth century B. C. showing Peloponnesian style—on coins, statuettes, reliefs, etc. It appears in Attic art exclusively on bareheaded types of Athena of the period just prior to that of the Lemnia.

Bulle499 has gone carefully into the technique of the hair by different Greek artists. In archaic times this was “ein, man darf sagen, unmoegliches Problem.” The primitive means at the disposal of the early artist made it impossible to render the hair naturally and hence it was conventionalized. Two styles arose in archaic times, which endured with modifications all through Greek art. The one was the pictorial (malerisch), where only the general appearance of the hair was represented, the merest necessary plastic form being added.500 Painting here helped the shortcomings of the sculptor to some extent. The second style was the plastic (plastisch), where individual locks were attempted. The plastic use of light and shade made the use of color now less necessary. Such examples as the Korai of the Akropolis Museum and the Rampin head in the Louvre show the difficulty which the early artist encountered in representing hair plastically. In the Rampin head501 we see examples of three sorts of plastic hair treatment: the pearl-string (Perlschnuerre) on the neck, grained hair (Koerner) in the beard, and snail-volutes (geperlte Schnecken) on the forehead. None of the three seems to belong integrally to the head, but each appears to have been pasted on. The pearl-string fashion was first used in the soft poros stone and was only later successfully transferred to marble. During the severe style of Greek sculpture, both fashions, pictorial and plastic, were used, as we see them in the pediment groups from the temple of Zeus at Olympia. In the period of Pheidias the plastic treatment was used almost exclusively, as we see in the Lemnian Athena. In the next century impressionism came in, though the plastic treatment still continued, for we see it in the bronze work of Lysippos and the marble work of Praxiteles. The old pictorial treatment was revived again in the later Hellenistic age.

ICONIC AND ANICONIC STATUES.

In a well-known passage Pliny says that “the ancients did not make any statue of individuals unless they deserved immortality by some distinction, originally by a victory at some sacred games, especially those of Olympia, where it was the custom to dedicate statues of all those who had conquered, and portrait statues if they had conquered three times. These are called iconic.”502 Many solutions of this passage have been offered. Older commentators, as Hirt and Visconti,503 interpreted Pliny’s word iconicas as life-size statues. Scherer, however, easily refuted this idea and showed that the adjective εἰκονικός, though ambiguous in its meaning, had nothing to do with size, but referred rather to an individual as opposed to a typical sense in relation to statuary. In his explanation he referred to the words of Lessing in the Laokoön: es ist das Ideal eines gewissen Menschen, nicht das Ideal eines Menschen ueberhaupt.504 Nowadays all scholars agree that Pliny’s word refers to portrait statues.505 However, Pliny’s dictum about the right of setting up portrait statues is certainly open to doubt.506 It can not have been true of monuments erected before the fourth century B. C., when portrait statues were rare. Portraiture was a form of realism and was a product of the later period of Greek art—especially after the time of Lysippos. In the fourth century B. C. we find one well-attested exception to Pliny’s rule. The discovered inscription from the base of a monument erected to the horse-racer Xenombrotos of Cos,507 reads (fifth line): τοῖ[ος], ὁποῖο[ν] ὁ[ρ]ᾷς Ξεινόμβροτο[ς]. These words indubitably point to a portrait statue. However, neither the recovered epigram nor Pausanias indicates anything about this victor being a τρισολυμπιονίκης, and consequently he appears not to have merited a portrait statue.508 Pliny’s statement can be explained in many ways: it may be apocryphal, or different usages may have fitted different periods; or the rule may have held good only for gymnic victors and not for equestrian ones, which, being strictly votive in character, may not have been restricted to its operation.509

Portrait Statues.

Pausanias mentions the monuments of several victors at Olympia who were entitled to portrait statues on the strength of Pliny’s rule, though we have no indication that they were so honored. Thus he mentions the statues of Dikon,510 Sostratos,511 Philinos,512 and Gorgos.513 The early fifth-century boxer Euthymos514 also won three victories, but at a time before we should expect a portrait statue. The Periegete also mentions several victors who won three or more times, though he does not say that they had any statues, portrait or otherwise.515 Percy Gardner516 has shown how erroneous is the prevailing view that the Greeks neglected portraiture in their art and left it for the Romans to develop. He shows that Greek artists of the third and second centuries B. C. left a great many portraits of the highest artistic value and that portraits of Romans before the time of Augustus, and the best Roman examples during the Empire, were made by Greek sculptors. The number of Greek portraits in our museums, especially in Rome, is very great.517 From archaic times down to the middle of the fifth century B. C. we should not expect portraiture. In the earlier period, therefore, it is difficult to distinguish between statues of gods and those of men. In the great period of Greek art, from the time of Perikles on to that of Alexander, the general tendency of Greek sculpture was so ideal that portraits, when they existed, seem impersonal. The later copyists of portraits also idealized them. Thus Pliny, in speaking of Kresilas’ portrait of Perikles, says that this artist nobiles viros nobiliores fecit—in other words, that he idealized them.518 The portraits of Alexander were especially idealized. In the first half of the fourth century we first hear of realistic portraiture. Thus Demetrios, who flourished 380–360 B. C.,519 made a “very beautiful” statue of a Corinthian general named Pelichos, which Lucian520 says had a fat belly, bald head, hair floating in the wind, and prominent veins, “like the man himself.”521 Except for the hair this description by the satirist seems to have been correct. At the end of the fourth century B. C. anatomical detail began to be shown in sculpture. Largely under the influence of Lysippos, the personality of victors began to be emphasized in figure and face in a very realistic way. We can distinguish between such portraits of victors before and after the time of Lysippos.522 Pliny523 says that Lysistratos, the brother of Lysippos, was the first to obtain portraits by making a plaster mould on the features and so to render likenesses exactly, as “previous artists had only tried to make them as beautiful as possible.” In any case, by the time of Lysippos realistic portraiture began to be emphasized. We see it at Olympia in the later bronze pancratiast’s head found there (Fig. 61, A and B), and in a still more revolting style in the Seated Boxer of the Museo delle Terme (Pl. 16, and Fig. 27).

The reason why the privilege of erecting portrait statues was given so seldom to Olympic victors was probably not because it was a highly esteemed honor. The real reason seems to have been that portraiture, with its tendency to realism, subordinated beauty to that realism and so conflicted with the Greek artistic ideal. The Thebans had a law which forbade caricature and commanded artists to make their statues more beautiful than the models. The Greeks worshiped beauty and hated ugliness. Many games in Greece were held in honor of personal beauty. Thus a contest of manly beauty among old men (ἀγὼν εὐανδρίας) was a part of the Panathenaic games at Athens.524 A contest of beauty among women, originating in the time of Kypselos, king of Arkadia, was kept up until the time of Athenæus.525 We hear of contests of beauty in Elis, at which three prizes were given,526 and of similar ones on the islands of Tenedos and Lesbos.527 The Crotonian Philippos, who won at Olympia in an unknown contest about 520 B. C., was honored after his death by the people of Egesta with a heroön and sacrifices because of his beauty.528 At Tanagra, in Bœotia, the most beautiful ephebe was chosen to carry a ram on his shoulders around the city wall at the festival of Hermes Kriophoros.529 At Aigion in Achaia the most beautiful boy was anciently chosen to be priest of Zeus.530 The most beautiful youths among the Spartans and Cretans dedicated offerings to Eros before battle.531 These and similar examples show the Greek feeling for beauty. The representation of passion and violence was foreign to the spirit of the best Greek art; it was rather the “quiet grandeur” (Stille Groesse) or “repose,” of which Winckelmann made so much, that was characteristic of that art. In Homer both men and gods, when wounded, shriek. Philoktetes, in the drama of Sophokles, wails throughout a whole act, when suffering from a gangrened foot. With the poets Zeus casts his thunderbolt in anger, but Pheidias has him hold it quietly in his hand. So we can see why portrait statues were rare at Olympia, where the representation of manly beauty and vigor was the rule. They were ruled out, not because of their increasing the honor accorded to the victor, but rather because they honored his egotism.532

Aniconic Statues.

Accordingly, since only victors who had won three or more contests at Olympia could set up iconic statues, the great majority of statues there represented some ideal type of common applicability, in which there was no attempt to show the individual features of this or that victor, but rather the typical athlete of muscular build. The older statues were merely variations of a few types which were held to be appropriate to the purpose. In process of time these few types in their treatment of details gradually approached truth to nature; this was especially characteristic of the Peloponnesian schools, which adopted the Doryphoros of Polykleitos as their norm of proportions. Statues of victors were the stock subject of the closely related schools of Argos and Sikyon.533 Doubtless, as E. A. Gardner says,534 there existed at Olympia itself a school of subordinate artists, who filled the regular demand for victor statues. However, some of these statues, especially those of the fifth and fourth centuries B. C., as we see them in originals and in Roman copies, and read the æsthetic judgments of them in Greek writers, were real works of art.

ÆSTHETIC JUDGMENTS OF CLASSICAL WRITERS.

The literary evidence for Greek sculpture is, for the most part, very unsatisfactory. Though classical writers were uncritical and not fond of analysis, still they have left us some useful opinions about works of sculpture and painting. The history and criticism of sculpture began in Greece, in the fourth century B. C., with the Peripatetics. Aristotle, whose observations on painting and sculpture were slight, did not despise the “mimetic” arts as did the Socrates of Plato.535 In the Rhetoric536 he speaks of the beautiful bodies of youths who trained as pentathletes, since the varied exercises of the pentathlon made them so. We have a similar opinion expressed by Xenophon in what is, perhaps, the most interesting passage in Greek literature on criticism of art.537 He has Sokrates go to the sculptor Kleito and compliment him on his power of representing different physical types produced by various contests, noting differences between statues of runners and wrestlers and between those of boxers and pancratiasts. When asked how he makes statues lifelike, Kleito has no answer, and the philosopher says it is by the imitation of real men, i. e., nature. He adds: “Must you not then imitate the threatening eyes of those who are fighting and the triumphant expression of those who are victorious?” Though some have thought that these words refer to portrait statues, which were spoken of as a matter of course at the beginning of the fourth century B. C., it is more reasonable to suspect that Sokrates was speaking of the older sculptors—for we may recognize Polykleitos in Kleito538—and consequently that he is not referring to portraiture. In the Symposium of Xenophon539 Sokrates also complains that the long-distance runners (δολιχοδρόμοι) have thick legs and narrow shoulders, while boxers have broad shoulders and small legs, and he therefore recommends dancing as a better exercise than athletics. As such differences in physique occur in vase-paintings of the date, but not in statuary, the philosopher seems to be speaking of athletics and not of sculpture. From these quotations of Aristotle and Xenophon, we gather that the all-round development of the pentathlon made beautiful athletes, and this beauty must have been carried over into their statues. It is essentially the young man’s contest,540 and some of the pentathlete victors at Olympia and elsewhere were noted for their strength in after life. Thus Ikkos of Tarentum, who won at Olympia in Ol. 76 ( = 476 B. C.), was the best teacher of gymnastics of his day.541 Gorgos of Elis was the only athlete to win the pentathlon four times at Olympia, besides winning in two running races.542 Another Elean, Stomios, who won three prizes at Olympia and Nemea, later became a leader of cavalry and beat his enemy in single combat.543 The Argive Eurybates, victor in the pentathlon at Nemea, was very strong, and later, in a battle with the Aeginetans, killed three opponents in single combats, but succumbed to the fourth.544 The Spartans and Krotonians seem to have been the best pentathletes.545 Noted sculptors made statues of these athletes.546 Plato, in the de Leg.,547 has the Athenian stranger praise Egyptian art because of its stationary character. This bespeaks but little artistic insight for the philosopher, though he was surrounded by the wonderful artistic creations of the end of the great fifth century B. C. The later classical writers were fond of expressing criticisms of art. Thus Pasiteles, a Greek sculptor living in Rome in the first century B. C., wrote five books on celebrated works of art throughout the world.548 The opinions on art of the Roman Varro appear in the pages of Pliny.549 Of all the ancient critics, Cicero was perhaps the most superficial. In a passage in the Brutus550 he gives us his judgment of several sculptors. He finds the works of Kanachos too rigid to imitate nature truthfully, while those of Kalamis, though softer than those of Kanachos, are hard; Myron, though not completely faithful to nature, produced beautiful works and Polykleitos was quite perfect. The most trustworthy critic of sculpture in antiquity, on the other hand, was certainly Lucian, as we see from many of his utterances, especially from his account of an ideal statue, which combined the highest excellences of several noted sculptures.551 His criticism of Hegias, Kritios, and Nesiotes, to the effect that their works were “concise, sinewy, hard, and exactly strained in their lines,” might have been made in the presence of the group of the Tyrannicides (Fig. 32).552 Unfortunately he touches the subject only casually, though he might have written a fine history of Greek art. We must also refer to two other imperial writers, the elder Pliny and Pausanias. Pliny’s abstracts on art, though our chief ancient literary authority on Greek sculpture and painting, are neither critical nor trustworthy. A careful analysis of his chapters shows that he was a borrower many times removed, though he seldom acknowledged it. This is excusable when we consider the custom of literary borrowing in antiquity and also the fact that his chapters on art form merely an appendix to his Natural History, being joined on to it by a very artificial bond, for his abstract on bronze statuary (Bk. XXXIV) is brought in merely to complete his account of the metals. His knowledge of the older periods of Greek art is small and his bias in favor of the two Sikyonian sculptors Lysippos and Xenokrates is very evident. His worst mistakes are in chronology. He puts Pythagoras after Myron, and both after Polykleitos, while Hagelaïdas, who is made the teacher of Myron and Polykleitos, lives on to the beginning of the Peloponnesian war. His real criticism of sculpture is seen in his dictum of the Laokoön group, that it is a “work superior to all the pictures and bronzes of the world.”553 Our debt to Pausanias, especially for our knowledge of the victor monuments at Olympia, is immense. This debt may be gauged by the fact that he mentions in his work many times more statues than any other writer and that a large portion of the Schriftquellen of Overbeck is concerned with him. However, he shows little real understanding for art. His interest in statues is confined almost entirely to those which are noted for their antiquity or sanctity, and his account of them is usually the pivot around which he spins religious or mythological stories. Throughout his work his chief interest is religious; his interest in art for its own sake is very small. He devotes many pages to the throne of Zeus at Olympia, and describes the temple sculptures merely because the statue of Zeus is within. His detailed account of the athlete statues in the Altis is made chiefly because of his religious and antiquarian interest. Though imitating the style of Herodotos, he does it badly, so that his book is without much charm. In concluding this rough estimate of the ancient criticism of art, we might mention the fragmentary information to be gathered from many other writers, Dio Chrysostom, Quintilian,554 Plutarch, and others, whose names occur frequently in the footnotes. All such references to works of art in ancient writers are conveniently collected in the great compilation of Overbeck so often quoted.555

As for æsthetic judgments of the statues of victors at Olympia we have a few direct hints from different writers. The epigram from the base of the statue of the boy wrestler Theognetos by Ptolichos of Aegina reads in part: Κάλλιστον μὲν ἰδεῖν, ἀθλεῖν δ’ οὐ χείρονα μόρ[φης].556 Pliny says of the sculptor Mikon, who made the statue of the Athenian pancratiast Kallias: Micon athletis spectatur.557 The same writer says of the horses of Kalamis: equis sine aemulo expressis.558 Kalamis with Onatas of Aegina made a chariot-group for the Syracusan king Hiero.559 Pausanias, in mentioning the statue of the boxer Euthymos by Pythagoras, says that it is καὶ θέας ἐς τὰ μάλιστα ἄξιος.560 In mentioning the statue by the same sculptor of the wrestler Leontiskos, he says: εἴπερ τις καὶ ἄλλος ἀγαθὸς τὰ ἐς πλαστικήν.561 Of the Argive sculptor Naukydes he says, when speaking of the statue of the wrestler Cheimon, that it is among the finest works of that artist.562 In another passage, in which he describes the dedication of Phormis at Olympia, he speaks of an ugly horse, which, besides being smaller than other sculptured horses in the Altis, has “its tail cut off, and this makes it still uglier.”563 However, here he is not so much interested in its lack of beauty as in the curious fact which he adds, that despite its ugliness this bronze mare attracted stallions.

GREEK ORIGINALS OF VICTOR STATUES.

PLATE 3

Bronze Head of an Olympic Victor. Glyptothek, Munich.

We are not, however, dependent upon such meagre scraps of evidence from classical writers, nor upon contested Roman copies,564 for an idea of the workmanship of some of the Olympic victor statues. We can judge it in no uncertain way by the few originals found at Olympia and by others which are to be found in European museums. As an example of the former we have only to recall the life-size bronze bearded head of a boxer or pancratiast of the third century B. C., which is now in the National Museum at Athens565 (Fig. 61, A and B). Its only decoration, an olive crown whose leaves have disappeared, proves it to be from the statue of a victor, and its wild locks, brutal look, flattened nose, and wide mouth represent a naturalistic study of the utmost strength and fineness, which could only have been produced after the time of Lysippos. We shall discuss this remarkable head more fully in Chapter IV. As examples of original victor monuments in European museums we shall mention three. The bronze head of a boxer in the Glyptothek at Munich (Pl. 3) is an original of the first rank.566 It is from a statue found near Naples in 1730, which was later destroyed, and it probably represents the head of a boy of about twelve years, a victor in boxing, to judge from the victor band in the hair and the fact that the visible part of the right ear is swollen. Like the head of the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos (Figs. 28, 29) this beautiful head exemplifies fully the “ethical grace” or modesty567 so characteristic of the best Greek art, and it certainly merits Furtwaengler’s praise of being the “most precious treasure of the Glyptothek.”568 Another head, found in Beneventum and now in the Louvre (Fig. 3)569 is a splendid Greek original of the last decade of the fifth century B. C., and, as Mrs. Strong says, should arouse in us a sense of what precious relics may still lie hidden in our museums.570 The victor fillet in the hair, consisting of two sprays of what seems to be wild olive (remnants of which appear in front), shows that the statue must once have ornamented the Altis. Like the one in Munich, this head shows Polykleitan inspiration tempered by Attic influence.571 Lastly, the bronze head of a youth from the tablinum, of the so-called villa of the Pisos at Herculaneum, now in Naples,572 is, to judge from its technique, an excellent original Greek work (Fig. 4). Here again the hair fillet shows it is from a victor statue, though its provenience from Olympia can not be established.

Fig. 3.—Bronze Head of an Olympic Victor, from Beneventum. Louvre, Paris.

Such beautiful works of art as these last show the influence which the great athletic festivals, and especially the Olympian, exerted on the development of Greek sculpture. In the gymnastic training carried on in the gymnasium and palæstra, which culminated in these festivals, the Greek sculptor found an unrivaled opportunity to study the naked human figure in its best muscular development and in every pose. In fact, we may say with Furtwaengler that without athletics Greek art would be inconceivable.573 To quote from another work of the same scholar:

“The gymnastically trained bodies of these slim boys and youths and vigorous men are evidence of the ennobling effect of athletics. Presented in complete nudity they are not faithful portraits from life, but motives or models from the palæstra transformed and exalted to the highest ideal of physical beauty and strength. They are the most splendid human beings that the art of any period has created.”574

CANONS OF PROPORTION.

In attempting to identify a given statue as the copy of a work by this or that master, certain well-known canons of proportion, which were taught and practiced by various Greek sculptors and schools, must be taken into consideration.

Fig. 4.—Bronze Head of an Olympic Victor, from Herculaneum. Museum of Naples.

Greek art may, like Greek philosophy and poetry, be summarized under the names of three qualities which constantly occur in classical literature—συμμετρία, εὐρυθμία or ῥυθμός, and ἀναλογία.575 Symmetry may be defined as “that technical regard for the placing of the parts to the best advantage,” the symmetrical arrangement of the parts of a statue or group of figures.576 Rhythm, following Vitruvius,577 is that tertium quid which is indispensable to true art. Analogy (Latin proportio)578 refers to the measured ratio of part to part in any given work of art, whether in architecture, painting, or sculpture. Most scholars nowadays interpret symmetry and analogy as the same thing. Pliny579 says that symmetria has no Latin equivalent, and in several passages580 keeps the Greek word, as does Vitruvius. Here Otto Jahn rightly says proportio or commensus would have adequately translated it.581 P. Gardner explains the word properly as “the proportion of one part of the body as measured against another.”582 Brunn held that, as symmetry was the relation of part to part in a statue at rest, rhythm expressed this relationship in one represented in motion.583 The simplest illustration of rhythm is seen in walking: when the right foot is advanced the left arm swings out in rhythm, and so the balance of the body is kept. Rhythm, therefore, has to do with balance in motion, and may refer equally to cadence in poetry and music and to movement in sculpture. An excellent example in sculpture is afforded by Myron’s Diskobolos (Pls. 21, 22, and Figs. 34, 35), while the balancing of figures on many Greek reliefs—especially on Attic funerary stelæ—illustrates symmetry (cf. Fig. 75). Pliny characterizes certain artists by their success in effecting symmetry and rhythm. Thus Myron surpassed Polykleitos in being more rhythmic and in paying more attention to symmetry.584 He says that Lysippos most diligently preserved symmetry by bringing unthought-of innovations into the square canon of earlier artists.585 Parrhasios was the first to introduce symmetry into painting.586 Diogenes Laertios says that the sculptor Pythagoras was the first to aim at rhythm as well as symmetry.587 In all such passages it is clear that canons of proportion are meant.

The doctrine of human proportions is very ancient, originating in Egyptian art.588 It appears early in Greek architecture in the proportions of columns and other members of a temple,589 and it was soon transferred to sculpture. As Greek sculpture evolved on traditional lines,590 we should assume that it paid attention to the doctrine of proportions in the human figure, based on numerical ratios, and that such a doctrine would vary from age to age in the various schools of sculpture. Such an assumption is borne out by both literary and archæological evidence. Toward the end of Hellenism many writers refer to just such a measured basis of proportion in Greek art.591 Archæologists have shown by the careful study of multitudes of statues that such proportions exist in Greek sculpture. Thus A. Kalkmann592 has proved that there are sets of ratios in the treatment of the face used by successive schools of sculpture, which were canonical, whether formulated or not. G. Fritsch593 has done for the whole body what Kalkman has done for the face. In fact, anthropometry in relation to Greek sculpture has now become an exact science.594

The greatest artists—architects, painters, and sculptors—of all times have taught and practised the doctrine that certain proportions are beautiful, e. g., the proportion of the height of the head or the length of the foot to the whole body, or the length of parts of the head or body to other parts. In modern times we have only to mention such names as those of da Vinci, Duerer, Raphael Mengs, and Flaxman.595 In Greek days there were many artists who formulated such canons of proportions. Greek sculptors followed ratios of proportions so closely that we have statues of various schools, which are distinguished by fixed proportions of parts, such as the Old Attic, Old Argive, Polykleitan, Argive-Sikyonian or Lysippan, etc. Some of these schools used the foot as the common measure, while others used the palm, finger, or other member.596 The earliest works on Greek art were treatises, now lost, by artists in which they worked out their theories of the principles underlying the proportions of the human figure.597 We shall briefly consider a few of these canons, together with the usual pose of body which conformed with them. The earliest Peloponnesian canon, which we can analyze, was that followed by Hagelaïdas of Argos and his school, a canon which was still used in the Polykleitan circle. Here the weight of the body rested upon the left leg, while the right one was slightly bent at the knee, its foot resting flat on the ground; the right arm hung by the side and the left was usually in action, and the head was slightly inclined to the left side; the shoulders were extraordinarily broad in comparison with the hips, the right one being slightly raised. These qualities produced a short stocky figure, firmly placed.598 In the middle of the fifth century B. C., Polykleitos worked out a theory of proportions in the form of a commentary on his famous statue known as the Doryphoros. This canon was characterized by squareness and massiveness of build. The weight of the body generally rested on the right foot, while the left was drawn back, its foot touching the ground with the ball only. Sometimes this pose was reversed, the left foot carrying the body-weight, as in the three bases of statues by the master found at Olympia (i. e., those of the athletes Pythokles, Aristion, and Kyniskos, to be discussed later), and in the works of some of his pupils, notably in those of Naukydes, Daidalos, and Kleon.599 Euphranor, who flourished, according to Pliny, in Ol. 104 ( = 364–361 B. C.), and wrote works on symmetry and color, was the “first” to master the theory of symmetry.600 Pliny, however, found his bodies too slender and his heads and limbs too large, a criticism of his painting which must have been equally applicable to his sculpture. His canon did not make much headway, as the majority of sculptors in his century were still under the domination of the canon of Polykleitos. It was left for Lysippos, in the second half of the fourth century B. C., finally to break this domination of the great fifth-century sculptor. Pliny quotes Douris as saying that he was the pupil of no man, and that because of the advice of the painter Eupompos he was a follower of nature—which appears to be a cut at the schools which mechanically followed fixed rules.601 His statues had smaller heads, and more slender and less fleshy limbs, than those of his predecessors, in order that the apparent height of the figure might be increased.602 While Polykleitos made his heads one-seventh of the total height of the statue, Lysippos made his one-eighth—if this change may be seen in the Apoxyomenos (Pl. 28), which is certainly a work of his school, if not of the master himself. Pliny further records his saying that while his predecessors represented men as they were, Lysippos represented them as they appeared to be. This means that Pliny regarded him as the first impressionistic artist.603 Pliny mentions other artists who wrote on art, and it is probable that theories of proportions formed the main element of such works.604

The best example of symmetry, i. e., of the ratio of proportions, in Greek sculpture is afforded by the Doryphoros of Polykleitos, which Pliny says was called the Canon, and he adds that this sculptor was the only one who embodied his art in a single work.605 The identity of the canon with this statue seems to be attested by the anecdote told of Lysippos that the Doryphoros was his master,606 and by Quintilian’s statement that sculptors took it as a model.607 The best-preserved copy of the Doryphoros, despite its rather lifeless character, is the one discovered in Pompeii and now in Naples (Pl. 4).608 As other late Roman copies do not conform to the identical proportions of this copy, it is perhaps difficult to say exactly what the canon of Polykleitos was. Possibly the original, if it had been preserved, would also strike us as somewhat lifeless; but we must remember that the statue was made merely to illustrate a theory of proportions. The dimensions of the Naples statue are known from very careful measurements and the proportions agree with those given in the description by Galen to be mentioned. It is almost exactly 2 meters, or 6 feet 8 inches, high.609 The length of the foot is 0.33 meter, or one-sixth of the total height, while the length of the face is 0.20 meter, or one-tenth of the height. E. Guillaume610 has made a careful analysis of it in reference to Galen’s611 statement that Chrysippos found beauty in the proportion of the parts, “of finger to finger, and of all the fingers to the palm and wrist, and of these to the forearm, and of the forearm to the upper arm, and of all the parts to each other, as they are set forth in the canon of Polykleitos.” He has found that the palm, i. e., the breadth of the hand at the base of the fingers, is a common measure of the proportions of the body. This palm is one-third the length of the foot, one-sixth that of the lower leg, one-sixth that of the thigh, and one-sixth that of the distance from the navel to the ear, etc. Such a remarkable correspondence in measurements would seem to show, if we had no other proofs, that the Naples statue reproduces the canon of Polykleitos more closely than any other.

PLATE 4

Statue of the Doryphoros, after Polykleitos. Museum of Naples.

A good example of asymmetry is afforded by the so-called Spinario of the Palazzo dei Conservatori in Rome612 (Fig. 40). This justly prized statue shows more asymmetry, perhaps, than any other down to its date—just before the middle of the fifth century B. C. Though its composition is such that there is no vantage-point from which it forms a harmonious whole, still its effect on the beholder is far from displeasing. Such a creation shows that a Greek artist, even without paying attention to the symmetrical arrangement of parts, could at times produce an attractive piece of sculpture.

ASSIMILATION OF OLYMPIC VICTOR STATUES TO TYPES OF GODS AND HEROES.

Since Greek art in the main was idealistic, we should not be surprised to discover in athletic sculpture a tendency toward assimilating victor statues to well-known types of gods or heroes, especially to those of Hermes, Apollo, and Herakles, who presided over contests or gymnasia and palæstræ. This phenomenon is only a further example of the extraordinary, almost superhuman, honors which were paid to victors at the great games. In the absence of sufficient means of identification, it is often very difficult to distinguish with certainty between statues of victors and those of the gods and heroes to whom they were assimilated. This difficulty, as we shall see, is especially observable in the case of Herakles. Even later antiquity recognized that statues of athletes were sometimes confused with those of heroes, just as those of heroes were with those of gods, as we learn from a passage in Dio Chrysostom’s oration on Rhodian affairs.613 This difficulty is one of the most perplexing problems that still face the student of Greek sculpture.

It was not an uncommon custom in Greece to heroize in this way an ordinary dead man.614 One of the most striking instances of this custom is afforded by the so-called Hermes of Andros, a statue found in a grave-chamber on the island in 1833 and now in Athens615 (Pl. 5). It has been a matter of dispute among archæologists whether this statue represents the god Hermes or a mortal in his guise. Although Staïs616 looks on it as un problème peut-être à jamais insoluble, there seems little reason for doubting that it represents a defunct mortal. Its place of finding in a tomb along with the statue of a woman of the Muse type, which probably represents the man’s consort,617 the presence of a snake on the adjacent tree trunk, the absence of sandals and kerykeion, and the portrait—like features—all point to the conclusion that a man and not a god is represented. The downcast, almost melancholy, look seems also to make it a funereal figure. The powerful proportions of a perfectly developed athlete, displaying no tendency toward the representation of brute force, show that the man is idealized into the type of Hermes, the god of the palæstra, rather than into the light-winged messenger of Olympos. The Belvedere Hermes of the Vatican,618 and a better one known as the Farnese Hermes of the British Museum,619 are noteworthy replicas of the type. The latter carries the kerykeion in the left hand and wears sandals, with a small chlamys over the left arm and shoulder. These attributes show that Hermes was intended in this copy. Probably the original of these various replicas, a work dating from the end of the fourth century B. C., and ascribed to Praxiteles or his school in consequence of similarity in pose and build of body and head to the Hermes of Olympia, was intended to represent Hermes. In the one from Andros, at least, the copyist intended to heroize a mortal under the type of the god. Similarly, the statue known as the Standing Hermes in the Galleria delle Statue of the Vatican,620 which has the kerykeion and chlamys, whether its original represented Hermes, hero or mortal, has been made by the copyist to represent Hermes, the god of athletics, as the late attribute of wings in the hair proves. Other examples of dead men represented as Hermes are not uncommon. Thus a Greek grave-stele in Verona621 shows the dead portrayed as a winged Hermes, and a similar figure appears on a stele from Tanagra.622 The so-called Commodus in Mantua623 is interpreted by Conze and Duetschke as the figure of a dead youth in Hermes’ guise. But this custom of representing defunct mortals as gods was less common in Roman art. The bust of a dead youth on a Roman grave-stone in Turin,624 set up in honor of L. Mussius, is a good example. Here the cock, sheep, and kerykeion, symbols of the god, show that the youth is represented as Hermes.

PLATE 5

Statue of Hermes, from Andros. National Museum, Athens.

Not only dead men, however, were heroized in this manner. It was not an uncommon practice in later Greece for living men, especially princes, to have their statues assimilated to types of gods and heroes, a practice which was very common in imperial Rome.625 Thus many of the Hellenistic princes were pleased to have their statues assimilated to those of the heroic Alexander. One of the best examples of this process is furnished by the original Fig. 5.—Bronze Portrait-statue of a Hellenistic Prince. Museo delle Terme, Rome. bronze portrait statue of such a prince, which was unearthed in Rome in 1884 and is now in the Museo delle Terme there (Fig. 5).626 It has been identified as the portrait of several kings of Macedon and elsewhere,627 but the similarity of the head of the statue to heads portrayed on Macedonian coins is only superficial.628 All that we can say is that this beautiful work, representing the prince in the heroic guise of a nude athlete of about thirty years, belongs to the third century B. C., the epoch following Lysippos. The sculptor, wishing to combine the ideal with the real, appears to have copied the motive directly from a bronze statue by Lysippos, which represented Alexander leaning with his left hand high on a staff.629 The pose also recalls that of the third-century B. C. statue of Poseidon found on Melos and now in Athens.630 The free leg, body, and head modeling correspond so nearly with the Apoxyomenos (Pl. 28) that it was at first called a work of Lysippos, but its lack of repose631 shows that it must be a continuation of the work of that sculptor by some pupil, who wished to outdo his master in both form and expression.

Before discussing the subject of the assimilation of victor statues to types of god and hero, we must make it clear that often, for certain reasons, statues of athletes were later converted into those of gods, and vice versa. Such examples of metamorphosing statues have nothing to do with the process of assimilation under discussion. A few examples will make this clear. An archaic bronze statuette from Naxos,632 reproducing the type of the Philesian Apollo of Kanachos, since it has the same position of hands as in the original, as we see it later reproduced on coins of Miletos and in other copies,633 holds an aryballos in the right hand instead of a fawn. As it is absurd to represent Apollo with the bow in one hand and an oil-flask in the other, it seems clear that in this statuette the copyist has converted a well-known Apollo into an athlete by addition of an athletic attribute. Famous statues were put to many different uses by later copyists. Thus Furtwaengler has shown that the statue of the boy boxer Kyniskos by Polykleitos at Olympia,634 which represented the athlete crowning himself, was modified to represent various deities, heroes, etc. Thus a copy from Eleusis of the fourth century B. C., because of its provenience and the soft lines of the face, suggests a divinity, perhaps Triptolemos.635 A copy of the same type in the Villa Albani (no. 222) has an antique piece of a boar’s head on the nearby tree-stump and, consequently, may represent Adonis or Meleager. A torso in the Museo Torlonia (no. 22) represents Dionysos, another in the Museo delle Terme has a mantle and caduceus and so represents Hermes, while on coins of Commodus the same figure, with the lion’s skin and club, represents Herakles.636 No ancient statue was used more extensively as a model for other types than the famous Doryphoros of Polykleitos. Furtwaengler637 has collected a long list of later conversions of this work into statues both marble and bronze, statuettes, reliefs, etc., representing Pan, Ares, Hermes, and in one case an ordinary mortal.638 Other examples of the conversion of statues will be given in our treatment of assimilation.

Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Hermes.

Hermes was one of the principal ἐναγώνιοι or ἀγώνιοι θεοί, i. e., gods who presided over contests, or who were overseers of gymnasia and palæstræ, or were teachers of gymnastics (γυμνάσται).639 Greek writers often mention these athletic gods. Thus Aischylos640 often uses the term, not in the sense of ἀγοραῖοι θεοί, “the great assembled gods,” (ἀγὼν = ἀγορά),641 but in the sense of gods who presided over contests.642 This is evident from the fact that Zeus, Apollo, Poseidon, and Hermes are the gods especially mentioned by Aischylos in this sense, and the first three correspond with the Olympian and Nemean games (Zeus), the Pythian (Apollo), and the Isthmian (Poseidon), while Hermes is concerned in them all. Thus the epithet ἀγώνιοι, in the Agamemnon of Aischylos refers to Zeus,643 Apollo,644 and Hermes.645 If the word referred to the twelve greater gods, as some have thought, other deities more important than Hermes would have been included. Elsewhere the word ἀγώνιος always refers to contests.646 Hermes was worshipped at Athens and elsewhere as a god of contests.647 The agonistic character of this god is shown by the fact that statues and altars were erected to him all over Greece.648 He was sometimes coupled with Herakles as the protector of contests,649 and the images of the two often stood in gymnasia.650 A fragmentary votive relief of the second century A. D. is inscribed with a dedication to both by a certain Horarios, victor in torch-racing.651 Athenian ephebes made offerings to Hermes,652 and to Hermes and Herakles in common, after their training was over. Thus Dorykleides of Thera, a victor in boxing and the pankration at unknown games, dedicated a thank-offering to the two.653 Hermes was early the god of youthful life and sports, especially those of the palæstra. He is said to have founded wrestling654 and inaugurated the sports of the palæstra.655 Pausanias mentions a Gymnasion of Hermes at Athens656 and an altar of Hermes ἐναγώνιος together with one of Opportunity (Καιρός) at the entrance to the Stadion at Olympia.657 He says that the people of Pheneus in Arkadia held games in his honor called the Hermaia,658 and he records the defeat of the god by Apollo in running.659 With such an athletic record there is little wonder that the Greek sculptor would often take his ideal of Hermes from the god of the palæstra and gymnasium, representing him as an athletic youth harmoniously developed by gymnastic exercises. It was but natural that a victor at Olympia or elsewhere should wish to have his statue—which rarely could be a portrait—conform with that athletic type.

PLATE 6

Statue of the Standing Diskobolos, after Naukydes (?). Vatican Museum, Rome.

An excellent instance of this tendency seems to be afforded by the so-called Standing Diskobolos in the Sala della Biga of the Vatican (Pl. 6),660 known since its discovery by Gavin Hamilton in 1792. It represents a youth who is apparently taking position for throwing the diskos, the weight of the body resting on the left leg, the knees slightly bent, the feet firmly planted, and the diskos held in the left hand, just prior to its being passed to the right. This position is one which immediately precedes that of Myron’s great statue. The bronze original dates from the second half of the fifth century B. C., and has been variously assigned to Myron by Brunn, to Alkamenes by Kekulé, followed by Overbeck, Michaelis and Furtwaengler,661 and to Naukydes, the brother and pupil of Polykleitos.662 The head of the Vatican statue shows no trace of Peloponnesian art, but rather resembles Attic types of the end of the fifth century B. C. However, as we shall see, this head does not appear to belong to the statue. Among the works of Alkamenes Pliny mentions a bronze pentathlete,663 called the Enkrinomenos, and this work has been identified with the statue under discussion.664 Such an assumption is tenable only if the statue fits Pliny’s epithet. This epithet appears to mean “undergoing a test,” and should refer not to the statue, for we know nothing of any principle of selecting statues, but to the athlete represented, the ἔγκρισις referring to the selection of athletes before the contest.665 Pliny’s statue, then, presumably, represented a pentathlete, not in action as the Vatican statue does, but standing at rest before his judges. An all-round athlete like a pentathlete would especially fit such an ordeal, and his statue, albeit lighter and more graceful, would be an ideal one like the Doryphoros of Polykleitos.666 We know how Alkamenes treated Hermes from the bearded herma of that god found in Pergamon in 1903 and inscribed with his name.667 Its massive features, broad forehead, and wide-opened eyes bear no analogy to the head on the Vatican statue, nor to the one with which Helbig would replace it. The ascription of the statue to Naukydes is better founded. As the head of the statue is Attic and not Argive, it is difficult to connect the work with a Peloponnesian artist. However, the present head of the statue can not be shown to belong to it, and no other replica has a head which can be proved to belong to the body. A fragmentary replica of the statue, of good workmanship, was found in Rome in 1910, and nearby a head, which must belong to the torso.668 This head fits the Vatican statue better than the head now on it, and certainly comes from the Polykleitan circle—both head and body showing elements of Polykleitan style. This new head represents the transition from Polykleitan art to that of the next century, i. e., to the head-types of Skopas, Praxiteles, and other Attic masters. Presumably, then, in the original of this fragment and its replicas, we have a famous statue—the one by Naukydes mentioned by Pliny.669

A more important question for our discussion is whether the Vatican statue represents a victor (diskobolos) or Hermes. G. Habich has argued that the pose of the statue, standing with the right foot advanced, is not that of a diskobolos taking position. He quotes Kietz670 to the effect that no vase-painting or other monument has the exact position of this statue, and that the natural position for such a motive is to advance the left foot.671 Moreover, the fingers of the right hand, which are supposed especially to uphold the diskobolos theory, are modern in all the replicas. On a coin of Amastris in Paphlagonia, dating from the Antonines, and on one of Commodus struck at Philippopolis in Thrace, a figure of Hermes is pictured, which, in all essentials, reproduces the Vatican statue.672 Since the figure on the coins has a kerykeion or training-rod in the right hand and a diskos as a minor attribute in the left—merely a symbol of the god’s patronage of athletics—we should see in the Vatican statue a representation of Hermes as overseer of the palæstra. Pliny’s words—if we omit or transpose the first et—refer, therefore, to a statue of Hermes-Diskobolos and to the Ram-offerer which stood on the Athenian Akropolis, to two, therefore, and not to three different monuments. We should restore all the replicas of the statue, then, with the caduceus, to represent Hermes as gymnasiarch. Though this interpretation of the statue has found opponents,673 the evidence is strong that in it and its replicas we have an athlete in the guise of Hermes. If we think that the caduceus can not be brought into harmony with the chief motive of the statue, we must conclude with Helbig that the copyist in one isolated case—the one copied on the coins—changed an original victor statue into Hermes by adding the herald staff. This would make it an instance, not of assimilation of type, but of conversion.

A small bronze statuette standing upon a cylindrical base, which was found in the sea off Antikythera (Cerigotto), reproduces almost exactly the attitude of the statue of Naukydes (Fig. 6).674 Here the left hand is stretched out horizontally at the elbow, but the right arm is lost, so that we get no additional evidence as to the attribute carried. Because of its correspondence with the aforementioned coins675 even in detail, Bosanquet, followed by Svoronos, looks upon this “little masterpiece” as a copy of the Argive master.

Fig. 6.—Bronze Statuette of Hermes-Diskobolos, found in the Sea off Antikythera. National Museum, Athens.

The statue discovered in the ruins of Hadrian’s villa in 1742 and now in the Capitoline Museum,676 which represents an ephebe nude, except for a chlamys thrown around the middle of his body, standing in an easy attitude with his left foot resting upon a rock and bending forward with the right arm extended in a gesture, was formerly looked Fig. 7.—Bronze Statue of a Youth, found in the Sea off Antikythera. National Museum, Athens. upon as a resting pancratiast. Because of its general likeness to Praxitelean figures—the head is especially like the Olympia Hermes—Furtwaengler interpreted the figure as that of Hermes Logios or Agoraios, the god of eloquence, and assigned it to an artist near to Praxiteles. However, it is probably nothing else than an idealized portrait of the age of Hadrian or the Antonines, and represents an ephebe, probably a victor, assimilated to the type of Hermes.677

Another example of assimilation may be the much-discussed bronze statue in the National Museum at Athens, which was accidentally discovered in 1901, along with the rest of a cargo of sculptures which had been wrecked off the island of Antikythera as it was on its way to Rome about the beginning of the first century B. C. (Fig. 7).678 This statue, the best preserved of the cargo, is a little over lifesize and represents a nude youth standing with languid grace, the weight of his body resting upon the left leg, while the right is slightly bent and the right arm is extended horizontally, the hand holding a round object now lost and variously interpreted. In short, the pose strongly resembles that of the Vatican Apoxyomenos (Pl. 29). Opinions as to the age and authorship of this statue have been very diverse, ranging from the fifth century B. C. down to Hellenistic times and ascribing it to many masters and schools. Kabbadias, who published it, in conjunction with the other objects, directly after their discovery,679 thought it would prove to “rank as high among statues of bronze as does the Hermes of Praxiteles among those of marble,” and characterized it as “the most beautiful bronze statue that we possess.” Waldstein praised it in no less exaggerated terms, and classed it along with the Charioteer from Delphi (Fig. 66) as among the first Greek bronzes, if not among the finest specimens of Greek sculpture.680 He followed Kabbadias in assigning it to the fourth century B. C. and in interpreting it as Hermes. He at first ascribed it to Praxiteles or his school, but later he thought it more Skopaic.681 Th. Reinach placed it in the early fourth century B. C., but regarded it as the work of a sculptor influenced by Polykleitos, naming the youthful Praxiteles or Euphranor.682 He explained the pose as that of a man amusing a dog or a child with some round object. A Greek scholar, A. S. Arvanitopoulos, assigned the work to the fifth century B. C. and to the Attic school, referring it possibly to Alkamenes.683 However, as soon as the statue was properly cleansed and pieced together, its early dating was seen to be untenable, and its Hellenistic character became evident.684 E. A. Gardner found little resemblance in the head to that of the Praxitelean Hermes, but more in the treatment of hair and eyes to that of the Lansdowne Herakles (Pl. 30, Fig. 71,), which he ascribes to Skopas.685 He saw in its labored and even anatomical modeling similarity to the Apoxyomenos of the Vatican and concluded that it was, therefore, later than the fourth century B. C., being an eclectic piece disclosing influences of several fourth-century sculptors, the work of an imitator especially of Praxiteles and Skopas. K. T. Frost also assigned the work to the Hellenistic age, but believed it was the statue of a god and not of a mortal, and so followed Kabbadias and Waldstein in interpreting it as a Hermes Logios.686 Gardner had interpreted it as probably the statue of an athlete “in a somewhat theatrical pose,” though admitting it might be a genre figure representing an athlete catching a ball, even if its pose were against such an interpretation. In any case he was right in saying that the pose, even if incapable of solution, was chosen by the sculptor with a desire for display, as the centre of attraction is outside and not inside the statue, and so is against the αὐτάρκεια of earlier works. More recently, Bulle has asserted that it is not an original work at all, but, as evinced by the hard treatment of the hair, merely a copy. He also interprets it as a Hermes, restoring a kerykeion in the left hand, and he likens its oratorical pose to that of the Etruscan Orator found near Lago di Trasimeno in 1566 and now in the Museo Archeologico in Florence, or the Augustus from Primaporta in the Vatican.687 For its date he believes the statue marks the end of the Polykleitan “Standmotif” (the breadth of the body showing Polykleitan influence, the head, however, being too small and slender for the Argive master), and the inception of the Lysippan (the free leg not drawn back, but placed further out), as we see it in the Apoxyomenos. He concludes that its author can not have been a great master.688 Doubtless, the statue, which is the pride of the Athenian museum, is merely a representative example of the kind of bronze statues made in great numbers in the early Hellenistic age; but it shows the high degree of excellence attained at that time by very mediocre artists.689

Apart from its period, our chief interest in the statue is to determine whether a god or a mortal is portrayed. As there are no certain remnants of the round object held in the right hand, and no other accessories, many interpretations have been possible. Especially the gesture of the right arm has been the centre for such interpretations. Some have looked upon this gesture as “transitory,” i. e., the sweeping gesture of an orator or god of orators, and this has led to the interpretation of the statue as Hermes Logios.690 However, the round object in the fingers is against this assumption. Others have therefore regarded the gesture as “stationary,” i. e., the figure is holding an object in the hand, which is the main interest of the statue, and this view has therefore also given rise to many different explanations. Among mythological interpretations two have received careful attention. Svoronos has reasoned most ingeniously that the statue represents Perseus holding the head of Medusa in his hand, and finds a similar type on coins, gems, and rings. Thus, almost the identical pose of the statue is seen on an engraved stone in Florence, which shows Perseus holding the Gorgon’s head, and Svoronos has restored the bronze similarly.691 But certainly the right arm of the statue was not intended to carry so great a weight. Others have seen in it the statue of Paris by Euphranor, mentioned by Pliny as offering the apple as prize of beauty to Aphrodite.692 But the statue scarcely reflects the description of the Paris by Pliny. Other scholars have interpreted the statue as that of a mortal. S. Reinach believes that it may be a youth sacrificing.693 Kabbadias and E. A. Gardner admitted it might be the statue of a ball-player as well as of Hermes. Since this latter interpretation has become popular, let us consider its possibility at some length in reference to ball-playing in antiquity. Now we know that ball-playing (σφαιρίζειν, ἡ σφαιρικὴ τέχνη) was a favorite amusement of the Greeks from the time of Nausikaa and her brothers in the Odyssey694 to the end of Greek history, and that it was practiced at Rome from the end of the Republic to the end of the Empire.695 It seems to have been regarded less as a game than as a gymnastic exercise. Its origin is ascribed to the Spartans and to others.696 A special sort of ball-playing was known as φαινίνδα,697 and this is described in a treatise by the physician Galen, of the second century A. D., in which he recommended ball-playing as one of the best exercises.698 Because of his ability in the art of ball-playing, Aristonikos of Karystos, the ball-player of Alexander the Great, received Athenian citizenship and was honored with a statue.699 The philosopher Ktesibios of Chalkis was fond of the game.700 A special room, called the σφαιριστήριον, was a part of the later gymnasium.701 The game was specially indulged in at Sparta. Several inscriptions, mostly from the age of the Antonines, commemorate victories by teams of ball-players there.702 The name σφαιρεῖς was given to Spartan youths in the first year of manhood. These competitions took place in the Δρόμος at Sparta.703 Though, then, we should naturally expect statues of ball-players, like the one in Athens of Aristonikos already mentioned, the calm mien of the Cerigotto bronze and the direction of the gaze are certainly, as Th. Reinach said earlier, against interpreting it as the statue of one engaged in so active a sport. Von Mach, because of its voluptuous appearance, thought it might represent merely a bon vivant. While Lechat interpreted it as possibly an athlete receiving a crown from Nike,704 Arvanitopoulos would have the right hand either hold a lekythion or be quite empty, and the left a strigil, thus restoring the statue as an apoxyomenos. S. Reinach would regard it merely as a funerary monument.

In all this discrepancy of opinion it is not difficult to recognize elements of both god and mortal blended. The resemblance in the expression and features of the face to those of the Praxitelean Hermes, even though superficial, as well as the pose of the right arm recall the god; the muscular build of the figure fits either the god Hermes, in his character of overseer of the sports of the palæstra, or an athlete. It therefore seems reasonable to see in this Hellenistic statue of varied artistic tendencies merely the representation of an athlete, perhaps of a pentathlete, who is holding a crown or possibly an apple as a prize of victory in the right hand, whose form and features have been assimilated to those of Hermes.

How the statue of an indisputable Hermes Logios, on the other hand, appears, may be seen in the Hermes Ludovisi of the Museo delle Terme, Rome,705 and in its replica in the Louvre. The original of this marble copy, dating from the middle of the fifth century B. C., has been variously ascribed to Pheidias,706 Myron,707 and others. In this statue the petasos, chlamys, and kerykeion indicate the god, while the position of the right arm raised toward the head708 and the earnest expression of concentration in the face bespeak the god of oratory. The careful replica of the statue, except the head, in the Louvre, is the work of Kleomenes of Athens, a sculptor of the first century B. C. The copyist, however, has given to the original a Roman portrait-head, whence it has been falsely called Germanicus.709 The Paris statue, then, is merely another example of the conversion of an original god-type, for the sculptor wished to represent a Roman under the guise of Hermes Logios, since the inscribed tortoise shell retained at the feet is a well-known attribute of the god.

Another excellent example of a true Hermes head is the fine Polykleitan one in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, which is a copy of a well-known type represented by the Boboli Hermes in Florence and other replicas.710 Though S. Reinach classed this head as Kresilæan,711 its true Polykleitan character has been established,712 even if it does not merit the praise formerly given it by Robinson, of being “easily the best extant copy of a work by Polykleitos.”713

The so-called Jason of the Louvre and its many replicas714 (Fig. 8) probably represent athletes in the guise of Hermes. These statues are copies of an original of the end of the fourth century B. C., when Fig. 8.—Statue of the so-called Jason (Sandal-binder). Louvre, Paris. the favorite motive originated—probably with Lysippos—of representing a figure, as in this case, with one foot on a rock, bending over and tying a sandal. Since the replicas in Munich and Paris extend both arms to the right foot, while those in London and Athens extend the left arm over the breast, with the hand resting on the right knee, Klein has argued two different versions of a common type. He compares the former with figures on the west frieze of the Parthenon, the latter with the well-known relief of Nike tying her sandal, from the Nike balustrade now in the Akropolis Museum. The one type he assigns to Lysippos, the other (with both arms down) to an earlier artist. However, the proportions of both groups agree with the Lysippan canon and so we should assume only one artist. The discussion whether the figure is tying or untying the sandal is as barren as the similar one raised about the Athena from the Nike balustrade;715 but the question as to who is represented by the type is worthy of careful consideration. The statue in the Louvre at first was believed to represent Cincinnatus called from the plough, but Winckelmann, without evidence, gave it its present name of Jason. In recent years it has been interpreted as Hermes tying on his sandals, his head raised to hearken to the behest of Zeus before going forth from Olympos on his duties as messenger. This interpretation was based on the description of a statue of the god by Christodoros,716 and the fact that the type conforms with a representation of Hermes on a coin of Markianopolis in Mœsia.717 Arndt has argued from the coin and from the motive of the statue that Hermes and not an athlete is intended; thus the inclination of the head, he thinks, is not that of an athlete looking out over the theatre, since the regard is not far off, but merely upward; the presence of the chlamys and the sandals also fits the god. He therefore refers the copies to a Hermes-type originated by Lysippos. But Froehner’s idea that they represent athletes, even if the type were invented for Hermes, is in line with our idea of the assimilation of athlete types to that of Hermes. In this connection it may be added that the head of an athlete in Turin,718 dating from the late third or early second century B. C., is very similar to that of the Louvre figure, and especially to the Fagan head in London. The pose of an athlete binding on a sandal was doubtless chosen by the sculptor merely to show the play of the muscles.

Heads of Hermes are often found with victor fillets,719 and some of these doubtless are from statues of victors. The beautiful fourth-century B. C. Parian marble head of a beardless youth in the British Museum, known as the Aberdeen head,720 which resembles so strongly the Praxitelean Hermes, although lacking its delicacy, may be from a victor statue assimilated to the god, for holes show that it once wore a metal wreath. In Roman days the Doryphoros of Polykleitos, as we have seen, was adapted to represent Hermes, and was set up in various palæstræ and gymnasia. The Naples copy of the Doryphoros stood in the Palaistra of Pompeii,721 and statues of ephebes carrying lances (hastae, δόρατα) and called Achilleae by Pliny,722 which must have been largely copies of Polykleitos’ great statue, were set up in gymnasia. A later type of Hermes-head often appeared on bodies of the Doryphoros,723 while other statues, showing the body of the Doryphoros draped with the chlamys,724 and many torsos following the attitude and form of this statue, have the chlamys, which shows that they were intended for the god.725 Hermes in the Doryphoros pose, in a bronze of the British Museum,726 is probably intended for an athlete. Furtwaengler has shown727 that the old Argive schema of the boxer Aristion at Olympia by Polykleitos728 was used in the master’s circle for statues of Hermes. The best preserved example of a number of existing statues of this type is one in Lansdowne House, London,729 in the pose of the Aristion, holding an object—probably a kerykeion—in the hand and a chlamys over the left shoulder.

Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Apollo.

Apollo figures in mythology as an athlete. In the Iliad, at the opening of the boxing match between Epeios and Euryalos,730 he is mentioned as the god of boxing, which refers, perhaps, to his presiding over the education of youths (κουροτρόφος) and to his gift of manly prowess. Pausanias records that he overcame Hermes in running and Ares in boxing.731 He gives these victories of the god as the reason why the flute played a Pythian air at the later pentathlon. Plutarch says that the Delphians sacrificed to Apollo the boxer (πύκτης), and the Cretans and Spartans to Apollo the runner (δρομαῖος).732 Apollo’s fight with Herakles to wrest from the hero the stolen tripod of Delphi,733 which is the subject of many surviving works of art,734 is outside the realm of athletics. As with Hermes, it is often difficult to distinguish between statues of Apollo and those of victors assimilated to his type. A good instance of this doubt is afforded by the long and indecisive discussion of the monument represented by several replicas, especially by the Choiseul-Gouffier statue in the British Museum (Pl. 7A), and the so-called Apollo-on-the-Omphalos (Pl. 7B) found in 1862 in the ruins of the theatre of Dionysos at Athens, and now in the National Museum there.735 The bronze original of these marble copies must have been famous, to judge from the number of replicas of it. It has been ascribed to many different artists—to Kalamis, Pythagoras, Alkamenes, Pasiteles,736 to one on more, to another on less probability. As A. H. Smith has pointed out, the krobylos treatment of the hair almost certainly indicates an Attic sculptor of the first half of the fifth century B. C. But here again the main interest in these copies is to determine whether the original represented Apollo or an athlete. The connection between the Athens replica and the omphalos found with it is all but disproved737 and can not be used as evidence that the statue represents the god. However, the original has been called an Apollo because of the presence of a quiver on certain of the copies. Thus, while we have a tree-trunk beside the Choiseul-Gouffier example, we have a quiver on the copy in the Palazzo Torlonia in Rome,738 and on a similar statue in the Fridericianum in Kassel,739 and both tree and quiver on the fragment of a leg from the Palatine now in the Museo delle Terme.740 The Ventnor head in the British Museum741 has long locks suited to Apollo, and the head from Kyrene there742 was actually found in a temple of Apollo. It has also been pointed out that the head of a similar figure, undoubtedly an Apollo, appears on a relief in the Capitoline Museum,743 and a similar figure is found on a red-figured krater in Bologna, which shows the god standing on a pillar with a laurel wreath in the lowered left hand and a bowl in the right.744 On coins of Athens, moreover, we see the figure of Apollo in a similar attitude with a laurel wreath in the lowered right hand and a bow in the left.745 From such evidence a good case for an Apollo has been made out by many scholars—A. H. Smith, Winter,746 Helbig,747 Conze,748 Furtwaengler,749 Schreiber,750 Dickins, and others. The evidence of the quiver in the delle Terme fragment and the Torlonia replica is looked upon as a deliberate device of the copyist to indicate the god. The attempt especially to connect it with the Apollo Alexikakos of Kalamis751 must certainly fall, since the date is about the only thing in its favor. In the long list of statues ascribed to this sculptor,752 there is none of an athlete, and the Choiseul-Gouffier type, whether it represents Apollo or an athlete, has a markedly athletic character. If the Delphi Charioteer (Fig. 66) be ascribed to Kalamis, certainly this type of statue can have nothing to do with him or his school. Nor is the type at all identical with the Alexikakos appearing on coins of Athens,753 in which the locks of hair, in the true archaic fashion of a cultus statue, fall down over the god’s shoulders. Besides, the work of Kalamis, characterized by λεπτότης and χάρις,754 must have been of the delicate later archaic style of the transition period.

PLATE 7A

Statue of the so-called Apollo Choiseul-Gouffier. British Museum, London.

PLATE 7B

Statue of the so-called Apollo-on-the-Omphalos. National Museum, Athens.

Waldstein, however, has made a good case against the evidence adduced for interpreting the original as Apollo and he believes that the statue represents an athlete.755 The thongs thrown over the stump in the Choiseul-Gouffier statue, doubtless those of a boxer, seem to point to an athlete for that copy at least. The muscular form and athletic coiffure of all the copies also point to the same conclusion, even if Waldstein’s ascription of the original statue to the boxer Euthymos, whose statue by Pythagoras of Rhegion stood in the Altis at Olympia,756 is only a guess. Wolters thinks the Choiseul-Gouffier statue may represent an athlete, but is against Waldstein’s ascription of the work to Pythagoras.757

Though differing in detail, the rendering of the hair, common to all the replicas, is a purely athletic coiffure. The argument for attributing the original to Apollo, based on the curls around the face, is of no importance, since a similar coiffure appears on many ephebe heads by various Attic masters of the same or a slightly earlier period. The hair treatment on a little-known replica of the head in the British Museum758 gives us an additional argument in determining whether the original was an Apollo or not. On this head there are two corkscrew curls side by side just back of the ears, which are so inorganically attached and so unsuited to the style of head as to make us believe that they were added by the copyist, even if their absence in other copies were not proof enough of this fact. Apparently the copyist adopted a well-known type of athlete and tried to convert it into an Apollo by the use of this Apolline hair attribute. The only other Apolline attribute, the quiver on the copies in the Palazzo Torlonia759 and Museo delle Terme, may have been added as a fortuitous adjunct by the copyists, who were converting an original athlete statue into one of Apollo. It may be added, also, that the quiver does not always indicate the god, as we shall see in discussing the Delian Diadoumenos (Pl. 18). When we consider, therefore, the athletic pose, the massive outline and proportions, the high-arched chest, the muscular arms and thighs, the accentuation of the veins,760 the fashion of the hair, and the relatively small size of the head, together with the presence of the boxing-thongs on the London example, it seems reasonable to conclude that in this series of copies we may see an original athlete statue, which in certain cases was later transformed into statues of Apollo. Even if the original was actually an Apollo, its proportions were far better suited to the patron of athletic exercises than to the leader of a celestial choir.

An instance of the similar use of the same type of head is shown by the colossal statue of Apollo unearthed at Olympia.761 Here we see the same coiffure as in the heads discussed, but the presence of the remnants of a lyre indubitably shows that this copy was intended for Apollo, and so it has been rightly assigned by Treu, not to the fifth, but to a later century. When long hair was no longer the fashion for athletes, a later artist might mistakenly think that the earlier plaits were genuinely Apolline, though we know that they were common to all early athletic art. Another head in the British Museum has been ably discussed by Mrs. Strong,762 who shows that it comes from an Apollo and not from an athlete statue. It is similar to an Apollo pictured on a stater struck at Mytilene about 400 B. C.,763 and consequently, like the statue from Olympia, it is merely an instance of the process of converting an athlete statue into that of an Apollo.

The marble copy of the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos, found on the island of Delos in 1894, and now in the National Museum in Athens764 (Pl. 18), has a chlamys and a quiver introduced on the marble support against the right leg. Until recently these attributes were regarded as the arbitrary introductions of the Hellenistic copyist, who wished to convert the famous athlete statue into one of Apollo, but lately it has been suggested that they belonged to the original statue, which is assumed to have represented Apollo. Thus, Hauser has propounded the theory that the Diadoumenos was originally an Apollo.765 He does not believe that the Delian sculptor could have transformed a short-haired athlete into an Apollo, since the typical Apollo after the time of Praxiteles was never represented as athletic. He later supported his theory that the Diadoumenos was originally an Apollo by the evidence of a bronze statuette and a Delphian coin, and reasserted his view that so virile a short-haired Apollo did not originate with the later copyist, but in the fifth century B. C.766 Hauser’s argument that Apollo was the original of the Diadoumenos seems as unsuccessful as his contention that Polykleitos’ other great creation, the Doryphoros, is to be classed as an Achilles.767 Loewy has sufficiently opposed Hauser’s theory of the Diadoumenos, by showing that the palm-tree prop in all the marble replicas of that statue points to athletic victories.768 He rightly explains the Apolline attributes of the Delian copy as the perfectly natural additions of an artist who lived on the island reputed to be the birthplace of the god. His ascription of the Polykleitan statue to the pentathlete Pythokles, the base of whose statue at Olympia has been found,769 is doubtful. More recently Ada Maviglia has shown the literary grounds for regarding the Diadoumenos as an athlete, and not an Apollo.770

The difficulty of distinguishing between statues of athletes and Apollo is also shown by the very beautiful fifth century B. C. Parian marble head in Turin,771 which is certainly a copy of an original Greek bronze. Furtwaengler, because of the hair, wrongly believed it the head of a diadoumenos, and connected it with Kresilas,772 while Amelung and Wace773 have found in it Attic and Polykleitan influences. The hair is parted over the centre of the forehead, as in the Diadoumenos and the Doryphoros, and in other works attributed to the Polykleitan school, while the locks over the ears and the plaits wound round the head have Attic analogues.774

Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Herakles.

Herakles was the reputed founder of the games at Olympia.775 He was a famous wrestler, Pausanias frequently mentioning his combats with giants.776 He won in both wrestling and the pankration at Olympia.777 In connection with the victory of Straton of Alexandria, who won in these two events on the same day,778 Pausanias names three men before him and three men after him who won in these events on the same day.779 We learn their dates from Africanus.780 After the date of the last of these victories, Ol. 204 ( = 37 A. D.), the Elean umpires, in order to check professionalism, refused to allow contestants to enter for both events.781 To win the crown of wild olive in both these events was therefore regarded as a great honor, and in the Olympic lists a special note was made of such victors, who were called πρῶτος, δεύτερος, τρίτος, κ. τ. λ., ἀφ’ Ἡρακλέους.782 They also received the title of παράδοξος or παραδοξονίκης.783 Statues of Herakles, like those of Hermes and Theseus, were commonly set up in gymnasia and palæstræ throughout Greece,784 and it was but natural that Olympic victors, especially those in the two events mentioned, should want their statues assimilated to those of the hero. The difficulty of deciding whether a given statue is one of Herakles or of a victor is even greater than that of distinguishing between statues of victors and those of Hermes or Apollo. To quote Homolle: “Maintes fois, comme pour la tête d’Olympie, comme pour plusieurs autres encore, on peut se demander si le personnage représenté est le héros luimême sous les traits d’un athlête ou un athlête fait à l’image du héros.”785 In reference to the statue of Agias by Lysippos discovered at Delphi, which is an excellent example of the assimilation process which we are discussing, he continues: “Ici en particulier, étant donnée la nature du monument, il est permis de supposer que l’auteur ... ait voulu élever le personnage à la hauteur idéale du type divin en qu’ Agias ait été assimilé à Héraclès.”786

We shall discuss a few examples of this process of assimilation to types of Herakles. Our ascription of the head from Olympia mentioned by Homolle, which was found in the ruins of the Gymnasion, to the statue of the Akarnanian pancratiast Philandridas by Lysippos787 (Frontispiece and Fig. 69) will be discussed in a later chapter.788 The swollen ears and hair-fillet might pass for hero or mortal, for in deciding whether a given head represents Herakles or a victor, the ears are not the deciding criterion, since many heroes had the “pancratiast” swollen ear, as we shall see later. A good example of assimilation is seen in the beautiful little marble head of a man, found in Athens and now in the Glyptothek Ny-Carlsberg in Copenhagen, dating from the early Hellenistic age.789 As traces of color remain in the hair, some have thought that this head came from the reliefs on the “Alexander” sarcophagus from Sidon, belonging to the body of a headless youth represented there. Though the marble (Pentelic) and the dimensions would fit, it would be the only head on the sarcophagus with a band in the hair, and so the question can not be definitely decided.790 The head was at first called a Herakles, though Furtwaengler rightly saw in it an ideal representation of an athlete, even if the ears are not swollen. A bronze head of a youth from Herculaneum, now in Naples, is evidently a part of the statue of a victor or of Herakles.791 A Polykleitan ephebe head-type, with rolled fillet around the hair and swollen ears, represented by replicas in Naples, in Rome, and elsewhere, may represent a boxer in the guise of the hero.792 In the Roman copy of the group of Herakles and Telephos in the Museo Chiaramonti of the Vatican, Herakles, still the god, wears a fillet.793 Similarly, a colossal head of mediocre workmanship in the Sala dei Busti of the Vatican represents the hero with a fillet,794 while another head in the Capitoline Museum, with fillet and swollen ears, seems to represent Herakles as a victorious athlete.795 Many other heads in various museums, which are commonly called heads of Herakles, may represent athletes in the heroic guise. A good example is the Parian marble terminal bust of the fourth century B. C., representing a young Herakles wreathed with poplar, now in the British Museum (Fig. 31).796 In this head the ears are bruised. It seems to have been copied from some well-known statue of Lysippan or Skopaic tendencies. Another head in the British Museum shows the beardless hero, his hair encircled by a diadem, and his ears broken and crushed.797 This almost certainly comes from a victor statue. Many bronze statuettes in the British Museum may be interpreted either as Herakles or as victors.798 A bronze from Corfu represents a nude Herakles or an athlete, with the left foot advanced and the left hand extended. The objects held in both hands are lost, but the challenging pose and expression indicate a boxer.799 Similarly a small bronze in Berlin, represented with a fillet and in the walking pose, may be a Herakles or a victor.800 Duetschke gives two examples of heads in the Uffizi, both of them having fillets, and one of them having swollen ears, which may come from statues of the hero or victors.801 Heads of the hero with the rolled fillet can not, however, according to Furtwaengler, be classed as victors, since he believes that this attribute was borrowed from the symposium, to distinguish the glorified hero rejoicing in the celestial banquet.802

Athletes Represented as the Dioskouroi.

Kastor is said to have won the foot-race and Polydeukes the boxing match, at Olympia.803 They had an altar at the entrance to the Hippodrome there,804 and were called “Starters of the Race” at Sparta.805 A stadion, in which they were fabled to have contended, was shown in Hermione, in Corinthia.806 Kastor was a famous horse-racer in Homer and later writers,807 and Polydeukes a famous boxer,808 both being κατ’ ἐξοχήν the rider and boxer respectively.809 Scenes showing Athena setting garlands on victorious hoplite racers (?) appear on reliefs of the Dioskouroi from Tarentum.810 An archaic Argive inscription tells how a certain Aischylos won the stade-race four times and the hoplite-race three times at Argos, for which he dedicated a slab to the Dioskouroi, which depicted them in relief.811 An inscribed bronze quoit of the sixth century B. C. from Kephallenia(?), now in the British Museum, was dedicated to the two heroes by Exoïdas for a victory (apparently in the pentathlon).812 A bronze four-spoked wheel with a dedicatory inscription in their honor was found at Argos, probably the remnant of a monument erected for a chariot victory.813 Doubtless certain victor statues were assimilated to them, though we have no direct evidence of the fact. Ordinary dead men appeared in the guise of the Dioskouroi on sepulchral reliefs, just as we have seen that in statuary they were heroized into statues of Hermes. Thus a grave-relief in honor of Pamphilos and Alexandros in Verona shows on the projecting lower rim the two Dioskouroi, the figure to the right carrying a lance in the right hand and holding the bridle of a horse in the left, while the figure to the left holds a lance in the left hand and touches a horse’s head with the right.814 A votive relief in the British Museum represents two youths on horseback, who, despite the absence of the conical cap or pilleus, are probably the Dioskouroi.815 Their short hair is bound with diadems, which shows that the dead men may have been victors.

Sufficient examples of the process of assimilation have now been given to prove that it was not an uncommon device of the ancient sculptor and to show the difficulty of distinguishing between types of gods and athletes.

CHAPTER III.
VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED AT REST.

Plates 8–21 and Figures 9–31.

We have seen816 that it was a very old custom in Greece to dedicate statues of victors at the great national games to the god in whose honor the games were held. On many sites, especially at Olympia, tiny statuettes of clay or bronze of very primitive technique have been found in great numbers, which represent victors in many attitudes and ways—as horsemen, warriors, charioteers, etc. By the sixth century B. C. this ancient custom, as we learn from literary, epigraphical, and monumental sources, had developed, with the rapid progress attained by the sculptor’s art, into the regular practice of erecting life-size statues of athletes at the site of the games or in the native city of the victor. Especially at Olympia hundreds of such monuments were gradually collected, whose numbers and beauty must have exerted an overwhelming impression on the visitor to the Altis. We shall now begin the consideration of these monuments in detail.

The victor statues at Olympia, as elsewhere, may be conveniently divided into two main groups—those which represent the victor as standing or seated at rest, before or after the contest, and those which represent him in movement, i. e., in some contest schema.817 Examples of statues of athletes represented at rest are common in Greek athletic sculpture. We need only mention the so-called Oil-pourer of Munich (Pl. 11), who is represented as pouring oil over his body to make his limbs more supple for the coming wrestling bout; the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos (Pls. 17, 18, and Fig. 28), who is binding a victor fillet around his head after a successful encounter; the Apoxyomenos of the school of Lysippos (Pl. 29), representing an athlete scraping off the oil and dirt from his body after his victory. In this class of statues, which forms by far the greater number and shows the richer motives, the poses are quiet and reserved, the figures are compact, and the expression earnest and even thoughtful. As examples of statues represented in movement we need only recall such well-known works as the Diskobolos of Myron with its rhythmic lines and vivacious expression (Pls. 22, 23, and Figs. 34, 35); the bronze wrestlers of Naples, who are bending eagerly forward watching for a grip (Fig. 51); or the artistically intertwined pancratiast group of Florence (Pl. 25). Such monuments show us the varied poses, the choice of the critical moment, the truth to life, and the masterly rhythm attained by certain sculptors.

THE APOLLO TYPE.

In this chapter we shall confine ourselves almost entirely to the statues of victors represented at rest, discussing those represented in motion chiefly in the next. Most of the oldest statues at Olympia, dating from a time when there were few variations in the sculptural type, must have been represented at rest and in the schema of the so-called “Apollos.” Ever since the discovery of the Apollo of Thera in 1836 (Fig. 9), this genre of sculpture, the most characteristic of the early period, extending from the end of the seventh century B. C. to the time of the gable groups of Aegina, has been carefully studied. Though we now know that the type passed equally well for gods and mortals,818 we still keep the name, because of its familiarity and for the sake of having a common designation. That this type actually represented Olympic victors we have indubitable proof. Pausanias mentions the stone victor statue of the pancratiast Arrhachion, dating from the first half of the sixth century B. C., which stood in the agora of his native town Phigalia. He describes it as archaic in pose, with the feet close together and the arms hanging down the sides to the hips—the typical “Apollo” schema.819 Moreover, this very statue has survived to our time (Fig. 79).820 A study, therefore, of this type of statue will give us an idea of how some of the early statues at Olympia looked.

The “Apollo” statues,821 because of differences in facial expression, have been conveniently divided into two groups: those represented by the examples from Thera, Melos, Volomandra, Tenea, etc., sometimes named the “grinning” group, because the corners of the mouth are turned upwards into the so-called “archaic smile,” and those represented by the examples from Orchomenos, the precinct of Mount Ptoion, and elsewhere, named the “stolid” group, because in them the mouth forms a straight line.822 There are, however, essential differences

Fig. 9.—Statue of so-called Apollo of Thera. National Museum, Athens.

between the statues of each group. Thus, while some of both groups—e. g., the examples from Melos, Volomandra, and Orchomenos—have square shoulders, most of the others have sloping ones. The type gradually improved, as in each successive attempt the sculptor overcame difficulties, until finally revolutionary changes had taken place in the original form. This improvement is seen in the treatment of the hair, in the modeling of the face and body, and in the proportions of the statues. In a head of a statue from Mount Ptoion823—which is broken off at the neck—we seem to see the sculptor in wood making his first attempt in stone. In the archaic example from Thera824 (Fig. 9) the arms hang straight down close to the sides, as in the statue of Arrhachion, being detached only slightly from the body at the elbows, showing that the artist was afraid that they might break off. In other examples, as in the one from Orchomenos825 (Fig. 10) and one from Mount Ptoion826 (Fig. 11), the space between the arms and the body has become larger, while in the example from Melos827 (Fig. 12) only the hands are glued to the thighs. In the “Apollo” found at Tenea in 1846, and now in Munich828 (Pl. 8A), the arms are free, but the hands are held fast to the body by the retention of small marble bridges between them and the thighs. The final step has been taken in two examples from Mount Ptoion (Fig. 13), in which the arms from the shoulders down are free from the bodies.829 The bridges shown on the photograph in the figure to the left, which connect the forearms with the thighs, are of plaster, being added at the time the statue was set up in Athens.830 The figure to the right is smaller and clearly discloses Aeginetan influence. The audacity of the sculptor in entirely freeing the arms in both examples was rewarded by the arms being broken off. Similarly, in the Strangford Apollo of the British Museum (Fig. 14),831 the arms, which hung loose from the shoulders, are broken away. The larger statue from Mount Ptoion just mentioned also has the arms slightly crooked at the elbows, the forearms being extended at an oblique angle to the body. This represents an intermediate stage between the earlier “Apollos,” in which the arms adhered vertically to the sides of the body (as e. g., in the ones from Orchomenos, Thera, Melos, and Tenea), and the later ones, in which the arms were bent, the forearms being extended at right angles to the body (see Figs. 15 and 19).832

Fig. 10.—Statue of so-called Apollo of Orchomenos. National Museum, Athens.

Fig. 11.—Statue of so-called Apollo, from Mount Ptoion, Bœotia. National Museum, Athens.

Fig. 12.—Statue of so-called Apollo of Melos. National Museum, Athens. The example from Thera shows the archaic method of working in planes parallel to front and side and at right angles to one another, the corners of the square block being merely rounded off. The outlines of muscles are indicated by shallow grooves, which do not affect the flatness of the surface, and there is but little facial expression. We see the chest outlined in some examples from Aktion.833 In the Melian example the rectangular form is modified by cutting away the sides obliquely in arms and body; here there is more expression in the face, and the treatment of the hair and the proportions of the body are more developed. In the example from Orchomenos we see a great improvement in form. Here, as in later Bœotian examples, the original rectangular form of the example from Thera has become round, so that a horizontal cross-section through the waist is almost circular; the muscles of the abdomen are indicated and the skin is naturalistically shown in the back and at the elbows. In later Bœotian examples from Mount Ptoion, which are directly developed from the Orchomenos type,834 the form is lighter and the proportions more graceful. In one example (Fig. 13, left) even the veins are shown. In the example mentioned above as showing Aeginetan influence, and dated about 500 B. C.,835 the muscles are clearly marked, just as in the Strangford example and in the statues from the temple at Aegina, showing that foreign art had been introduced into Bœotia by that time. In the example from Volomandra in Attica,836 we see affinity to the examples from Thera and Melos, but Attic softness in the carving of the shoulders and in the proportions. In the Apollo of Tenea (Pl. 8A), “by far the most beautiful preserved statue of archaic sculpture,”837 a statue most carefully worked, we see a Peloponnesian example of the beginning of the sixth or even of the end of the seventh century B. C. Here the sculptor has shown great care in executing details and in the proportions. The eyes are not flat, but convex, and are wide open as in most of the earlier examples. The downward flow of the lines of the statue is striking, which is caused by the sloping shoulders and the elongated triangular-shaped abdomen. The slimness of the figure, with the contour of bones and muscles, is remarkable at so early a date. The fashioning of the knees is detailed. When we contrast this tall, slim, agile statue with the massively square-built Argive type found at Delphi (Pl. 8B), we find it reasonable to suspect that the Apollo of Tenea is an imported work, coming probably from the islands.838 The two statues of (?) Kleobis and Biton, discovered at Delphi in 1893 and 1894, and inscribed with the name of the sculptor Polymedes of Argos, have added much to our knowledge of early Argive sculpture (Pl. 8B, = Statue A).839 This Polymedes may have been one of the predecessors acknowledged by Eutelidas and Chrysothemis, among the first victor statuaries known to us by name, in the epigram preserved by Pausanias from the base of the monument of Damaretos and his son Theopompos at Olympia.840 The epigram, in any case, implies that the reputation of the Argive school in athletic sculpture was already well established by the end of the sixth century B. C. These massively built statues, dating from the beginning of the sixth century B. C., outline the muscles to a certain extent, even showing the line of the false ribs by incised lines. They display, however, but little detail in modeling, except in the knees, where the artist has tried to indicate the bones and muscles. The features of the large heads are without expression; the large eyes are flat and not convex, as in the example from Tenea, though the Argive artist was, perhaps, later than the Corinthian one, and a long distance removed from the later artist of the Ligourió bronze (Fig. 16), to be discussed later.

Fig. 13.—Statues of so-called Apollos from Mount Ptoion. National Museum, Athens.

PLATE 8A

A. Statue of so-called Apollo of Tenea. Glyptothek, Munich.

PLATE 8B

So-called Argive Apollo from Delphi. Museum of Delphi.

Fig. 14.—Statue known as the Strangford Apollo. British Museum, London. In all these “Apollos,” which have been found all over the Greek world from Naukratis in Egypt to Ambrakia, and along the Asian coast and on the Aegean Isles, the archaic artists have attempted, by their modeling of the muscles, especially of the chest and abdomen, to express trained strength. The heavy Argive examples, which may be said to be the prototypes of the Ligourió bronze and of the Doryphoros of Polykleitos (Pl. 4 and Fig. 48), are in strong contrast with the lighter type best represented by the example from Tenea. In the former, with their big heads and shoulders and their powerful arms and legs, we may see early boxers or pancratiasts; in the latter a long-limbed runner, with powerful chest, but slim and supple legs. In the Apollo of Tenea there is no flabbiness nor softness, and yet no emaciation. We see very similar runners on Panathenaic vases. Between the two extremes we have a long series, those from Mount Ptoion and elsewhere.

We do not doubt that the early statues of athletes at Olympia showed all the variations we have discussed in these “Apollos.” Of this type, then, were the statues at Olympia of the Spartan Eutelidas, the oldest mentioned by Pausanias,841 those of Phrikias of Pelinna in Thessaly,842 and of Phanas of Pellene in Achæa,843 to whom, later on in this chapter, we shall ascribe the two archaic marble helmeted heads found at Olympia (Fig. 30), the wooden statues of Praxidamas and Rhexibios,844 the statue of Kylon on the Akropolis of Athens,845 and that of Hetoimokles at Sparta.846 The statue of the famous wrestler Milo of Kroton by the sculptor Dameas, mentioned by Pausanias847 and described by Philostratos,848 must also have conformed with the “Apollo” type, though it showed a step in advance of the earlier ones by having its arms bent at the elbow, the forearms being extended horizontally outward. This statue needs a somewhat detailed account. The description of Philostratos seems to have been founded on the account in Pausanias849 of Milo’s prowess, which, in turn, may have arisen from the appearance of the statue and the cicerone’s description. Philostratos says that it stood on a quoit with the feet close together and with the left hand grasping a pomegranate, the fingers of the right hand being extended straight out, and a fillet encircling the brows.850 Philostratos has Apollonios explain the attributes of the statue on the ground that the people of Kroton represented their famous victor in the guise of a priest of Hera. This would explain the priestly fillet and the pomegranate sacred to the goddess, while the diskos, on which the statue rested, would be the shield on which Hera’s priest stood when praying. Scherer, however, rightly pointed out that the statue in the Altis was of Milo the victor and not the priest. He therefore explained the diskos851 merely as a round basis on which the statue, of the archaic “Apollo” type with its feet close together, stood, and the tainia as a victor band. He followed Philostratos in believing that the gesture of the right hand was one of adoration.852 He looked upon the object in the left hand not as a pomegranate at all, but as an alabastron, a toilet article adapted to a victor. He, therefore, believed that the Apollo of the elder Kanachos of Sikyon,853 the so-called Philesian Apollo,854 represented nude and holding a tiny fawn in the right hand and a bow in the left, would give a good idea of the pose of Milo’s statue.855 Hitzig and Bluemner believe this explanation of Scherer probable, although they rightly disagree with him in his exchanging the pomegranate for an alabastron, since Pausanias expressly mentions a pomegranate in the hand of another victor statue at Olympia.856 Pliny speaks of a male figure by Pythagoras, mala ferentem nudum,857 and Lucian says apples were prizes at Delphi,858 and we know that Milo was also a Pythian victor. The same commentators believe that Pausanias’ story of Milo bursting a cord drawn round his brow by swelling his veins arose from the victor band on the statue, and the story of the strength of his fingers from the position of the fingers on it.

We have seen in the “Apollo” statues a considerable variety of physical types. In the sixth century B. C. the artist was feeling his way and was hampered by local school tendencies. At first he knew only how to produce rigid statues in the conventional Egyptian attitude with the arms glued to the sides, the two halves of the body being symmetrical and the hips on the same level. He gradually improved on this Fig. 15.—Bronze Statuette of a Palæstra Victor, from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. model, making the position more elastic—as in the statue of Milo—rightly indicating bones and muscles and giving to the figure natural proportions. Bulle has shown on one plate859 three statuettes which illustrate the improvements reached in bronze in various parts of Greece by the end of the sixth century B. C. To the left is represented a victorious palæstra gymnast—as is indicated by the remnants of akontia in the hands—in the Akropolis Museum (Fig. 15);860 in the center is the Payne Knight statuette of the British Museum,861 carrying a fawn in the right hand, which is a copy of the Philesian Apollo which stood in the Didymaion near Miletos; to the right is Hermes with the petasos, short-girded tunic, and winged sandals, holding a ram in the left and probably a kerykeion in the right hand.862 The attributes of the three, then, attest respectively a victor, Apollo, and Hermes. In all three the arms are freed from the body, and the muscles of the breast, chest, and abdomen are indicated, though carelessly in the case of the victor. The proportions of the three vary greatly; the Attic victor has a large head, broad shoulders, powerful chest, long body, and short legs; the Apollo has long legs, shorter though slimmer body, and small head;863 the Hermes has a clearly outlined figure and shows the careful modeling so characteristic of the schools of Argos and Sikyon in the fifth century B. C. Bulle shows that the further development of the “Apollo” type was halted by the Argive school, which, while continuing the restful pose of these figures, counteracted their rigidity by inclining the head to the side and throwing the weight unevenly on the legs by lowering one hip and further advancing one foot. The central line was no longer vertical, but curved, and it was now possible to give greater detail to chest and abdomen. Polykleitos finally perfected this curve and threw back the left foot, resting the weight of the body on the right—from which time on we have the regular scheme of “free” and “rest” legs. Despite all these later improvements, Olympic victors continued to set up statues in the rest attitude of the “Apollo” type down perhaps into the third century B. C. Such dedications were the result both of school tendencies and economy, especially in the case of equestrian victors, who frequently were content to use such “actionless” statues in place of groups. We have only to mention the monuments of Timon of Elis, whose statue was the work of the Sikyonian Daidalos,864 and of Telemachos of Elis, whose statue was made by the otherwise unknown sculptor Philonides.865

Before systematically considering victor statues at Olympia and elsewhere with general motives, i. e., represented at rest, we shall now rapidly sketch the development of athletic sculpture in four great centres, Argos, Sikyon, Aegina, and Athens, even though some of the works mentioned were represented in motion. Sculptors of other schools known at Olympia will be treated incidentally in both this and the following chapters.

THE AFFILIATED SCHOOLS OF ARGOS AND SIKYON.

While in general it is unprofitable to discuss sculptors who have not surely left any example of their art behind, there are two early schools of Peloponnesian sculpture, those of Argos and Sikyon, which, though we may assign work to them only by conjecture, can not be summarily passed over, owing to their great importance in the history of Greek athletic art. The bronze used in their works was too valuable to escape the barbarians, and, furthermore, the monotony, which must have characterized early Peloponnesian sculpture, militated against these works being reproduced to any great degree by later copyists.

The School of Argos.

The Argive school was devoted mainly to athletic statuary. The greatest name in old Argive art is that of Ageladas or Hagelaïdas,866 the reputed teacher of Myron and Polykleitos, who lived from the third quarter of the sixth century into the second quarter of the fifth century B. C. While his connection with Myron and Polykleitos is scarcely to be doubted,867 his supposed connection with Pheidias has made the chronology of the life of this sculptor one of the difficult problems of the ancient history of art. A scholion on Aristophanes’ Ranae, 504, dates the statue known as the Herakles Alexikakos in the Attic deme Melite by Hagelaïdas after the pestilence in Athens of 431–430 B. C., and makes the Argive sculptor (Gelados = Hagelaïdas) the teacher of Pheidias. As his statue of the Olympic victor Anochos commemorated a victory won in Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.), this late date is manifestly impossible.868 Furthermore, a better tradition says that Hegias was the teacher of the Attic master.869 Furtwaengler’s attempt to show that these two divergent traditions were really in accord, by the assumption that Hegias was the pupil of Hagelaïdas and that his art came from the latter—thus explaining certain similarities in the work of Hagelaïdas and Pheidias,—does not solve the problem.870 As the scholion is based on a good tradition,871 the best solution of the difficulty is that of Kalkmann872 and others, that the Alexikakos was the work of a younger Hagelaïdas, the grandson of the famous master, by the intermediate Argeiadas. For a lower limit to the activity of Hagelaïdas there seems to be no good reason for distrusting the evidence that he made a bronze Zeus for the Messenians to be set up at Naupaktos, whither they moved in 455 B. C.873 This makes quite possible a period of collaboration of four or five years at least between Polykleitos and Hagelaïdas.

Pausanias mentions the monuments of three victors at Olympia by Hagelaïdas: the statues of the pancratiast Timasitheos of Delphi, who won two victories some time between Ols. (?) 65 and 67 (520 and 512 B. C.);874 of the runner Anochos of Tarentum, who won in the stade- and double-race in Ols. 65 and (?) 66 ( = 520 and 516 B. C.);875 and the chariot-group of Kleosthenes of Epidamnos, who won in Ol. 66 ( = 516 B. C.).876

None of the works of Hagelaïdas at Olympia or elsewhere is known. Messenian coins of the fourth century B. C. show the motives of two of his statues, that of his Zeus Ithomatas just mentioned as being made for the Messenians,877 and the beardless Zeus παῖς at Aigion.878 However, we infer the characteristics of his style from the bronze statuette in Berlin which was found at Ligourió near Epidauros (Fig. 16).879 This is undoubtedly an Argive work contemporary with the later period of Hagelaïdas. Furtwaengler and Frost are right in looking upon it as showing the prototype of the canon of Polykleitos. Though too small to count as a characteristic work of the early Argive school, it shows us that the style of that school was a short and stocky type, similar to Aeginetan works, only somewhat fleshier and heavier. The straight mouth and heavy chin, the treatment of the eyelids, and the clumsy limbs are all archaic features to be expected in the period preceding Polykleitos. The modeling is carefully executed, showing a knowledge of anatomy. If such excellence is found in a statuette, we can form some idea of the perfection of a statue by the master.

Fig. 16.—Bronze Statuette, from Ligourió. Museum of Berlin.

The bronze Apollo from Pompeii now in the Naples Museum,880 with marble replicas in Mantua and Paris,881 shows us how Hagelaïdas treated a god type, while the statue of an athlete by Stephanos will give us some idea of how he treated his victor statues, as it seems to have been modeled after an athlete statue of the early fifth century B. C., perhaps after a work by some pupil of the master. Stephanos belonged to the school of Pasiteles, a group of sculptors flourishing at Rome at the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Empire. They devoted themselves to the reproduction of early fifth-century statues. They were not ordinary copyists, for their works show individual mannerisms and a system of proportions foreign to the originals. Thus their statues have the square shoulders of the Argive school, but the slim bodies and slender legs of the period of Lysippos and his scholars. Apart from such mannerisms, then, in the male figure signed Stephanos, pupil of Pasiteles, in the Villa Albani in Rome (Pl. 9),882 which reappears in a very similar statue in groups combined with a female figure of related style,883 or with another male figure,884 we may see a copy of a bronze original of the Argive school before Polykleitos. The standing motive and the body forms are the same in both the Mantuan Apollo and the Stephanos figure, although the former is more developed and the head type is different in both; this shows that the two, while displaying the same basic ideal, were not works of the same master.885 As the statue by Stephanos has a fillet around the hair, it may well represent an ideal athlete, who in the original held an aryballos or similar palæstra attribute in the raised left hand. It is interesting to compare the copies of this group with those of another representing mother and son, the work of Menelaos, the pupil of Stephanos, which, though transferred from Greek to Roman taste in respect of drapery and forms, is merely a variation of the same theme without any heroic traits.886

PLATE 9

Statue of an Athlete, by Stephanos. Villa Albani, Rome.

The influence of Hagelaïdas can be easily traced in other schools of art, especially in the Attic School and in the sculptures of the temple of Zeus at Olympia, whether these latter be Peloponnesian in origin or not. It will be convenient in this connection to discuss briefly the style of these important sculptures, which we have already mentioned several times. The statement of Pausanias,887 that the sculptors of the East and West Gables were Paionios of Mende in Thrace and Alkamenes respectively—the latter being known as the pupil of Pheidias888—was not doubted until the discovery of the Olympia sculptures.889 Then doubts arose both on chronological and stylistic grounds, and now only a few archæologists would maintain that either artist had anything to do with these groups. The style of the two gables (as well as that of the metopes) is so similar that many have assigned them to one and the same artist.890 They have been referred to many schools from Ionia to Sicily, even including a local Elean one. Thus Brunn assigned them to a North Greek-Thracian school; Flasch891 and (more recently) Joubin892 to the Attic; Kekulé893 and Friedrichs-Wolters894 to a West Greek (Sicilian) one, because of their similarity to the metopes of temple E at Selinos; Furtwaengler895 to an Ionic one (Parian masters). Most scholars, however, including K. Lange,896 Treu,897 Studniczka,898 Collignon,899 and Overbeck,900 have referred them to Peloponnesian sculptors.901

To return to the art of Hagelaïdas: if we assume that the Ligourió bronze comes from the school of that Argive master certain conclusions must be drawn. The figure is archaic, but does not have the archaic smile. In Athens at the end of the archaic period there was a reaction against this smile, and doubtless the Athenian artists were strongly influenced by Argive models. Thus an archaic bronze head of a youth, found on the Akropolis and dating from about 480 B. C., shows a serious mouth, a strong chin, heavy upper eyelids, and finely worked hair, characteristics which we found in the Ligourió statuette. These traits show that the statuette and the head were the forerunners of the Apollo of the West Gable at Olympia. So finished a bronze as this one from the Akropolis, at the beginning of the fifth century B. C., has inclined Richardson to look upon it as “not improbably a work of Hagelaïdas,”902 though here again Furtwaengler would ascribe it to Hegias.903 The Parian marble statue of an ephebe found on the Akropolis (Fig. 17)904—one of the most beautiful recovered during the excavations Fig. 17.—Statue of an Ephebe, from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. there—shows the same Argive influence. This statue is chronologically the first masterpiece, thus far recovered, which marks the break with archaism by having its head turned slightly to one side.905 It has the same pose as the Athlete by Stephanos and probably represents a palæstra victor. The head, with its heavy chin, and the muscular body strikingly resemble the Harmodios (Fig. 32), which has led Furtwaengler and others to ascribe it to Kritios or his school.906 At the same time a similarity is seen between this head and that of the Apollo of the West Gable at Olympia, and so with Bulle and others we ascribe it to the Argive school.

One of the female statues (Korai) found on the Akropolis, and approximately of the same date as the ephebe, viz, the fragmentary one consisting of head and bust and known popularly as la petite boudeuse, shows the same revolt against Ionism.907 In many respects this statue is very different from most of the other Akropolis Korai. The eyes are not yet set back naturally, but the appearance of depth is attained by thickening the eyelids, quite in contrast with the modeling of the eyeball in most of the other statues. The corners of the mouth turn down, which gives it the appearance of pouting. This statue is also our first example in sculpture of the so-called Greek profile—the nose continuing the line of the forehead. The same Argive influence in Athenian art is also discernible in the Parian marble head of an athlete with traces of yellow in the hair (Fig. 18),908 which may be dated a little later than the Akropolis ephebe—about 470 B. C. Because of its resemblance to the Fig. 18.—Head of an Ephebe, from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens. Apollo of Olympia, its Attic-Peloponnesian origin seems clear.909 Its expression is comparable with that of the Kore just discussed—as it has the same mouth, eyes, and nose, both monuments showing the reaction against the archaic smile, which characterized the Ionian period of Attic art. This same Ionic reaction also may be seen in the bronze statuette of a diskobolos in the Metropolitan Museum (Fig. 46),910 which resembles in style that of the Tyrannicides, but shows also Argive traits. These Argive traits, small head and slender limbs, are easily seen by comparing this statuette with the Ligourió bronze.

We have already mentioned the monumental group of the hoplite victor Damaretos and of the pentathlete Theopompos, which was made about 500 B. C. by the Argive sculptors Chrysothemis and Eutelidas.911 These artists were known to later antiquity only by the epigram inscribed on the base of this monument at Olympia, and the probable dates of the two victories of Theopompos, Ols. (?) 69 and 70 ( = 504 and 500 B. C.), show that they were contemporaries of Hagelaïdas, and not, as formerly was believed, the forerunners of his school.912

Polykleitos, a Sikyonian by birth,913 migrated early to Argos to become the pupil of Hagelaïdas, and became the great master of the Argive school in the next generation after him. We have four statues by him at Olympia. His earliest work probably was the statue of the boxer Kyniskos of Mantinea, who won in Ol. (?) 80 ( = 460 B. C.); he made the statues of the Elean pentathlete Pythokles and of the Epidamnian boxer Aristion, both of whom won their victories in Ol. 82 ( = 452 B. C.); and lastly he made the statue of the boy boxer Thersilochos from Kerkyra, who won in Ol. (?) 87 ( = 432 B. C.)914 The footprints on the three recovered bases of the statues of the first three show that all were represented at rest. Of Patrokles, the brother of Polykleitos, Pausanias mentions no statues at Olympia, though Pliny says that he made athlete statues.915 Of Naukydes,916 the nephew or brother of Polykleitos, we have record of three athlete statues at Olympia: those of the wrestlers Cheimon of Argos, who won in Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.), and Baukis of Trœzen, who won some time between Ols. (?) 85 and 90 ( = 440 and 420 B. C.); also one of the boxer Eukles of Rhodes, who won some time between Ols. 90 and 93 ( = 420 and 408 B. C.).917 A contemporary of Naukydes was the sculptor Phradmon, who, according to Pliny, was a contemporary of Polykleitos;918 he made the statue of the boy wrestler Amertas of Elis, who won a victory some time between Ols. 84 and 90 ( = 444 and 420 B. C.).919 In the next century, Polykleitos Minor, the grandson or grandnephew of the great Polykleitos, and the pupil of Naukydes,920 had three statues at Olympia: those of the boy boxer Antipatros of Miletos, whose victory is given by Africanus as Ol. 98 ( = 388 B. C.); of the two boy wrestlers Agenor of Thebes, who won some time between Ols. 93 and 103 ( = 408 and 368 B. C.), and Xenokles of Mainalos, who won some time between Ols. 94 and 100 ( = 404 and 380 B. C.).921 The inscribed base of the latter has been recovered and the footprints show that the statue was represented at rest, the body resting equally on both feet, the left slightly advanced. Andreas, a second-century B. C. Argive sculptor, made a statue at Olympia of the boy wrestler Lysippos of Elis, who won some time between Ols. 149 and 157 ( = 184 and 152 B. C.).922

The School of Sikyon.

The Sikyonian school of bronze founders was closely affiliated with the one at Argos. Early in the archaic period the brothers Dipoinos and Skyllis, sons or pupils of the mythical Daidalos of Crete, migrated to Sikyon.923 A generation later another Cretan sculptor, Aristokles, founded there an artist family which lasted through seven or eight generations.924 His two grandsons Aristokles and Kanachos are known to have collaborated with Hagelaïdas on a group of three Muses.925 Many have seen in the small bronze found in the sea off Piombino, Tuscany, and now in the Louvre (Fig. 19),926 a copy of the Apollo Philesios, the best-known work of Kanachos. This gem of the bronze art, in true archaic style, may very well represent the Apollo, which, according to the description of Pliny927 and the evidence of Milesian copper coins of all periods,928 had as attributes a fawn in the outstretched right hand and a bow in the left. However, Overbeck,929 followed by von Mach, believes that it is not a copy of Kanachos’ Apollo, but merely Fig. 19.—Bronze Statuette of Apollo, found in the Sea off Piombino. Louvre, Paris. represents a boy assisting at a sacrifice, and that the original held a cup in the left hand and a saucer in the right. In any case the statuette is too inaccurate to give us more than the pose of the Apollo of Kanachos, even if it were proved to be a copy. It may be merely a reproduction of the mythological type of Apollo, which the artist himself followed, and so we can not say definitely to what school it belongs. The Payne Knight bronze in the British Museum,930 which holds a tiny fawn in the right hand, the bow originally in the left hand being lost, has better pretensions, perhaps, to be a copy of the Apollo. Another archaic half life-size bronze, formerly in the Palazzo Sciarra,931 is of a similar type, though its style is different. Another bronze statuette from Naxos, now in Berlin,932 shows the same position of the hands, but has an aryballos or pomegranate in the right hand. We have already classed it as an example of the conversion of an original god-type into that of a victor. We might also mention the mutilated torso found by Holleaux at the sanctuary of Apollo Ptoios in Bœotia (Fig. 12, right), which has a similar pose to that of the statuette from Piombino, and whose hair technique shows that it is an imitation of a bronze work.933 However, as we shall see later, it may be rather representative of the Aeginetan school of sculptors. All these works may tell us of the general character of the Apollo, but little of its style.934

No athlete statue by Aristokles or his brother Kanachos is known to have stood at Olympia. That the latter actually made victor statues, however, is proved by Pliny’s statement (l. c.) that he made celetizontas pueros. Of the later Sikyonian school we have twenty-seven statues of victors made by eleven different sculptors, whose dates range from near the end of the fourth down into the third century B. C., of whom we shall give a chronological list. Alypos, the pupil of the Argive Naukydes, had four statues at Olympia: those of the wrestler Symmachos of Elis, of the boy boxer Neolaïdas of Pheneus, of the boy wrestler Archedamos of Elis, and of the boy and man wrestler Euthymenes of Mainalos, all of whom must have won their victories some time between Ols. 94 and 104 ( = 404 and 364 B. C.).935 Kanachos, the Younger, made one statue, that of the boy boxer Bykelos of Sikyon, who won some time between Ols. 92 and 105 ( = 412 and 360 B. C.).936 Olympos made the statue of the pancratiast Xenophon of Aigion, who won some time between Ols. 95 and 105 ( = 400 and 360 B. C.).937 The sculptor Daidalos, the son and pupil of Patrokles, and probably the nephew of Polykleitos, made four monuments for four victors: the equestrian group of the Elean charioteer Timon and his son Aigyptos, a victor in horse-racing, and statues of the Elean wrestler Aristodemos and the stade-runner Eupolemos. Their victories fell between Ols. 96 and 103 ( = 396 and 368 B. C.).938 Damokritos made the statue of the Elean boy boxer Hippos, who won between Ols. 96 and 107 ( = 396 and 352 B. C.).939 Kleon had five statues credited to him, all but one being of boy victors: those of the boy runner Deinolochos of Elis, the pentathlete Hysmon of Elis, the two boy boxers Kritodamos, and of Alketos of Kleitor, and of the boy runner Lykinos of Heraia. Their victories fell between Ols. 94 and 103 ( = 404 and 368 B. C.).940 The great Lysippos had the same number of victor statues as Kleon, and also two honor statues at Olympia: those of the equestrian victor Troilos of Elis, of the Akarnanian pancratiast Philandridas, of the wrestler Cheilon of Patrai, of the pancratiast Polydamas of Skotoussa, and of the hoplite-runner Kallikrates. Their victories occurred between Ols. 102 and 115 ( = 372 and 320 B. C.).941 The son of Lysippos, Daïppos, made two statues, one for the Elean boy boxer Kallon and the other for the Elean Nikandros, who won the double foot-race. Their victories fell within the activity of the sculptor, Ols. 115 and 125 ( = 320 and 280 B. C.).942 Daitondas made the statue of the Elean boy boxer Theotimos, who won his victory some time between Ols. 116 and 120 ( = 316 and 300 B. C.).943 Eutychides, the most famous pupil of Lysippos, famed alike as a bronze founder, statuary, and painter, carved the statue of the boy runner Timosthenes of Elis, who won some time between Ols. 115 and 125 ( = 320 and 280 B. C.).944 Pliny gives Ol. 121 ( = 296 B. C.) as the floruit of this sculptor, which was probably the date of the erection of his most famous work, the colossal bronze Tyche, as tutelary deity of the city of Antioch on the Orontes, which was founded by Seleukos I in Ol. 119.3 ( = 302 B. C.).945 This shows that Eutychides was already by that date a famed sculptor, having begun his career by 330–320 B. C. Kantharos, the pupil of Eutychides, made the statues of the two boy wrestlers Kratinos of Aigira and Alexinikos of Elis, who won their victories some time between Ols. 120 and 130 ( = 300 and 260 B. C.).946

ÆGINETAN SCULPTORS.

We have but little left of the prominent early Aeginetan school of bronze sculptors. Of Kallon, the earliest historical sculptor of the school, the reputed pupil of Tektaios and Angelion (who in turn were the pupils of Dipoinos and Skyllis), we have only literary evidence. He was typical of archaic severity just prior to the era of transition, and therefore should be compared with Hegias of Athens and Kanachos of Sikyon. For Onatas, the most famous of the Aeginetan sculptors, whose floruit was in the first half of the fifth century B. C., we have evidence of many monuments at Olympia. Besides the colossal Herakles dedicated by the Thasians,947 a Hermes dedicated by the people of Pheneus,948 and a large group of nine statues of Greek heroes standing on a curved base faced by a statue of Nestor on another, the group being dedicated by the Achaians,949 he made a chariot and charioteer to commemorate the victory of Hiero of Syracuse at Olympia in 468 B. C., for which monument Kalamis furnished two horses.950 Glaukias made a bronze chariot for Hiero’s brother Gelo of Gela, who later became tyrant of Syracuse, and who won a chariot victory in Ol. 73 ( = 488 B. C.).951 This sculptor also excelled in fashioning statues of boxers and pancratiasts, making the monuments of the boxers Philon of Kerkyra and Glaukos of Karystos, and that of the renowned boxer and pancratiast Theagenes of Thasos.952 The statue of Glaukos was represented in the schema of one “sparring” (σκιαμαχῶν),953 and so was in movement and not at rest. We have athlete statues by three other Aeginetan sculptors at Olympia. Thus Ptolichos, the pupil of the Sikyonian Aristokles, set up statues of the Aeginetan boy wrestler Theognetos, who won in Ol. 76 ( = 476 B. C.), and of the boy boxer Epikradios of Mantinea, who won between Ols. (?) 72 and 74 ( = 492 and 484 B. C.);954 Serambos made the statue of the boy boxer Agiadas of Elis, who won between Ols. (?) 72 and 74;955 Philotimos made the horse for the horse-racing victory of Xenombrotos of Kos, who won in Ol. (?) 83 ( = 448 B. C.).956 All of these sculptors appear to have used bronze exclusively, and their art, though independent, showed a bias toward Peloponnesian work. There are few examples left of this art. The bronze head of a bearded warrior or hoplite victor found on the Akropolis, if we are justified in classing it as Aeginetan and not Attic, shows the excellence which we associate with this school.957 The delicate execution of its hair and beard, as well as the strength and precision of this head, makes it not unworthy of being ascribed to one of the best artists of the school, perhaps to Onatas himself. The beardless bronze head discovered in 1756 in the villa of the Pisos in Herculaneum, now in Naples, has also been assigned to Onatas, as its features are similar to those of the one under discussion.958 The Tux bronze statuette of a hoplitodrome, to be discussed in Ch. IV (Fig. 42), has also been assigned to an Aeginetan master.959 The marble statue known as the Strangford Apollo in the British Museum, already mentioned (Fig. 14),960 may show the characteristics of the early school in marble, though it is impossible to say whether it is a copy of a bronze original or a minor work in stone under Aeginetan influence. The smaller “Apollo” from Mount Ptoion, already discussed (Fig. 13, right),961 appears to show in exaggerated form the same Aeginetan traits. However, we get out best notion of Aeginetan work in marble from the gable statues in the Munich Museum, representing Homeric warriors fighting, which adorned the temple of Aphaia in the northeastern corner of the island. Their importance in this connection calls for a brief account of them.

Fig. 20.—Figure, from the East Pediment of the Temple on Aegina. Glyptothek, Munich.

Since the discovery of these groups by an international party of Englishmen and Germans in 1811, and their restoration soon after their arrival in Munich by the sculptor Thorwaldsen, many new fragments have been discovered by Furtwaengler during his excavations of the temple site in 1901, and have been incorporated into the existing figures in the Glyptothek. His reconstruction, though not definitive, is more in accord with artistic probability than any that preceded.962 As we should expect from the athletic tradition of the Aeginetan school of sculpture just outlined, these sculptures represent finely trained nude athletes, whose modeling shows great observation of nature, especially in the treatment of muscles and veins. In fact it has been truly said that anatomical knowledge was never expressed again in Greek art so simply and naturally. The figures, without any excess of flesh, are slightly under life-size, short and stocky—shoulders square, but the waists slender and the legs long in proportion to the bodies—and withal are very compact and full of strength. The figures of the two pediments differ slightly, the eastern being more developed than the western. Brunn, long ago, arguing from the stele of Aristion, which then was the best example extant of archaic Attic art, showed how that art was characterized by grace and dignity of effect, while Aeginetan art was characterized by a finer study of nature. This generalization is no longer a matter of inference, but of knowledge.

Fig. 21.—Two Figures, from the West Pediment of the Temple on Aegina. Glyptothek, Munich.

These groups represent the highest period of Aeginetan art. They have been dated anywhere from the end of the sixth century B. C. down to a period after the battle of Salamis.963 Probably a date just after that battle is correct, as Aeginetans won prizes of valor there.964 Any attempt to assign them to this or that artist is merely conjectural. The general similarity in subject to that of the Delphi group by Onatas, which represented the death in battle of Opis, the king of the barbarian Iapygians, at the hands of the Tarentines,965 and the group at Olympia already mentioned as representing a Trojan subject, led earlier scholars to assign the slightly more advanced statues of the East Pediment to Onatas and the more archaic ones of the West Pediment to Kallon. But we know both these sculptors only as bronze workers. The violent action of some of the figures reminds us at once of Pausanias’ description of the statue of the boxer Glaukos by the sculptor Glaukias, which we have already mentioned. But on the whole, though they are violent, the slight proportions of these athletic figures do not fit the appearance of boxers and pancratiasts, which, as we have seen, formed the staple of Aeginetan sculptors, but rather those of runners. We see a good wrestler in the Snatcher of the East Gable (Fig. 20),966 and the corresponding figure in the right half of the same gable.967 The Champion of the West gable (Fig. 21, left),968 of the finest Parian marble, represented as lunging forward, pressing on the enemy armed with helm, spear, and shield, would pass as a good example of a hoplitodrome, far freer and more individual than the warrior from Dodona.

ATTIC SCULPTORS.

Owing to the Persian sack of the Athenian Akropolis in 480 and 479 B. C., and the subsequent burial of works of art there and their rediscovery by the excavations of 1885–1889, we know more of archaic Attic sculpture (600–480 B. C.) than of any other early school.969 We have already mentioned certain Attic works which show the influence of the severer Argive school—la petite boudeuse, the head of the yellow-haired ephebe (Fig. 18), the Akropolis athlete statue (Fig. 17), etc.—which was prominent at the beginning of the fifth century B. C., works which can be attributed to Hegias, Kritios, and their associates. They illustrate the reaction against Ionic taste, an influence which came from Asia Minor and the islands, especially after the fall of the Lydian Empire of Crœsus, and which for a time submerged native Attic art. This Ionic art was characterized by great technical ability, and by rich draperies and decorative effect. The archaic smile was its special feature. Ionism is best represented by some of the Akropolis Korai.970 In athletic art we see Ionism at its flood tide in the Rampin head found in Athens in 1877, now in the Louvre, which corresponds in style with some of the earlier female statues of the Akropolis.971 This head has a more elaborate frisure than any of the female heads and, in fact, the elaborate treatment of the hair of the crown and forehead is more suitable to a female than a male statue. The beard is carefully plaited, while traces of red seem to show that the mustache was painted on. Similar traces of color appear on the beard and hair. The smiling mouth, high ears, and almond eyes recall many archaic works, but especially the Apollo of Tenea (Pl. 8A). The garland of oak leaves above the frisure of the forehead may suggest a victor,972 or perhaps a priest or assistant on some religious embassy.973 The turning of the neck—as in the ephebe statue of the Akropolis (Fig. 17)—shows a break at this early time with archaism. Another work illustrating Ionism is the fragment of a grave-stele found near the Dipylon gate in 1873 and dating from the second half of the sixth century B. C.974 It represents the head of an athlete in profile, the youth holding a diskos in his left hand, so placed that his head is projected upon it in relief as on a nimbus. The top of the head is broken off, but we see the usual archaic features in the face—the almond-shaped eye (in profile), big nose with knob-like nostrils, thick lips with the archaic smile, retreating chin and forehead, and high ear with a huge lobe. The neck and chin, however, are full of grace and strength, as is also the slender thumb outlined against the diskos. As the stele broadens downward,975 the figure appears to have been represented with the feet apart, and so may have represented a palæstra diskobolos on parade,976 and is, therefore, our earliest representation of such an athlete. A similar dress-parade pose is seen on the stele of Aristion in the National Museum at Athens, the work of the sculptor Aristokles, which represents a warrior with a spear in the left hand.977 Another torso of an ephebe in the Akropolis Museum represents Ionic work from Paros.978 Another head, the so-called Rayet head in the Jakobsen collection in Copenhagen, one of the most remarkable specimens of Greek archaic art979 (Fig. 22), somewhat later in date than the Rampin head, represents quite a different tendency in Attic art. While the Rampin head represents Ionic influence, this head represents pure Attic work untrammeled by foreign influence, a true development of the old Attic sculpture in poros, Fig. 22.—Archaic Marble Head of a Youth. Jakobsen Collection, Ny-Carlsberg Museum, Copenhagen. the best examples of which are to be found in the decorative sculptures of the Old Temple of Athena on the Akropolis, enlarged by the Peisistratidai. Comparing it with the head of the Athena of the gable of that temple,980 we see great similarity in the simple execution and reserve in the treatment of details—characteristics of pure Attic sculpture—especially in the deep lines on either side of the mouth in the Jakobsen head. The hair is pictorially treated like a cap, traces of red appearing on it as well as on the lips and eyes. The Copenhagen and Rampin heads, together with the famous portrait head in the old Sabouroff collection,981 and the head of a woman in the Louvre,982 form our best examples of old Attic art outside of the museums of Athens.983 The swollen ears of the Jakobsen head show that it is from the funerary statue of a victor, perhaps a boxer. Furtwaengler wrongly classed it as a portrait head.984 A much discussed Attic work is the archaic relief of a charioteer in the Akropolis Museum (Fig. 63).985 This was formerly thought (e. g., by Schrader) to be a block from the later Ionic frieze of the old Hekatompedon which many believe survived the Persian sack, but it is more likely a part of a frieze belonging to a small shrine or altar. It represents a draped person entering a two-horse chariot with the left foot, the hands outstretched to hold the reins, the head and body leaning forward. Because of the krobylos treatment of the hair, fitted for both sexes, and the long flowing robe, the sex has been needlessly doubted, some calling it an Apollo or a mortal charioteer, others an Athena or a Nike, even though the line of the breast, so far as it is visible, shows no fullness, and the long chiton is common in representations of male charioteers.986 However, for the appreciation of the relief it is of no consequence whether the figure is male or female. It may be merely a dedicatory offering of a Panathenaic victor in chariot racing, very possibly assimilated to the type of Apollo,987 as the god often appears in vase-paintings of the same period in similar costume mounting a chariot.988 We shall discuss its interpretation more fully later on.989 While Ionism was prone to represent richly draped figures which concealed the form of the body, we see in this relief, with its fine modeling, a suggestion of the form beneath the folds of the garment, and so, perhaps, only another example of an Attic master rebelling against alien influence.990

At Olympia we have no names of Athenian sculptors prior to the Persian war period. Kalamis helped Onatas with the monument of King Hiero already mentioned. Mikon made a statue of a pancratiast, Kallias of Athens, who won in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.).991 The great Myron, of whom we shall speak at length in the next chapter, made five statues of victors, which were erected between Ols. 77 and 84 ( = 472 and 444 B. C.).992 Only four later Athenian artists are mentioned: Silanion of the fourth century, who made statues for three victors, whose victories ranged from Ols. 102 to 114 ( = 372 to 324 B. C.);993 Polykles the Elder, who made the statue of the boy pancratiast Amyntas of Eresos, who won in Ol. (?) 146 ( = 196 B. C.);994 Timarchides and Timokles, the sons of Polykles, who in common made the statue of the boxer Agesarchos of Tritaia in Achaia, who won in Ol. (?) 143 ( = 208 B. C.)995

GENERAL MOTIVES OF STATUES AT REST.

The victor represented as standing at rest was often characterized by general motives, such as praying, anointing or scraping himself, offering libations, and the like. We shall now consider such motives in detail.

Adoration and Prayer.

Prayer was a common motive represented in votive monuments. Pliny mentions many such works by Greek sculptors.996 The custom of raising the arms in prayer is found all through Greek literature, from Homer down.997 Pausanias says that the people of Akragas made an offering in the form of bronze statues of boys placed on the walls of the Altis, προτείνοντάς τε τὰς δεξιὰς καὶ εἰκασμένους εὐχομένοις τῷ θεῷ, these statues being the work of Kalamis.998 In the Athenian Asklepieion there were many τύποι καταμακτοὶ πρὸς πινακίῳ, among which were representations of men and women in the praying attitude.999 The motive was used at Olympia in victor statues, representing the victor as raising the hand in prayer to invoke victory.1000 The statue of the wrestler Milo, already discussed at length, shows that this motive was employed at Olympia in the improved “Apollo” type in the second half of the sixth century B. C.1001 From the next century we may cite the statue of the Spartan chariot victor Anaxandros, which was represented as “praying to the god,”1002 and the statues of the Rhodian boxers Diagoras and Akousilaos, as we learn from a scholion on Pindar,1003 which is based on a fragment of Aristotle1004 and on one of Apollas.1005 Of the statue of Diagoras it says: τὴν δεξιὰν ἀνατείνων χεῖρα, τὴν δὲ ἀριστερὰν εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἐπικλίνων; of that of Akousilaos: τῇ μὲν ἀριστερᾷ ἱμάντα ἔχων πυκτινόν, τὴν δὲ δεξιὰν ὡς πρὸς προσευχὴν ἀνατείνων.1006 The bronze statue from Athens, now in the Antiquarium, Berlin,1007 which represents a nude boy with the right hand raised as if in prayer and the left lowered and holding a leaping-weight—therefore a pentathlete—seems to correspond with this description of the statue of Akousilaos. The same motive may have been used in the statue of the chariot victress Kyniska, a princess of Sparta, whose statue along with that of her charioteer and the chariot was the work of the sculptor Apellas.1008 This is the interpretation of Furtwaengler,1009 based on a passage in Pliny, which mentions statues of adornantes se feminas1010 by Apellas, which he reads adorantes feminas. However, adornantes may be right, for in another passage, Pliny speaks of Praxiteles’ statue of a ψελιουμένη, i. e., of a woman clasping a bracelet on her arm.1011 Two notable bronze statues will illustrate this motive of Olympic victor statues. The statue found in 1502 at Zellfeld in Carinthia, now in Vienna,1012 has been interpreted both as a Hermes Logios and a votive statue in the attitude of prayer,1013 which latter interpretation the inscription on the leg, giving a list of dedications,1014 favors. However, Furtwaengler believes it a free imitation of an Argive victor statue, though not in the Polykleitan style. Because of its similarity to the Idolino (Pl. 14), he has ascribed its original to the sculptor Patrokles. From technical considerations he believes it is not a Greek original dedicated by Romans of a later period, but a Roman work (after Patrokles) of the period of the inscription.1015 The bronze statue of the Praying Boy in Berlin1016 (Pl. 10) is one of our most beautiful Greek bronzes and comes from the circle of Lysippos.1017 We now know that the uplifted arms of this statue, in which most scholars saw the Greek attitude of prayer, are restorations which were probably made in the time of Louis XIV, when the statue was in France. Of the original motive we only can say that the action of the shoulders shows that both arms were raised, but we do not know how far, or the position of the hands. Monumental evidence shows that the hands in prayer should have the palms turned away from the face instead of upwards, as in the present statue, since the Greek position was the outgrowth of an old apotropaic gesture, i. e., one directed against an evil spirit. Mau’s idea1018 that the figure represented a player catching a ball is certainly inconsistent with the calm attitude of the statue. Furtwaengler rejected it,1019 and he has restored the arms and hands on the basis of a Berlin gem1020 and an ex voto relief found by the French excavators at Nemea in 1884.1021 On this relief a youth crowned with a woolen fillet is represented. On both relief and gem the figures are in the same attitude, the arms raised over the head manibus supinis, which confirms the restoration of the Berlin statue. Many other monuments give the more usual attitude of prayer, not as in the relief and gem discussed, but with only one hand extended as high as the breast. Older writers thought that such monuments did not represent the gesture of adoration, but one of adlocutio,1022 an opinion disproved by Pausanias’ statement about the bronze statues of the Akragantines at Olympia, already mentioned. We may cite a relief from Kleitor, now in Berlin,1023 and a fine one of the fourth century B. C. from Lamia (?),1024 as well as a red-figured Etruscan stamnos in Vienna representing, probably, Ajax praying before committing suicide.1025 We shall mention also two little statuettes in New York which represent youths in the praying attitude.1026 The first, dating from the second half of the fifth century B. C., and showing Polykleitan influence, represents a nude youth standing erect with the forearms bent, showing that the two hands were extended in prayer. The second, which dates from the first half of the fifth century B. C. (after the date of the Myronian Diskobolos), represents a nude youth standing with the right hand raised to the lips in an attitude usual in saluting a divinity, while the left is by the side, with the palm to the front.

PLATE 10

Bronze Statue of the Praying Boy. Museum of Berlin.

Anointing.

Various familiar motives from the everyday life of the gymnasium and palæstra were reproduced in the statues of athletes. One of the commonest methods was to represent the victor anointing his body with oil. The use of oil was indispensable in all athletic exercises, in order to make the body and limbs more supple, and especially in wrestling and the pankration, to make it difficult for one’s antagonist to get a grip.1027 Pliny mentions a painting by Theoros, representing a man se inunguentem,1028 which appears to have been a votive portrait of an athlete. The motive was common in vase-paintings and statuary. Several red-figured vases of the severe style, antedating the statues to be considered, show from realistic representations of palæstra scenes that it was customary for athletes to hold a round aryballos high in the right hand and pour oil from it into the left, which was placed across the body horizontally.1029 The same motive appears with variations in statues.1030 Thus the statue of an ephebe in Petworth House, Sussex, England,1031 a statue, as Furtwaengler says, to be praised more for its excellent preservation than for its workmanship, represents an athlete, who holds a globular aryballos in his right hand raised over the shoulder, while the left arm is held across the abdomen. On the nearby tree-trunk are small cylindrical objects which seem to be boxing pads. This statue, and especially its head, have been regarded by Michaelis and Furtwaengler as unmistakably Polykleitan in style.1032 Several other copies of original statues representing athletes pouring oil have been wrongly classed as replicas of one original,1033 though they merely have essential features alike, due chiefly to the subject. First is the famous statue in the Glyptothek known as the Oelgiesser (Oil-pourer), a Roman copy of an Attic bronze of about the middle of the fifth century B. C. (Pl. 11).1034 Though the right arm and left hand are lost, it is clear that the athlete held in his raised right hand an oil flask, as in the Petworth statue.1035 Notwithstanding that the head resembles the Praxitelian Hermes,1036 this does not show that the statue is of fourth-century origin, for its original is older; it merely shows that the art of Praxiteles was deeply rooted in that of his fifth-century Fig. 23.—Head of so-called Oil-pourer. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. predecessors. Because of its Attic affiliations, Klein tried to identify it with the Ἐγκρινόμενος of Alkamenes mentioned by Pliny,1037 by amending that title to Ἐγχριόμενος, the “Anointer.” Brunn, however, rightly saw the analogy of the body forms to Myron’s Marsyas,1038 and Furtwaengler and Bulle have ascribed it to Lykios, the son and pupil of that master, who worked about 440 B. C., the approximate date of the original of the statue. A fragmentary head in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts (Fig. 23),1039 formerly in private possession in England, is a copy of the same original as the Munich statue. Its special interest is that it is not an exact copy of the original, as the Munich statue is, but a freer one, showing a fuller mouth, fleshier cheeks, and deeper-set eyes. While the Munich statue is the dry work of a Roman copyist of Augustus’ time, this head is by a far abler Greek copyist of the second century B. C. A torso in the Albertinum in Dresden, without a head,1040 is similar to the Munich statue, but hardly a replica. It probably goes back to an original by an Attic master of the end of the fifth or beginning of the fourth century B. C. Other under life-size statues related to this torso show the same motive.1041 A black-marble statue found at Porto d’Anzio in 1758, and now in the Glyptothek,1042 has the Polykleitan standing motive. The left arm, which is stretched out, holds an oil flask in the hand, while the right arm is lowered. The band, which the position of the fingers shows that the right hand probably held, indicates it is the statue of a victor. A bronze statuette from South Italy, now in the British Museum,1043 represents a nude youth holding an alabastron in his right hand, while the left has the palm open to receive the oil. The hair fashion (κρωβύλος) seems to point to an Attic sculptor of about 470 B. C.1044 The same motive is found on terra-cotta statuettes from Myrina,1045 on reliefs,1046 and on gems.1047

PLATE 11

Statue of the so-called Oil-pourer. Glyptothek, Munich.

Oil-scraping.

Another ordinary palæstra motive was employed in representing the athlete after the contest, scraping oil and dirt from his body and arms with the scraping-blade or strigil (στλεγγίς, strigilis).1048 This motive is not uncommon on r.-f. vase-paintings of the fifth century B. C.1049 It was treated in sculpture by many masters. Pliny mentions such statues of athletes destringentes se (ἀποξυόμενοι), by Polykleitos, Lysippos, and Daidalos of Sikyon.1050 Perhaps the perixyomenoi by Antignotos and Daïppos, the latter the son of Lysippos, had the same motive.1051 Of the Apoxyomenos of Polykleitos we have no authenticated copies in sculpture, though Furtwaengler believes that he has found reminiscences of it on gems which represent a youth resting the weight of his body on the left leg, the right being drawn back (i. e., in the attitude of the Doryphoros), the right forearm extended, and the left holding a strigil. The similarity of these gem-designs makes it certain that they are all derived from a well-known work of art.1052 Perhaps the fine bronze statuette, dating from the middle of the fifth century B. C., and now in the Loeb collection in Munich, represents the pose of the destringens se by Polykleitos.1053 It represents a nude youth resting the weight of the body on the soles of both feet, the left one slightly advanced, and holding a strigil in the raised right hand. The famous marble copy of an Apoxyomenos in the Vatican1054 (Pl. 29), which, because of its long slim legs and graceful ankles, might well represent a runner, has long been held to represent the canon of Lysippos, as it exhibits proportions widely different from those employed by Polykleitos, and agreeing with Pliny’s account of Lysippos’ innovations.1055 However, the doubts arising in recent years as to whether this statue is a copy of Lysippos’ statue or a later work will be considered at length in Chapter VI.1056

PLATE 12

Statue of an Apoxyomenos. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

The same motive is exemplified by many existing statues, statuettes, reliefs, etc. The marble statue of an athlete in the Uffizi, Florence, (Pl. 12),1057 a copy of an original of the end of the fifth century B. C., wrongly restored as holding in both hands a vase at which the athlete is looking down, was interpreted by Bloch as an ephebe pouring oil from a lekythos held in the right hand into an aryballos held in the left. This action for an athlete has been characterized by Furtwaengler as “unparallelled, unclassical and, above all, absurd.” Through recent discoveries we now know that it represents an apoxyomenos, and that it should be restored with the left forearm close to the thigh, and with the right crossing the abdomen diagonally in the direction of the left hand. This attitude so closely corresponds with that of a figure on a gem as to make it probable that both gem and statue are copies of the same original. The figure on the gem1058 holds a strigil in both hands and is generally explained as scraping the dirt from the left thigh; the light hand holds the handle and the left the blade. A hydria, palm-branch, and crown are pictured to the right—showing that the figure represents an athlete, just as the statue has the swollen ears of one. The attention of the athlete in both monuments is concentrated on the operation involved—a concentration reminding us of Myron’s Diskobolos. While, however, in the latter work the concentration is momentary, it is less transient in the Florence statue and also in the Munich Oil-pourer. This pose is too conscious in the Florentine statue to be the work of Myron. Arndt names no artist, but as the similarity between the head of the statue and that of the Oil-pourer is so marked, and as every one now regards the latter as Attic—even if not by Alkamenes—he thinks that the two must be by the same Attic sculptor, although the Uffizi statue is somewhat later than the Munich one.1059 The original of the Florence statue was famous, if we may judge by the existing number of replicas with variations.1060

Among statues showing the same motive and pose, we may note the bronze statue of an athlete over life-size—pieced together from 234 fragments—found by the Austrians at Ephesos and now in Vienna.1061 The subject, pose, and heavy proportions recall the Argive school of Polykleitos, and its original has been assigned by Hauser to the Sikyonian Daidalos, the son and pupil of Patrokles, who was the pupil of Polykleitos. As further reproductions of the same type of figure, we may cite a bronze statuette in Paris,1062 and a marble one found at Frascati in 1896 and now in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.1063

A chalcedony scarab of archaic type in the British Museum represents a nude athlete with a lekythos slung over the left arm and a strigil in the left hand, which rests on the hip.1064 A beautiful marble grave-relief, much mutilated, in the museum at Delphi,1065 which dates from the middle of the fifth century B. C., represents a palæstra victor, with his arms extended to the right, cleansing himself with a strigil, which is held in the right hand, while a slave boy, holding the remnant of an aryballos in his right hand, looks up at him from the right. The careful anatomy of this relief may point to Pythagoras of Samos, as its author, though we have no certain work of his, for it fits the description of that artist by Pliny, who says that he was the first to express sinews and veins.1066

Libation-pouring.

PLATE 13

Statue of an Athlete, after Polykleitos. Farnsworth Museum, Wellesley College, U. S. A.

An original Greek bronze statuette in Paris (Fig. 24)1067 reproduces the motive of the statue of the boy wrestler Xenokles by the sculptor Polykleitos Minor at Olympia, as a comparison with the footprints on the recovered base of the latter shows.1068 As the forms correspond with those of the Doryphoros and Diadoumenos, and as its execution is so marvelous, Furtwaengler has ascribed the statuette to the circle of Polykleitos’ pupils. The position of the right hand, which has the thumbs drawn in, corresponds with that of the Idolino (Pl. 14), which we are to discuss, and can best be explained by assuming that it similarly held a kylix; the left hand carried a staff-like attribute. Fig. 24.—Bronze Statuette of an Athlete. Louvre, Paris. The head is bent and looks to the right. Furtwaengler believed that, inasmuch as the act of pouring a libation does not occur in art or literature as an athletic motive, the statuette represented a hero or god. Many Roman marble copies show the same motive and preserve to us a Polykleitan work which corresponds in all essentials with the Louvre statuette.1069 We mention two, the only ones of the type in which the heads are on the trunks, one in the Galleria delle Statue of the Vatican,1070 the other in the Farnsworth Museum at Wellesley College (Pl. 13).1071 These copies represent a youth standing with both feet flat upon the ground, the weight of the body resting upon the right one, while the left is turned a little to the side. He is looking downwards to the right. Doubtless we should restore these copies after the Paris bronze, with a kylix in the right hand. The palm-branch in a similar statue, to be mentioned further on, shows that in all probability the origin statue was that of an athlete; and that he was a famous athlete is shown by the number of copies of the torso and head.1072 A bronze head from Herculaneum (Fig. 25)1073 so strongly resembles in its forms the type under discussion—which Furtwaengler has called the “Vatican athlete standing at rest”1074—and corresponds with it so closely in its measurements, that it might be regarded as a copy of the same original, if certain differences, not due to the copyist, did not rather show that it comes from a closely allied work. This head shows an intense melancholy, which has been explained by Furtwaengler as due to the lack of skill on the part of the copyist, who fashioned it slightly askew. Amelung very properly explains the absence of the motive of libation-pouring in athletic art as merely a lacuna in our sources.1075 If the original of these copies and variations represented an athlete, he was certainly pouring a libation before victory; if a warrior, he was doing the same thing before going on a campaign. In the latter case the left hand should be restored with a spear.

Fig. 25.—Bronze Head of an Athlete, from Herculaneum. Museum of Naples.

We must also place here the life-size original Greek bronze in Florence, discovered at Pesaro, near Ancona, in 1530, and known from the early eighteenth century as the Idolino (Pl. 14),1076 for its motive connects it with the series just discussed. This is, perhaps, our finest bronze statue from antiquity, as it represents the highest ideal of boy beauty, just as the Doryphoros does of manly beauty. The chief characteristics—the positions of the feet, head, and arms, though essentially those of the statues discussed, offer certain differences. Thus the left leg is placed more to one side and turned further outwards than in the statue of Xenokles and kindred works; the left hand hangs down at an angle to the leg differently from the others. In other words, by comparing it with the Paris statuette, we see a slightly different rhythm from that found in Polykleitan works. The Idolino has been looked upon as Myronic by Kekulé,1077 Studniczka,1078 and hesitatingly Klein,1079 while Mahler regarded it as Pheidian.1080 Furtwaengler, however, by a careful analysis, has shown its Polykleitan characteristics—especially the shape of the head and the features, and the treatment of the hair, which reminds us of the Naples copy of the Doryphoros. Owing to differences, however, he did not assign it to the master himself, but suggested that it was the work of his pupil Patrokles.1081 Bulle found the head Polykleitan, but the body Attic, and assigned the figure to an unknown Attic sculptor working in the Polykleitan circle. In this controversy on its style, a statue found in 1916 in the excavations of the Baths at Kyrene should be of use, for it is the most faithful of all the Roman copies known of the bronze original and clearly shows a Polykleitan character influenced by Attic art.1082 By a comparison of this marble copy with the Florentine bronze we see that the latter was a subsequent rendition of the same original, and doubtless by some artist of lesser fame from the Polykleitan school, who was influenced by Attic art.

But it is the interpretation of the Idolino which chiefly interests us here. While Longpérier called the similar Paris statuette a Mercure aptère, and the publisher of the statue from Kyrene called that copy a Hermes, yet Kekulé, Bulle, and most other archæologists have seen in the Idolino an athlete. The inner surface of its outstretched right hand is left rough, and the fingers are in the same position as those of the Paris bronze. Such a position can be explained satisfactorily by restoring the hand with a kylix or a φιάλη, such as was commonly used in libations. The left hand is smooth and evidently empty, though Bulle restores it with a victor’s fillet, and so, following Kekulé, calls the statue that of a boy victor, who is bringing an offering to the altar in honor of his victory. The marble statue in the Galleria delle Statue has the right forearm restored; in the Kyrene statue the right hand is preserved and has a thick object held downwards at a greater angle than in the Idolino. The photograph does not let us judge decisively, but it seems to be too thick an object for the remnants of a kylix. A marble statue in the Barberini Palace, Rome,1083 which resembles the Idolino so closely as to be considered a copy of it, though with variations of pose and technique, has the arms broken off, and so adds nothing to the solution of the motive of the Idolino. The fact that a palm-stem stands beside the right leg, however, adds weight to the interpretation as victor. Furtwaengler interprets the Idolino and kindred works as divinities. Though boys serve at libations, he thinks they never perform the ritual act of pouring the libation.1084 That a libation-pourer should appear in the guise of a boy victor (that of Xenokles) he calls a genuine Argive trait. Svoronos, also, has recently tried to show that the Idolino is not a victor,1085 but represents the hero Herakles. He compares the figure with a fourth-century Pentelic marble relief in Athens,1086 which represents Herakles standing at the door of Hades and beside him a father leading his son up to the open air. The pose of the figure of Herakles resembles that of the Idolino in a remarkable way. In the relief Herakles holds a kylix in the right hand1087 and a club in the left, and a lion skin is thrown over the left arm. Svoronos believes that the left hand in the relief explains the turning in of the left hand of the Idolino—for he believes that the latter also held a club. We must, however, leave the final solution of the motive of the Idolino and kindred works open, although inclining to the belief that they represent a victor.

PLATE 14

Bronze Statue known as the Idolino. Museo Archeologico, Florence.

A statue in Athens, which was found in 1888 in the Roman ruins at the Olympieion, may represent a boy victor pouring a libation (Fig. 26).1088 It is a poor Roman copy, dry and lifeless, Fig. 26.—Marble Statue of an Athlete(?). National Museum, Athens. of a bronze original of the middle of the fifth century B. C.1089 In this statue Mayer has seen the motive, and probably the copy, of the Splanchnoptes (Roaster of Entrails) by the sculptor Styphax (or Styppax) of Cyprus, which, according to Pliny,1090 represented Perikles’ slave “roasting entrails and blowing hard on the fire, to kindle it, till his cheeks swell.” He thinks that the position of the broken arms and a comparison of the figure with similar ones on vases make the identification possible. Von Salis concurs in his restoration and interpretation and publishes a small statuette in Athens from Dodona,1091 which has a similar pose, and holds a three-pronged fork in the left hand, which he believes should be restored in the statue. Although statue and statuette have much in common (e. g., the position of the breast and shoulders, the treatment of the hair, etc.), which shows that both may be copies of one original, the conception of the two is somewhat different. The statue from Athens represents a boy standing busily engaged at the altar; the statuette represents one standing at rest merely looking on, the fork not being held in position for use.1092 In any case the face of the Athens statue can not correspond with Pliny’s description—ignemque oris pleni spiritu accendens. Quite a different explanation of the statue is possible—one which Mayer thought improbable. The right arm—broken above the wrist—was raised to the height of the shoulder and may have held an object in the hand; the left arm—broken off below the shoulder—seems to have been held close to the body and appears to have corresponded in movement with the other. The boy, therefore, may have held a cup in the right hand and a branch or a victor fillet in the left. Thus it may merely be another example of a boy victor pouring a libation.

Certain other statues have been mistaken either for libation-pourers or oil-pourers, when they are really wine-pourers and have nothing to do with the athletic motives under discussion. A good example is the marble statue of a Satyr in Dresden,1093 which represents the youthful demi-god lifting a can with his right hand, out of which he is pouring wine into a drinking-horn held in the left. There are many copies of this work,1094 a fact which shows that the original bronze was famous. An attempt has therefore been made to identify it with the bronze Satyr of Praxiteles mentioned by Pliny as the Periboëtos or “far-famed,”1095 which seems to have been grouped with a Dionysos and a figure of Drunkenness—a grouping which might fit the Dresden Satyr, since a second figure should be imagined, for which the horn is being filled. However, it differs stylistically so much from the Hermes of Olympia that the ascription has been given up, though its graceful form shows Praxitelean influence and certainly emanates from the fourth century B. C.

PLATE 15

Marble Head of an Athlete, after Kresilas (?). Metropolitan Museum, New York.

Resting After the Contest.

A very favorite motive was to represent a victor, either standing or seated, resting after the exertions of the contest (ἀναπαυόμενος). An excellent example of this motive in a standing posture is the fourth-century B. C. statue of Attic workmanship found at Porto d’Anzio and now in the Vatican,1096 which reproduces the type of the Apollo Lykeios.1097 Many of the statues, by various sculptors, which represent the victor standing at rest may be intended to represent him as resting after the contest. The well-known head of a youth adorned with the victor’s chaplet, and preserved in four copies in European museums, appears to come from a statue which represented a victor in this manner. The best of these copies is in the collection of Lord Leconfield at Petworth House, Sussex.1098 We should add a fifth, a Roman copy of the head, in the Metropolitan Museum, New York (Pl. 15).1099 In these copies the ears are not swollen, and a certain refinement and gentleness show that the original was not from the statue of a boxer or pancratiast, but from that of another type of athlete, perhaps a pentathlete. Since Pliny mentions the statue of a Doryphoros by Kresilas,1100 and because of its supposed Kresilæan style, Furtwaengler, albeit on slender grounds, has attempted to identify the original of these heads with that work.1101 The expression is certainly one of complete repose. On the crown of the head, and on the left side over the fillet, is a rectangular broken surface,1102 apparently the remnant of a support for the right arm, which, as Conze thought, proves that the athlete stood with one arm resting on the head, the hand hanging over the left side. Furtwaengler admitted that such an attitude might be that of an apoxyomenos,1103 but pointed out that the expression of the face in all the copies seems too tranquil for such an interpretation. Since the victor was in repose and the left arm required a slight support, he believed that this support might have been an akontion. He therefore reconstructed the original statue as that of a resting pentathlete, and assigned it to the great Cretan contemporary of Pheidias, who worked in Athens.1104 The number of replicas at least shows that the original was a famous work.

Fig. 27.—Head from Statue of the Seated Boxer. Museo delle Terme, Rome.

Perhaps our best example of the motive of a seated victor resting after the contest is the bronze statue of a boxer found in Rome in 1884 and now in the Museo delle Terme there (Pl. 16 and Fig. 27).1105 This is a masterpiece in the portrayal of brute strength in the most naturalistic and revolting way. If we like to think of victors as having noble forms, we are rudely startled on looking at this brutal prize-fighter. If we compare it with works of the fifth and fourth centuries B. C., we see in it, as in no other example of Greek sculpture, the great change which professionalism had later wrought in the Greek ideal of athletics. Here are massive proportions, bulging muscles, arms and legs hard and muscle-bound. We can compare it only with the bronze head of a boxer found at Olympia (Fig. 61 A and B) of similar style and age.1106 But there we have only the head, while here we have a complete statue almost perfectly preserved, the only restorations being a portion of the left thumb, a piece of the right flank, and the base.

PLATE 16

Bronze Statue of the Seated Boxer. Museo delle Terme, Rome.

It represents a professional boxer, who is seated exhausted at the close of the bout, the severity of which is indicated by every part of the body. He leans forward, his arms rest on his thighs, and his head, sunk between his shoulders, is raised and turned to the right, as he stupidly looks around at the applauding spectators. His nose is broken and his ears are swollen and scars of the contest show on his face and limbs. Beneath his retreating upper lip some of his teeth appear to have been knocked out as the result of previous fights, while indications of the recent struggle are to be seen in the blood dripping from his ears and the deep lacerations in face and shoulder, which may have once been filled with red paint to make his appearance even more realistic. The right eye is swollen and the lower lid and the cheek imperceptibly sink into each other. The mustache shows flecks of blood and the swollen back of the right hand protrudes through the glove. His nose is clotted with blood and he seems to be struggling to get his breath.

Such realism and delight in depicting the hideous show that the work, like the Olympia head, belongs to the Hellenistic age. The careful workmanship, especially visible in the hair and beard and in the hair on the chest1107, proves that the statue is not a Roman copy, but a Greek original of the beginning of the Hellenistic age, of the end of the fourth or beginning of the third century B. C. Nor is it a portrait, as Winter maintained,1108 since it is an adaptation of a late type of Herakles. It certainly is a victor statue from one of the great Greek games, and is, perhaps, from Olympia itself. Since the head is turned toward the right shoulder and the mouth is open, as if speaking, Wunderer tried, on the basis of a passage in the history of Polybios,1109 to identify it with the statue of the famous Theban boxer and pancratiast Kleitomachos at Olympia by an unknown artist.1110 The historian states that Kleitomachos, while fighting with the Egyptian Aristonikos, was angered by the acclaim given the foreigner and, stepping aside, chided the spectators for not cheering one who was fighting for the honor of Greece. The speech caused a revulsion in the popular feeling, which helped, even more than the fists of Kleitomachos, to vanquish Aristonikos. However, the motive of the statue does not fit the incident, as the boxer is not speaking, but breathing hard, nor is the seated posture that of one haranguing a crowd. Moreover, the date of the Theban’s victory is too late for the statue.1111

ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES.

At the beginning of the fifth century B. C. athletic training tended to produce a uniform standard of physical development, which was reflected in sculpture. At this date we do not find the divergence of style which we saw in our review of the “Apollo” type of the sixth century. Vase-paintings show the change better than sculpture. On black-figured vases of the sixth century B. C., we see a good deal of variety in groups of boxers and wrestlers, while on red-figured vases of the early fifth century the number of types is far less. In sculpture, however, differences in physical type did exist in the various schools at the beginning of the fifth century. We have, for example, the heavy, square-shouldered type in the Apollo Choiseul-Gouffier (Pl. 7A), which we have classed as a victor statue, and the tall, rawboned type in the Tyrannicides by Kritios and Nesiotes (Fig. 32, Harmodios).1112 We have, on the other hand, a very different physical type in the short, stocky Aeginetan pedimental figures (Figs. 20 and 21). Between such extremes there are, of course, many gradations. We might instance the archaic bronze statuette of a diskobolos in the Metropolitan Museum (Fig. 46).1113 However, notwithstanding the diversity in type, it is often difficult to distinguish runners from wrestlers, boxers from pentathletes. Thus few early fifth-century statues show the type of runner as well as the Apollo of Tenea (Pl. 8A), or that of a boxer as well as the “Apollo” from Delphi (Pl. 8B). The reason for this is the ideal element, which entered into all these statues and which was a reflection of the uniform development of athletics long before specialization had set in. Out of this uniformity grew the canon of Polykleitos, developed from that of Hagelaïdas.

The sculptor of the sixth century B. C. was incapable of differentiating between god and mortal. This was especially the case, as we have seen, with Apollo, as the “Apollo” type was a model of manly vigor. In the early fifth century the sculptor had largely overcome this difficulty, but still showed little diversity of type in treating statues of different kinds of athletes. A method of differentiation which was essential to athlete sculptors of the sixth century was found convenient of retention by those of the fifth—i. e., characterizing the statue of the victor by some attribute, in order, on the one hand, to differentiate it from the nude god or hero, and on the other to distinguish between different types of victors.

PRIMARY ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES.

The Victor Fillet.

In the first place, the sculptor would characterize the victor statue as such. The easiest way to do this would be to represent it with a fillet or chaplet (ταινία)1114 bound round the head, as we saw was the case in the statue of Milo. This fillet was merely a band or riband of wool which was given the Olympic victor in addition to the garland of olive leaves, or the palm-branch, as a symbol of victory. Waldstein has argued that this fillet originally was not an essential attribute of the victor, but that the crown and palm were the prizes, and the fillet merely a decoration used on various occasions, such as at symposia,1115 which only later became a general athletic attribute.1116 Though the presence of the fillet on statues should not, therefore, be proof that the given statue is that of a victor,1117 there is no defense for the contention of Passow1118 that the tainia was in no sense a symbol of victory, but merely a toilet article among the gifts presented by the public to a victor at the ovation of the crowning. Pausanias says that the victor Lichas of Sparta was scourged by order of the umpires at Olympia for having set the tainia on the head of his victorious charioteer.1119 This is sufficient evidence that it was not a mere toilet article, but rather a part of the official prize of victory. Similarly the tainia in the hand of Nike upon the right hand of the statue of Zeus by Pheidias at Olympia can not have been a toilet article.1120

We have many examples from athletic sculpture of the use of the fillet. Thus it appears on the bronze head of a boxer in the Glyptothek (Pl. 3)1121 and on the bronze head from Herculaneum in Naples (Fig. 4),1122 both of which have been discussed in Chapter II, as fragments of Greek original statues of Olympic victors. It also appears on the marble head of a youthful victor—not necessarily Olympic—from the Akropolis,1123 which, because of the similarity in cheeks, mouth, and eyes to heads on the metopes of the Parthenon, should be dated somewhere between 450 and 440 B. C. It occurs on the Olympia marble head (Frontispiece and Fig. 69),1124 which we ascribe in Chapter VI to Lysippos, and likewise on the statue of the pancratiast Agias in Delphi (Pl. 28, Fig. 68). In most athlete heads the fillet is twisted into a knot at the back of the head. In one case, on the Petworth head of a pentathlete already discussed,1125 which, because of the curve of the neck, must come from a statue represented at rest, it is not so tied, but is wound round the head with the two ends tucked in and pushed through the fillet on either side over the temples.1126 Though so practical an arrangement as the latter must have been common enough in real life, this seems to be the only example of its representation in sculpture.

The fillet, instead of encircling the head, was sometimes held in the hand, as in the case of the Spartan chariot victor Polykles at Olympia.1127 A curious life-size statue of the Roman period, found in the Peiræus, represents a nude boy holding in his right hand over the breast a bundle of books and in the left an alabastron. The body is covered with fillets—fifteen in all—which appear to have been prizes won in gymnic contests, probably at the gymnasium or palæstra.1128

Fillet-binders.

Statues representing victors binding fillets in their hair (diadoumenoi) are common to all periods of Greek art.1129 We shall discuss only two—those of Pheidias and of Polykleitos.

PLATE 17

Statue known as the Farnese Diadoumenos. British Museum, London.

Pausanias mentions a statue by Pheidias, representing a Boy Binding on a Fillet, as standing in the Altis at Olympia.1130 Robert has argued that this figure was the one of similar motive mentioned by Pausanias as on the throne of Zeus there.1131 However, the figure on the throne was very probably in relief and not in the round.1132 The cicerones at Olympia seem to have been imposing on the periegete when they said that a likeness to Pantarkes, the boy favorite of Pheidias, was to be seen in the face of this figure on the throne. The mention of Pantarkes has given rise to the usual identification of the παῖς ἀναδούμενος with the victor statue of the Elean Pantarkes mentioned by Pausanias as standing in the Altis.1133 However, the assumption1134 is far-fetched and must be rejected, because Pausanias mentions the two statues in two different parts of his periegesis of the Altis.1135 Of the παῖς we know only the artist’s name. It was probably merely a votive gift,1136 and the name of the person so honored was unknown to Pausanias. Of the statue of the victor Pantarkes we know only the name, and neither the artist nor the motive of the statue. It seems clear, therefore, that we have to do with three distinct monuments: the boy with the fillet, the throne figure by Pheidias, and the victor by an unknown sculptor.1137

The small marble statue in the British Museum known as the Diadoumenos Farnese1138 (Pl. 17), which is now almost universally regarded as an Attic work,1139 has been assumed by many archæologists to be a copy of Pheidias’ statue.1140 Since Pausanias tells us that a statue by Pheidias stood in Olympia, representing an unknown boy binding a fillet around his head, and since the style of the Farnese statue shows great similarity in head and body forms and general bearing to certain figures on the Parthenon frieze,1141 and its motive agrees with that of the Olympia statue, it seems reasonable to see in this little work a copy of the statue in the Altis by the great master. Furtwaengler and Bulle have shown that the motive of this work was initiated by Pheidias and not by Polykleitos, since the latter’s great statue was several years younger than the work of Pheidias at Olympia. That Pheidias was pleased with the motive is disclosed by the fact that he repeated it on the throne of Zeus.

PLATE 18

Statue of the Diadoumenos, from Delos, after Polykleitos. National Museum, Athens.

The Diadoumenos of Polykleitos was little less famous than his Doryphoros, if we may judge by the number of copies which have survived and from literary notices of it.1142 In all the copies of this work we see the well-known Polykleitan characteristics—powerful build, heavy proportions, and fidelity to nature; but none of the ideal tendency prominent in the works of Pheidias and his school, nor of the violent energy characteristic of Myron’s art. In all of them the pose of the earlier Doryphoros is retained, except that the arms are differently employed and the build of the body is more slender. Pliny, despite his statement—which is probably taken from some Greek authority—that monotony was the characteristic of Polykleitos’ works (paene ad unum exemplum),1143 emphasizes this slenderness by calling the Doryphoros viriliter puer—Lessing’s Juengling wie ein Mann—and the Diadoumenos molliter juvenis—a youth of gentle form. This judgment of Pliny was difficult to understand so long as we had only the Vaison copy of the Diadoumenos to study. The Delian copy showed that supple grace was characteristic of the original, even if modified to suit the taste of three centuries later. Although the body forms and the attitudes of the Doryphoros and the Diadoumenos are very similar, the head of the latter, usually assigned to Polykleitos, is of a different type from that of the Doryphoros. While the head of the Doryphoros is square in profile, flat on top, and long from front to back, that of the Diadoumenos is rounder and softer and can best be explained on the assumption that Polykleitos later in life came under Attic influence. The copies of this work are many and varied.1144 For a long time the marble copy in the British Museum found in 1862, at Vaison, France,1145 was, despite its poor workmanship, considered our best copy (Fig. 28). It was made perhaps five hundred years after the original, at a time when sculpture was in its decline, and consequently can give us merely a suggestion of the character of Polykleitos’ statue. As it is a direct marble translation of the bronze, the muscular treatment appears exaggerated. Another marble copy was found in 1894 by the French excavators on the island of Delos, and is now in Athens (Pl. 18).1146 The Delian artist added a mantle and a quiver to the nearby tree-trunk and thus converted an original victor statue into one of a god.1147 Though its hands are lost, it is easy to see that the athlete is pulling the ends of the fillet together so as to tighten the knot at the back of the head. As this is a Hellenistic Greek copy, it comes far nearer to the original than the Fig. 28.—Statue of the Diadoumenos, from Vaison, after Polykleitos. British Museum, London. imperial Roman one from Vaison. The lighter proportions and softer modeling show the Attic influence on Polykleitos’ later career, although the fleshy forms are out of harmony with his art and evidently introduced by the copyist. One of the best preserved and most beautiful copies is the one in the Prado at Madrid.1148 Although a Roman copy, like the one in the British Museum, it comes very near the original because of the precision in its details. There are many good copies of the head alone.1149 Marble heads in Kassel and Dresden, evidently the works of Attic sculptors, show the pure Polykleitan traits. The one in Dresden1150 (Fig. 29) surpasses all others in the beauty of its finish, being a careful and exact copy. The proportions and structure of the head are those of the Doryphoros, although the surface is differently treated. The Kassel head1151 is not so exact in its details, but has more expression. Furtwaengler rightly calls it the better of the two as a work of art, but inferior as a copy. A marble head in the British Museum1152 is a direct copy from the original bronze, like the Vaison statue. The clear-cut eyelids and wiry hair reproduce the original material, and its resemblance to the head of the Doryphoros is greater than that of any other copy.

A later variant of the statue is seen in a small terra-cotta statuette from Smyrna in private possession in London.1153 Fig. 29.—Head of the Diadoumenos, after Polykleitos. Albertinum, Dresden. It shows the Polykleitan type so completely assimilated to the style of Praxiteles that its genuineness has been doubted. Perhaps, with its Attic softness, it gives us a better idea of the beauty of the original than many of the other copies. Finally, we must mention the original bronze head of the fifth century B. C. in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, recently published by Percy Gardner.1154 This head, put together from nine fragments, and restored as that of a boy fillet-binder, and rivaling in delicacy and beauty such original bronzes as the Beneventum head (Fig. 3) and the Idolino (Pl. 14), not only gives us the best idea of the technical ability attained by bronze workers in the middle of the fifth century B. C., but also helps us to understand the ancient repute of Polykleitos’ athletes. Here the headband and “starfish” arrangement of the hair have their close parallels in the Dresden, Kassel, and British Museum heads already discussed, which essentially reproduce the head of the Vaison statue (Fig. 28). As Gardner points out, it closely agrees with the type of the Farnese Diadoumenos (Pl. 17) only in one particular, the mode of tying the knot. While the Vaison athlete is preparing to tie it, the Farnese one has just finished the operation, the boy still holding the ends of the fillet in his hands. But only the treatment of the hair, the eye, and the ear offers a contrast. Despite these differences Gardner follows the older view of Brunn in regarding the Vaison and Farnese types as two variants of Polykleitan originals; but the pose, style, and proportions of the latter seem to us to be too thoroughly Attic to warrant us in bringing it into relation with the work of Polykleitos. Though the heads of the two are not so dissimilar, the pose, as Gardner also points out, is quite different. The Vaison figure is represented as walking, i. e., in the very act of changing the weight of the body from one leg to the other, while the Farnese athlete stands at rest with both feet flat upon the ground. Gardner rightly regards this exquisite head not as the original of the statue mentioned by Pliny, since the Vaison and Delian copies show that the latter represented a fully developed man, somewhat over life-size, and not a boy, but rather as a work of the Polykleitan school, though he does not exclude the possibility that it may come from one of the many boy athletes of the master.

Furtwaengler connects with the Diadoumenos the statue of a youthful boxer, slightly under life-size, which shows a similar motive. It is known to us in two copies, one in Kassel,1155 the other in Lansdowne House, London.1156 That it is a work of Polykleitos is shown by the correspondence of its body forms with those of both the Diadoumenos and the Doryphoros. A bronze statuette, dating from about 400 B. C., in the Akropolis Museum, also repeats the motive without being an exact copy.1157

The Crown of Wild Olive.

The crown of wild olive1158 in the hair is another general but not customary attribute of Olympic victor statues. Fewer sculptured heads show it than show the tainia, and in most of these the leaves have fallen off. Examples of its presence are afforded by the bronze head from Beneventum (Fig. 3) in the Louvre,1159 and on the realistic bronze head of a boxer found at Olympia (Fig. 61 A and B).1160 A good illustration of a boy victor crowning himself is on a fourth-century B. C. funerary relief, found in 1873 at the Dipylon gate, and now in the Athens Museum.1161 The victor is holding or placing a crown of leaves on his head. In the Museo delle Terme, Rome, is a mediocre headless copy of an original statue of the end of the fifth century B. C., the work of an artist of the Polykleitan school, the restoration of which as a victor engaged in wreathing his head is probable.1162 A protuberance on the right shoulder seems to have been left by the end of the lemniskos or ribbon with which the wreath was adorned.1163 The left hand carried an attribute, but probably not a palm-branch as Helbig assumed, since such a branch, if of metal, would have left traces on the shoulder. The same restoration has been proposed for another statue.1164 A crown on the head, together with the remains of fingers near it, has been noticed on a bronze statue of Eros, of Hellenistic workmanship, found off Tunis in the sea,1165 which shows Polykleitan influence.

PLATE 19

Statue known as the Westmacott Athlete. British Museum, London.

The statue of a Boy Crowning Himself, which has survived in many Roman copies and variant Greek originals, notably in the so-called Westmacott Athlete of the British Museum (Pl. 19),1166 a fragmentary statue of poorer workmanship in the Barracco collection in Rome,1167 and a Greek copy from Eleusis now in the National Museum in Athens,1168 and identified by many archæologists with the statue of the boy boxer Kyniskos by Polykleitos at Olympia, should be discussed here. While the Westmacott Athlete appears to be a copy from the original bronze, the Barracco statue, though showing the same pose, is unlike it in the treatment of hair and muscles, and with its Attic head, seems to be a carelessly executed variant, more or less Myronian in style, of the Polykleitan original. While its original may be assigned to the end of the fifth century B. C., the Eleusis variant, with its head differently placed, is not a Roman copy, but a Greek original statue showing the Polykleitan motive carried into the soft Attic style of the fourth century B. C.1169 A fine copy of the head alone is in the possession of Sir Edgar Vincent, in his Constantinople collection.1170 This should be associated with another head in Dresden, both being closely related to that of the Westmacott Athlete.1171 The best copy of the head is in the Hermitage, in which the treatment of the hair approaches nearest to that of the bronze original.1172 A marble head from Apollonia in Epeiros, now in the British Museum, which so closely resembles the head of the Westmacott Athlete that the missing sections of the neck and shoulders were restored by a cast from the latter, is somewhat different in style. For while the Westmacott head is a mechanical copy, this Greek head is full of vigor, disclosing Attic characteristics of the early fourth century B. C., and obviously is an Athenian imitation of the original, like the statue from Eleusis.1173 A more remote variant is the beautiful marble head formerly in the possession of Dr. Philip Nelson in Liverpool, but now in America, which is not an exact copy of any of the known variants, but so closely resembles the Capitoline type of Wounded Amazon, assigned first by Otto Jahn and later by Furtwaengler to Kresilas, that it must be by the same hand.1174 This head also reminds us of that of the Kresilæan Diomedes of the Munich Glyptothek (Pl. 21),1175 though the hair-treatment is Polykleitan.1176 Both show a modification of Polykleitan forms under Attic influence. The numerous fine copies indicate that the original was a well-known work. That it was Polykleitan is clear from a study of the heads, which show a great resemblance to that of the Doryphoros, and of the body forms, which resemble those of both the Doryphoros and the Diadoumenos. While some believe this original a work of Polykleitos himself,1177 others think that it was by one of his pupils or successors, who imitated the master’s early style. If the original, however, was not the statue of Kyniskos, there is little evidence that it was by Polykleitos himself.

The palm-trunk in the Westmacott copy certainly argues that the original was an athlete statue. The gesture of the right hand has given rise to different interpretations. The Barracco copy furnishes the best evidence, as on it the right arm is preserved to the wrist, the hand only being lost. Helbig at first (in the Barracco Catalogue) expressed the opinion that the right hand might have held an oil-flask, from which oil was being poured into the left. However, the position of the left hand, as shown by the puntello on the left hip, must have been the same as that on the Westmacott copy, i. e., hanging close to the left side. Helbig later (in the Fuehrer) explained the motive as that of a boy setting a crown on his head, as in the bronze Eros already mentioned. This interpretation, first suggested by Winnefeld,1178 has been the favorite one among archæologists. But all sorts of other explanations of the motive of the original have been offered, as that the athlete was scraping his forehead or shoulders with the strigil,1179 that the statue represented Narkissos looking into the pool and shading his eyes with his right hand,1180 that it was an athlete standing at rest and holding an akontion in his right hand—a theory harmonizing with the poise of the head, but not with the turn of the wrist, which shows that the hand was held downwards1181—and that it was, in fact, the nudus talo incessens of Pliny.1182 On the head of the Eleusis statue there is a mass of marble left over the right ear just opposite the place where the hand would be, if it were setting a wreath on the head. The fact that no marks are visible where the crown was attached is explained by the assumption that the wreath was of metal even in the marble copies. That this motive, moreover, was known to both Attic and Peloponnesian art in the second half of the fifth century B. C. is well attested. Thus we see on the Parthenon frieze a youth crowning himself with one hand, while holding the horse’s bridle with the other.1183 The pose of this figure—especially the legs—recalls the Myronian Oil-pourer already discussed (Pl. 11). On the other hand, one of the figures of the Ildefonso group in Madrid, which is Polykleitan in style, represents a boy wearing a wreath, a figure closely akin to the Westmacott Athlete, the leg position being the same in both and the poise of the head nearly so, although the arms are different, the left one being raised and the right hanging down.1184 It is probable that the raised right hand of the original of the Westmacott and other replicas touched the wreath and the lowered left held a fillet. The best explanation, then, of the Westmacott Athlete and kindred works is that the motive of the original was allied to that of the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos, though the modeling is too soft for Polykleitos, showing that the copyists changed the original of the Argive master to suit a later and different taste. Whereas the Diadoumenos is tying on a victor’s fillet, the other is presumably placing a victor’s wreath on his head. Certainly no better restoration can be made for the Barracco copy. Furthermore, many other monuments, which show a similar attitude, and which must be regarded as very free imitations of the original, seem to show that the boy was represented as placing a wreath on his head.1185

Whether the original of the series was an actual victor statue at Olympia or not is an interesting question. It has been repeatedly suggested that it was the very statue of the boy boxer Kyniskos there, mentioned by Pausanias, the base of which has been recovered.1186 The external evidence for the identity consists altogether in the similarity in the position of the feet on this base and in the series of copies, which argues a similar pose. The base shows that the left leg bore the weight of the statue; it was slightly advanced and rested on the sole, while the right leg was set back and rested on the ball only. Thus the statue of Kyniskos was represented in the characteristic Polykleitan schema of rest, except that the position of the legs is reversed from that of the Doryphoros, Diadoumenos, Amazon, and other works of the master. We might add that this same reversal appears on two other bases found at Olympia, which held victor statues by the elder Polykleitos1187 and one by the younger.1188 Moreover, the leg position of the canon does not occur in the works of the master’s pupils Naukydes and Daidalos, and only in one work of Kleon.1189 This shows that teacher and pupils also used another motive, i. e., the old canon of Hagelaïdas, besides the one associated with the Doryphoros. The similarity in the position of the feet on the Olympia base and in the series of statues discussed has led some scholars, e. g., Petersen and Collignon, to accept the proposed identity. This similarity in foot position, the probability that the statue on the basis was life-size, like those of the Westmacott series, and the palm-tree support in the British Museum replica, all pointing to a victor statue, make the identity well within the range of possibility, but by no means certain. It is necessary only to rehearse the objections to this view. In the first place the length of the foot on the Olympia basis can not be accurately measured for purposes of comparison. In the next place Polykleitos, as we have just seen, made other statues of victors at Olympia with almost the identical foot position of that of Kyniskos. Furthermore, it seems very unlikely that so celebrated an original as that of these many replicas could have been standing in the Altis so late as the time of Pausanias.1190 It is difficult, also, to understand why an imitative Attic sculptor of the fourth century B. C., should make a copy of an Arkadian boy victor statue for Eleusis. And lastly we must not forget that up to the present time not a single Roman copy has been conclusively identified with that of a victor statue at Olympia. If the date of the victory of Kyniskos were definitely fixed, the question of identity would be better substantiated. By a process of exclusion, to be sure, Robert reached the date Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.),1191 but other dates are possible. Under these circumstances there seems to be little more than the possibility that we have recovered an actual victor statue at Olympia in these copies.1192

The Palm-branch.

The palm-branch, either woven into a wreath or held in the hand, was a victor attribute. Pausanias says that a crown of palm leaves was common to many contests, and that the victor everywhere in Greece carried a palm-branch in his right hand.1193 He refers the custom to mythical times, tracing it back to the contest held by Theseus on Delos in honor of Apollo.1194 Pliny mentions a painting by the Sikyonian Eupompos, which represented a victor certamine gymnico palmam tenens.1195 While Milchhoefer1196 believed that the motive of an athlete setting a crown on his head with his right hand and holding a palm in his left, which is repeated frequently and with variation in many works of art, went back to this painting of Eupompos, Furtwaengler1197 goes further in assuming that the painter derived the motive from the statue of Polykleitos represented by the Westmacott Athlete and kindred works just discussed. The pupils of the great sculptor appear to have transferred his school from Argos to Sikyon, and were, therefore, associated with Eupompos. This attribute of the palm, permanent in bronze statues, has been broken off for the most part in marble ones. We see it in an unfinished statue of a young athlete in the National Museum, Athens, who holds the palm-branch in his hand. Here it has survived, since the statue was only blocked out.1198 It is prominent in the funerary stele from the Dipylon representing a victor, which has been mentioned in a preceding section;1199 here the palm extends from the left hand, which is held down close to the side, up to the shoulder. We have already noted that the copyist added a palm-branch to the stump placed beside the Vatican girl runner (Pl. 2). In the Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo (Pl. 7A) the left hand should doubtless be restored with the palm-branch, because of the projecting notch of marble on the side of the left leg near the knee.1200 A similar notch appears also on the Apollo-on-the-Omphalos in Athens (Pl. 7B), which shows that the left hand held a long attribute, which was doubtless a palm-branch. This attribute occurs frequently on vases.1201 We see it on a marble statue found at Formiae and now in the Glyptothek Ny-Carlsberg in Copenhagen, which shows the same motive as that of the statue by Stephanos (Pl. 9), though in a freer style of execution. Here the lowered right hand holds a palm-branch, which is shown in low relief against the right arm.1202

SECONDARY ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES.

In course of time the sculptor was not content to represent victor statues merely as victors, but differentiated the various kinds of victors by special attributes.

Fig. 30.—Marble heads of two Hoplitodromoi, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia.

Hoplitodromoi.

Thus a hoplite victor would be represented with his usual weapons. Pausanias, in mentioning the statue at Olympia of the hoplite runner Damaretos of Heraia by the Argive sculptors Eutelidas and Chrysothemis, says that it “has not only a shield, as the armed runners still have, but also a helmet on his head and greaves on his legs.”1203 He adds that the helmet and greaves were gradually abolished at Olympia and elsewhere. We have seen that the statue of Damaretos was set up at the beginning of the fifth century B. C., when his son Theopompos, the pentathlete, won his second victory, the monuments of the two being in common.1204 Toward the middle of the fifth century the hoplite victor Mnaseas of Kyrene had a statue at Olympia, the work of Pythagoras of Rhegion, which represented him as an armed man.1205 A Pythian victor, Telesikrates, of the fifth century B. C., had a statue at Delphi, which represented him with a helmet.1206 We have actual remnants of two hoplite victor statues of the sixth century B. C., in the two bearded and helmeted life-size heads of Parian marble found at Olympia (Fig. 30, a, b = A; c, d = B).1207 The younger of these heads (A), to which probably belong either an arm and the remnants of a shield attached with a ram and a representation of Phrixos upon it in relief,1208 or a shield fragment with a siren’s wing upon it1209 and the fragment of a shield edge1210 and right foot of fine workmanship,1211 I assigned long ago to the statue of the Thessalian hoplitodrome Phrikias of Pelinna, who won two victories in Ols. 68 and 69 ( = 508 and 504 B. C.).1212 R. Foerster had referred this head to the statue of the hoplite runner Damaretos of Heraia, whose monument, in common with that of his son, the pentathlete Theopompos, was the work of the early Argive sculptors Chrysothemis and Eutelidas.1213 But this fresh and vigorous head is not Peloponnesian, but shows strongly marked Attic traits in its round face, full cheeks, and soft lips, and in the rows of regularly wound locks of hair. The arm and foot similarly disclose Attic softness and grace. Because of its Attic character, Treu and Overbeck,1214 in opposition to Foerster, ascribed it to the statue of the Elean hoplite victor Eperastos mentioned by Pausanias.1215 Though the date of his victory is unknown, it certainly fell some time after Ol. 111 ( = 336 B. C.)—a date far too late for so archaic a sculpture. Furtwaengler1216 referred this and the more archaic head B to the group of Phormis at Olympia, mentioned by Pausanias.1217 However, Treu1218 showed that there was no stylistic connection between the two heads. The slightly more archaic head B, badly injured from weathering, I have referred to the Achaian hoplitodrome Phanas of Pellene, who won Ol. 67 ( = 512 B. C.).1219 In this carefully executed head the hair and beard are arranged in small locks and the archaic smile is prominent. While the younger head is Attic, this one is unmistakably Peloponnesian; and while the former comes from a statue represented at rest, the latter, because of the twist of the neck, seems to have come from one represented in violent motion. For this reason Wolters believed that it came from the statue of a warrior represented as thrown to the ground and defending himself.

The Myronic statue in the Palazzo Valentini, Rome, known as Diomedes,1220 whose pose recalls the Diskobolos, may represent a hoplitodrome, because of its marked resemblance in attitude to the Tuebingen bronze to be discussed in the next chapter (Fig. 42), and because of the helmet on its head.1221

Pentathletes.

Pentathletes were represented by attributes taken from three of the five contests—jumping, and throwing the diskos and the javelin. All these attributes appear in gymnasium scenes pictured on red-figured vases. Thus a kylix of the severe style in Munich1222 gives us a general picture of the exercises of the gymnasium. On the walls hang diskoi in slings, strigils, leaping-weights, oil-flasks, sponges, and javelins. Archaic leaping-weights (ἁλτῆρες) appeared in the hands of the statue of the Elean Hysmon at Olympia by the Sikyonian sculptor Kleon.1223 Similarly, a figure of Contest (Ἀγών) in the group set up there by Mikythos had weights.1224 The offering of the people of Mende at Olympia very nearly deceived Pausanias into thinking it the statue of a pentathlete, because of its ancient halteres.1225 This shows that these weights formed a regular attribute of pentathlete statues there. A relief from Sparta1226 represents an athlete leaning on his spear and holding a pair of leaping-weights in his right hand. There is a bronze statue of such a victor in the Berlin Antiquarium.1227 Halteres hang on a tree-trunk to the right of the statue of an athlete in the Pitti palace in Florence.1228 The breast of a marble torso, less than life-size, of a boy statue found at Olympia, shows that the hands were stretched forward, and very possibly the objects which they held were leaping-weights.1229

We have no direct literary reference to a victor statue at Olympia of a pentathlete with the attributes of the diskos or javelin. That they existed there, however, seems probable enough. Such a work as the Diskobolos of Myron, which displays the youthful victor in its every line, other statues, statuettes, reliefs, and vase-paintings, show us how the artist represented the different steps in the casting of the quoit. Similarly, the famous Doryphoros of Polykleitos, copies of which have been identified in many museums (Pl. 4 and Fig. 48), will give us an idea how a javelin thrower might have been represented at rest. The akontion or victor’s casting-spear, was, as we see from the Spartan relief of a pentathlete just mentioned, about the height of a man. The attitude of the diskobolos and doryphoros will be discussed at length in the next chapter.

Boxers.

The statue of a boxer would be sufficiently characterized by thongs, which he might carry in his hand, as in the statue of the Rhodian Akousilaos at Olympia,1230 or wound round his forearm, as in the statue of a boxer in the Palazzo Albani, Rome,1231 or on a near-by prop, as on the tree-stump beside the Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo in the British Museum (Pl. 7A).1232

Wrestlers.

Long ago Scherer tried to show that the aryballos was a wrestler-attribute, since oil was so important in wrestling.1233 He interpreted as aryballoi the pomegranates mentioned by Pausanias as held in the hands of the statues of the wrestlers Milo1234 and Theognetos1235 at Olympia, assuming that the Periegete mistook oil-flasks for pomegranates (ῥοιαί). But it hardly seems reasonable that such a small utensil, which was used by athletes in general, could ever have been regarded as a peculiar attribute of the wrestler. A similar attribute may have been held in the outstretched hand of the half life-size archaic bronze “Apollo” of the Sciarra Palace in Rome,1236 and it occurs on other statues.1237

Caps for Boxers, Pancratiasts, and Wrestlers.

Often the boxer and pancratiast (and even wrestler)1238 are represented as wearing close-fitting caps, made up of thongs of leather or of solid leather. This, however, can scarcely be called a determining attribute. Our best example of such a cap is afforded by an athlete head dating from the first half of the fifth century B. C., in the Capitoline Museum, Rome,1239 formerly called a portrait of Juba II, who was the king of Numidia and Mauretania from 25 B. C. to 23 A. D. This ascription was based on the barbarous look of the head and the fact that another head, discovered in the Gymnasion of Ptolemy in Athens and thought to resemble it, was assumed to be that of Juba, since Pausanias mentions one of that prince there.1240 It is rather the head of an athlete engaged in putting on a cap. This cap consists of three transverse leather pieces crossing the head from side to side, one over the forehead, one over the crown, and the third over the occiput, all three converging above the ears. A fourth strap fastens them together and is drawn over the crown from forehead to occiput. In the complete statue doubtless the hands were raised to the head, grasping the straps near the ears to fasten them. This is, therefore, an anticipation of the later Diadoumenos motive. We see it in a statuette formerly in the Stroganoff collection in Rome, but now in private possession in England,1241 which represents an athlete putting on a similar headdress. Though the arms of the statuette are gone, remains of the two hands are seen touching the left ear and tying the straps, one of which runs around the cranium above the swollen right ear. With this complicated head-dress we may compare the close-fitting cap—evidently of leather—pictured on an archaistic Greek votive relief-in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, in Rome, which represents an athlete washing his hands in a basin, which stands on a tripod.1242 Here the cap is fastened by two bands, one around and the other under the chin. An object in the upper left corner of the relief, enclosed in a frame, appears to be a victor crown adorned with bow-knots. Such caps, used in wrestling, would make it impossible for an opponent to grasp the hair; in boxing and the pankration it would protect the head from injury. We saw that such a cap was pictured on a Munich kylix of the early fifth century B. C. It is probable that such caps were customary at a period before athletes lost their long hair and that it was continued afterwards for various reasons. The little statuette from Autun now in the Louvre (Fig. 60), representing a pancratiast, has a close-fitting cap. The ring at the top shows that this statuette was hung up—perhaps being used as a weight in a Roman scale, or perhaps for adornment. In later days boys while practising in the palæstra, but never at the public games, wore ear-lappets (ἀμφωτίδες or ἐπωτίδες) to protect their ears, not dissimilar to those worn in our day for protection against the cold. We see them on a marble head, formerly in the possession of Fabretti.1243

The Swollen Ear.

We have lastly to speak of the swollen ear, which was an attribute of victor statues, both primary and secondary, since it characterized victors as such, and also early differentiated victors in various contests. Swollen ears may have played a role as a characteristic attribute of pugilists in early times.1244 We found them on the Rayet head in the Jacobsen collection (Fig. 22), which belongs to the last quarter of the sixth century B. C. and comes from the funerary statue of an athlete, probably a boxer. In course of time, however, they came to characterize pancratiasts, wrestlers,1245 and athletes in general. The assumption, then, that heads with swollen ears come from statues of boxers,1246 and that the boxer was known throughout Greek history as the “man with the crushed ear” is erroneous.1247 The earliest literary reference to the bruised ear is in Plato.1248 The philosopher used the term slightingly of those who imitated Spartan customs, especially Spartan boxing. The Lacedæmonians never boxed scientifically, but fought with bare fists and without rules. Literary evidence, furthermore, shows that bruised ears did not play the part in boxing matches which other bruised features of the face did—the eyes, nose, mouth, teeth, and chin. Vase-paintings sustain this evidence, for we often see bloody noses and cuts on the cheeks and chin, but no crushed ears.1249 In short, the crushed ear was merely a professional characteristic, a realistic detail, common to athletes of various sorts, and, as we shall see, to warriors, gods, and heroes. To quote Homolle: “La bouffissure des oreilles ellemême n’est pas un trait personnel, mais un caractère professionnel; elle ne désigne pas Agias, mais en général le lutteur. Cette déformation peut atteindre même un dieu, s’il a pratiqué les exercices gymnastiques et passé sa vie dans les luttes”.1250 It is found constantly on athletic types of heads in sculpture, whether these represent gods or mortals. A few examples will make this clear. The following heads of athletes show the swollen ears: the bronze portrait head of a boxer or pancratiast from Olympia, dating from the end of the fourth century B. C. or the beginning of the third (Fig. 61 A and B);1251 the marble head from the statue of the boxer Philandridas set up among the victor statues at Olympia, the work of Lysippos (Frontispiece and Fig. 69);1252 the head of the statue of the pancratiast Agias at Delphi (Pl. 28 and Fig. 68) ;1253 that of the Seated Boxer in the Museo delle Terme in Rome (Pl. 16 and Fig. 27);1254 that of the Apoxyomenos of the Uffizi in Florence (Pl. 12);1255 the bronze head from an athlete statue found at Tarsos and now in Constantinople, an Attic work of the end of the fifth century B. C.;1256 the beautiful bronze head of a boxer in the Glyptothek (Pl. 3);1257 the head of the so-called Apollo-on-the-Omphalos in Athens (Pl. 7B);1258 the athlete head from Perinthos (Fig. 33);1259 the bronze copy of the head of the Doryphoros, found in Herculaneum and now in Naples, by the Attic artist Apollonios (Fig. 47);1260 the Ince-Blundell head in England, to be discussed; four heads in Copenhagen;1261 the remarkably beautiful bust of an athlete in the Metropolitan Museum, New York (Pl. 20), whose rounded skull, oval face, projecting lower forehead, and dreamy, half-closed eyes place it in the fourth century B. C., a work influenced by the art of Praxiteles.1262

PLATE 20

Head of an Athlete, School of Praxiteles. Metropolitan Museum, New York.

When we consider heads of gods and heroes we find the swollen ears on a variety of types. We see them on the so-called Borghese Warrior of the Louvre (Fig. 43),1263 formerly called a Gladiator, and on the marble statue of Kresilæan style in Munich, which has been known since Brunn’s interpretation as Diomedes (carrying off the Palladion from Troy) (Pl. 21).1264 This latter statue is a careful, though inexact, Hadrianic copy of a famous work and is shown to represent the hero, and not an athlete, by the mantle thrown over the arm. Skill in the boxing match, the roughest and most dangerous of sports, is as appropriate to Diomedes as to Herakles himself. The crushed ears appear on the Dresden replica of this statue, a cast from the Mengs collection, the original of which was once probably in England,1265 but do not appear on the poor copy in the Louvre.1266 They also appear on the Myronian bust in the Riccardi Palace, Florence, which is a copy of an original that was, perhaps, the forerunner of the Kresilæan Diomedes.1267 Here again the garment thrown over the left shoulder shows that a youthful hero, and not an athlete, is intended.

On heads of Herakles the swollen ears are very common. The first dated representation of the hero with battered ears appears to be

Fig. 31.—Head of Herakles, from Genzano. British Museum London.

on coins of Euagoras I, the king of Salamis in Cyprus during the years 410–374 B. C.1268 We have several examples in sculpture from the fourth century B. C. Thus swollen ears and the victor fillet appear on the Skopaic head in the Capitoline Museum.1269 Another example is the terminal bust of the youthful hero found in 1777 at Genzano, and now in the British Museum (Fig. 31).1270 This head wreathed with poplar leaves, is probably a Græco-Roman copy of an original of the fourth century B. C., by an artist of the school of Lysippos. In the group representing Herakles and his son Telephos, a Roman copy in the Museo Chiaramonti of the Vatican, the hero is represented with fillet and battered ears.1271 A Parian marble head, encircled by a crown, in the Glyptothek, going back to a Lysippan bronze original, seems to come from the statue of the hero represented as a victor.1272 Another life-size head, of poor workmanship, in the Chiaramonti collection of the Vatican, sometimes confused with the Doryphoros head-type, seems to come from a statue of Herakles, as shown by the broken ears and rolled fillet, the latter a well-known attribute of the hero taken from the symposium.1273 A much finer replica is the bust from Herculaneum now in Naples.1274 Swollen ears appear also on heads of Ares. We may instance the helmeted one in the Louvre,1275 and especially the replica in the Palazzo Torlonia in Rome.1276 They are less prominent on a Parian marble head of the god in the Glyptothek, which appears to be a copy of an original of which the Ares Ludovisi is a more complete one.1277

PLATE 21

Statue of Diomedes with the Palladion. Glyptothek, Munich.

So far as we know, the statues of wrestlers, runners (except hoplitodromes), and probably pancratiasts were not distinguished by special attributes. In these cases the sculptor was obliged to express the type of contest in the figure itself. His problem, therefore, was to represent the victor in the characteristic pose of the contest in which he had won his victory, that is, by representing the statue as if in movement. This brings us to the second division of our treatment of victor statues, those which represented the victor not at rest, but in motion, a scheme which, in course of time, was extended not only to victors in wrestling and running, but to those in all contests, by representing them in the very act of contending. The treatment of this class of monuments will occupy the chief portion of Chapter IV.

CHAPTER IV.
VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED IN MOTION.

Plates 22–25 and Figures 32–62.

Just when the important step of representing the victor in motion instead of at rest was taken in Greek athletic sculpture we can not definitely say. The statement of Cornelius Nepos that the statues of athletes were first represented in movement in the fourth century B. C., after the time of the Athenian general Chabrias—whose image he describes as representing Chabrias in his favorite posture with his spear pointed at the enemy and his shield on his knee—has long since been shown to be worthless.1278 Nor is the assumption of many archæologists1279 that this advance in the plastic art was taken over into athletic sculpture soon after the statues of the Tyrannicides were set up at Athens, which represented them in the midst of their impetuous onslaught on Hipparchos, to be relied upon. These statues, however, occupy so important a place in the history of Greek sculpture that we shall consider them briefly in this connection.

THE TYRANNICIDES.

The bronze statues of the popular heroes Harmodios and Aristogeiton, by the sculptor Antenor, were, in all probability, set up in the Athenian agora in 506–5 B. C.1280 The group was carried off to Susa by Xerxes in 480 B. C., and to replace it a new group, doubtless a free imitation of the older one, and probably also of bronze, was set up in 477 B. C., the work of the sculptors Kritios and Nesiotes.1281 Nearly a century and a half later the stolen group was restored to Athens by Alexander the Great1282 and the two continued to stand side by side in Athens down to the time of Pausanias. Neither of these groups has survived to our time, but a late Roman marble copy of one, somewhat over lifesize, found in the ruins of Hadrian’s villa and now in Naples, gives us a good idea of the original, despite restorations (Fig. 32, Harmodios).1283

Fig. 32.—Statue of Harmodios. Museum of Naples.

The reconstruction of this group is aided by several minor works of art, reliefs, vase-paintings, coins, lead marks, etc., the number of which shows that it was a common subject for Athenian artists. Botho Graef, by a careful study of the female statue found on the Akropolis in 1886 and inscribed as the work of Antenor, has shown that the stylistic contrast between it and the Naples group is too great for the latter to be assigned to Antenor.1284 It is now, therefore, the prevailing view that the Naples group reproduces the later statues of Kritios and his associate.1285 We do not know, then, how the older group looked, but we are certain that it was different from the later one, for, in the years elapsing between the dates of the two, Attic sculptors had become entirely free from the Ionic influence which we discussed in the preceding chapter and which characterizes the female statue of Antenor. Archaic stiffness, however, is still traceable in the later group, for in the copy we see a work which is “concise, sinewy, hard, and with strained lines,” in harmony with Lucian’s characterization of the works of Hegias, Kritios, and Nesiotes.1286

The restorations of the Naples group, though right in the main, make us doubtful as to the exact pose of the original figures.1287 Harmodios has new arms, new right leg, and left leg below the knee, while Aristogeiton has a Lysippan head in place of the original bearded one, to correspond better with that of his companion. His left arm, with the drapery hanging down, has been put on at a wrong angle, as he should be represented holding a scabbard in the left hand and a sword in the right. On a vase fragment (oinochoe) in Boston1288 both heroes are making the onset, the younger one (Harmodios) in front of the other, but in the original statues, they were probably making the onset abreast, something that the vase-painter could not represent.1289

While the Akropolis ephebe, already discussed as showing Argive influence (Fig. 17), still shows but little break with the law of “frontality” formulated by J. Lange,1290 whereby an “imaginary line passing through the skull, nose, backbone, and navel, dividing the body into two symmetrical halves, is invariably straight, never bending to either side,” the Tyrannicides have broken it completely. The ephebe has his head slightly turned to one side, and, because of resemblances in head and body to the figure of Harmodios, has been assigned to Kritios or his school.1291 Another statue at rest ascribed to the same school is the athlete in the Somzée collection, which reminds us of the Pelops of the East Gable at Olympia.1292 We have record of one more statue by Kritios himself, which was represented in motion only less violent than that of the Tyrannicides. Pausanias saw on the Akropolis of Athens a statue by him of the hoplite runner Epicharinos, which represented the athlete in the attitude of one practicing starts, perhaps in the very pose of the Tuebingen statuette (Fig. 42).1293

In the statues of the Tyrannicides, then, which might pass equally well for typical athletes of the time, we have examples of statues in motion at the end of the sixth century B. C.; for the same violent action must have characterized the earlier group of Antenor as the later one. We have seen that the Aeginetan sculptors not only made pediment groups in action at a date not later than that of the group by Kritios and Nesiotes, but single figures still earlier. Thus the sculptor Glaukias represented the Karystian boy boxer Glaukos in the act of sparring with an imaginary opponent.1294 Though Glaukos won in Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.), his statue was set up later by his son, perhaps as late as the end of the sixth century B. C., or the beginning of the fifth, as the floruit of the sculptor would show.1295 This is the oldest example attested by literary evidence of an athlete statue in motion at Olympia. Whether Glaukias got his motive from Antenor’s Tyrannicides, or whether his work was the older, we can not determine, but it is safe to say that this genre of statuary must have existed at Olympia long before, as we know it did elsewhere. The Rampin head, already discussed as a fragment of a victor statue, shows by the turn of its neck that athlete statues represented in motion existed at least as far back as the first half of the sixth century B. C.1296

ANTIQUITY OF MOTION STATUES IN GREECE.

Apart from specifically athletic types, we know that statues in motion, especially those representing winged figures, antedated the sixth century B. C. in Greece, and were, perhaps, coeval with the very origin of Greek art.1297 We know that the oldest Egyptian art attempted to render the human body in motion. We may instance the limestone funerary statuette dating from the Old Kingdom, which represents a slave woman grinding corn,1298 and similar figures found in the graves of Memphis. In fact, the making of such statues ceased in Egyptian art after the end of the Old Kingdom. While Assyro-Babylonian art represented figures in motion only on reliefs, Cretan art, as we have seen in the first chapter, showed the utmost skill in representing movement in figures in the round. It used to be assumed that in Greek art motion statues developed out of the archaic “Apollo” type through the gradual freeing of legs and arms. Any such assumption is easily disproved by the fact that figures in motion exist, which date back almost as far as figures at rest. It is equally fallacious to argue that slight movement was easier for the early artist to represent than violent movement, for just the contrary was the case, so that in general the greater the movement represented, the greater is the age of the given monument. Early vase-paintings show that the early painter delighted in portraying free movement.1299 It may be that the vase-painter preceded the sculptor in portraying movement, for it was easier to effect this in two dimensions than in three. But that statues in motion were already known at the beginning of the sixth century B. C., at least, is shown by the winged flying figure known as the Nike of Archermos,1300 unearthed on the island of Delos by the French in 1877, which is a masterpiece of early Chian sculpture, perhaps coeval with the statue dedicated to Artemis by Nikandre of Naxos, found a year later on Delos,1301 even though the latter appears more archaic. This earliest example of treating a flying figure in Greek sculpture we find repeated almost unchanged for a long time after, especially for akroteria figures on temples and in the minor arts. We might mention the bronze statuette of the end of the sixth century B. C., found on the Akropolis, which comes from the edge of a vessel and represents a winged Nike springing through the air, the legs in profile and the head and upper body turned to the front, just as in the figure of Archermos.1302 Such figures completely disprove the contention of Sikes that the Greek idea of a winged Nike did not antedate the fifth century B. C.1303 The early date of statues represented in a lunging attitude, like the Tyrannicides, is also shown by the story that Herakles destroyed his own statue by Daidalos in the agora of Elis, because in the night he mistook it for an enemy lunging at him. The scheme of combatants fighting with lances seems to have been native to Rhodian art at the end of the seventh century B. C., for we see it first on a painted terra-cotta plate in the British Museum, which represents Hektor and Menelaos fighting for the body of Euphorbos.1304 This pose was taken over into other arts, as we see it in the bronze statuette of a warrior found in Dodona in 1880, now in the Antiquarium in Berlin, which dates from the end of the sixth century B. C., or the beginning of the fifth.1305 All these examples are sufficient to show that representing the human figure in motion was an ancient motive in Greek art.

PYTHAGORAS AND MYRON.

Besides Kritios, two other sculptors of the transitional period—Pythagoras and Myron—gave a great impetus to the type of statue in motion in the first half of the fifth century B. C. Before proceeding further we shall briefly consider their artistic activity.

The attempt to ascribe something tangible to Pythagoras of Rhegion has often been made.1306 Practically all we really know about him is that he was celebrated for his statues of athletes. Pausanias mentions seven statues at Olympia of victors who won in many different events, in running (including the hoplite-race), wrestling, boxing, and the chariot-race; and Pliny, in giving a list of his works, praises the statue of a pancratiast at Delphi.1307 Thus Pausanias records the statues of the Sicilian wrestler Leontiskos, who won two victories in Ols. 81 and 82 ( = 456 and 452 B. C.);1308 of the boy boxer Protolaos of Mantinea, who won in Ol. (?) 74 ( = 484 B. C.);1309 of the boxer Euthymos of Lokroi, who won three times in Ols. 74, 76, 77 ( = 484, 476, 472 B. C.);1310 of Dromeus of Stymphalos, who won the long foot-race (δόλιχος) twice in Ols. (?) 80 and 81 ( = 460 and 456 B. C.);1311 of Astylos of Kroton, who won the stade-race, the double foot-race (δίαυλος) three times, and the hoplite-race twice in Ols. 73, 74, 75, 76 ( = 488–476 B. C.);1312 of the hoplite victor Mnaseas of Kyrene, victor in Ol. 81 ( = 456 B. C.);1313 and of the latter’s son Kratisthenes, who won the chariot-race in Ol. (?) 83 ( = 448 B. C.).1314 Some of these statues at Olympia must have been represented at rest, while others appear to have been represented in motion. Thus the statue of Mnaseas—though it is possible that it was represented in motion like that of Epicharinos by Kritios already mentioned—was probably represented at rest, since Pausanias described it simply as that of an ὁπλίτης ἀνήρ.1315 When we inquire into the style of Pythagoras we do not find much that is definite to guide us. Besides the bare list of his works, we have little except the statement of Diogenes Laertios that he was the first to aim at rhythm and symmetry.1316 Nevertheless many attempts have been made to identify his athlete statues with existing copies. Waldstein’s interpretation of the Choiseul-Gouffier statue in the British Museum (Pl. 7A), and of the so-called Apollo-on-the-Omphalos in Athens (Pl. 7B), as copies of an original athlete statue, is, as we have shown in the second chapter, well-founded, since the muscular build and the coiffure of these statues betoken the athlete. But his further attempt to show that the original was by Pythagoras, and his identifying it with the statue of the boxer Euthymos at Olympia, is not so reasonable.1317

The attempt to ascribe the head of a pancratiast from Perinthos in Dresden (Fig. 33)1318 to Pythagoras is not convincing, though Furtwaengler has included it in his provisional Pythagorean group,1319 as he does the boxer in the Louvre known as Pollux (Fig. 58),1320 the athlete of the Boboli Gardens in Florence formerly called Harmodios by Benndorf,1321 and the statue of an athlete of later style in Lansdowne House, London.1322 Other Fig. 33.—Head of an Athlete, from Perinthos. Albertinum, Dresden. scholars have also connected the Perinthos head with Pythagoras.1323 Hermann brought it into relation with the bust in the Riccardi Palace in Florence, which, despite its swollen ears, we have already classed as representing a hero and not an athlete, because of the garment thrown over the shoulder.1324 Furtwaengler tried to show that this bust was Myronian in style, classing it and the head of an athlete in Ince Blundell Hall, Lancashire, England,1325 along with that of the earlier Diskobolos, explaining the acknowledged differences in the three by Pliny’s statement that Myron primus multiplicasse veritatem videtur.1326 Arndt lists the Perinthos, Riccardi, and Ince Blundell heads, together with two others in the Jakobsen collection in Copenhagen,1327 the head of the so-called Pollux of the Louvre, a bearded head in Petrograd,1328 and the so-called head of Peisistratos in the Villa Albani, Rome,1329 as works emanating from one school of sculptors—the differences being explained by the many copyists. But to attempt to differentiate within the group two different sculptors, Myron or Pythagoras, he finds impossible, chiefly because we are dealing in every case with copies and not with originals, and because in no case are we certain that the head belongs to the torso on which it is set.1330 Still another critic, A. Schober, classes together as more or less related works the Riccardi, Ince Blundell, Perinthos, and Ny-Carlsberg heads, the Louvre boxer (Pollux), Chinnery Hermes in the British Museum,1331 the Boboli athlete, the athlete metamorphosed into a Hermes in the Loggia Scoperta of the Vatican, and the Lansdowne athlete, and finds them all Myronian. He believes the Perinthos head to be the prototype of the Riccardi and Ince Blundell heads.1332

In all this confusion of opinion as to the style of Pythagoras, and in the absence of any fixed criterion of judgment furnished by an original authenticated work, it seems hazardous to ascribe this or that sculpture to this little-known artist. The difficulty of separating Myron and Pythagoras is even greater than that which confronts us in trying to distinguish works of Lysippos and Skopas in the next century. We may some day recover a genuine Pythagorean athlete statue, though this is extremely improbable now that we have no more to expect from Olympia and Delphi, where most of his statues appear to have stood. But despite the difficulty, many identifications of his Olympia statues have been suggested, some of which we shall now mention.

As Pausanias says that the victor Mnaseas was surnamed Libys, the Libyan, and that his statue was by Pythagoras, it may be that this is the statue mentioned by Pliny in the words: [Pythagoras] fecit ... et Libyn, puerum tenentem tabellam eodem loco (= Olympiae) et mala ferentem nudum.1333 However, in that case we can not connect the words Libyn and puerum, since one represented a man and the other a boy.1334 Consequently, Pliny is speaking of three different statues, and not two, by this artist. Reisch believes that the statues of the boy and the nude man were represented at rest,1335 the boy bearing a tablet (i. e., an iconic πινάκιον) in his hand, like the Athenian youth appearing on a vase-painting in Munich.1336 Another scholar, L. von Urlichs, formerly identified the boy carrying the tablet with the statue of Protolaos at Olympia,1337 explaining the tablet as a means of characterizing the young learner. He changed his theory later,1338 when, in consequence of the discovery of the Corinthian tablets, he called it a votive tablet. His son, H. L. von Urlichs, agreed with him because of a passage in the collection of Proverbs by Zenobios, the sophist of Hadrian’s age,1339 according to which the marble statue of Nemesis at Rhamnous by Pheidias’ favorite pupil, the Parian sculptor Agorakritos,1340 held an apple-branch in her left hand, from which a small tablet containing the artist’s name was suspended, and also because certain coins of Syracuse and Catania represent Nike as carrying a tablet hung by a ribbon, on which the coin-striker’s name was engraved.1341 The same scholar further identified the nude man carrying the apples with the statue of Dromeus at Olympia. Since Pliny does not expressly say that the statue of the nude man was at Olympia, even though the sense of the passage inclines us to think it was, L. von Urlichs interprets the apples in the hand as an additional prize at Delphi, and so makes the statue that of a Pythian victor.1342 All such identifications are based on too uncertain premises.

That Pythagoras did make statues in motion is proved by his statue of a limping man at Syracuse mentioned by Pliny1343 in very realistic terms. We know of other statues by him representing athletes in motion only by inference. Thus, in the passage just quoted, Pliny says that he surpassed Myron with his Delphian pancratiast, which appears, inasmuch as Pliny merely calls the statue a pancratiast without mentioning any attribute, to have been represented in the characteristic lunging pose.1344 However, we can not say definitely, since the contemporary statue of the pancratiast Kallias, by Mikon of Athens, was represented in the attitude of rest, as we learn from the footprints on its recovered base.1345 Pliny also says that Pythagoras surpassed with his Delphian pancratiast his own statue of Leontiskos,1346 a statement which similarly appears to mark the latter as a statue in motion. Reisch assumes that the statue of Euthymos was in motion, since Pausanias says it was an ἀνδριὰς θέας ἐς τὰ μάλιστα ἄξιος.1347 On the whole, then, we may assume that Pythagoras was a sculptor who represented many of his victors in the attitude of motion.

Love of movement also characterized the artistic temperament of Myron, even though we know that he represented gods, heroes, and even athletes, at rest. Thus coins show that Athena in his Marsyas group was represented as standing in a tranquil pose.1348 Similarly the Riccardi bust in Florence, already discussed, which may be Myronian, comes from a statue of a hero shown in an attitude of rest. Myron was the first Greek sculptor to make his statues and groups self-sufficient,1349 that is, he gave to them a concentration which does not allow the spectator’s attention to wander. We readily see this new principle in art when we compare the Diskobolos and the group of the Tyrannicides. In the latter our attention is not concentrated, for a third figure, that of the tyrant on whom the onset is being made, is required in imagination to complete the group. We have no originals from Myron’s hand, but we are in far better case in regard to his work than in regard to that of Pythagoras, since we have unmistakable copies of two of his greatest works, the Marsyas and the Diskobolos. In them there is little trace of the archaic stiffness that is still visible in the Tyrannicides. Both of these works are represented in violent action, and in both there is complete concentration. While the Diskobolos represents a trained palæstra athlete executing a graceful movement, the Marsyas represents a wild Satyr of the woods, wholly untrained and controlled by savage passions, in the moment of fear.1350 In the Diskobolos the face is impassive, being little affected by the violent movement of the body—a contrast only partly to be explained as due to the copyist; in the Marsyas, on the contrary, there is complete harmony between the facial expression and the violent action of the body.

PLATE 22

Statue of the Diskobolos, from Castel Porziano, after Myron. Museo delle Terme, Rome.

Since we are chiefly dependent for our knowledge of Myron’s athletic work on the marble copies of the Diskobolos, which represents a new era in athletic art, and since this statue is perhaps the most famous athletic statue of all times, it will be well to speak of it here at some length. It is not, so far as we know, the statue of any particular victor, but rather a study in athletic sculpture.1351 Of this work there are twelve full size replicas and several statuettes. We shall discuss only those which give us the best idea of the lost original. The most faithful copy is the superb marble statue in the Palazzo Lancellotti, Rome, discovered on the Esquiline in 1781 (head seen in Pl. 23).1352 As the head has never been broken away from the body, this copy preserves the original pose, whereas all other copies have the head turned in the wrong direction.1353 The head and face preserve Attic proportions and the treatment of the hair and muscles differs from that of the other copies, which disclose later elements. The hair, in particular, shows signs of archaism, just as it must have been treated in the original, as evinced by Pliny’s criticism.1354 The most carefully worked copy, however, is the Parian marble torso, which was found in 1906 at Castel Porziano, the site of the ancient Laurentum, and is now in the Museo delle Terme, Rome (Pl. 22).1355 This torso was already restored in antiquity. Since the villa in which it was found was built in Augustus’ day and was restored in the second century A. D., we have the approximate dates both of the origin and restoration of the statue. A weak copy, discovered in Tivoli in 1791, is in the Sala della Biga of the Vatican; the head, left arm, and right leg below the knee have been restored, the head wrongly (Fig. 34).1356 A Græco-Roman copy discovered also in 1791, in Hadrian’s villa, is in the British Museum (Fig. 35).1357 Here the head, although antique, belongs to another copy, and has been set upon the torso wrongly, in such a way that the throat has two Adam’s apples. It looks straight to the ground and not upward as in the Lancellotti copy. There is a better replica of the torso in the Capitoline Museum, which formerly belonged to the French sculptor Étienne Mounot (1658–1733), who wrongly restored it as a falling warrior. It agrees in accuracy with the Lancellotti copy, though it is dry and lifeless, and is a better guide to the original than either the Vatican or British Museum replicas.1358 A combination of these and other copies gives us an excellent idea of the original bronze. In Pl. 23 we give a combination of the Vatican torso and the Lancellotti head from a cast in Munich.1359 Perhaps a better combination is that given by Bulle1360 from a cast made up of the delle Terme body, the Lancellotti head, the right arm and the diskos from the Casa Buonarroti in Florence, the feet from the British Museum copy and the fingers of the left hand being freely restored.

Fig. 34.—Statue of the Diskobolos, after Myron. Vatican Museum, Rome.

Fig. 35.—Statue of the Diskobolos, after Myron. British Museum, London.

PLATE 23

Statue of the Diskobolos, after Myron. A bronzed Cast from the Statue in the Vatican and Head from the Statue in the Palazzo Lancellotti, Rome.

The pose of the Lancellotti copy agrees with Lucian’s description of the original: “Surely, said I, you do not speak of the quoit-thrower who stoops in the attitude of one who is making his cast, turning round toward the hand that holds the quoit, and bending the other knee gently beneath him, like one who will rise erect as he hurls the quoit?”1361 That the head of the original was turned back as in the Lancellotti copy, and not downwards, as in the Vatican, British Museum and other replicas, is shown by this description, which is corroborated by two bronze statuettes in Munich and Arolsen1362 and by a gem in the British Museum.1363 Myron chose the most difficult, but at the same time the most characteristic, moment in swinging the diskos, the moment which combines the idea of rest and motion. The quoit has been swung back as far as it will go. The momentary pause before it is hurled forward suggests rest and at the same time implies motion, both that which has preceded and that which is to follow. It is this short pause at the end of the backward swing which the sculptor has fixed in the bronze. The right arm is stretched backwards as far as possible and draws with it the body with the left arm and head; in another instant the diskos will be hurled and the tension on the right leg relaxed. The original statue rested upon the right foot; the tree trunk is a necessary addition to the marble copies. As Greek art was mostly characterized by repose, we are not surprised that such a daring effect received the censure of the ancient critics. Quintilian says that if any one blames the statue for its labored effect, he is wrong, since the novelty and the difficulty of the work are its chief merits.1364 For a statue of the transitional stage of Greek sculpture it is remarkably bold; only in imagination can we see the action by which the body has got into this position and by which it will recover its equilibrium. It illustrates a principle laid down by Lessing in the Laokoön: “Of ever changing nature the artist can use only a single moment and this from a single point of view. And as his work is meant to be looked at not for an instant, but with long consideration, he must choose the most fruitful moment, and the most fruitful point of view, that, to wit, which leaves the power of imagination free.”1365

Myron was the sculptor of five statues for four victors at Olympia, one of a pancratiast, another of a boxer, a third of a runner, and two of a victor in the hoplite-race and the chariot-race.1366 Pliny also says that Myron made statues of pentathletes and pancratiasts at Delphi.1367 Thus he showed as much versatility as Pythagoras in the representation of victors in different contests. None of these statues has survived and the identification of existing Roman copies with any of them is, of course, highly problematical. Thus, a little further on we make the suggestion that the statue of the boxer in the Louvre, commonly known as Pollux (Fig. 58), may be, because of its Myronian character, the statue of the unknown Arkadian boxer at Olympia mentioned by Pausanias (in connection with the boy boxer Philippos) as the work of Myron.1368 Pliny, in the passage just cited, also mentions statues of pristae by Myron, a word which has given rise to many interpretations: e. g., sea-monsters (pristes or pistres), men working with a cross-cut saw (pristae), players at see-saw (pristae?),1369 and boxers (pyctae).1370 The manuscripts are unanimous for pristae, and hence it is probable that a realistic group by Myron is meant, since Myron is often classed as a realist in opposition to Polykleitos, the idealist. Long ago Dalecampius, followed in recent years by Furtwaengler,1371 believed that these pristae formed a votive offering, and H. L. von Urlichs has shown that a group of sawyers as the dedication of some master-builder is quite in harmony with fifth-century traditions.1372 H. Stuart Jones1373 connects the words Perseum et pristas of Pliny’s text, and follows the theory of Mayer1374 that the carpenters or sawyers were a part of a group, which represented the inclosure of Danaë and Perseus in the chest.

While the athletic statues in motion by Pythagoras and Myron became models for later sculptors, especially in the following century,1375 the rest statues of Polykleitos still remained in vogue in works by members of his family and school down through the fourth century, as we have seen in our treatment of the Argive-Sikyonian sculptors at Olympia.

MOTION STATUES REPRESENTING VICTORS IN VARIOUS CONTESTS.

We shall now review the types of victor statues, which reproduced in their pose the various contests, i. e., statues in motion. We shall find it convenient to follow in the main the order of contests as they appear on the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus1376—the stade-race (στάδιον), double race (δίαυλος), long race (δόλιχος), pentathlon (πένταθλον), wrestling, (πάλη), boxing (πύξ), pankration (παγκράτιον), hoplite-race (ὁπλίτης), chariot-race (τέθριππον), and horse-race (κέλης)—except that we shall class the four running races (nos. 1, 2, 3, and 11) together and include the three boys’ contests (παίδων στάδιον, πάλη, πύξ, nos. 8, 9, 10) under the corresponding men’s events. The classification of competitors by ages (ἡλικίαι), which varied at different festivals, will need a word of explanation. While athletes at Nemea, the Isthmus, and Delphi were divided into three classes, παῖδες, ἀγένειοι, and ἄνδρες,1377 at Olympia they were divided into two, παῖδες and ἄνδρες.1378 At local competitions there was a more elaborate classification. Thus at the Bœotian Erotidia, boys were divided into younger and older;1379 at the games held on the island of Chios there were five divisions, boys, younger, middle, and older ephebes, and men;1380 and at the Athenian Theseia, the boys were divided into first, second, and third classes, while an open contest also existed for boys of any age.1381 Girls at the Heraia at Olympia were similarly divided into three classes.1382 Plato proposed three classes of athletes in his Laws—παιδικοί, ἄνδρες, and a third class, ἀγένειοι, between boys and men.1383 The classification of athletes at Athens into παῖδες and ἄνδρες, adopted by Boeckh, Dittenberger, and Dumont,1384 is now the one generally followed. According to it the παῖδες were subdivided into three classes, those τῆς πρώτης ἡλικίας, τῆς δευτέρας, and τῆς τρίτης; and so the ἀγένειοι were merely the παῖδες της τρίτης ἡλικίας. The boys, including the ἀγένειοι, ranged from 12 to 18 years old; at 18 they became ἔφηβοι or ἄνδρες.1385 We have already seen that the age of boy victors at Olympia was over 17 and under 20.1386

As we have already remarked in an earlier chapter, we are mostly indebted to Pausanias for our knowledge of the victor statues at Olympia.1387 He mentions in his periegesis of the Altis 192 monuments, which were erected to 187 victors.1388 Some of these victors won in more than one contest, so that there are 258 different victories recorded in all. In the following sections we shall see how these were distributed among the various contests.

Runners: Stadiodromoi, Diaulodromoi, Dolichodromoi.

Running races formed at all times a part of the Greek games and of the exercises of the youth in the gymnasia and palæstræ. A scholiast on Pindar1389 says that the running race had its origin in the first celebration of the Eleusinian mysteries. It figures largely in mythology, especially at Olympia, which also shows its antiquity.1390 In historic times many varieties of running developed, but four chief ones were practised at the great games.1391 First there was the simple stade-race (στάδιον, δρόμος), which was merely the length of the stadion or 600 Greek feet, corresponding with the running race of Homer.1392 Then there was the double race (δίαυλος), twice as long as the preceding, to the end of the course and back again.1393 The long race (δόλιχος, ὁ μακρὸς δρόμος), which Philostratos derives from the institution of messenger runners (hemerodromoi),1394 is variously given as seven, twelve, fourteen, twenty, and twenty-four stades in length, i. e., from about four-fifths of a mile to nearly three miles.1395 Lastly there was the race in armor (ὁπλιτοδρόμος,1396 ὁπλίτης,1397 ἀσπίς.1398) The long race was instituted not so much as a contest of fleetness as of endurance. At Olympia only men were admitted, though there was such a race for boys at Delphi.1399 The Cretans were famed in this style of running.1400 The race in armor, which was a double race or two stades at Olympia, we shall discuss further on. Probably the boys’ stade-race at Olympia was shorter than that of the men. Plato, who gives the historic division of running races outlined above, has the boys run one-half of the men’s course and the ephebes (ἀγένειοι) two-thirds.1401 Just so Pausanias has the girl runners at the Olympia Heraia run one-sixth of the men’s stadion.1402

At Olympia, as at the Panathenaia in Athens and probably elsewhere, the first event preceding all others was the stade-race. Pausanias says that it was the oldest event at Olympia,1403 and it existed there all through antiquity from the first recorded Olympiad ( = 776 B. C.), when Koroibos of Elis won.1404 But the notion generally held1405 that the stade-race for men was honored above all other events at Olympia, because the winner became ἐπώνυμος for the Olympiad and because his name occurs in the lists of Africanus for every Olympiad, is incorrect. In two passages Thukydides cites Olympic pancratiasts for dates,1406 and in the earliest inscription which makes use of Olympiads for chronology the later introduced pankration is the event used.1407 The literary supremacy of Athens, where, at the Panathenaia, the stade-race was the most important event, doubtless helped later in making the stade runner at Olympia eponymous. This custom, however, was not generally employed before the third century B. C.

Fig. 36.—Athletic Scenes from a Bacchic Amphora in Rome. A. Stadiodromoi and Leaper. B. Diskobolos and Akontistai.

Fig. 37.—Athletic Scenes from a Sixth-century B. C. Panathenaic Amphora. Stadiodromoi (left) and Dolichodromoi (right).

Pausanias dates the introduction of the double foot-race at Olympia in Ol. 14 ( = 724 B. C.).1408 He does not say when the long race was instituted, but Eusebios says that it was in Ol. 15 ( = 720 B. C.).1409 The boys’ stade-race was introduced there in Ol. 37 ( = 632 B. C.).1410 The hoplite-race was inaugurated at the end of the sixth century B. C., in Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.).1411 Pausanias mentions 24 stadiodromoi at Olympia, who won 32 victories, which makes this event third in importance, next after boxing and wrestling. He mentions 7 victors in the double race with 11 victories, and 5 victors in the long race with 8 victories. He also mentions 12 hoplite victors with 14 victories. Consequently, in all four running events there, he records 48 victors with 65 victories, which brings the running races only to second place in importance at Olympia, ranking next after boxing.1412 The ordinary sprinter or stadiodromos, and the double sprinter, diaulodromos or hoplitodromos, naturally ran differently from the endurance runner or dolichodromos. Panathenaic vases clearly show this difference. Thus while the sprinter swung his arms violently, spreading the fingers apart and touching the ground only with his toes1413 (Figs. 36A and 37, left), the endurance runner, who had to conserve his strength to the last, ran with a long stride, holding his arms bent at the elbow and close to the body, his fists doubled and his body slightly bent forward, its weight resting on the ball of the foot, the heel being raised only a little. Thus Philostratos says that the dolichodromoi ran with their hands extended and with their fists balled, but that at the finish they also swung their arms violently like wings.1414 The race (showing balled fists) is seen on a Panathenaic amphora dating from the archonship of Nikeratos (333 B. C.), now in the British Museum, and on another of the sixth century B. C., pictured in Fig. 37 (right).1415 In the diaulos the movement was less violent. Thus on an Athens vase inscribed, “I am a diaulos runner,”1416 the movement is between that of a sprinter and an endurance runner. It seems probable that this difference in the style of running was similarly shown in sculpture.1417 We shall next consider certain sculptural monuments which represent runners.

The typical scheme for archaic and archaistic art was to represent the runner with one knee nearly touching the ground, the upper log forming a right angle with the lower, the other leg being perpendicular to the upper. This scheme appears on many vases and reliefs and in statuettes and statues.1418 This old method of depicting runners was kept up by vase-painters down to the time of the red-figured masters.1419 We see them on many reliefs, e. g., on the Ionic-Greek reliefs on the three archaic bronze tripods of the middle of the sixth century B. C. in the possession of Mr. James Loeb;1420 on a small bronze relief in the Metropolitan Museum in New York which represents a winged Boreas;1421 and on the marble funerary stele of the so-called dying hoplite runner found in 1902 near the Theseion, and now in the National Museum in Athens.1422 Almost the same position as that of the figure on this Athenian relief is seen in a small bronze in the Metropolitan Museum, whose primitive features and solidly massed hair date it in the early part of the sixth century B. C.1423 Another slightly larger bronze in the same museum represents Herakles running in a kneeling posture.1424 Because a spearman is incongruous behind a bowman, Kalkmann1425 and Furtwaengler1426 have interpreted the two kneeling figures near either end of the West gable of the temple on Aegina as archaic runners (see Fig. 21, left). We may further compare with these figures the positions, though not the motives, of two others from the West gable at Olympia,1427 as well as that of the kneeling bowman Herakles from the East gable of the temple on Aegina.1428 In this connection we shall also mention the life-size marble torso of a kneeling youth found in Nero’s villa at Subiaco in 1884 and now in the Museo delle Terme, Rome (Pl. 24).1429 This statue, representing a boy of delicate build apparently striding forward with the right leg and bending the left so that the knee nearly touches the ground, has been regarded by some scholars1430 as a runner, whose pose copies the archaic manner, being historically the last example known of its use in sculpture. The right shoulder is turned backward and the head, now missing, was turned back and upwards; the right arm is raised high and twisted about with the palm of the hand facing backward, the left arm extended with its hand in some way related to the right knee. The impression made on the spectator is that of a boy bending aside as if to ward off some danger. It is an excellent piece of work, evidently the marble copy of an original bronze. This has been variously assigned to the fifth, fourth, and even later centuries B. C.,1431 and interpreted in various ways1432—as a Niobid,1433 as Ganymedes swooped down upon by the eagle,1434 as Hylas drawn into the water by nymphs when he was filling his pitcher,1435 as a ball-player,1436 as a boy throwing a lasso,1437 as a gable figure,1438 as a runner at the games, etc. Many of these interpretations are purely fanciful; the last is, perhaps, as good as any, though the strongly turned upper body seems not quite fitted to it. If it represents a runner, the sculptor has reproduced the well-known archaic pose.

The Statue of the Runner Ladas.

We shall next consider the famous statue of the runner Ladas by Myron, which is unfortunately known to us only from literary evidence, but which attained in antiquity an even greater fame than his nameless Diskobolos, since it portrayed even more tension than that wonderful work. Its fame was partly due to the picturesque story how the victory cost the runner his life, for he died of strain while on his way home to Sparta; it was also due in no less degree to the striking way in which the victor was depicted.1439

Two fourth-century epigrams tell us of the statue. The first of these runs:

Λάδας τὸ στάδιον εἴθ’ ἥλατο, εἴτε διέπτη,
οὐδὲ φράσαι δυνατόν· δαιμόνιον τὸ τάχος.

[ὁ ψόφος ἦν ὕσπληγγος ἐν οὔασι, καὶ στεφανοῦτο

Λάδας καὶ κάμνων δάκτυλον οὐ προέβη.]1440

The second epigram, naming Myron as the sculptor, runs:

Οἷος ἔης φεύγων τὸν ὑπήνεμον, ἔμπνοε Λάδα,
Θῦμον, ἐπ’ ἀκροτάτῳ πνεύματι θεὶς ὄνυχα,
τοῖον ἐχάλκευσέν σε Μύρων, ἐπὶ παντὶ χαράξας
σώματι Πισαίου προσδοκίην στεφάνου.

PLATE 24

Statue of a Kneeling Youth, from Subiaco. Museo delle Terme, Rome.

To these verses are added the following, which Benndorf thinks belonged to another epigram on the same statue:

πλήρης ἐλπίδος ἐστίν, ἄκροις δ’ ἐπὶ χείλεσιν ἆσθμα
ἐμφαίνει κοίλων ἔνδοθεν ἐκ λαγόνων.
πηδήσει τάχα χαλκὸς ἐπὶ στέφος, οὐδὲ καθέξει
ἁ βάσις· ὢ τέχνη πνεύματος ὠκυτέρα.1441

Professor Ernest Gardner translates the two parts of the second epigram as follows:

“Like as thou wast in life, Ladas, breathing forth thy panting soul,1442 on tip-toe, with every sinew at full strain, such hath Myron wrought thee in bronze, stamping on thy whole body thy eagerness for the victor’s crown of Pisa.”

“He is filled with hope, and you may see the breath caught on his lips from deep within his flanks; surely the bronze will leave its pedestal and leap to the crown. Such art is swifter than the wind.”1443

Even if part of the epigram is rhetorical, we can not doubt that Ladas was represented in the final spurt just before he arrived at the goal. His eagerness was not confined to the face—though the panting breath could have been indicated by half opened lips, but was visible in the whole body.1444 Whereas the girl runner of the Vatican (Pl. 2) is represented at the beginning of the race, Myron’s statue represented Ladas at the end of it. Probably the victor was represented with his weight thrown on the advanced foot and with the arms close to the sides and bent at the elbows—a treatment which would have been easy for the sculptor of the Diskobolos. Mahler tried to identify the statue with one of the Naples group of so-called runners (Fig. 51).1445 However, as we shall see, these probably represent wrestlers, and not runners, and neither of them shows any such tension as we should expect from the description of the statue of Ladas. Though Foerster believes that the statue of Ladas stood in Olympia, in honor of his victory in the long race there,1446 we can not say definitely where it was.1447

Fig. 38.—Statue of a Runner. Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome.

Fig. 39.—Statue of a Runner. Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome.

Perhaps our best representation of runners is to be seen in the two marble statues discovered near Velletri and now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome (Figs. 38 and 39).1448 The hair and the sharp edges of the modeling of the flesh, as well as the tree-stumps near the right legs, show that these statues are copies of bronze originals. They were at first interpreted as runners, but later were regarded as forming a group of wrestlers, who were standing opposite one another and holding their hands out for an opening. However, there is nothing in the pose or the expression of these statues to show the tension of two opponents. Moreover, they certainly never formed a group, for stylistic differences reveal that they are copies of statues by different artists who lived at different times; one belongs to the severe style of the last quarter of the fifth century,1449 while the other, with its softer forms, smaller head, and deeper-set eyes, is a product of the fourth century B. C.1450 The prominent edge of the chest is doubtless meant to indicate the hard breathing of a runner.1451 Just in front of the tree-stump on the older statue is to be seen a round hole in the plinth, which may have been made for the end of a club held in the right hand, as such an object is found in other works of art, notably in a statuette from Palermo, which is the copy of a fifth-century B. C. original, and on a second-century B. C. grave-stele from Crete.1452 Its use, however, is not certainly known.

Furtwaengler, by an ingenious process of reasoning, argued that he had recovered an actual statue of an Olympic runner in the so-called Alkibiades, formerly in the Villa Mattei, but now in the Sala della Biga of the Vatican.1453 This torso he ascribed to the sculptor Kresilas, because of its likeness to the Perikles of that master, which once stood on the Akropolis,1454 and to a marble torso in Naples representing a wounded man ready to fall, which he thinks is a copy of the Volneratus deficiens of Kresilas mentioned by Pliny.1455 The Alkibiades is very similar to the Naples gladiator, though later in date; the bearded head, drawn-in stomach, and muscular chest, and the veins in the upper arm are common to both. The restorer of the Vatican statue has placed a helmet under the right foot. But the deep-breathing chest may indicate a runner, as we saw in the case of the statues of the Conservatori just discussed. Furtwaengler has the body bend further forward, so that the right foot may rest upon the ground and the glance be fixed upon the goal, with the arms extended at the elbows, a position proved for the right arm, at least, by the puntello above the hip. As the head shows portrait-like features and only those athletes who had won three victories had portrait statues, he has identified the original of the Alkibiades with the statue of the famous stade-runner Krison of Himera, who won his victories at Olympia just after the middle of the fifth century B. C., the approximate date of the Vatican copy.1456 Such an identification appears, however, to be too far-fetched to be convincing.

Statues of Boy Runners.

Fig. 40.—Statue of the Thorn-puller (Spinario). Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome.

Probably the statues of boy runners did not differ essentially from those of men. That they were sometimes represented in motion is shown by the footprints on the recovered base of the statue of Sosikrates by an unknown artist. Here the right foot touched the ground only with the front portion.1457 The view has often been expressed that the bronze statue in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome, known as the Spinario (Thorn-puller) portrays a runner (Fig. 40).1458 It represents a boy, from twelve to fifteen years old, seated upon a rock bending over and engrossed in extracting a thorn from his left foot, which rests upon the right knee. The severe hair treatment, low forehead, full cheeks, and strong chin appear to show the ideal beauty of a boy of the period of about 460 B. C. The motive seems to have been inspired directly by nature—witness the supple bend of the back, the delicate arms, the naïve, though not too realistic, concentration of interest in the act portrayed. Few pieces of ancient sculpture have given rise to more discussion and extraordinary difference of opinion than this popular work. One school of archæologists1459 believes it a late adaptation of a Hellenistic original, a more accurate copy being the one in the British Museum, and consequently views it as a purely genre statue impossible of conception before Alexander’s time. According to this view the London copy was an archaistic work of the time of Pasiteles. Another school, however, including Helbig, Wolters, Kekulé, and many others, sees in the Roman statue an original work of 460 to 450 B. C., chiefly because the face shows great similarity to those of the statues of the Olympia gables (especially to that of Apollo)1460. According to this view the statue can not have been a genre work, as such works of decorative character were of later origin, but the motive must be sought in some definite incident—in some myth or historical event. Thus it has been referred to the colonization of the Ozolian Lokroi, whose ancestor Lokros is said to have got a thorn in his foot and to have founded cities near where this occurred in fulfilment of an oracle. Many others, on the other hand, have seen in its motive that of a boy victor in running, who has gained his victory despite a thorn, which he is now pulling out, and who has dedicated his statue to commemorate both the victory and the untoward circumstances under which it was won. It has been assigned to various sculptors and schools—to Myron, Pythagoras, and Kalamis, and to Peloponnesian, Bœotian, and even Sicilian art.1461 The boy’s absorption in his task certainly reminds us of the concentration so characteristic of the Diskobolos of Myron. In determining its age and artistic affiliations several things must be considered. In the first place, the Roman statue is a copy, as the rock on which the boy sits is cast with the figure, which would have been impossible in the fifth century B. C. The long hair on this copy, which is short on the one in the British Museum, falls down the neck, but not over the cheeks, as it should on a head which is thus bent downwards. Pasiteles almost certainly would have tied it with a ribbon. This shows that the original was the work of an artist who was used to making standing statues, and was not aware of the change in the representation of the hair brought about by drooping ones. Such considerations, in conjunction with the archaic facial characteristics, almost certainly refer the original work to the fifth century B. C., a date when genre statues, produced for adornment, did not exist. Consequently a definite incident must be represented by it, and it is quite possible that this incident should be sought in athletic sculpture in the representation of a boy runner.

The Thorn-puller became a model for many imitations from the beginning of Hellenistic times on. These imitations tended to greater realism and consequently to the debasement of the original conception, for they were made to represent peasants, shepherds, satyrs, and even negroes. The motif was also transferred to figures of girls, as, e. g., in the fragment of a terra-cotta statuette found in 1912 at Nida-Haddernheim.1462 In the early Empire it was frequently copied in marble, and again, during the Renaissance, the motive was used for small bronzes.1463 Of Hellenistic copies, showing how the motive deteriorated, we shall mention only two: the marble one found on the Esquiline, in 1874, and known as the Castellani copy, now in the British Museum,1464 the sculptor of which has made it into a truly genre fountain figure by transforming the noble features of the beautiful Greek runner into the snub nose and thick lips of a street Arab, and the still later bronze statuette found near Sparta and now in the Paris collection of Baron Edmund de Rothschild,1465 which represents the boy extracting the thorn in anger.

Similarly the so-called Sandal-binder—with replicas in Paris (Fig. 8), London, Athens, Munich, and elsewhere, has been looked upon, without decisive grounds, to be sure, as a runner who is tying on his sandals after the race.1466 We have already discussed this statue in Chapter II, in connection with the subject of assimilation.

Hoplitodromoi.

The race in armor had a practical value in the training of soldiers, and so became a popular sport, since it appealed not only to the trained athlete, but to the citizen in general. It belonged to “mixed athletics,”1467 i. e., to competitions which were conducted under handicap conditions, such as our obstacle races, and consequently it never attained the prestige of the strictly athletic events. It came last among the gymnic contests at Olympia and elsewhere,1468 being followed by the equestrian events. It seems to have varied in different places in the distance run, in the armor of the runner, and in the rules which governed the race. At Olympia, as at Athens, it appears to have been a diaulos or a race of two stadia.1469 The most strenuous race of the sort was run at the Eleutheria at Platæa, where the contestants were completely enveloped in armor1470 and were subject to peculiar rules. At Olympia the competitors originally ran with helmets, greaves, and round shields, as we infer from scenes on archaic vases and from the statement of Pausanias that the statue of the first victor in this event, Damaretos of Heraia, was represented with these arms.1471 In this passage Pausanias adds that the Eleans and other Greeks later (ἀνὰ χρόνον) gave up the greaves, and we find that they disappear on the vase-paintings.1472 Hauser has shown that the vase-paintings, which, however, mostly illustrate the Athenian practice, display a varied custom in respect of the use of the greaves before about 520 B. C., the general use of them until about 450 B. C., and after that date their disuse.1473 The helmet disappeared after the greaves, but the shield was never given up.1474 Thus the bronze statue of Mnesiboulos of Elateia, a victor (σὺν τῇ ἀσπίδι) of Pausanias’ day, which stood in “Runner Street” of his native city, appears to have been represented with the shield.1475 It was for this reason that the event was later sometimes called merely ἀσπίς.1476 The shields that appear on the vases are always round and the helmets are Attic.1477 The gradual reduction in the amount of the armor may have been a concession to the regular athletes, who probably looked upon the contest as a spurious sort of athletics. As for the style of the race, the hoplite runners seem to have run somewhat as the stade and double-course runners, i. e., with their right hands up and their arms violently swinging.1478

Fig. 41.—Hoplitodromes. Scenes from a r.-f. Kylix. Museum of Berlin.

The picturesqueness of such a race appealed especially to vase-painters, who have given us all the details of the event. The preparations for the race are seen on a red-figured kylix from Vulci, now in Paris, ascribed to Euphronios (Panaitios), on which one runner is donning his armor, while others are practising preliminary runs.1479 The start is seen in the right-hand figure depicted on a r.-f. kylix in Berlin (Fig. 41, a).1480 On another r.-f. kylix we see a pair of hoplites, one slowing up before reaching the central post, the other turning it.1481 The finish is seen on an obscene r.-f. kylix from Vulci in the style of Brygos, in the British Museum, where the bearded winner, with his helmet in his hand, looks back on his rival, and the latter, apparently in disgust, drops his shield.1482 The most complete illustration of the race is to be seen on the r.-f. Berlin kylix just mentioned (Fig. 41, a, b, c.) Here on one side is a group of three runners; the right-hand one is bending over, ready to start; the one at the left is about to turn the central post, and the one in the centre, who is turned in an opposite direction, is on the home stretch; on the other side of the vase are three runners in full course, while another appears on the interior of the vase.1483 Some vases seem to show that the contest often had a semi-comic character, the variations in running being used to amuse the spectators. Thus the shield might be dropped and picked up again,1484 or it might be held in a peculiar manner.1485 This comic element is brought out in the Aves of Aristophanes, in a scene in which Peisthetairos, while observing the chorus of birds advancing with their crests (λόφωσις), compares them with hoplite runners advancing to begin the race.1486 The regular painter outdid the vase-painter Fig. 42.—Bronze Statuette of a Hoplitodrome (?). University Museum, Tuebingen. in representing the runner in violent motion, if we may rely on Pliny’s description of two paintings of hoplites by Parrhasios.1487 In one of these the runner was represented as perspiring as he ran, while in the other he was represented as having laid aside his arms and panting so realistically that the observer seemed to hear him.

We have few representations of hoplitodromes in sculpture. In the preceding chapter we discussed the two marble helmeted heads found at Olympia (Fig. 30), one of which shows that the statue of which it was a part was represented at rest, while the other, because of the twist in the neck, seems to have come from a statue which represented the runner in violent motion. Pausanias saw on the Athenian Akropolis the statue of the hoplite runner Epicharinos, the work of the sculptor Kritios, represented as practising starts (ὁπλιτοδρομεῖν ἀσκήσαντος).1488 In the well-known Tux bronze in the University Museum at Tuebingen, we have a statuette in which the position of the statue of Epicharinos is probably reproduced. This little bronze, which is only 0.16 meter tall (Fig. 42),1489 represents a bearded man, entirely nude, except for the Attic helmet on his head, standing with feet close together, knees slightly bent, and body inclined forward. The right arm is extended, while the left, crooked at the elbow, rests upon the hip. While Schwabe and Wolters, following the early theory of Hirt and of the sculptor Dannecker, interpreted the bronze as the figure of a charioteer, whose left hand was drawn back to hold the reins and whose right was outstretched in a gesture intended to quiet the horses, Hauser, de Ridder, Bulle, and many other archæologists have interpreted it better as a hoplitodrome. The left arm, then, carried a round shield, such as we have seen on Attic vases. The next moment the right leg will be advanced, the shield, held back to get a better start, will be pushed forward, and the runner will race to the goal in a series of leaps, since the weight of the shield would prevent him from following the more regular motion of the ordinary runner. It probably represents, therefore, a hoplite runner, not in the actual course, as Hauser thought, but practicing a preliminary start, as de Ridder argued. If the figure represented a charioteer, the legs would have been set farther apart, in order to give a firmer position, and it would not be represented as standing on a base, nor would it be wearing a helmet. The statuette stylistically belongs to the opening years of the fifth century B. C., and may well be a free imitation of a life-size original of such statues of hoplites as stood in the Altis at Olympia. Despite the energy depicted in this figure, it is rash to connect it with the Aeginetan sculptures, as Wolters and Collignon have done, since a comparison between it and the Champion of the East gable1490 will show great differences. Brunn ascribed the original to Pythagoras; de Ridder, with reservations, to Kritios and Nesiotes; while Bulle is more reasonable in referring it to an important though unnamed artist of the early fifth century B. C.

Hartwig has published a bronze statuette from Capua,1491 now in the Imperial collection at Vienna, representing a nude youth with a crested helmet on his head. There is no trace of a shield, but the helmet and the similarity of the pose to that of the Tuebingen bronze make it probable that this statuette also represents a hoplitodrome starting. The so-called Diomedes of Myronian style in the Palazzo Valentini, Rome,1492 whose stooping posture recalls the Diskobolos and accordingly has been interpreted as one by Matz and von Duhn, more probably also represents a hoplite-runner, as Furtwaengler maintained, because of the similarity of its pose to that of the Tux bronze and because of its helmeted head.1493

Fig. 43.—Statue of the so-called Borghese Warrior.
Louvre, Paris.

Some other attempts to see hoplite runners in existing works of sculpture have not been so successful. Thus Rayet’s attempt to resuscitate the old interpretation of Quatremère de Quincy, who had explained the statue of the so-called Borghese Warrior by Agasias of Ephesos (Fig. 43) as that of a hoplitodrome just before reaching the goal, has been recently revived again by Six.1494 This famous marble statue of the Louvre, belonging to late Greek art, is an example of the last development in the Argive-Sikyonian school, which for centuries had been devoted to athletic sculpture.1495 Since the statue has no helmet, there seems to be no valid reason for not adhering to the usual interpretation, according to which it represents a warrior—by restoring the lost right arm and hand with a sword—who is defending himself against a foe above him, conceived of as seated upon a horse. The attitude and the upward gaze are certainly not those of a runner. Though Collignon, following Visconti, believes the figure to be one of a group, the man actually defending himself against a horseman and covering himself with his shield as he looks up, it is doubtful whether a second figure ever existed. The artist seems to have contented himself with representing, not a fight, but only a fighting pose. We are beginning to understand that the Greek sculptor left something to the imagination of the beholder.

An attempt has also been made to see a dying hoplite runner in the Parian marble archaic grave-relief in the National Museum in Athens, which has already been mentioned as an example of the archaic scheme of representing running.1496 It represents a beardless youth running in a half-kneeling posture, even though the head is bent and turned in the opposite direction. The eyes appear to be closed—due, perhaps, to the faulty sculptor—and the two hands are touching the breast. While no shield is represented (it is contended that its presence would nearly hide the figure), still, because of the helmet and the position of the arm, which latter is obviously that of a long-distance runner, Philios, followed by Perrot-Chipiez and Bulle, explained it as the representation of a hoplite runner who is expiring at the end of his course. They date it about 520 B. C.,1497 the date of the introduction of this race at Olympia. However, the absence of the shield, to say nothing of the greaves, seems an insuperable objection to such an hypothesis, as the shield was never omitted in this race, but was invariably its symbol. Svoronos is therefore more probably right in interpreting the relief as the monument of a military runner (δρομοκῆρυξ), even if his dating (490–480 B. C.) is somewhat too late,1498 and if his identifying it with some particular messenger (such as the Athenian runner Pheidippides, who ran to Sparta for aid just prior to the battle of Marathon) is fanciful.

Pentathletes.

The peculiar features of the pentathlon (πένταθλον) were the three events, jumping, diskos-throwing, and javelin-throwing. All five events are summed up in Simonides’ epigram on the pentathlete Diophon, who won at Delphi and on the Isthmus, the second line of which runs: ἅλμα, ποδωκείην, δίσκον, ἄκοντα, πάλην.1499

The pentathlon did not exist in Homer’s time. Pindar expressly says that it did not exist in heroic days, but that then a separate prize was given for each feat.1500 At the games on Scheria, King Alkinoos boasts to Odysseus of the superiority of his countrymen in πύξ τε παλαισμοσύνῃ τε καὶ ἅλμασιν ἠδὲ πόδεσσιν.1501 The pentathlon for men was introduced at Olympia at the same time as wrestling toward the end of the eighth century, in Ol. 18 ( = 708 B. C.),1502 and the pentathlon for boys eighty years later, in Ol. 38 ( = 628 B. C.), only to be stopped soon after.1503 Pausanias mentions fifteen victors at Olympia, who had statues erected in their honor, for seventeen victories in the pentathlon, thus giving the pentathletes sixth rank there in point of number.

The b.-f. Bacchic amphora in Rome already discussed represents four events out of the five: running, leaping, diskos-throwing, and akontion-throwing (Figs. 36 A and 36 B).1504 On several Panathenaic vases we find one or more events, and the three characteristic ones on several, one of which we here reproduce (Fig. 44).1505

The various events are common on r.-f. vases,1506 though these may not represent the pentathlon contests, but merely gymnasium scenes, showing that such contests were important. We have already said that the pentathlon represented the whole physical training of Greek youths; consequently the pentathlete was looked upon as the typical athlete, being superior to all others in all-round development, even if surpassed by them in certain special events. It was for this reason that Polykleitos, in order to embody the principles of his athlete canon, made a statue of a javelin-thrower (the Doryphoros) as the best example of an all-round man.

Fig. 44.—Pentathletes. Scene from a Panathenaic Amphora in the
British Museum, London.

None of the statues of pentathletes at Olympia has been recovered with certainty in Roman copies. That some of them were represented at rest is shown by the base of the statue of the victor Pythokles of Elis, by the elder Polykleitos, which has been recovered.1507 This base supported two different statues in succession. The feet of the earlier one by Polykleitos were riveted into circular holes, and behind the right foot on the upper surface of the base was inscribed the artist’s name, while the victor’s appeared on the vertical front. This statue was later removed and was replaced by another, whose pose was different, as we see from the footmarks, which show that the feet were attached with lead in hollows. Probably the old inscription was renewed in archaic letters when this second statue was set up, the older letters being retained, perhaps, to conceal the theft. The original statue was removed by the first century B. C., or perhaps under Nero;1508 the new one was also inscribed as the work of Polykleitos. A base of the Hadrianic or Antonine age has been found in Rome, inscribed with the names Polykleitos and Pythokles.1509 Since the footmarks do not agree with those of either one of the Olympia statues, Petersen believes that the existing footmarks are due to an older use of the base and that they have nothing to do with the statue of Pythokles. Perhaps the statue on the Roman base was the original one by Polykleitos removed from Olympia to Rome, though it is possible that it was only a copy, the original being elsewhere in Rome. While the later statue at Olympia had the feet squarely on the ground, the original one stood on the right foot, the left being drawn back and turned out, touching the ground only with the ball. Hence the left knee must have turned outwards, a natural position, if the head of the statue was turned slightly to the left. In other words, this is the usual Polykleitan scheme. Furtwaengler has made a strong though hardly convincing attempt to identify this original statue with a copy surviving in two replicas at Rome and Munich, which, as he believes, fit the conditions of the statue of Pythokles.1510 These copies represent a nude youth standing with the weight of the body on the right leg, the left drawn back and outwards. The head is turned to the left, the right arm is held close to the side (the hand, perhaps, once holding a fillet), and the left forearm is outstretched from the elbow and holds an aryballos in the hand. The two works are manifestly Polykleitan in style—the body, head, and hair treatment resembling that of the Doryphoros. He assumed that the feet corresponded in scale with the footmarks on the Olympia base.

Helbig, in the first edition of his Fuehrer, recognized the kinship between the Vatican statuette and the Doryphoros of Polykleitos, and was prone to accept Furtwaengler’s identification; but later on, in the third edition, he ascribed the statuette only to the Polykleitan circle and denied that its foot position corresponded with that of the Pythokles base. Amelung also, while accepting its Polykleitan character, has shown that the feet of the statuette are closer together than those on the Olympia base and are placed at a slightly different angle. As for the Munich statue, both Helbig and Amelung have ruled it out of the evidence. The head, though similar to that of the statuette, also discloses marked differences, and the legs of the two works do not have the same pose. Loewy agrees with Amelung that the statue of Pythokles conformed with the type of the Diadoumenos—especially Fig. 45.—Statue of a Boy Victor (the Dresden Boy). Albertinum, Dresden. with the Vaison copy (see Fig. 28)—and with that of the Doryphoros.1511 We can not, therefore, safely assume that the statue of Pythokles has been recovered in any existing copy.1512 A further variant of the works just discussed should be mentioned here—the beautiful marble statue of a boy victor in Dresden, known as the Dresden Boy (Fig. 45).1513 In this statue the leg position is nearly like that indicated by the marks on the Pythokles basis, though the left foot is not set so far back nor its tip so far out. The head is turned to the left and slightly lowered, the right arm hung to the side, and the left forearm was outstretched, the hand doubtless holding some athletic article, at which the boy is looking down, perhaps a diskos1514 or a fillet. This beautiful athlete statue has many stylistic points in common with the Diadoumenos, and shows similar Attic influence, and its original may be referred with Furtwaengler to the later period of the master himself. It gives us an excellent idea how Polykleitos may have made his Olympia boy victors appear. A more remote variant seems to be furnished by a fourth-century B. C. bronze statuette of a youthful athlete in the Louvre.1515 Here the position of the feet, the turn of the head, and the direction of the gaze are the same as in the Dresden Boy. However, as the right arm is raised horizontally, Furtwaengler believed that the right hand held a fillet which the youth is letting fall into the palm of the left.

That statues of pentathletes at Olympia were also represented in motion is shown by the footmarks on the recovered base of one of the two statues mentioned by Pausanias as set up in honor of the Elean Aischines, who won two victories some time between Ols. 126 and 132 ( = 276 and 252 B. C.).1516 These marks show that the statue represented the victor in violent movement, since the left foot was turned outwards and the right one was brought almost to the edge of the base.

We shall next consider in some detail how the pentathlete may have been represented at Olympia in the three characteristic contests of jumping, diskos-throwing, and javelin-throwing. We have already discussed the runner, and in a future section we shall discuss the wrestler, both of whom contended in these events not only in the pentathlon, but also in the corresponding independent competitions.

Jumpers.

Jumping was a well-known contest in heroic days. In Homer, however, it did not take place at the games of Patroklos, but only at those held by King Alkinoos.1517 Quintus Smyrnæus has the Trojan heroes contend in jumping,1518 and the contest goes back to mythology.1519 Though Plato does not mention it, Aristotle does.1520 Later it became an essential part of the pentathlon, though never an independent contest at the great games. It was probably considered to be the most representative feature of the pentathlon, perhaps because of the customary use of the halteres in the physical exercises of the gymnasium. Jumping-weights were, in fact, the special symbol of the pentathlon, and, as we saw in the preceding chapter, were often the definitive attributes indicated on statues of pentathletes.1521 We shall next discuss the appearance and use of such jumping-weights. Their form is often a sure indication of the date of a statue.

Juethner has made a careful study of the different shapes of halteres and his conclusions have been followed, for the most part, by Gardiner.1522 The halteres do not appear in Homer, but were in existence at least by the beginning of the sixth century B. C., and a little later they probably appeared on pentathlete statues. To this period belongs the lead weight from Eleusis now in Athens, whose inscription records that it was dedicated by one Epainetos to commemorate his victory in jumping.1523 On vase-paintings of the sixth and fifth centuries B. C., we see numerous types, but two main ones. Early b.-f. vases show a semicircular piece of metal or stone with a deep depression on one side for a finger grip, the two club-like ends being equal (as in Figs. 36A and 44). In the early fifth century B. C., a club-like type came in, which shows many modifications in the size and shape of the ends.1524 In the fifth century B. C., the second main type appeared, of an elongated semispherical form, thickest in the middle and with the ends pointed or rounded. These correspond with the “archaic” ones, which Pausanias saw on the figure of Agon in the dedicatory group of Mikythos at Olympia1525 and describes as forming half an elongated circle and so fastened as to let the fingers pass through. We have two stone examples of this type: one found at Corinth, now in the Polytechnic Institute in Athens,1526 in which a hole is cut behind the middle for the fingers and thumbs, and a more primitive single one from Olympia.1527 Philostratos divides the Greek jumping-weights into “long” and “spherical,”1528 which Juethner identifies with the two types just discussed. Gardiner, however, finds this impossible, since Pausanias speaks of one type as “archaic,” and he consequently thinks that these were no longer in use in the time of Philostratos. After the fifth century B. C. we have little evidence about halteres until Roman days, when a cylindrical type appears on Roman copies of Greek statues of athletes, on mosaics and wall-paintings.1529 Thus it appears on the tree-trunk in two athlete statues in Dresden1530 and the Pitti Gallery in Florence,1531 and on the Lateran athlete mosaic from Tusculum of the imperial period.1532 In Roman days jumping-weights were used for the most part in medical gymnastics, like our dumb-bells.1533

Philostratos says that the jump was the most difficult part of the pentathlon.1534 It never existed as an independent competition despite its popularity in Greece. This popularity is attested by the frequency with which it is depicted on vases from the sixth century B. C. onward. Here the jumper is regularly shown with weights, and we can assume that many pentathlete statues were so represented, the sculptor ordinarily copying the kind of weight which was in use in his own age. While Philostratos in his day thought that the use of weights was merely to aid in exercise, Aristotle long before had rightly understood that the jumper could make a longer jump with than without them,1535 a fact easily proved by the feats of modern jumpers. While the modern record for the running broad jump is 25 feet 3 inches,1536 an English athlete jumped 29 feet 7 inches with the use of 5-pound weights,1537 and a German officer in full uniform jumped 23 feet from a springboard.1538 The recorded jumps of Phaÿllos at Delphi and of Chionis at Olympia, the former 55 feet and the latter 52, can not, however, be explained as ordinary broad jumps, even if we assume that the Greek jumper was far superior to the modern one. Such jumps would be impossible even with springboards or raised platforms, and we have no evidence that the Greeks used such devices. We might explain them on the theory of triple jumps1539—though the difficulty of such a solution is very great—or simply as mistakes in the records. Thus the record of Phaÿllos is found in a late epigram, in which this athlete is also said to have thrown the diskos 105 feet.1540 That of Chionis is, to be sure, given by Africanus.1541 But it is more than probable that νβʹ (52) of his record should read κβʹ (22), since the Armenian Latin text reads duos et viginti cubitus.1542

Vase-paintings tell us how the halteres were used.1543 The jumper swung them forward and upward until they were level with or higher than the head; then he brought them down, bending the body forward until the hands were below the knees, the jump taking place on the return swing. We find the preliminary swing represented most commonly on the vases;1544 we also see on them the top of the upward swing,1545 the bottom of the downward swing,1546 the jumper in midair,1547 and the moment just before alighting.1548 The act of landing is seen on an Etruscan wall-painting from a tomb at Chiusi.1549 Running jumps are the ones most commonly depicted.1550

The representation of the jump, therefore, was specially adapted to the vase-painter and not to the sculptor. If any movement in the jump could have been represented to advantage in sculpture, it would have been the early position in which the weights were swung forward and upwards. This is the one represented on an incised bronze diskos from Sicily now in the British Museum,1551 where an athlete, with his right leg drawn back for the spring, is holding the weights in his outstretched hands. A small finely modelled bronze statuette dating from the middle of the fifth century B. C., in the Metropolitan Museum, New York, may represent a jumper either just taking off, or perhaps just finishing the jump.1552 The athlete is standing with his left foot advanced, his knees bent back, and his body leaning forward, and is holding both arms in front, the palms downwards. Such a concentrated attitude reminds us strongly of Myron, under whose influence this statuette must have been made. Some have interpreted it as the representation of a diver, though the hands seem to be held too far apart and the body wrongly poised for that position, as we see it in a statuette of a diver from Perugia.1553 More likely a jumper is intended, as the attitude is very similar to that depicted on several vases.1554 However, as the jumper has no halteres, it can not represent a pentathlete, but must be an ordinary gymnasium athlete.

Diskoboloi.

The diskos-throw (δισκοβολία) goes back to mythology and heroic days.1555 In Homer, at the games of Patroklos, Achilles casts a metal mass called the σόλος.1556 This was the primitive type of diskos. Of such early contests and feats of strength we have a good record in the red-sandstone mass, weighing 143.5 kilograms ( = 315 pounds), which has been found at Olympia, marked with a sixth-century inscription to the effect that one Bybon threw it over his head.1557 There is nothing athletic, however, about the use of such a stone or of the Homeric solos. The diskos was also known to Homer.1558 It was of stone, and in Pindar the heroes Nikeus, Kastor, and Iolaos still hurl the stone diskos instead of the metal one of the poet’s day.1559 The stone diskos appears on sixth-century vases as a white object,1560 but metal ones were introduced at the end of the sixth century B. C. A bronze one from Kephallenia (?) in the British Museum has a sixth-century inscription in the Doric dialect and in the alphabet of the Ionian Islands, which gives the dedication of Exoïdas to the Dioskouroi.1561 Several others have been found in different parts of Greece, especially at Olympia.1562 Pausanias says that boys used a lighter diskos than men.1563

While only unimportant monuments outside of vase-paintings illustrate the jump, those illustrating the diskos-throw are rich and varied, including not only vases, but statues, statuettes, small bronzes, reliefs, coins, and gems.1564

In his careful attempt at reconstructing the method of casting the diskos, E. N. Gardiner has distinguished seven different positions, which are illustrated by the monuments.1565 He shows that while the swing of the quoit was always the same, i. e., in a vertical and not in a horizontal arc, and the throw was invariably made from a position like that of Myron’s statue, the preliminary and certain other movements varied. It will be well, before discussing representations of the diskos-thrower in sculpture, very briefly to recapitulate his summary of positions, using the evidence which he and others have collected. First, the preliminary position or stance, with three variations: either the position of the Standing Diskobolos of the Vatican (Pl. 6), which occurs in bronzes, but not on vases; or the position in which the diskobolos raises the quoit with the left hand level with the shoulder, which occurs on vase-paintings;1566 or that in which the diskos is held outwards in both hands level with the waist.1567 From any of these stance positions, either with or without change of feet, we reach the second position, in which the diskos is raised in both hands and extended either horizontally to the front and level with the head,1568 or held above the head.1569 Thirdly the diskos is swung downwards and rests upon the right forearm, with either foot forward.1570 This position leads up to that of Myron’s statue, in which the diskos is swung as far back as possible (Pls. 22, 23, and Figs. 34, 35).1571 The fifth position is the beginning of the forward swing, when the body is straightened.1572 As the diskos swings downwards and the left foot advances, the sixth position is reached.1573 Lastly the right foot is advanced after the diskos is cast.1574

A victor statue of a diskobolos might conceivably have taken Fig. 46.—Bronze Statuette of a Diskobolos. Metropolitan Museum, New York. any one of these seven positions. We have already considered the two statues, the Standing Diskobolos of Naukydes in the Vatican (Pl. 6) and that of Myron (Pls. 22, 23, and Figs. 34, 35), the two most important works in sculpture to illustrate positions of the throw. The statue of Naukydes is not taking aim, as Juethner maintains, nor looking down the course. The head is inclined a little to the right and downwards, and the eyes are directed to the ground only a short distance away, thus measuring the distance the left foot is to be advanced, when the diskos is finally swung forward for the cast, which takes place off the left and not off the right foot. The right forearm is rightly restored, as it thus appears on bronzes which imitate this stance.1575 A different stance is shown in a fine bronze statuette in the Metropolitan Museum (Fig. 46),1576 dating from about 480 B. C. This little masterpiece of the transition period of Attic art, still disclosing archaic traits, represents a diskobolos standing firmly on both legs, the right being slightly advanced, and holding with the left hand the diskos level with the head. That he is preparing for intense action is seen by the way in which the toes catch the ground. Though the right arm is broken off from below the shoulder, we can infer from vase-paintings which show diskoboloi in the same position1577 that it was lowered and bent at the elbow and the hand left open. From this position the diskos will be raised high above the head with both hands, as in a bronze in Athens,1578 which illustrates Gardiner’s second position.

The movement is carried a little further—showing the moment of transition to the downward swing or third position—in a fifth-century B. C. bronze in the British Museum.1579 Here a nude, beardless athlete is represented standing with the right foot advanced and holding the diskos in both hands before him above the head. The right hand grasps the quoit underneath and the left at the top.1580 The third position is well illustrated by the tiny archaic bronze on the cover of a lebes in the British Museum,1581 which represents a nude and beardless youth standing with the left foot advanced and with the left hand raised, while the right holds the diskos. Almost the same pose is also seen in a small bronze in the Antiquarium, Berlin.1582

Two archaic statuettes from the Akropolis, now in the National Museum in Athens, and recently published, should be mentioned in this connection.1583 The more archaic of these represents a youth in an attitude which has been misunderstood. De Ridder interpreted it as a dancing man, while Staïs thought it represented a youth walking along with his left hand raised as if to ward off a blow. White, however, showed that it (like another less perfect example from the Akropolis, no. 6594) represents a diskobolos standing with the right foot advanced and holding the diskos in front of the body with the right hand, resting it against the flat of the forearm, while the left arm is raised above the head. Thus it is another example illustrating the initial stage of Gardiner’s third position. The other statuette, wrongly mounted, should, according to White, be made to lean further forward; the knees are bent, the body swung forward from the hips, the head thrown back and upward, the right arm stretched forth with the flat of the forearm uppermost and the left similarly placed. Gardiner and Staïs interpreted this figure as a charioteer, and de Ridder as either a jumper, who has raised his halteres preparatory to the leap, or a diskobolos. White has shown that the position of the right arm proves it to be a diskobolos, represented in a movement between Gardiner’s third and fourth positions, just prior to that of Myron’s statue. De Ridder believed both statues to be Aeginetan, but no. 6614, when compared with Myron’s statue, is certainly Attic, and resemblances in the treatment of the hair, eyes, and mouth show that both statuettes are of the same school. It has often been said that Myron’s great statue had no predecessor, as it certainly had no successor. Its fame was enhanced by the assumption that Myron passed at one stride from such statues as the Tyrannicides to that complex work. Such works, however, as these statuettes—especially no. 6614—show that the preliminary problems had been solved on a humble scale before Myron undertook his consummate work. Here, then, we have works by artists who belonged to the very movement which produced Myron.

For the last three positions analyzed by Gardiner (nos. 5, 6, 7) our only illustrations appear to be vase-paintings.

Akontistai.

Javelin-throwing (ἀκοντίζειν, ἀκοντισμός) was very old and was universal in Greece, its origin being traced back to mythology.1584 Stassoff tried to trace it to Oriental sources,1585 but inasmuch as no such contest is shown on the monuments of Egypt or Assyria, Juethner is probably right in assuming that it was Greek in origin. In Homer it was a separate contest at the games of Patroklos.1586 Juethner has distinguished two types of javelin-throwing in the historical period: one in which the spear or akontion was pointed more or less upwards,1587 the other in which it was held horizontally.1588 Only the former type is represented in illustrations of purely athletic competitions, the latter type referring to illustrations of the practical use of javelin-throwing, i. e., in war or in the chase. Vase-paintings of palæstra scenes almost invariably show javelins with blunt points; the throwers’ heads are frequently turned back before the throw, and there is no sign of any target. On vase-paintings, however, which represent practical javelin-throwing from horseback, the javelins are pointed. This proves that in athletic contests the throw was for distance and not at a mark.1589 The javelin used in Greek games had several names, ἄκων, ἀκόντιον, etc.1590 It was about the height of a man, as we know from its appearance on a Spartan relief,1591 and from many vase-paintings representing palæstra scenes (Fig. 44). It was thrown by means of a thong (ἀγκύλη, Lat. amentum), which was fastened near the centre and consisted of a detachable leathern strip from 12 to 18 inches long. This was bound tight, with a loop left, into which the thrower inserted his first and middle fingers.1592 The method of casting is seen on many vases.1593 Gardiner has analyzed three different positions from vase-paintings. Usually the throw was made with a short run, though standing throws are also pictured.1594 First the thrower extends the right arm back to its full length and, with the left hand opposite the right breast, holds the end of the spear and pushes it back, holding it downwards or horizontally.1595 Next he starts to run, turning his body sidewise and extending his left arm to the front. On a r.-f. Munich kylix1596 we see the first and second positions. The youth on the left is steadying the javelin with the left hand, while the one on the right has just let it go. A further turn of the body to the right takes place and the right knee is bent, while the right shoulder is dropped and the hand is turned outwards.1597 The actual cast is very uncommon on vase-paintings, because of difficulty in representing it.1598

Because of the assumed lack of sculptural monuments, Reisch1599 and Fig. 47.—Bust of the Doryphoros, after Polykleitos, by Apollonios. Museum of Naples. others have wrongly doubted whether javelin-throwers were represented in sculpture as victors. There certainly is no a priori reason why athletic sculptors might not have made statues in any one of the three poses which Gardiner has distinguished on vase-paintings, even if this contest, like jumping, was better adapted to the painter than to the sculptor. Furthermore, we shall attempt to show that such monuments actually did exist.

The best example of such a javelin-thrower seems to be the Doryphoros, the most famous statue of Polykleitos, in which he illustrated his canon of athletic forms. The Doryphoros exists in many copies, all of which agree fairly well in style and proportions. K. Friedrichs, in his monograph Der Doryphoros des Polyklets, which appeared in 1863,1600 was the first to show that the statue found in 1797 in the Palaistra at Pompeii, and now in the Naples Museum (Pl. 4), was a copy of the original bronze, as it shows all the peculiarities of the master’s style known to us from tradition.1601 Mahler enumerates 7 statues, 17 torsos, and 36 heads copied from the original, and the fine, but expressionless, Augustan bronze bust from the villa of the Pisos, Herculaneum, inscribed as the work of the sculptor Apollonios, son of Archios, of Athens, which is now in Naples (Fig. 47).1602 The best-preserved Fig. 48.—Statue of the Doryphoros, after Polykleitos. Vatican Museum, Rome. copy of the statue, the one in Naples, is surpassed in workmanship by the green basalt torso in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence1603 and by the marble one formerly in the possession of Count Pourtalès in Berlin.1604 A poorer copy is to be found in the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican (Fig. 48).1605 In these copies we see a thick-set youth standing with the weight of the body on the right leg, the left one thrown back and touching the ground only with the toes, seemingly ready to advance, though the shoulders do not partake of the walking action. He is represented, therefore, at the moment of transition from walking to a rest position—in other words in a purely theoretical pose—at rest, indeed, but just ready again to advance.1606 His left hand held a short akontion over the shoulder and not the long spear (δόρυ), whence the name Doryphoros or spear-bearer is derived.1607 The head is turned to the same side as the advanced foot, which perhaps is an example of the monotony in the work of the master complained of by ancient critics; variety would have been attained by turning it in the opposite direction. In the carefully worked bronze original, which, however, must have had an insignificant intellectual aspect, the apparently simple problem—hitherto vainly attempted in Greek art—of representing a man standing almost motionless, but full of life, was for the first time solved. It is a long way from the motionless figures known as “Apollos,” with their arms glued to the sides and their legs close together, to this vigorous athlete. As we have already indicated, Greek art developed the first step beyond the “Apollos” by further advancing one leg of a statue and, it may be, extending one forearm horizontally. The next step was to place one foot slightly sidewise and thus relieve it of the weight of the body—the well-known scheme of the “free” and “rest” leg. At first the relaxation was slight, the “free” leg not being intended to move forward, nor the parts of the body to be much shifted. Polykleitos’ innovation consisted in having the legs so placed, one behind the other, that the figure, while apparently resting on one,1608 seemed to be advancing. On the ground of the familiar passage in Pliny cited, it has been generally assumed that Polykleitos introduced the walking motive into sculpture. However, this motive was probably the invention of the earlier Argive school, borrowed by Polykleitos for his canon, as seen in the statue of the so-called Munich King (Zeus?), of the Glyptothek, which Furtwaengler has shown to be a work of about 460 B. C.1609

Does the Doryphoros represent a pentathlete victor? Since Quintilian says that it appears ready for war or for the exercises of the palæstra,1610 Helbig and others have classed it as a warrior, perhaps one of the Achilleae mentioned by Pliny1611 as set up in the Greek gymnasia. Furtwaengler stressed the incorrectness of calling an athlete a Doryphoros1612—a name originally given to an attendant bearing a lance (δόρυ), and so inapplicable to the statue of Polykleitos, which represented not a server, but an athlete carrying an akontion (witness the Berlin gem already mentioned)—but later1613 concluded that an athlete statue with the akontion might have been vaguely described in late art jargon as a spear-bearer. Consequently he found probable the interpretation of the various doryphoroi mentioned by Pliny1614 as victor statues, and thought that the original of the Doryphoros of Polykleitos might very well have represented an Olympic pentathlete, which was originally set up at Argos, where it was also adopted for a figure on the heroic grave-relief already mentioned, which represented the youth with a spear over his shoulder standing beside a horse. Bulle also thinks that the statue represented a victor athlete set up in some sacred spot.

For its interpretation as the statue of a pentathlete victor, an added proof is furnished by the discovery of a late Roman copy of it at Olympia.1615 This may very well have been the dedication of an athlete of late date—of the first century B. C. or of the first A. D.—who preferred to be represented by a copy of the famous work of Polykleitos rather than by a new statue. Treu’s contention that the torso is too large for a victor statue,1616 because Lucian says that the Hellanodikai did not allow statues of victors to be over life-size,1617 falls to the ground, since we know that exceptions to the rule existed at Olympia.1618 He agrees with Collignon1619 in interpreting it as a decorative statue, which surely involves an anachronism in the middle of the fifth century B. C.; and his argument that its good preservation shows it to have been set up in an interior room, perhaps of the Bouleuterion, in whose ruins it was found, adducing this as additional evidence of its decorative character, is no proof, since victor statues at Olympia seem sometimes to have been housed.1620 Thus the theory that the Doryphoros represents a pentathlete victor is well within the range of possibilities.

Two bronze statuettes in the Metropolitan Museum,1621 New York, belonging to the second half of the fifth century B. C., may be representations on a small scale of pentathletes with the akontion. The first shows a youth standing with the weight of the body on the left foot, the right drawn slightly back. The left hand, held close to the side, may have carried an akontion, the right arm being extended. The other, more carelessly executed, represents a youth standing similarly with his weight on the left foot, the right being drawn back. Here again the left arm is hanging by the side, and probably held the same attribute as the first statuette. The right arm is also bent at the elbow. A patera may have been held in the outstretched hand of each. The square build, short thighs, flat abdomen, long skull, and oval face are all Polykleitan characteristics, and remind us of the series of kindred works already discussed, which, as Furtwaengler believed, went back to the original statue of the boy wrestler Xenokles at Olympia, the work of the younger Polykleitos.1622

Wrestlers.

Wrestling (πάλη) is perhaps the oldest, and in any case is the most universal, of athletic sports. Wall-paintings at Beni-Hasan on the Nile, dating from about 2000 B. C., show nearly all the grips and throws now known.1623 Plato says that this sport was instituted in mythical times.1624 In Greece its origin is lost in mythology.1625 The very name palaistra, “wrestling school,” indicates the early importance of the contest. It was one of the most popular of Greek sports from the time of Homer down.1626 This popularity is shown by the frequency with which it appears in mythology and art. Early b.-f. vases picture Herakles wrestling with giants and monsters. Here we see the same holds and throws as in the palæstra scenes on later r.-f. vases. The whole history of coins down to imperial days shows such scenes. No other exercise required so much strength and agility, and consequently wrestling matches early became a part of the great games. At Olympia wrestling was introduced in Ol. 18 ( = 708 B. C.), the same year in which the pentathlon was instituted.1627 The boys’ match appeared there less than a century later in Ol. 37 ( = 632 B. C.).1628 Pausanias mentions statues erected to 36 victors (for 45 victories), which makes this contest second only in importance to boxing there.

There were two sorts of wrestling in Greece, wrestling in the proper sense (ὀρθὴ πάλη), where each tried to throw his antagonist to the ground, making his shoulders touch three times, and ground wrestling (κύλισις, ἁλίνδησις), where the fight was continued on the ground by using every means, except biting and gouging, till one was exhausted. The first kind was the only one used in the event called πάλη at Olympia, as well as in the pentathlon; the other was used only in the pankration. In this section we shall discuss only the first.1629 A recently discovered papyrus of the second century A. D., containing brief instructions for wrestling lessons intended to help the παιδοτρίβης, indicates that every movement in the contest was systematically taught.1630 The various positions used—grips and throws—are shown by many monuments, vase-paintings, gems, coins,1631 statuettes, and statues. The vases1632 especially illustrate the various holds assumed by wrestlers during a bout—front (σύστασις), side (παράθεσις), wrist, arm, neck (τραχηλίζειν), and body holds. Still others illustrate the various throws—flying mare,1633 heave,1634 buttocks and cross-buttocks (ἕδραν στρέφειν), and tripping (ὑποσκελίζειν). We here reproduce two such paintings. The first, the obverse of a r.-f. amphora from Vulci, signed by Andokides and now in Berlin (Fig. 49),1635 shows two positions. In the central group the wrestler on the left side has grasped his opponent’s left wrist with his right hand. The latter, however, has rendered the grip useless by passing his own right hand behind his opponent’s back and grasping his right arm just below the elbow. In this way he keeps his opponent from turning round, which movement would not have been possible if the latter had grasped him by the upper arm. In the group of wrestlers to the right we see an illustration of a body hold. Here a youthful athlete has lifted his bearded antagonist clear off his feet preliminary to throwing him. However, the one lifted from the ground has caught his foot around his opponent’s leg, which is an illustration of tripping. On a r.-f. kylix in the University of Pennsylvania Museum in Philadelphia (Fig. 50a),1636 we see a body hold preparatory to the heave; here to the right are two youths wrestling, and to the left stands a bearded trainer with his rod. One wrestler has already lost his balance and is supporting himself with both hands on the ground, while the other with his left hand holds the other’s right arm down, and with his right prepares to throw him over his head.

Fig. 49.—Wrestling Scenes. From Obverse of an Amphora, by Andokides. Museum of Berlin.

Fig. 50.—Wrestling and Boxing Scenes. From a r.-f. Kylix. University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia.

Fig. 51.—Bronze Statues of Wrestlers. Museum of Naples.

From vase-paintings, then, we can see what positions the sculptor might have used in representing groups of wrestlers. For the positions of individual figures of wrestlers, we are guided by several statues and small bronzes. The preliminary position (σύστασις) seems to be best represented by the bronze statues of wrestling boys discovered at Herculaneum in 1754, and now in the Museum of Naples (Fig. 51).1637 These figures have been variously interpreted as runners,1638 diskoboloi,1639 and wrestlers. Their attitude, bent forward with outstretched hands, implies the utmost expectancy. If they were runners, they would lean further forward; as they are standing, they could not begin to run without loss of time in raising the heels of the forward feet. If, on the other hand, they represented diskos-throwers at the moment just subsequent to the throw, their right feet would be advanced and not their left, in order to recover their balance, as we have seen above in considering Gardiner’s seventh position. The position of their arms, however, and the expression of their faces make it almost certain that they are wrestlers eagerly watching for an opening. The two statues certainly belong together, and may have been set up as antagonists in the villa in whose ruins they were found. F. Hauser was the first to show that the form of body and head in both was the same.1640 While most critics believe that they are Hellenistic in origin, Bulle is certainly right in showing that the body ideal expressed is Lysippan—i. e., long legs and slender trunk—even if he goes too far in ascribing them to the master himself, basing his conclusion chiefly on the similarity of their ears with those of the Apoxyomenos (Pl. 29). A good illustration of a hand or wrist grip is afforded by a small wrestler group, which decorates the rim of a bronze bowl from Borsdorf.1641 This is a poorly wrought Etruscan work of fifth-century B. C. Greek origin. The two wrestlers have already gripped and their heads are close together, though the lunge in each case is much exaggerated. Similar are the two groups on the rim of a bronze bowl in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.1642 A third-century B. C. Etruscan cista in the Metropolitan Museum,1643 has a handle on the lid in the form of two nude wrestlers, whose bodies are inclined toward one another, their heads in contact, and their arms locked behind their heads. Groups of wrestlers in similar attitudes commonly appear as cista handles.1644 A portion of a bronze group of wrestlers was dredged from the sea near Kythera and is now in Athens.1645 The heave is represented by a metope from the Theseion representing the wrestling bout between Theseus and Kerkyon.1646 A later moment is seen in a bronze wrestling-group in Paris.1647 The cross-buttocks is illustrated by a small Hellenistic bronze group in the collection of James Loeb in Munich, of which five other copies are known.1648 Here two athletes, one bearded and the other beardless, are just ending the bout. The youth is in the power of the man, who stands behind him and presses him down by holding his arms backward. All the other replicas differ from the Loeb example in that the victor has both legs and not one in front of the right leg of the vanquished wrestler. A good illustration of tripping is seen in another related series of groups known to us in five bronze copies. These represent a wrestler on the ground supporting himself on his left arm, while over him stands the victor, whose left foot is twisted around the other’s right. These groups are, like the preceding, also Roman provincial copies of a Hellenistic original.1649 The two groups are very similar, the only real difference being that the vanquished wrestler in the second series still has his left arm free and holds himself up on his right knee. Both series seem to have been influenced by the marble pancratiast group in the Uffizi (Pl. 25).1650 The head of an athlete in the Museo delle Terme, Rome,1651 shows by its strongly projecting neck that it comes from the statue either of a runner ready to start or of a wrestler about to grip his adversary. The face is fourth-century B. C. Attic in character and the head may, therefore, come from Euphranor’s circle. Pliny speaks of a panting wrestler (luctator anhelans) by the statuary Naukeros, which must have exhibited the contestant in intense movement.1652 It might have represented him after victory, as in the painting of Parrhasios discussed above, which pictured a hoplitodrome after the race, breathing hard.1653 Pliny also mentions a painting of a wrestler by Antidotos without describing it.1654 As we have already remarked, doubtless some of the apoxyomenoi and perixyomenoi mentioned by Pliny were also wrestlers.

Whether wrestling-groups were set up at Olympia is doubtful. Chariot-groups were indeed common, but there is no reason why the victorious wrestler should have had himself coupled with his defeated opponent. Pausanias, moreover, mentions no such groups. We are therefore safe in inferring that in most, if not in all, cases the wrestler would content himself with a single statue, and this might represent him in any position in which he was not actually interlocked with his adversary. That such statues represented him both in repose and in motion is attested by recovered bases. The footprints on the base of the statue of the Elean wrestler Paianios, a victor of the early third century B. C.,1655 shows us that he was represented as standing in repose, the weight of the body resting on the right leg, the left being drawn back and touching the ground with the toes only. A hole in the base may have been for a spear on which the victor’s hand rested, though the statue is not that of a pentathlete. The perfectly preserved footprints on the base of the statue of the boy wrestler Xenokles by Polykleitos the Younger show that he was represented as standing with his weight on the right leg, the left being slightly advanced and to one side, though resting flat on the ground. The head was probably turned a little to the right. Thus the wrestler was poised ready to grip his adversary.1656 This statue must have been a favorite among athlete monuments, since the same motive appears in various Roman copies, which Furtwaengler assigns to the immediate circle of the pupils of Polykleitos. The statue of the Argive wrestler Cheimon by Naukydes may have represented him in motion, since Pausanias, in mentioning two statues of the victor, one in Olympia and the other in the temple of Concord at Rome, says that they were among the most famous works of that sculptor. From this encomium Reisch has assumed that the one at Olympia was represented in lively motion.1657

Boxers.

Boxing, like wrestling, was one of the oldest sports in Greece, as it has been everywhere else. The fist is the simplest and most natural of all weapons.1658 Boxing was popular already in Homer, matches being described both in the Iliad and the Odyssey.1659 Homer speaks of it as πυγμαχίη ἀλεγεινή,1660 and this “painful” character is also mentioned by Xenophanes.1661 However, boxing was far older than epic poetry. We have already seen that it was the only form of real athletics in Aegean Crete. One of the oldest representations of a boxing match is seen on the fragments of a bronze shield discovered there in the grotto of Zeus on Mount Ida. Here on a single concentric ring are seen two warriors, armed like Assyrians with corslets, shields, and helmets, fighting with doubled fists.1662 The high antiquity of boxing in Greece is also shown by myths.1663 At Olympia Apollo is said to have beaten Ares,1664 and Polydeukes won a victory there.1665 Apollo appears as the god of boxing in the Iliad,1666 and the Delphians sacrificed to Apollo Πύκτης.1667 Herakles, Polydeukes, Tydeus, and Theseus were all famed boxers; the latter was said to have invented the art.1668 The historical boxing match was introduced at Olympia in Ol. 23 ( = 688 B. C.), and Onomastos of Smyrna, the first victor, instituted the rules of the contest.1669 The boys’ contest was instituted in Ol. 41 ( = 616 B. C.).1670 It was by far the most popular contest there. Of the 192 monuments erected to 187 victors mentioned by Pausanias, 56, or nearly one-third, were erected to men and boy boxers for 63 victories.

Greek boxing1671 is conveniently divided into two periods by the kind of glove used in the matches. From Homer down to the end of the fifth century B. C., soft gloves (ἱμάντες, ἱμάντες λεπτοί or μειλίχαι) were used; from then to late Roman days the heavy gloves (σφαῖραι or ἱμάντες ὀξεῖς) were the fashion. The weighted Roman cestus was not used in the Greek contest. Before discussing representations of boxers in art, we shall devote a few words to these two kinds of boxing-gloves, which frequently give us the date of a given monument.1672 The Cretans are thought to have worn boxing-gloves, as they seem to be visible on the so-called Boxer Vase from Hagia Triada (Fig. 1). Here, on the top and lower two rows, a leather gauntlet appears to cover the arm to beyond the elbow, being padded over the fist and confined at the wrist by a strap. Mosso derives the later Greek glove, which appears on athlete statues, from this primitive thong.1673 In any case the antiquity of the glove in Greece is attested by its origin being ascribed to the myth of Amykos, king of the Bebrykes.1674 Gloves were already known to Homer, who speaks of “well-cut thongs of ox-hide.”1675 They are not mentioned in any detail before the time of Pausanias and Philostratos, so that we are mostly dependent for our knowledge of them on the monuments. The simplest form consisted of long, thin ox-hide thongs, which were wound round the hands, the soft gloves (ἱμάντες μαλακώτεροι or μειλίχαι) of later writers.1676 They were used, not to deaden the blow, but to increase its force. Vase-paintings show that the thongs were about 10 or 12 feet long before being wound.1677 On the exterior of a r.-f. kylix from Vulci by Douris, in the British Museum, showing chiefly boxing scenes, we see two youths standing before a paidotribes preparing to put on the thongs (Fig. 54).1678 One of them is holding the unwound thong in his outstretched hands. A similar figure appears on the r.-f. vase in Philadelphia already discussed (Fig. 50b), which represents a palæstra scene.1679 This scene has been wrongly interpreted as an illustration of the game of σκαπέρδη described by Pollux1680 as a sort of tug-of-war, the unwound thong being explained as the rope used in this game,1681 and the hurling-sticks stuck in the ground at either end as goals instead of akontia. A wound thong is seen hanging on the wall to the left. Philostratos describes how the boxing thongs were put on,1682 and vase-paintings illustrate the method.1683 The best example of the thongs on statuary is afforded by the bronze arm found in the sea off Antikythera (Cerigotto) (Fig. 52), which Svoronos1684 believes to be a remnant of the statue of the Nemean victor Kreugas of Epidamnos, which stood in the temple of Apollo Lykios in Argos.1685 Pausanias says that Kreugas was crowned notwithstanding that he was killed by his adversary Damoxenos, and his description of the soft glove corresponds so closely with the one on the recovered arm that it seems as if it had been written in the presence of the statue: “In those days boxers did not yet wear the sharp thong (ἱμὰς ὀξύς) on each wrist, but boxed with the soft straps (μειλίχαις), which they fastened under the hollow of the hand in order that the fingers might be left bare; these soft straps were thin thongs (ἱμάντες λεπτοί) of raw cowhide, plaited together in an ancient fashion.”1686 The strap allowed the ends of the fingers to project, and was held together by a cord wound around the forearm, just as Philostratos says. These μειλίχαι were used at the great games through the fifth century B. C., and were continued in the palæstra in the fourth. Early in the latter century the σφαῖραι mentioned by Plato1687 and other writers appeared. We see them on Panathenaic vases of that century and on Etruscan cistæ of the following one.1688 About the same time the regular ἱμάντες ὀξεῖς came in,1689 but the old μειλίχαι or something similar were still used in the exercises of the palæstra.1690

Fig. 52.—Bronze Arm of Statue of a Boxer, found in the Sea off Antikythera. National Museum, Athens.

Fig. 53.—Forearm with Glove. From the Statue of the Seated Boxer (Pl. 16). Museo delle Terme, Rome.

Our best illustration of these more formidable gloves on statuary is the gauntlet clearly represented on the forearms of the Seated Boxer of the Museo delle Terme (Fig. 53). Here a close-fitting glove covers each forearm, leaving the upper joints of the fingers free and the palm open. It extends to above the wrist and ends in a rim of fur. Over it are drawn three thick bands of leather, which cover the first joints of the fingers and are fastened together on the outside of the hands with metal clasps. A soft pad keeps these bands from chafing the fingers. They are kept in place and the wrists are strengthened by two narrow straps which are interlaced several times around hand and wrist. Similar gloves appear on the Sorrento boxer in Naples (Fig. 57),1691 on the bronze forearm of a statue from Herculaneum in Naples,1692 on a left fist found in 1887 in the arena at Verona,1693 and on many other statues and fragments. The last representation in art of this sort of glove appears on the Roman relief in the Lateran, which dates from the time of Trajan, and represents a fight between two pugilists.1694 The metal cestus was a Roman invention. None of the late Greek writers—neither Plutarch, nor Pausanias, nor Philostratos—makes any mention of this loaded glove. The “sharp thongs” were enough to cause all the injuries mentioned by the writers of the Greek Anthology.1695 The cestus, perhaps used in the later gladiatorial shows in Greece, but never in the great games there, gave the death blow to real boxing. Virgil describes it and the vicious results of its use.1696

There are fewer representations of boxing matches on vases than of almost any other Greek sport, despite its great popularity. Gardiner has collected a number of vase-paintings dating from the sixth to the fourth centuries B. C., which illustrate the different positions assumed by boxers in action—attack, slipping, ducking, and leg and arm movements. We reproduce two from r.-f. kylikes in the British Museum. In one by Douris (Fig. 54)1697 we have, besides the group already mentioned of two athletes preparing to put on thongs, three pairs of boxers engaged in a bout. In two groups one of the contestants is seen from behind; in all three the boxers extend their left arms for guarding and draw the right back for hitting—the fists being level with the shoulders. In one group we see the beginning of the fight, in the other two the middle, perhaps, and the end of it, respectively. In the last scene one contestant has fallen to the ground on his knee, and his conqueror has swung his right hand far back for a final blow, only to be stopped by the other, who raises his finger in token of defeat. On the other vase we see, besides a scene from the pankration, two pairs of boxers sparring (Fig. 55).1698 Here in one group the contestants do not have their fists doubled, but keep their fingers opened. On an Attic b.-f. Panathenaic panel-amphora in the University Museum in Philadelphia (Fig. 56),1699 we see bearded boxers sparring, while a boxer with thongs in his right hand stands to the right, and a trainer with his rod at the left. Statues of victorious boxers at Olympia were represented either in motion, i. e., probably in the position of sparring, or in repose, like that of the boy boxer Kyniskos by the elder Polykleitos discussed in the preceding chapter. The same foot position visible on the Kyniskos base1700 occurs on two other Olympia bases, which, therefore, must have supported Polykleitan statues represented in repose. One of these, in the form of an astragalos, will be discussed further on in our treatment of pancratiast statues; the other supported the statue of the boy boxer Hellanikos of Lepreon, who won a victory in Ol. 89 ( = 424 B. C.).1701 In this case the statue was also life-size, the left foot was firmly placed, and the right was set back resting on the ball, the stride being a little longer than in the case of the Kyniskos. Three other Olympia bases supported statues of boxers represented in repose, those of the boy Tellon from the Arkadian town Oresthasion,1702 of the Epidaurian Aristion by the elder Polykleitos,1703 and of the Rhodian Eukles by Naukydes of the Polykleitan circle.1704 Furtwaengler believed that a number of existing statues of the Hermes type reproduced the statue of Aristion, because of a similar foot position. Among them the Pentelic marble one in Lansdowne House, London, is the best preserved, and most faithfully reproduces the Polykleitan style.1705

Fig. 54.—Boxing Scenes. From a r.-f. Kylix by Douris. British Museum, London.

Fig. 55.—Boxing and Pankration Scenes. From a r.-f. Kylix. British Museum, London.

We may infer how a Polykleitan statue of a boxer at rest looked, from the Roman copy of one in Kassel.1706 Here a youth just out of boyhood is represented as standing with the weight of the body resting upon the right leg and the head turned to the right. The forearms are covered with gloves, the right fist being raised for attack and the left for defense. Fig. 57.—Statue of a Boxer, from Sorrento. By Koblanos of Aphrodisias. Museum of Naples. Another marble statue, representing a boxer in repose, was found in a fragmentary condition in Sorrento in 1888, and is now in the National Museum at Naples (Fig. 57).1707 It is inscribed as the work of Koblanos of Aphrodisias in Karia, whom Fig. 56.—Boxing Scene. From a b.-f. Panathenaic Panel-Amphora. University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia. we know as a copyist of the first century A. D., and who was active in reproducing Greek works for the Roman market.1708 The body forms are too badly injured for us accurately to date the original from which this copy was made, but the head gives us the clue, as its style appears to be a connecting link between that of the seated statue of Herakles, in the Palazzo Altemps in Rome1709 and the Munich Oil-pourer (Pl. 11),1710 as it shows affinity to both. Though Sogliano referred it to the school of Lysippos and Juethner to the beginning of the fourth century B. C., it shows indubitable Myronian characteristics and may have been the work of Myron’s pupil Lykios, who is known to us as an athlete sculptor.1711 In this statue the youth is resting his weight on his right leg, the left, with full sole on the ground, being turned to one side. The left forearm is extended outwards and to the side, the head leaning toward the right leg—in other words, the athlete is represented in an attitude similar to that of the Idolino (Pl. 14). As there is an olive crown in the hair, it seems reasonable to conclude that the original statue was that of an Olympic victor.

By the beginning of the fifth century B. C., if not earlier, boxers were represented in violent motion, as we saw in the case of the statue of the boy boxer Glaukos, by the Aeginetan sculptor Glaukias,1712 represented in the act of sparring (σκιαμαχῶν). Whether he was represented as facing an imaginary antagonist or as merely punching a bag we can not say, though the latter seems the more probable. The motive is depicted in many art works, notably in the figure of a youth punching a bag which hangs from a tree on the Ficoroni cista in the Museo Kircheriano, Rome,1713 and in that of another represented on the so-called Peter cista in the Museo Gregoriano Etrusco of the Vatican, whose engraved scenes show exercises of the palæstra.1714 The same motive is seen also in a statuette in the Museo Chiaramonti of the Vatican, which is proved to be that of a boy boxer by the glove on the right hand.1715 Here the boy is represented with the right foot far advanced and rising on the toes of both feet, the right shoulder being drawn back, the right forearm raised, and the left extended forwards. The marble torso of a copy of the same original on a large scale is in Berlin.1716 While Amelung believes that the original of both statuette and torso was a bronze of the second half of the fourth century B. C., Furtwaengler thought that the torso went back to the severe style of the fifth century, and that this original once stood in Olympia, where it might have served as the inspiration for a carelessly worked bronze statuette of a boxer found there, which repeats the motive of the torso and similarly belongs to the fifth century B. C. (Fig. 2).1717 The Olympia statuette also has the right foot advanced, the upper part of the body leans backward, and the left arm with open palm is outstretched for defense, while the right with balled fist is held up ready to strike. It certainly is a votive offering of an Olympic victor—doubtless one of the small reductions, which were not uncommonly erected for economy’s sake.1718 Whether the Aeginetan Glaukias also made victor statues in repose is doubtful.

Waldstein, on insufficient grounds, has argued that the so-called Strangford Apollo in the British Museum (Fig. 14)1719 is a copy of the statue at Olympia of the famous Thasian boxer and pancratiast Theagenes by Glaukias. Its close observation of nature finds its analogy in the statues of the Aeginetan pediment groups (see Figs. 20, 21). The statue of the boy boxer Athenaios of Ephesos, by an unknown sculptor, was represented as lunging at his adversary, as we see from the footmarks on the recovered base. The left foot was advanced and turned outwards, while the right one touched the ground only with the toes.1720 Similarly the statue of the boxer Damoxenidas by Nikodamos of Arkadia was represented as about to strike. On its recovered base the left foot stood solidly upon the ground, while the right foot was drawn back and touched the ground only with the toes—if we judge rightly from the size of the missing part of the stone.1721 The statue of the Ionian boxer Epitherses by Pythokritos of Rhodes seems to have had but one foot flat upon the ground, and consequently must have been represented in motion, though we are not sure of the position of the other, since one stone of the base is missing.1722

The bronze plate from the base of the statue of the boy boxer Philippos, an Azanian of Pellene, was found at Olympia and has been referred to the end of the fourth or beginning of the third century B. C.1723 However, since Pausanias says that Myron made the statue,1724 various attempts have been made to reconcile the discrepancy in dates. Our own solution is that the statue seen by Pausanias did not represent Philippos at all, but some earlier unnamed Arkadian boxer, who was contemporary with Myron.1725 Years later the Azanian boy Philippos Fig. 58.—Statue known as Pollux. Louvre, Paris. won a victory at Olympia and attached the recovered epigram to the old base, in which he implored Zeus to let the ancient glory of Arkadia be revived in him, and also a newer one in which he said that he had restored the statue of Myron.1726 Pausanias saw the newer one, but omitted to mention the older, which was probably illegible from weathering. He therefore thought that the original Myronian statue used by Philippos represented the latter victor.1727 The words on the affixed plate beginning ὧδε στὰς ὁ Πελασγὸς ἐπ’ Ἀλφειῷ ποκα πύκτας κ. τ. λ., may refer to the position of the boxer rather than to a portrait of the victor.1728 We have long ago hazarded the suggestion1729 that the so-called Pollux of the Louvre (Fig. 58),1730 whose body forms recall the Marsyas and whose head recalls the Diskobolos, may go back to the statue of the unnamed Arkadian by Myron.1731 But the uncertainty which we have found in a former section1732 in assigning this and kindred works to Myron or to Pythagoras leaves it only a suggestion.

Pancratiasts.

The pankration (παγκράτιον)1733 was a combination of boxing and wrestling, in which the contestants fought either standing, or prone on the ground. While the wrestler merely tried to throw his opponent in a series of bouts, the pancratiast continued the fight on the ground until one or the other acknowledged defeat. The etymology of the word shows that it was a contest in which every power of the contestants was exerted to the utmost.1734 Strangling, pummeling, kicking, and, in fact, everything but biting and gouging were allowed. Both Lucian1735 and Philostratos1736 speak of the prohibition against biting and gouging, which statements Gardiner thinks are quotations from the rules governing the contest at Olympia, as they are twice quoted by Aristophanes.1737 Philostratos, however, says that the Spartans allowed both biting and gouging, but that the Eleans allowed only strangling. A case of gouging the eye of an opponent with the thumb is seen on the r.-f. kylix in the British Museum, already mentioned (Fig. 55).1738 Here the official is rushing up with his rod to punish such a breach of the rules. Philostratos calls the men’s pankration the “fairest” of contests at Olympia, probably in reference to the impression made on the spectators by the various positions of the contestants, who had to rely quite as much on skill as on strength. Pindar wrote eight odes in praise of this contest.1739 However, even though it was carefully regulated at Olympia by rules, it was a dangerous sport—τὸ δεινὸν ἄεθλον ὅ παγκράτιον καλέουσιν, in the words of the protesting philosopher Xenophanes.1740 But it was never the brutal sport which some modern writers have pictured it.1741 Plato, to be sure, kept it out of his ideal State,1742 not, however, because of its brutality, but merely because its distinctive feature, the struggle on the ground, was of no service in training a soldier. The Greeks themselves considered the boxing match far more dangerous. Inasmuch as gloves were not used in the pankration, this seems reasonable.1743 We have in the preceding section mentioned the epithets applied to boxing. Pausanias, in speaking of the boxing match between Theagenes and Euthymos, says that the former was too much wearied by that contest to enter the pankration, and was in consequence compelled to pay a talent to the god and another to Euthymos.1744 In speaking of another contest, between Kapros and Kleitomachos, he records that the latter told the umpires that the pankration should be brought on before he had received hurts from boxing.1745 Artemidoros states that no wounds resulted from the pankration.1746 However, death by strangulation was often the result of the bout. Thus the pancratiast Arrhachion was crowned after he had been throttled by his adversary, for just before expiring he was able to put one of the toes of his opponent out of joint and the pain caused the latter to let go his grip.1747 Pausanias tells also how the boxer Kreugas was slain by Damoxenos in the pankration at Nemea, but adds that the body of the former was proclaimed victor.1748

The pankration was not known to Homer, though later writers ascribed its invention either to Theseus or Herakles, the typical mythical examples of skill as opposed to brute force.1749 It was introduced at Olympia in Ol. 33 ( = 648 B. C.),1750 long after the separate events, wrestling and boxing, had appeared there. The boys’ contest was instituted at Olympia in Ol. 145 ( = 200 B. C.),1751 though it had appeared elsewhere much earlier.1752 It must have been a popular sport at Olympia, since Pausanias records statues erected to twenty victors for thirty victories in this contest.

Vase-paintings1753 show many grips and throws of the pankration—the flying mare, leg hold,1754 tilting backwards by holding the antagonist’s foot, “chancery” (i. e. catching the adversary around the neck with one arm and hitting his face with the other fist), stomach throw (i. e., seizing the adversary by the arms or shoulders and at the same time planting one’s foot in the other’s stomach, and then throwing him over one’s head),1755 jumping on the back of one’s opponent,1756 strangling, wrestling and boxing combined, and kicking and boxing combined. Ground wrestling is very commonly depicted on vases and especially on gems, since such groups were adapted to oblong or oval spaces.1757 We reproduce a pancratiast scene from a Panathenaic amphora of Kittos, dating from the fourth century B. C., in the British Museum (Fig. 59).1758 This is a conventional representation of wrestling and boxing combined. The pancratiast at the right of the group has rushed in with his head down and has been caught around the neck by his adversary’s arm, a hopeless position, from which he can not escape. The latter is either about to complete the neck hold (if it be an actual case of “chancery”), or perhaps to hit him with his right hand. A third pancratiast is looking on from the extreme right, while a paidotribes, switch in hand, appears at the left. The fight on the ground is well depicted on the r.-f. kylix of the British Museum already discussed as showing boxing scenes (Fig. 55).1759

Fig. 59.—Pankration Scene. From a Panathenaic Amphora by Kittos. British Museum, London.

We have but few representations of pancratiasts in sculpture. The preliminary sparring—known as ἀκροχειρισμός1760—must have characterized the statue of the Sikyonian pancratiast Sostratos at Olympia by an unknown sculptor, since Pausanias says that this victor was known as ὁ ἀκροχερσίτης, explaining the epithet as that of one who gained his victories by seizing and bending his adversaries’ fingers, holding them fast till he yielded.1761 Since a Delphian inscribed base1762 gives the same number of victories as Pausanias, we infer that they were given also on the Olympia base, the source of Pausanias’ information. Since nothing is said, however, of Sostratos’ mode of fighting in the Delphi inscription, Pausanias must have argued it from the pose of the statue. The Sicilian wrestler Leontiskos of a century earlier, whose statue was by Pythagoras, had, according to Pausanias, used similar tactics, for “he vanquished his adversaries by bending back their fingers.”1763 These cases show that statues of pancratiasts and wrestlers were frequently represented in vigorous lunging attitudes as well as in groups. The epigram on the base of the monument of the pancratiast Teisikrates at Delphi shows that the statue was represented in a similar way.1764 The same lunging attitude is also shown on the Halimous grave-relief.1765 Sometimes the contest ended with the preliminary sparring, though usually it developed into wrestling and boxing.

Fig. 60.—Bronze Statuette of a Pancratiast (?), from Autun, France. Louvre, Paris.

A good representation of a pancratiast trying to kick his antagonist seems to be furnished by the small bronze statuette from Autun, South France, now in the Louvre (Fig. 60).1766 This statuette is of mediocre workmanship, its hard muscles, imperfect proportions, and realism showing that it comes from the Hellenistic period of Greek art. It represents a bearded athlete, who holds his hands ready to strike and his left foot raised apparently to kick his adversary’s leg. The foot is just ready to return to its original position, so that the motive of this poor little statuette discloses a transient period of time between two movements, just as the Diskobolos and Marsyas of Myron did. We have already noted1767 that on the head is a cap with a ring in the top, by which it could be suspended as a decorative piece, or perhaps as part of a steelyard. Hauser believes that this motive was known to the elder Polykleitos and that this is the interpretation of that sculptor’s statue of a nudus talo incessens mentioned by Pliny, a statue which has formed the basis for much discussion among archæologists.1768 The Plinian passage, therefore, is to be translated as “the nude man attacking with his heel (talo)”—in other words, it describes a statue represented as kicking, which was allowable in the pankration. The manuscripts of Pliny all read talo, which Benndorf1769 thought could be retained only by assuming that the naturalist mistranslated his Greek source γυμνὸς ἀστραγάλῳ ἐπικείμενος, translating the word ἐπικείμενος “standing upon,” as incessens “pursuing.” He therefore assumed that Polykleitos’ statue stood upon an astragalos (talus) basis, which he believed was the forerunner of the statue of Opportunity (Καιρός) by Lysippos,1770 and he referred it to the knuckle-bone basis found at Olympia.1771 Woelfflin,1772 however, has shown that talo incessens can only mean “mit einem Knochel nach Jemand einwerfen.” Following this, Furtwaengler showed1773 how impossible on grammatical and other grounds it was to read talo in Benndorf’s sense, since the passage then would mean “advancing towards” or “pursuing,” by means of a knuckle-bone, which is manifestly nonsense. The word could be only instrumental in use, as Woefflin said, i. e., the weapon by means of which the man was attacking. Furtwaengler, therefore, followed Benndorf’s earlier alternative reading telo, assuming that Pliny mistakenly wrote talo because he was influenced by the presence of the same word in the passage immediately following: duosque pueros item nudos talis ludentes qui vocantur astragalizontes.1774 But Hauser’s interpretation of talo meets all the conditions better, since it keeps the manuscript readings, makes grammatical Latin, and seems to be illustrated by the statuette in question.

Sometimes the statues of Olympic pancratiasts were represented at rest with the weight of the body equally on both legs, as we see from the recovered basis of the statue of the Athenian Kallias by the Athenian sculptor Mikon.1775 Furtwaengler has identified a statue in the Somzée Collection as a copy of this work.1776 The footprints on the recovered base of the statue of the Rhodian Dorieus show that it was represented at rest with one leg slightly advanced.1777 We have actual remnants of statues of Olympic pancratiasts in the marble head found at Olympia, which we are to assign to the statue of the Akarnanian Philandridas by Lysippos, mentioned by Pausanias (Frontispiece and Fig. 69),1778 and the beautiful statue of Agias discovered by the French at Delphi in 1894, a work by the same sculptor (Pl. 28 and Fig. 68).1779

The struggle on the ground implies groups and not single statues. Our best representation of such a group is furnished by the famous marble one in the Uffizi, Florence (Pl. 25).1780 Though having no pretensions to be a victor monument, this group is the most important monument extant connected with the pankration, a fine anatomical study from Hellenistic times, evincing the direct influence of Lysippos in its proportions.1781 It shows affinity of design to certain sculptures from the frieze of the Great Altar at Pergamon.1782 Pliny speaks of a symplegma by Kephisodotos, the son of Praxiteles, at Pergamon, but that group was of an erotic character and can not have had anything to do with the Florentine one.1783 Unfortunately the group in question has been much restored, though the restoration in the main is right. The heads, though probably antique, do not seem to belong to the statues, but both appear to be copies of the head of one of the Niobids, with which group the pancratiasts were discovered in 1583. The right arm of the uppermost athlete seems to have been wrongly restored; in any case this athlete is not strangling his opponent. One youth has thrown the other down on to his knee, and his left leg is intertwined with the left leg of the other, and he is drawing back his arm to aim a blow. The wrestler underneath supports himself upon his left arm, and the intention of his opponent is to destroy this support by a blow of the fist, which would bring the contest to a sudden conclusion, since the right arm of the under youth is fast and he must defend himself with the left. As Gardiner points out, such a situation is illustrated by Heliodoros’ description of the match between Theagenes and an Aethiopian champion.1784 The under man’s position, however, may suddenly change and the issue yet be in his favor. Many writers have explained the group as ordinary wrestlers,1785 but Gardiner has conclusively shown that it belongs to the pankration, since in wrestling the contest is ended when one of the contestants has been thrown, while here the struggle is continuing on the ground.1786

PLATE 25

Marble Group of Pancratiasts. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

Kapros of Elis was the first of seven Olympic victors to emulate the fabled feat of Herakles by winning the pankration and wrestling matches on the same day—that is, he was the first professional strong man.1787 The other six all came from the East. It has been suggested1788 that the colossal Farnese Herakles found in Rome in the ruins of the Baths of Caracalla in 1540 and now in Naples, inscribed as the work of the Athenian Glykon, which represents the hero leaning wearily on his club against a rock,1789 may represent the type of these professional strong men, who called themselves the successors of Herakles. But such a suggestion is as unfounded as the one already examined, which identifies the original of the Seated Boxer of the Museo delle Terme (Pl. 16 and Fig. 27) with Kleitomachos of Thebes, the redoubtable opponent of Kapros, since the dates in both cases are against such identifications. The Farnese statue and other replicas of the same original1790 obviously revert to a Lysippan original, though they are considerably metamorphosed by the taste of a later age. Such big swollen muscles at first sight appear to be alien to the sculptor of the graceful Agias, but that the Naples copy by Glykon—who, from the inscription on the base, must be referred to the first century B. C.1791—really represents the work of Lysippos seems well established by the fact that a smaller copy, though still over life-size, of poorer workmanship, in the Pitti Gallery in Florence, is inscribed as Λυσίππου ἔργον.1792 This type of weary hero appears in the Telephos group on the small Pergamene frieze, but is even earlier, since the latter seems to have been borrowed from a statue which is reproduced on a coin of Alexander, which was struck at least as early as 300 B. C.1793 The type of Herakles wearied by his superhuman labors was inaugurated still earlier by Lysippos, who was fond of representing the hero in many poses, seated and standing, resting and laboring. We might mention his colossal bronze statue of Herakles, which was set up in Tarentum and then carried to Rome and placed on the Capitol by Q. Fabius Maximus, when Tarentum was captured in 209 B. C., and was later transferred to the Hippodrome at Constantinople, where it remained until the sack of that city by the Franks in 1202.1794 It is hazardous, therefore, to reject the evidence, and it will be best to see in the original a genuine Lysippan work, as do Bulle, Overbeck, von Mach, Schnaase,1795 and others, and so to make Glykon responsible only for the exaggerations of his own copy. Thus we have to face the fact of divergent styles in the great bronze founder of the fourth century B. C., even if we admit with Richardson that “for our peace of mind this statue might well have been sunk in the sea.”1796

Fig. 61.—Bronze Head of Boxer (?), from Olympia. National Museum, Athens.

Long ago, I referred the life-size bronze portrait-like head of a boxer or pancratiast found at Olympia, now in the Athens Museum (Figs. 61A and B),1797 to one of two statues of the pancratiast Kapros mentioned by Pausanias.1798 The remnant of a wild-olive crown in the hair proves that it comes from the statue of an Olympic victor. Its bruised appearance may, however, betoken the punishment administered by the gloves of a boxer rather than by the bare fists of a pancratiast. That Greek sculpture was not always ideal we have seen from the description of the Seated Boxer of the Museo delle Terme (Pl. 16 and Fig. 27). This peculiarly life-like head is another example of the same realism; it would be hard to name a more brutal and repellent piece from the whole range of Greek sculpture. The profession of this bruiser is evident in every feature, for the sculptor has betrayed it by the swollen ears, flat nose, thick neck, swollen cheeks, projecting under lip, frowning brows, and unkempt hair and beard. All these traits—especially the treatment of the eyes—give to it the sullen gloomy look so characteristic of boxers and pancratiasts.1799 The man appears to be awaiting the attack, his contracted brows showing alert expectation, and his closed lips great determination. Furtwaengler, Bulle, Flasch, and others have dated it in the fourth century B. C., and are fain to see in it the work of an artist of the immediate circle of Lysippos or Lysistratos;1800 but its exaggerated realism seems rather to point to a later period, not earlier than the third century B. C.1801 The bronze foot of a victor statue also found at Olympia (Fig. 62)1802 has been assigned by Furtwaengler to one of the statues of Kapros, an ascription which we also have followed.1803 The position of this foot shows—as an experiment with a living model has disclosed—great movement, which makes it obvious that it comes from a statue in lively motion, probably of a boxer or pancratiast. It belongs to the statue of a strong man of coarse build; there is not the slightest trace of unnecessary flesh on it, but the whole is vigorous muscle, even the swollen veins being clearly visible in the photograph. While Furtwaengler finds its stylistic parallels in the copies of the Pergamene works of the third century B. C., e. g., the Dying Gaul statues, the material and form of the base fitting that period, Wolters emphasizes its stylistic analogy to the bronze head just discussed.

Fig. 62.—Bronze Foot of a Victor Statue, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia.

The monuments which represent equestrian victors will be left for another chapter.

CHAPTER V.
MONUMENTS OF HIPPODROME AND MUSICAL VICTORS.

Plates 26–27 and Figures 63–67.

In the preceding chapters we have considered the monuments of victors in various gymnic contests, in which the victor won by his own strength and skill. In the present chapter we shall be concerned chiefly with the monuments set up by victors at Olympia in chariot- and horse-races, in which the victory did not depend upon the athletic prowess of the victor, but upon the skill of his charioteer or jockey and the endurance of his horses.1804 Though such events were not in the strict sense a part of Greek athletics, they formed a very important feature of the festival at Olympia as elsewhere.1805 Indeed the four-horse chariot-race was the most spectacular and brilliant event at Olympia. Chariot-races, and to a less extent horse-races, were the sport only of the rich—kings, princes, and nobles.1806 Thus victories were won in these events at Olympia in the fifth century B. C. by Hiero and Gelo, kings of Syracuse, and Arkesilas IV of Kyrene; in the fourth, by Philip II of Macedonia, and in Roman days by Tiberius, Germanicus, Nero, and many others. Alkibiades in Ol. 91 ( = 416 B. C.), i. e., in the midst of the great Peloponnesian war, entered seven chariots at Olympia and won three prizes.1807 Sometimes a city entered a chariot or horse. Thus in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.) the public chariot of Argos, and in Ol. 75 ( = 480 B. C.) the public horse of the same city, won at Olympia.1808 Such entries show not only the expense attending these contests, but also their importance in the eyes of the Greeks.

Hippodromes, chariot-races, and horse-races were very common in Greece. A votive inscription in the museum at Sparta, dating from near the middle of the fifth century B. C., enumerates sixty victories by Damonon and his son Enymakratidas in both chariot- and horse-races at eight different meets in or near Lakonia, and Damonon was merely a local victor, unknown at Olympia.1809 Greeks of Sicily and Magna Græcia were especially fond of such contests, as we see these constantly represented on coins of different cities there from the beginning of the fifth century B. C. on.1810 However, only a few of the sites of these many hippodromes are now known, and only one can be positively identified, that mentioned by Pausanias on Mount Lykaios in Arkadia.1811 The others are known from literary sources.1812 The one at Olympia was destroyed in the course of centuries by the floods of the Alpheios, and its exact location can not be determined, though we know in general that it lay somewhere southeast of the Altis, between the river and the Stadion, and surmise that it ran somewhat parallel to the latter.1813

Its measurements, however, are known to us from a Greek metrological parchment manuscript in the old Seraglio, Constantinople, which dates from the eleventh century A. D.1814 According to it the length of the course, i. e., from the starting-point to turning-post and return, was about 8 stades (1538 meters, 16 centimeters) or nearly 1 mile. One of the two sides—which Pausanias says were of unequal length1815—was 3 stades and 1 plethron long. The breadth of the course at the starting-point was 1 stade and 4 plethra. We are told, however, that only a portion of the entire course, six stades, or about two-thirds of a mile, was traversed in the various races.

The oldest literary account of a Greek chariot-race is found in Homer in the description of the games of Patroklos—the longest and finest episode there described.1816 But the first trace of such a contest goes back to mythology, to the story of Pelops and Oinomaos contending for the hand of the latter’s daughter Hippodameia.1817 This mythical race began at the village of Pisa in Elis and ended at the altar of Poseidon on the Isthmus of Corinth.1818 The chariot-race was the chief if not the only event at the oldest funeral games in Greece, those mentioned by Pausanias as held in honor of Azan, the son of Arkas, in Arkadia.1819 It figured largely in mythology1820 and was represented in many works of art.1821 At Olympia it was one of the earliest, and perhaps the earliest, of the events. Pausanias says that the four-horse chariot-race was introduced there in Ol. 25 ( = 680 B. C.),1822 but this may merely mean, as Gardiner points out, the date of exchanging the older prehistoric two-horse chariot for the one drawn by four horses. In any case the antiquity of the race at Olympia is shown by the great number of early votive offerings in the form of models of chariots and horses, which have been found there in a stratum extending below the foundations of the Heraion.

PROGRAMME OF HIPPODROME EVENTS.

By the middle of the third century B. C. the fully developed programme of equestrian events at Olympia and elsewhere consisted of six races, three for full-grown horses (τέλειοι), and three for colts (πῶλοι); for each of these two classes there were a four-horse chariot-race (ἅρμα, τέθριππον), a two-horse chariot-race (συνωρίς), and a horse-race (κέλης), thus:

ἅρματι τελείῳ, συνωρίδι τελείᾳ, κέλητι τελείῳ.
ἅρματι πωλικῷ, συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, κέλητι πωλικῷ.

These six events comprised the ἀγὼν ἱππικός at Olympia, Delphi, Nemea, Corinth, Athens, and elsewhere, as opposed to the ἀγὼν γυμνικός.1823 The distinction between horses and colts was apparently a matter which was decided by the Hellanodikai at Olympia. Thus, Pausanias recounts how the Spartan victor Lykidas entered a pair of colts for the chariot-race, and that one of them was rejected by the judges; he thereupon entered both for the race with full-grown horses and won it.1824 Though such a story does not fit the date of Lykidas, who won before the colt-race was introduced at Olympia, it shows the method of selection.1825 The race in which the chariot was drawn by four full-grown horses (ἵππων τελείων δρόμος) was introduced, as we have seen, in Ol. 25. The contestants drove twelve times round the course, a distance of seventy-two stades or over eight miles.1826 Pausanias mentions the monuments of eighteen such victors at Olympia for nineteen victories. The race in which the chariot was drawn by four colts (πώλων ἅρμα) was introduced in Ol. 99 ( = 384 B. C.),1827 and extended eight times round the course, or about 5.5 miles.1828 Pausanias mentions the monuments of only two such victors at Olympia.1829 The race in which the chariot was drawn by pairs of full-grown horses (συνωρίς) was introduced in Ol. 93 (408 B. C.) and extended eight times round the course.1830 Pausanias mentions but one victor in this event at Olympia1831 and an Olympic victress who had a statue erected to her in Sparta for such a victory.1832 This was probably the original chariot-race at Olympia revived in Ol. 93, since the two-horse chariot was the historical descendant of the Homeric war-chariot.1833 Panathenaic vases show that this race existed at Athens in the sixth century B. C., side by side with the four-horse chariot-race and horseback-race. The earliest of these vases, the so-called Burgon vase in the British Museum,1834 was a prize there for this event. The race in which the chariot was drawn by a pair of colts (συνωρὶς πώλων) was introduced at Olympia in the third century B. C., in Ol. 129 ( = 264 B. C.),1835 and extended three times around the course. Pausanias mentions no monument erected to a victor in this race. The horse-race (ἵππος κέλης) was instituted in Ol. 33 ( = 648 B. C.)1836, and the foal-race (πῶλος κέλης) nearly four centuries later, in Ol. 131 (256 B. C.).1837 Neither of these races was known to Homer, for κελετίζειν in the Iliad,1838 as we saw in Chapter I, refers only to the acrobatic feat of vaulting from the back of one horse to that of another. Pausanias mentions monuments erected to eight victors (for nine victories) in the regular horse-race at Olympia. We conclude from a passage of his work1839 that the riding-race consisted of one lap only or six stades, about two-thirds of a mile. A mule chariot-race (ἀπήνη) was introduced in Ol. 70 ( = 500 B. C.), and a trotting-race with mares (κάλπη) in Ol. 71 ( = 496 B. C.), but both were abolished in Ol. 84 ( = 444 B. C.).1840 Pausanias mentions one monument erected to an anonymous victor in κάλπη, who won some time between Ols. 72 and 84 ( = 492 and 444 B. C.).1841 He mentions the first victor in the mule-race, Thersias of Thessaly, but this does not occur in his periegesis of the Altis.1842 Only three other victors in this event are known to us, and they came from Sicilian towns.1843

Equestrian events were discontinued at Olympia in the first century B. C., owing to the waning of interest in athletics in consequence of the Roman conquest of Greece in 146 B. C. They were revived thereafter under the Empire only spasmodically and were destined finally to be replaced by the amusements of the Roman circus. Thus we learn from the Armenian version of Africanus that the chariot-race ceased at Olympia in Ol. 178 ( = 68 B. C.). It must, however, have been reinstated toward the end of the century, since Tiberius Claudius Nero—afterwards the Emperor Tiberius—won in Ol. 194 ( = 4 B. C.).1844 It again went into disuse, since Africanus says that it, πάλαι κωλυθείς, was reintroduced in Ol. 199 ( = 17 A. D., when Germanicus, the adopted son of Tiberius, won.1845 Once more it was discontinued, and again renewed in Ol. 222 ( = 109 A. D.), according to the same authority, who, however, does not name any victor for that date. Just when this discontinuance took place, we can not say, but it was certainly after Ol. 211 ( = 65 A. D.), when the emperor Nero is known to have won victories in various kinds of chariot-races.1846 Three Olympiads before, an Elean, Tiberios Klaudios Aphrodeisios, had also won the horse-race.1847

REPRESENTATIONS OF THE CHARIOT-RACE.

PLATE 26

Racing Chariot and Horses. From an archaic b.-f. Hydria. Museum of Berlin.

Representations of the various chariot-races are commoner than those of any other Olympic contest, appearing on vases, reliefs, coins, and gems.1848 There seem to have been two distinct types of racing-chariot in Greece.1849 The four-horse chariot was a modification of the heroic two-horse war-chariot, which was a low car on two wheels, surmounted by a box consisting of a high framework, open only at the rear, and large enough to contain the chieftain and the charioteer. The war-chariot was known to both Mycenæan Greece and Crete. There is a relief of uncertain date in the Museum of Candia, which represents a chariot and charioteer.1850 It is far superior to the type of chariots appearing in relief on the gravestones found at Mycenæ,1851 though the type on both is of the same general pattern, having the same box and four-spoked wheels. On the Mycenæan reliefs the box seems to rest directly upon the rim of the wheel, and the portrayal of a single horse is very inartistic. On the Candia relief, however, there are at least two horses discernible, and both the horses and the warrior, who is about to mount the car, are lifelike. The Greek racing-car was much lighter than the Homeric and Mycenæan war-chariot, and the box had room only for the charioteer. It was drawn usually by four horses. The Athenian type appears on Panathenaic vases throughout the whole history of the manufacture of these vases,1852 and also on Macedonian and Sicilian coins. On certain vases of later date the car is still lighter and has larger wheels. One of the earliest racing-cars is seen on a vase in the British Museum,1853 dating from the eighth century B. C. It seems to be a two-horse car, as we should expect at this early date, though the artist has drawn but one horse. The charioteer is clothed in a long chiton, a custom which was generally kept throughout the history of the chariot-race. The regular two-horse type of chariot appears on vases as a cart, the body of the old war-chariot being so diminished that nothing is left but the driver’s seat with a square open framework on the sides. The driver rests his feet on a footboard suspended from the pole.1854 Perhaps this represents a peculiarly Athenian type of chariot, since the two-horse chariot on coins of Philip II, son of Amyntas and father of Alexander the Great, a victor at Olympia in both horse-racing and charioteering, resembles the ordinary four-horse car, and the driver stands instead of sits.1855 The mule-car was like the two-horse chariot, as we see in representations of it on coins of Rhegion and Messana.1856 The best illustrations of racing with four-horse cars are afforded by coins of Sicilian cities.1857 We see an excellent representation of such a race on a sixth-century B. C. Panathenaic vase recently found at Sparta, on which a chariot driven by a standing charioteer is represented as passing a pillar on the right, and therefore perhaps near the end of the race.1858 The harnessing of two horses to a racing-car is seen on an archaic b.-f. hydria in Berlin (Pl. 26).1859 Here a third horse appears, led by a nude youth, who is crowned, and who therefore probably represents a victorious horse-racer. Several other b.-f. vase-paintings showing four-horse chariots have been collected by Gerhard.1860 However, we are not dependent upon vase-paintings and coins to judge of the magnificence of Greek chariots of the historical period, for we have actual remains of them—war-chariots, to be sure, but not very unlike the ones used at the corresponding dates in Olympia. Among these is the fine bronze biga found in the grave of an Italian prince at Monteleone, Etruria, in 1902, and now one of the chief treasures of the Metropolitan Museum in New York.1861 This is a war-chariot of the beginning of the sixth century B. C., the only complete ancient bronze chariot now known. The restored frame of wood is sheathed with thin bronze plates richly ornamented with reliefs in repoussé. Because of its form and its relationship to chariots appearing on archaic Ionic monuments of Asia Minor, for example, on the reliefs of sarcophagi from Klazomenai, and because of the strong resemblance between its decorative designs and those of archaic Italian monuments of Ionicizing style, Furtwaengler has classed it as the product of Ionic Greek art. Professor Chase, on the other hand, finds these decorations pure Etruscan in character, comparing them with the reliefs on three bronze tripods in the possession of Mr. James Loeb, which are dated some half a century later.1862 In any case this chariot is “das glaenzendste, vollstaendigste” archaic metal work yet recovered. In the British Museum there are considerable remnants of the chariot-group of King Mausolos and his wife Artemisia, which once stood on the apex of the Mausoleion at Halikarnassos, the work, according to Pliny,1863 of Pythis (or Pytheos), the architect and historian of the tomb.1864 Besides the figures of the royal pair, we have the head of one horse, the hinder half of another, fragments of still others, and one wheel of the chariot.1865

CHARIOT-GROUPS AT OLYMPIA.

Great artists were engaged to set up chariot-groups at Olympia and elsewhere. Many of the quadrigae and bigae mentioned by Pliny as the works of sculptors and painters must have been agonistic offerings.1866 Aeginetan sculptors were especially in favor at Olympia. Thus Onatas, in conjunction with the Athenian Kalamis, made a group for King Hiero,1867 and Glaukias made another for Hiero’s brother Gelo;1868 Simon made an equestrian group for Phormis,1869 and Philotimos made a statue for the horse-racer Xenombrotos of Kos.1870 The oldest dedication by a chariot victor at Olympia was the votive offering of Miltiades, the son of Kypselos, of Athens, which consisted of an ivory horn of Amaltheia, inscribed with archaic letters and set up in the treasury of the Sikyonians. Miltiades won his victory in Ol. (?) 54 ( = 564 B. C.).1871 The next oldest dedication at Olympia was that of a chariot, without any human figure, by the Spartan Euagoras, who won three victories in Ols. (?) 58–60 ( = 548–540 B. C.).1872 This custom of dedicating merely the model of a chariot continued sporadically into the third century B. C. Thus Polypeithes of Sparta, who won a victory near the end of the sixth century B. C.,1873 dedicated a chariot, while a figure of his father, the wrestler Kalliteles, stood beside it.1874 A Pythian victor, Arkesilas IV, son of Battos IV, king of Kyrene, who won a victory in the 31st Pythiad ( = 462 B. C.), dedicated a chariot at Delphi.1875 At the beginning of the fourth century B. C. the Spartan princess Kyniska set up “bronze horses less than life-size” in the pronaos of the temple of Zeus at Olympia. The recovered base shows that Pausanias was right about the size of this votive offering.1876 Theochrestos of Kyrene, who won some time between Ols. (?) 100 and 122 ( = 380 and 292 B. C.),1877 and Glaukon of Athens, who won in the third century B. C.,1878 also set up votive chariots. The recovered base of Glaukon’s chariot shows that it was small. Sometimes a chariot victor, for economy’s sake, contented himself with dedicating merely a statue of himself in honor of his victory—a custom which continued from the sixth to the third centuries B. C. Perhaps one of the oldest examples of such a dedication of which we have record is that of the Elean Archidamas, who won a victory at an unknown date, but certainly some time after Ol. 66 ( = 515 B. C.).1879 In the fifth century B. C., the Spartans Anaxandros1880 and Lykinos1881 dedicated merely statues of themselves. In the fourth century B. C. the Elean victors Timon,1882 whose monument was by Daidalos, Troilos, whose monument was by Lysippos,1883 and Telemachos, whose statue was by Philonides,1884 set up statues in honor of their victories. The footprints on the inscribed base of the statue of Telemachos show that he was represented standing at rest with both feet flat on the ground. This was probably the position of the statues of the other two victors mentioned. The statue of the Spartan victor Polykles, surnamed Polychalkos, stood in a singular group. He was represented as being greeted on his return home by his children, one of whom held a small grace-hoop in his hand, while the other was trying to snatch the victor ribbon from his father’s hand.1885 We learn from Diogenes Laertios that the tyrant Periandros of Corinth vowed to set up a golden statue of himself if he won the chariot-race.1886

The first instance chronologically recorded by Pausanias of a chariot victor dedicating his statue along with chariot and horses is that of king Gelo of Syracuse, the group being the work of the Aeginetan Glaukias.1887 The first instance of a victor dedicating his statue in a group with chariot, horses, and charioteer, is that of Kleosthenes of Epidamnos, the group being the work of the Argive Hagelaïdas.1888 Even the names of the horses were inscribed on this monument.1889 The owner of the chariot, to be sure, took the prize, but he felt that the victory was due to the horses and driver, and so he associated them with himself in the monument. Sometimes the victor acted as his own charioteer. Thus the Spartan Damonon, already mentioned as the hero of many chariot victories in and near Sparta, tells in the inscription appearing on his votive relief that he was his own charioteer.1890 In the first Isthmian Ode Pindar congratulates Herodotos of Thebes, who won the chariot-race (?) in 458 B. C., on not entrusting his chariot to strangers, but driving it himself.1891 Thrasyboulos seems to have driven his father’s car at the victory commemorated by the sixth Pythian Ode, sung in honor of the chariot victory of Xenokrates of Akragas in 490 B. C. at Delphi. Karrhotos, the charioteer of Arkesilas of Kyrene already mentioned, was the latter’s brother-in-law.1892 Similarly Aigyptos appears to have ridden his own horse at Olympia instead of entrusting it to a jockey.1893 Sophokles, in the Electra, has the hero Orestes drive his own chariot at the Pythia. Kyniska, the daughter of king Archidamas of Sparta, was the first woman to enter the contests at the race-course and the first to win an Olympic victory with her chariot.1894 Apart from the small votive offering, already mentioned as standing in the temple of Zeus, she had also a victor-group at Olympia, by the sculptor Apellas, consisting of chariot, horses, charioteer, and herself. The rounded form of the recovered base,1895 in connection with the description of Pausanias, permits us to assume that the statue of the princess stood in front on the projecting rounded portion of the pedestal. This is the contention of Loewy, who opposes the theory of Furtwaengler1896 that the statue stood away from the rest of the group, since Pausanias makes no mention of such an arrangement. In any case, the charioteer in the group can not have been separated from the car.

In an unpublished paper by my former teacher, Dr. Alfred Emerson, which was read by Professor D. M. Robinson before the Archæological Institute of America at its Christmas meeting in Providence in 1910, and entitled The Case of Kyniska,1897 the argument was made that the chariot was in miniature; that the statue of Kyniska was a portrait, because of the wording of the recovered epigram; and, lastly that the smallest of the so-called bronze dancers from the villa of the Pisos in Herculaneum, now in Naples, is a late reproduction of the statue at Olympia by Apellas. Emerson thinks that Pliny no doubt often visited the villa and may well have had these statues in mind when he mentioned Apellas as the author of several statues of women adorning themselves.1898

The monument erected by Hiero, son of Deinomenes and brother and successor of king Gelo at Syracuse, who won two horse-races and a four-horse chariot victory at Olympia in Ols. 76, 77, 78 ( = 476–468 B. C.),1899 consisted of a bronze chariot, on which the charioteer was mounted, and on either side a race-horse with a jockey on each. Onatas made the chariot (and possibly the statue of the driver), while Kalamis sculptured the horses and jockeys. Such a division among sculptors was not uncommon at Olympia. Thus the Aeginetan artist Simon and the Argive Dionysios made a group in common for Phormis, which we have already mentioned, consisting of two horses and two charioteers.1900 The Chian Pantias and the Aeginetan Philotimos made a group in common for Xenombrotos of Kos, victor in horse-racing, and for his son, the boy boxer Xenodikos, which consisted of statues of the man and the boy on horseback.1901 Pliny mentions a four-horse chariot-group for which the elder Praxiteles made the charioteer and Kalamis the chariot, adding that Praxiteles did this out of kindness, not wishing it to be thought that Kalamis had failed in representing the man after succeeding in representing the horses.1902

In some of the Olympic chariot-groups doubtless the charioteer was represented at the moment of entering the chariot or already in it. Sometimes a figure of Nike took the place of the charioteer, in order that the victor’s exploit might be more exalted. Thus Pausanias, in mentioning the bronze chariot of Kratisthenes of Kyrene by Pythagoras of Rhegion,1903 says that statues of Nike and Kratisthenes himself are mounted upon the car. The Nike in some cases was replaced by the figure of a young maiden, who stood beside the victor, as in the cases of the Elean Timon1904 and the Macedonian Lampos.1905 Pliny notes a similar example in reference to the chariot of Teisikrates, a Delphian victor in the two-horse chariot-race.1906 The maiden in all these cases may have been merely a Nike personified or a mortal.1907 Pliny records that the painter Nikomachos, son and pupil of Aristeides, painted a Victoria quadrigam in sublime rapiens.1908 The figure of Nike appears often on reliefs. Thus on a terra-cotta sarcophagus from Klazomenai we see a two-horse chariot driven by a boy, while alongside is a winged female figure—Iris or Nike—mounting it.1909 The moment of victory is shown on an Attic marble votive relief representing a four-horse chariot, now in the British Museum. Here a figure of Nike is represented as floating in the air and extending a wreath (now wanting) towards the head of the charioteer, who is draped with a tunic girdled at the waist, as he mounts the car. If the charioteer in this relief is a female (which is doubtful), it may he the personification of the city to which the winner belongs.1910 On a votive relief in Athens a horse is represented as being crowned by Nike.1911 On a relief in Madrid Nike is represented as driving a chariot.1912 A quadriga with a female figure, apparently Nike, appears on a relief dedicated to Hermes and the Nymphs, which was found in Phaleron.1913 Doubtless some of the chariot-groups at Olympia represented movement—the start, the course, or the end of the race—as do these and similar reliefs.1914 We should add that the figure of Nike was not confined to equestrian monuments. On the Ficoroni cista in Rome is represented the boxing match between Polydeukes and Amykos among the Bebrykes. In the centre we see Amykos hanged to a tree by the hands, while to the right stands Athena, and above her Nike is flying with a crown and fillet of victory for Polydeukes.1915

REMAINS OF CHARIOT-GROUPS.

From this discussion of the literary evidence about the monuments of chariot victors at Olympia and elsewhere, we shall turn to a brief consideration of certain existing works of sculpture, reliefs and statues, which will serve to illustrate the manner in which the sculptor represented this class of victor monuments.

Fig. 63.—Charioteer Mounting a Chariot. Bas-relief from the Akropolis. Akropolis Museum, Athens.

The motive of representing a figure in the act of mounting a chariot is old. Amphiaraos was thus represented on the chest of Kypselos at Olympia1916 and appears in a similar pose on the b.-f. Corinthian vase from Cerveteri, now in Berlin, which we have already mentioned.1917 Among reliefs we shall first discuss the Parian (?) marble one found in 1822 near the Propylaia at Athens and now in the Akropolis Museum (Fig. 63).1918 Here we see represented a robed figure stepping into a chariot, holding the reins in the extended hands. This Attic work, perhaps dating from the very beginning of the fifth century B. C., has long been admired for its vigor and grace. Whether the figure is male or female, human or divine, is still a matter of debate. The head is too badly weathered to make the decision final. The upper part of the figure of Hermes (?) on another fragment, which appears to come from the same relief and which was found near the south wall of the Akropolis in 1859,1919 has made it seem reasonable to call the charioteer a god, perhaps Apollo.1920 The hair of Hermes and of the charioteer is arranged in the old Attic krobylos fashion. This also makes it natural to interpret the charioteer as male, despite the slender and delicate arms and hands, which appear to be female.1921 But such effeminate male figures are not unknown to Attic art, which was characterized by grace and softness.1922 The line of the breast, however, shows no such fulness as archaic masters were wont to give to female forms, and hence this figure may very well be that of a male. Schrader has tried to refer the slab to the frieze of the Old Temple of Athena, which, he believes, survived the sack of the Akropolis by Xerxes,1923 thus assuming a chariot-frieze similar to the later one appearing on the Mausoleion at Halikarnassos, which antedated similar scenes on the Parthenon frieze by nearly a century. As the Parthenon slabs represent mortal charioteers, who are doubtless males, the relief may also represent a mortal. However, the Akropolis relief may have had nothing to do with any temple frieze nor with the adornment of a great altar of Athena, as Furtwaengler contended,1924 but may be from a votive monument set up by a chariot victor.1925

We see a good representation in relief of a chariot-group on one side of the arched roof of the so-called Chimæra tomb discovered by Sir Charles Fellows at Xanthos in Lykia. Here is represented a chariot drawn by four horses, in which stands a charioteer, with sleeved tunic and Phrygian cap, and an armed figure. Because of the figure of the Chimæra in the lower right-hand corner, the charioteer, despite the absence of Pegasos, has been called Bellerophon.1926

THE APOBATES CHARIOT-RACE.

On the north frieze of the Parthenon there were originally at least 9 four-horse chariot groups,1927 while on the south frieze there were 10 such groups.1928 These various groups represent a ceremonial chariot-race called the apobates, known at Athens and in Bœotia and a favorite contest at the Panathenaic games.1929 This race preserved the tradition of Homeric warfare, when the chieftain was driven to battle in his chariot, but dismounted to fight, remounting only to pursue or avoid his enemy. During the race, while the charioteer kept the horses at full speed, the apobates dismounted, ran alongside the chariot, and mounted again. In the last lap he dismounted and ran beside the chariot to the goal.1930 In the North frieze we see the charioteer in the chariot, and the apobates, armed with shield and helmet, either stepping down from the chariot or standing beside it; while a third figure, a marshal, stands nearby. Thus on slab XIV we see the apobates about to step down; on slab XV he is standing up in the chariot; on slab XVII (Fig. 64) he is leaning back, supporting himself by means of his right hand, which grasps the chariot rail, and is just ready to step down; on slab XXII he is remounting the chariot. In the scenes on the South frieze, on the other hand, the apobates is not represented as dismounting, but is standing either inside the chariot or by its side. The South frieze, therefore, represents preparation or the beginning of the race, while the North one represents the actual course. There is, therefore, as Gardiner points out, no need to accept Michaelis’ theory that the two friezes portray different motives, the North one representing the apobates at the games and the South one representing war-chariots. The double character of the race is shown by inscriptions which make both charioteer and apobates equally victors. Many other reliefs show the apobates dismounting. Thus, on a fragmentary relief found in 1886 at the Amphiareion at Oropos and now in Athens,1931 we see a nude and beardless youth standing in a chariot, which is moving rapidly to the left. He has a helmet on his head and a shield in his left hand and holds on to the rim of the chariot, as in the Parthenon frieze slab just mentioned. To his right is a charioteer with his arms outstretched to hold the reins. As this relief is obviously influenced by the Parthenon frieze, it must stand midway between that frieze and the Hellenistic relief to be described below. Another relief, found at Oropos in 18351932 and dating from the first half of the fourth century B. C., represents a four-horse chariot moving to the left and containing two persons. One is the charioteer, who has long waving hair and a short beard and is clothed in the usual long tunic; the other is a nude apobates, who is armed with helmet and shield and holds on to the rim of the chariot with his right hand, the upper part of his body being inclined backwards, the knees bent, and the shield held away from the body.1933 We can not say whether these two reliefs from the Amphiareion represent offerings of apobatai, who were victorious at races held in Oropos or elsewhere in Bœotia, or represent the victorious Panathenaic apobatai. They may well be ex votos to the hero Amphiaraos at the games held in Oropos. We see an excellent illustration of an apobates in the very act of dismounting on a Hellenistic votive relief discovered in 1880 on the Akropolis, which dates from the end of the fourth century B. C.1934 A marble relief, supposably from Herculaneum, but now in Portugal,1935 represents a figure dressed in a long chiton. Wolters suggests that it may represent an apobates, but the absence of the usual armor makes it probable that a charioteer is intended. In a future section we shall discuss the apobates in the horse-race at Olympia known as κάλπη.

Fig. 64.—Apobates and Chariot. Relief from the North Frieze of the Parthenon, Athens.

Fig. 65.—Charioteer. Relief from the small Frieze of the Mausoleion, Halikarnassos. British Museum, London.

STATUES OF CHARIOTEERS.

The best-preserved slab from the small Parian marble chariot-frieze from the Mausoleion of Halikarnassos, now in the British Museum, represents a male figure standing in a chariot (Fig. 65).1936 This long-haired charioteer, dressed in a tunic which extends to the feet and is girded at the waist, is leaning forward in an eager attitude. The folds of his garment curved to the wind show the speed of his horses, and the mutilated face discloses a look of intense excitement. The deep-set eyes and overhanging brows recall the Tegea heads of Skopas (Fig. 73) and the combatants pictured on the so-called Alexander Sarcophagus discovered near Sidon in 1887 and now in Constantinople.1937 The pose is so characteristic and spirited that it was copied by later artists on reliefs and gems.1938 The same pose, forward inclination of the body, half-opened mouth, and intense look seem to be reproduced in a statue of the fourth century B. C. now in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston (Pl. 27).1939 Robinson, because of the similarity of its head to certain heads of Apollo published by Overbeck,1940 interpreted this statue as Apollo starting to run. Von Mach, however, has pointed out that its head bears a more striking resemblance to that of a Kore in Vienna.1941 Klein interpreted it as a jumper, assuming that the two supports on the legs were for the wrists, indicating that the arms were held downwards, the hands, then, holding halteres. But von Mach makes it clear that these supports are not parallel, as Klein thought, but that they diverge outwards and consequently may have made the connection with the sides of a chariot rim. Furthermore, the likeness to the figure on the Mausoleion frieze (Fig. 65) makes it probable that we are here concerned with a charioteer. The objection to this theory on the ground of nudity is baseless. Though the conventional garb of the charioteer in Greek art from the eighth century B. C. onwards1942 was certainly a long, close-fitting chiton, there are several examples in existence of nude charioteers.1943 Similarly the objection that the artificial head-dress does not belong to a charioteer is equally erroneous. Klein has shown that it appears on several heads of boys, and, as von Mach says, it is certainly no better suited to Apollo or a jumper than to a boy driving colts in a chariot-race. The pose of the Boston statue also reminds us somewhat of that of the small bronze statue of a boy found in the Rhine near Xanten in 1858 and now in Berlin.1944 This is a Roman work seemingly inspired by a Greek prototype, and has been interpreted variously as the statue of Bonus Eventus, Novus Annus, and Dionysos. However, here again the forward inclination of the body points to the interpretation of a charioteer,1945 despite its nudity. The nude statue found on the Esquiline in 1874 and now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome, which has already been mentioned,1946 has been shown to be that of a charioteer by a comparison with figures on Attic vases which represent mortals and gods entering chariots, and with a figure on the so-called Satrap Sarcophagus in Constantinople.1947 The youth is represented as standing on his left foot; he places his right on the chariot floor and extends his hands to hold the reins. The statue seems to be a mediocre Roman copy of a Greek original bronze of about the middle of the fifth century B. C., as it shows certain traces of archaism. Furtwaengler has assigned it to the sculptor Kalamis along with a closely connected group of monuments.1948

PLATE 27

Statue of a Charioteer (?). Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

Finally, in this connection, even though it has nothing to do with monuments set up at Olympia, we shall discuss the life-size bronze statue of the Charioteer discovered by the French in 1896 in the excavations of Delphi, and now the cynosure of the village museum there. (Fig. 66.)1949 This example of ripe archaic art is one of the finest bronzes yet recovered in Greece. Its ancient fame is disclosed by the fact that it was copied in many monuments down to the end of antiquity.1950 The figure is clothed in a short-sleeved chiton, which reached nearly to the ground, and is girded above the waist. With the figure Fig. 66.—Bronze Statue of the Delphi Charioteer. Museum of Delphi. were found also fragments of reins, which were held in the extended right hand, portions of three horses, a chariot pole, and the left arm and hand of a second figure, that of a boy or woman, showing that the Charioteer was part of a group. The group rested on a base on which was cut a two-line metrical inscription, the ends of which are preserved. The first line ends Πολύζαλός μ’ ἀνέθηκεν. A part of the inscription is lost and another part, including the above words, is written over the erased original, which is still partly legible. The original inscription gives the name of the first dedicator as ending in ιλας. From this ending Professor Washburn recovers the name Ἀρκεσίλας. He refers the original dedication to Arkesilas IV of Kyrene,1951 and identifies it with the group known from Pausanias to have been dedicated at Delphi by the people of Kyrene, representing Battos and the figure of Libya crowning him in a chariot and the charioteer personified as Kyrene outside, the whole being the work of the Knossian sculptor Amphion.1952 Svoronos1953 follows Washburn’s suggestion and identifies the Charioteer with Battos, believing that the fragment of the left arm found with the statue is from the statue of Kyrene represented as a charioteer.1954 Ingenious as the theory is, there are chronological difficulties in the way of accepting it unreservedly. Thus Amphion’s pupil Pison worked on the Spartan memorial of Aigospotamoi at Delphi in 404 B. C.1955 Furthermore, the ending ιλας may equally well refer to Anaxilas, the tyrant of Rhegion, as the original dedicator,1956 in which case it seems reasonable to assume that the group might have been the work of Pythagoras, the great sculptor of Rhegion.1957 A Greek scholar believes that the original dedicator was Gelo, and that his name was erased and replaced by that of his brother Polyzalos; he consequently dates the group shortly after Gelo’s death in 478 B. C.1958 He refers it to Glaukias of Aegina, while Joubin1959 classes the Charioteer as an Attic work. However, the whole subject of Greek sculpture in the years just after the Persian war period is too complicated to name definitely the artist of this simple and severe work. Its deficiencies are as apparent as its virtues. Thus the parallel folds of the chiton show little of the form beneath; the feet are too flatly placed on the ground, and the contour of the head and face is not altogether graceful.1960 Whatever the original purpose of the group was, it may well have been used by Polyzalos to honor the Pythian victory of his brother Hiero.1961 From it, then, we can get, perhaps, an idea of the magnificence of Hiero’s monument by Onatas and Kalamis at Olympia.

DEDICATIONS OF VICTORS IN THE HORSE-RACE AT OLYMPIA AND ELSEWHERE.

The hippic victor at Olympia frequently dedicated merely the model of his victorious horse without the jockey, just as the early chariot victor dedicated a chariot without the charioteer. We have evidence of several instances of this custom from the sixth century B. C. on. Krokon of Eretria dedicated a small horse of bronze in the Altis.1962 The Corinthian Pheidolas dedicated a model of his horse alone, but for a different reason.1963 The jockey who rode for him fell off at the start, but the mare, named Aura, continued the race and reached the goal as victor. The owner was allowed by the judges to set up a monument to her. The sons of Pheidolas were also victors in the horse-race1964 and set up a horse on a column with an epigram upon it—ἵππος ἐπὶ στήλῃ πεποιημένος καὶ ἐπίγραμμά ἐστιν ἐπ’ αὐτῷ. Just how this monument looked is doubtful. Pausanias may have seen the bronze horse of the father Pheidolas, and nearby a column with a bas-relief representing the horse of the sons;1965 or the horse may have stood on top of the column in the round, since the epigram was ἐπ’ αὐτῷ (on the horse) and not ἐπ’ αὐτῇ (on the stele).1966

More frequently a jockey was seated upon the model of the horse, just as we see frequently on vase-paintings. In the Olympic monument of King Hiero already mentioned, race-horses with boys seated upon them stood on either side of the chariot in honor of his two victories in the horse-race and one in the chariot-race.1967 Another Olympia group represented the boy horse-racer Aigyptos on horseback, and his father, the chariot victor Timon, standing beside him.1968 This is also a case in which the victor (Aigyptos) acted as his own jockey. In the group representing Xenombrotos of Kos, the horse-racer, and his son, the boy boxer Xenodikos, by the Aeginetan Philotimos and the Chian Pantias respectively, the boy was seated on a horse and the statue of the father stood nearby.1969 The base of this group has been recovered, large enough to have carried the two monuments.1970 Pliny says that the sculptors Kanachos and Hegias made groups of horse-racers.1971 We have seen that Pausanias mentions others by Kalamis and Daidalos. The work of Kalamis, the immediate predecessor of Pheidias, an artist noted for his grace and softness and as an unrivaled sculptor of horses,1972 must have been excellent.

MONUMENTS ILLUSTRATING THE HORSE-RACE.

When we turn to the monuments which illustrate the horse-race, we find as varied a number—vase-paintings, reliefs, coins, statuary, etc.—as in the case of chariot victors.

Fig. 67.—Horse-Racer. From a Sixth-Century B. C. b.-f. Panathenaic Vase. British Museum, London.

Vase-paintings show that the jockey was generally nude and rode without stirrups or saddle. We see nude long-haired jockeys on horseback with whips pictured on a sixth-century B. C. Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum.1973 One also appears on a silver tetradrachm in the same museum, which commemorates the Olympic victory of Philip II of Macedonia.1974 Here the victorious mounted jockey has a palm in his hand, the symbol of his victory. On the other hand, the jockey is sometimes represented as wearing a close-fitting short-sleeved chiton. We see such a one on an archaic b.-f. Panathenaic vase of the sixth century B. C. in the British Museum (Fig. 67).1975 In front of the mounted youth on this vase stands a herald in official robes, from whose mouth issue the words “the horse of Dyneiketos is victorious.” Behind the jockey is an attendant bearing a wreath in his left hand and holding a prize tripod over his head. The short chiton also appears on a horse-racer on the Amphiaraos vase.1976 We see racing boys on a proto-Corinthian lekythos in the museum at Taranto, with tripods as prizes.1977 A fine example of five nude horse-racers also appears on a vase pictured in the Daremberg-Saglio Dictionary.1978 Here one has fallen from his horse and is being dragged by the bridle.

A boy on a galloping horse is shown on a terra-cotta relief from Thera.1979 On a funerary marble relief from Sicily, now in the Museo Gregoriano, Rome, a rider is represented urging his horse on with a whip.1980 An Athenian relief shows victorious ephebes leading horses,1981 while another from Athens shows a mounted boy.1982 Horsemen representing Athenian knights appear on many slabs of the Parthenon frieze,1983 either mounted or standing by their horses.

The inscribed base of Onatas found on the Akropolis seems to have borne the statue of a horse-racer.1984 The bronze statue of Isokrates at Athens, which represented him as a παῖς κελητίζων, is mentioned by the pseudo-Plutarch.1985 A bronze statuette in Athens from Dodona represents an ephebe on a galloping horse.1986 A statue in the Palazzo Orlandi in Florence represents a horse-rider.1987 In the Akropolis Museum there are two monuments which we should mention in this connection. One is the lower part of the statue of a nude rider on horseback, the mutilated horse being represented as pawing the ground with its forefoot. Closely resembling it in scale and finish, though more developed in style, is another fragmentary statue of a horse without a rider, the latter probably to be understood as standing in front of the horse, as in some of the riders pictured on the Parthenon frieze. The two are good examples of pre-Persian Attic sculpture.1988 A later example is the small bronze statuette of an ephebe represented as a horseman (the horse is lacking) discovered recently at the French excavations at Volubilis in Morocco. This almost perfectly preserved work has been referred to the first half of the fifth century B. C.1989 The position of the hands holding the reins reminds us strongly of the Delphi Charioteer (Fig. 66). The diadem in the hair shows that a victor is represented. A small bronze statuette in the Loeb collection in Munich represents a boy riding a prancing horse, which is standing on its hind legs. This vigorous, but poorly finished, work is decorative in character and probably once belonged to the crown of a candelabrum. It appears to be either an Etruscan or early Roman work based on a Hellenistic original.1990

THE APOBATES HORSE-RACE.

In a previous section we discussed the apobates chariot-race run at the Panathenaic games in Athens, in which the apobates leaped down and ran to the goal abreast of the chariot. We shall now briefly speak of a similar race at Olympia (the κάλπη) in which the rider leaped from his mare in the last lap and ran with her to the goal.1991 There is no certain illustration in sculpture or on vase-paintings of this race, but Gardiner believes that something like it appears on coins of Tarentum, on which a nude youth, armed with a small round shield, is represented in the act of jumping from his horse.1992 The military character of this race, like that of the apobates chariot-race discussed, is shown by the shield held in the left hand of the dismounting horseman. Helbig has shown that the Greek knight of the sixth century B. C. was merely a mounted infantryman, the successor of the Homeric warrior who used his chariot merely for pursuit or flight, while actually fighting from the ground.1993 Just so the knight rode to battle on his horse, but dismounted when near the enemy, leaving the horse in charge of his squire, as the Homeric chieftain left his chariot in charge of his charioteer. This old custom of the heroic age survived not only in the Panathenaic chariot-race, but also, for a few years in the fifth century B. C., in the Olympic mare-race known as the κάλπη. It seems to have been instituted there for military reasons in order to revive the old form of fighting that had gone out of use just at the close of the sixth century B. C., but it endured for only a half century, from Ols. 71 to 84 ( = 496 to 444 B. C.). The corresponding chariot-race at Athens and elsewhere continued at least to the end of the fourth century B. C.

DEDICATIONS OF MUSICAL VICTORS AT OLYMPIA AND ELSEWHERE.

In closing this chapter we shall say a few words about monuments erected to trumpeters, heralds, and musical victors at Olympia, though such contests had nothing to do with athletics.

Contests for trumpeters and heralds were held in many parts of Greece.1994 They were introduced at Olympia in Ol. 96 ( = 396 B. C.), when Timaios of Elis won as trumpeter and Krates of Elis as herald.1995 Pausanias mentions an altar, near the entrance to the stadion, upon which trumpeters and heralds stood when competing.1996 Such contests seem to have been mere displays of lung power. Herodoros, for example, who won as trumpeter at Olympia ten times in the last quarter of the fourth and beginning of the third century B. C.1997, could blow two trumpets at once so loud that no one could stand near him.1998 To perform such a feat he was said to be a very large man.1999 Diogenes, son of Dionysios of Ephesos, won five victories in trumpeting at Olympia. He was twice periodonikes and also won many other victories at the Isthmus, Nemea, and elsewhere—eighty in all.2000 We have an excellent bronze statuette of a trumpeter, which was found in the Hieron of Athena Chalkioikos at Sparta, dating from the middle of the fifth century B. C., about a century and a half before the event was introduced at Olympia.2001 This “little masterpiece of Spartan art,” whose style resembles that of the Olympia pediment sculptures, represents a nude man standing, the left arm hanging by his side, while the right is bent upwards to the mouth, where it held a tubular object pointing upwards. Since the lips are tightly compressed, Dickins has interpreted the object as a trumpet. A much damaged bronze statuette in the British Museum represents a man playing on a long trumpet-shaped instrument.2002 Trumpeters also appear now and then on r.-f. Attic vases of the middle of the fifth century B. C.

Music victors played a greater role at Delphi than elsewhere, since music from the first was the chief interest there. Monuments to such victors, though few in number, by little-known artists were set up there, but they seem to have enjoyed the same meagre honor at Delphi as the statues of athletic victors.2003 We have record of a statue of the Epizephyrian Locrian kitharoidos Eunomos, set up in his native town in honor of his Pythian victory over Ariston of Rhegion. Timaios says that this monument showed a cicada seated on the singer’s lyre.2004 Whether such monuments at Delphi or elsewhere were regarded as victor or votive in character, we can not say.2005 Pausanias mentions several statues of poets and musicians, mostly mythical, on Mount Helikon, which were set up partly in consequence of victories won there or elsewhere.2006 Of these the statue of the Thracian or Odrysian Thamyris was represented as a blind man holding a broken lyre;2007 that of Arion of Methymna as riding a dolphin;2008 that of Hesiod, seated, as holding a lute on his knees; and that of the Thracian Orpheus with Telete at his side and round about beasts in stone and bronze listening to his song. Of the statue of the Argive Sakadas, Pausanias says that the sculptor, not understanding Pindar’s poem on the victor, made the flutist no bigger than the flute.2009 The epigram on the statue of the Sikyonian flutist Bacchiadas, mentioned by Athenæus as standing on Mount Helikon,2010 was votive in character. The inscribed base of the statue of the kitharoidos Alkibios has been found on the Athenian Akropolis.2011 Musical contests are pictured on many imitation Panathenaic vases, and many Greek reliefs seem to have been set up in honor of such victors. Among the latter we might instance the one in the Louvre representing Apollo, Artemis, and Leto,2012 and another found in Sparta in 1885, which represents Artemis pouring a libation before Apollo.2013

At Olympia flute-playing accompanied certain of the events of the pentathlon. Pausanias says that the reason why the flute played a Pythian air while the athletes jumped was that this air was sacred to Apollo, who had beaten Hermes in running and Ares in boxing at Olympia.2014 Thus on the chest of Kypselos a flutist was represented as standing between Admetos and Mopsos at their boxing match.2015 But the explanation given by Philostratos seems more sensible, that leaping was a difficult contest, and that the flute stimulated the jumpers.2016 At Argos, at the games in honor of Zeus Σθένιος, wrestlers contended to the tune of the flute.2017 Many vase-paintings illustrate flute-playing at the pentathlon.2018 At Olympia only a few monuments were set up in honor of musical victors, and these seem to have been statues erected honoris causa, instead of primarily for victories. An example is that of the Sikyonian flutist Pythokritos, who won a victory as αὐλητής in the sixth century B. C.2019 Pausanias says that his monument was that of a small man with a flute wrought in relief on an inscribed slab. The explanation of such a description probably is that the size of the flute made the victor appear small, just as in the case of the monument of Sakadas just mentioned.2020 We know that artists, poets, prose writers, musicians, and actors all had an audience at Olympia, and that statues were often erected there in honor of such men, though these are not to be treated as victor monuments and do not properly fall within the scope of the present work.2021

CHAPTER VI.
TWO MARBLE HEADS FROM VICTOR STATUES.2022

Plates 28–30 and Figures 68–77.

THE GROUP OF DAOCHOS AT DELPHI, AND LYSIPPOS.

If in these later years our knowledge of Skopas has been greatly augmented by the discovery of the Tegea heads (Fig. 73), that of Lysippos has been almost revolutionized. With the discovery in 1894 at Delphi of the group of statues dedicated by the Thessalian Daochos2023 in honor of various members of his house, whose dates covered nearly two centuries,2024 an entirely new impetus was given to the study of the last of the great Greek sculptors. Homolle immediately recognized the fourth-century origin of the group, and at first pronounced the statue of Agias Lysippan;2025 later he saw in the types, poses, and proportions of the group the mixed influences of Praxiteles, Skopas, and Lysippos, but referred the Agias to the school of Skopas,2026 while still later he again pronounced it Lysippan.2027 But its true character was not destined to be long in doubt. When Erich Preuner2028 found almost the same metrical inscription, which was on the base of the best preserved statue of the group, that of Agias (Pl. 28 and Fig. 68),2029 in the traveling journal of Stackelberg,2030 copied from a base in Pharsalos, the Thessalian home of Daochos, with the additional information that Lysippos of Sikyon made the statue, our views of the work of that artist had to undergo a thorough revision. For this discovery brought the Agias—if not the others of the group—into direct relation to Lysippos by documentary evidence, while the easily recognized Lysippan characteristics of the statue—the slender body and limbs, the small head, the proportions and pose—confirmed this connection on stylistic grounds. It became clear that Daochos had set up a series of statues in honor of his ancestors both at Pharsalos and Delphi. Whether the Thessalian group was of bronze, as is generally held, owing to the widespread belief that Lysippos worked only in metal, and the Delphian group was composed of contemporary marble copies of those originals, will be discussed further on. If the marble group was a copy, we may infer that it reproduced the original statues, not mechanically and laboriously as was often the case in Roman days, but accurately; for having employed a noted artist in the one case, the dedicator would have desired an accurate reproduction of the work in the other.

PLATE 28

Statue of the Pancratiast Agias, from Delphi. Museum of Delphi.

Fig. 68.—Head from the Statue of Agias (Pl. 28). Museum of Delphi.

PLATE 29

Statue of the Apoxyomenos, after Lysippos or his School. Vatican Museum, Rome.

THE APOXYOMENOS OF THE VATICAN, AND LYSIPPOS.

But another statue, the Apoxyomenos, of the Vatican (Pl. 29),2031 ever since its discovery by Canina in 1849, had held the honored place of being regarded as the centre of the stylistic treatment of Lysippos. Seldom has the discovery of a Roman copy of a Greek original proved so important for the study of ancient sculpture as this athlete statue, which was found in an appropriate place, in the ruins of a building, which almost certainly was a Roman bath. Despite unimportant restorations, the statue is well preserved. The fingers of the right hand holding the die were wrongly restored by the sculptor Tenerani at the suggestion of Canina who wrongly interpreted the passage in Pliny (XXXIV, 55), which refers to two works by Polykleitos, destringentem se et nudum talo incessentem, as meaning one and the same monument.2032 This slightly over life-size statue represents a nude athlete, who is standing with legs far apart, employed in scraping the sand and oil from his extended right arm with a strigil held in the left hand. This, as we saw in Chapter III, was a common palæstra motive.2033 Despite certain portrait-like features, this statue may not represent an individual victor, but, like Myron’s great work, an athletic model. The words of Pliny,2034 which mention one of the best-known works of Lysippos in antiquity—it heads the list in his account of the sculptor—as an athlete destringentem se, and his statement in another passage2035 that Lysippos introduced a new canon into art capita minora faciendo quam antiqui, corpora graciliora siccioraque, per quae proceritas signorum major videretur, i. e., a canon of bodily proportions essentially different from that of Polykleitos, seemed to have their best illustration in the slender and graceful body and limbs, and noticeably small head of this statue. It was, therefore, though admittedly a Roman work, long regarded as a direct copy of the Lysippan original, and as faithfully representing his style in every detail.2036 Such a view, of course, was founded entirely on circumstantial evidence, and could not survive any positive evidence to the contrary which might come to light in the future. G. F. Hill, in speaking of the insufficient evidence on which the Apoxyomenos had been accepted as the key to Lysippan style, rightly remarks: “It is more scientific, until we acquire documentary evidence of excellent character, to classify our extant examples of ancient art as representing tendencies rather than men.”2037 The Lysippan character of the Vatican statue had not been seriously attacked until the discovery of the Agias. Its original was certainly a work worthy of Lysippos. Its rhythm, proportions, and fine modeling have received praise of connoisseurs ever since its discovery. Its difficult pose had been remarkably well executed. While appearing at rest, the statue suggests vigorous action both by its supple limbs and the suppressed excitement indicated by the partly opened lips, an excitement befitting a victorious athlete. Perhaps it was the difficulty of such a pose that best explains why the Apoxyomenos has left no other copy.2038 The very excellence of the Vatican statue prejudiced us in favor of regarding it as an illustration of Lysippos’ ideal of bodily proportions. But we really knew very little of the original Apoxyomenos, only what we gathered from Pliny, that Lysippos made such a statue and that it was carried to Rome by M. Agrippa and was set up in front of his Thermæ, whence it was removed by the enamored Tiberius to his bed-chamber, only to be restored when the populace remonstrated. As for the proportions of the supposed copy in question, they only prove that this statue goes back to an original which was not earlier than Lysippos, but not that it was by the master himself.2039 The discovery of the Agias showed us at last on what slender foundations our theory had been built. Despite certain well-marked similarities in the pose, proportions, and relatively small head—characteristics which were not even exclusively Lysippan, since they are just as prominent in certain other works, e. g., in the warriors of the Mausoleion frieze—between the Agias and the Apoxyomenos, nevertheless just as striking differences appear, which make it difficult to keep both statues as examples of the artistic tendency of one and the same artist, even if we should assign them to different periods of his career.

THE AGIAS AND THE APOXYOMENOS COMPARED, AND THE STYLE OF LYSIPPOS.

These differences are most apparent in the surface modeling and facial expression of the two works. In the Agias the muscles are not over-emphasized in detail, but show the simple observation of nature characteristic of artists who worked before the scientific study of anatomy at the Museum of Alexandria had reacted upon sculpture. In the Apoxyomenos, on the other hand, we see an intentional display of the new learning in the labored and detailed treatment of the muscles, which disclose a knowledge of anatomy unknown before the Hellenistic age. This academic treatment, culminating later in such realistic works as the Laocoön and the Farnese Herakles, can hardly have antedated the beginning of the third century B. C., when anatomy was studied by the physicians Herophilos and Erasistratos, a date after the close of the activity of Lysippos. We see no trace of this influence in the Agias. Moreover, the face of the latter discloses the intense expression, which is elsewhere seen only in works supposed to be by, or influenced by, Skopas, which recalls what Plutarch2040 said of Lysippos’ portraits of Alexander, that they reproduced his masculine and leonine air (αὐτοῦ τὸ ἀρρενωπὸν καὶ λεοντῶδες); for a comparison of this face with that of the Apoxyomenos, which exhibits the lifelessness and lack of expression so characteristic of many early Hellenistic works, makes it still more evident that we must be on our guard against assuming that both works are representative of the same sculptor. The essential differences in physical type and artistic execution between the two statues have been well summarized by K. T. Frost in a letter published by Prof. Percy Gardner in the latter’s treatment of the same subject.2041 After a careful analysis of these differences, Frost closes by saying: “It is difficult to believe that the two statues represent works by the same artist; it is not only the type of man, but the way in which that type is expressed which forms the contrast.” He compares the Apoxyomenos with the Borghese Warrior (Fig. 43) as true products of the Hellenistic age.

When we consider these differences between the two statues, we see that our judgment of Lysippan art must depend on how we interpret them. We may either flatly reject the Apoxyomenos and put the Agias in its place as representing the norm of Lysippan art, or keep the Apoxyomenos and reject the Agias as evidence; or lastly we may keep both as characteristic works of two different periods in the artistic career of Lysippos, explaining the differences as the result of influence or of the lapse of years. A recent writer, to be sure, has cut the Gordian knot by rejecting both statues, and placing the Apoxyomenos of the Uffizi—which we have treated at length in a preceding chapter (Pl. 12)—as the key to our knowledge of the art of Lysippos.2042 But such a solution of the problem raises even more difficulties. Long before the Agias came to light some critics, indeed, had doubted whether the Apoxyomenos really represented the work of Lysippos, as its Hellenistic character seemed evident. Thus, in 1877, Ulrich Koehler,2043 following a still earlier judgment,2044 had come to the conclusion that the Vatican statue was only a free reproduction of Lysippos’ masterpiece and attributed its Hellenistic characteristics to the Roman copyist; but even yet the school which long recognized the Apoxyomenos as the norm of Lysippos has its supporters,2045 though many archæologists have now supplanted the Apoxyomenos by the Agias.2046 Others, not willing to renounce the Apoxyomenos as evidence, accept both it and the Agias as characteristic works of the master, appealing to the length of his career to explain the differences, and suggesting that in his youth Lysippos was under the influence of Skopas, but later in life attained independence, and followed a more anatomical rendering for his athlete statues.2047 However, despite the fact that other artists must have influenced Lysippos,2048 the Agias can not be shown to be a youthful work of his, nor can the special influence of Skopas be shown to have been that of master on pupil, but rather of one great master on another and equally great contemporary. The difficulty about penetrating the obscurity surrounding Lysippos comes largely from the fact that he borrowed traits from several of his predecessors and contemporaries. The influence of Polykleitos, Skopas, and Praxiteles, and especially of the last two, as Homolle emphasized in his study of the Daochos group,2049 can be certainly traced in the Agias. Fräulein Bieber, in a recent article,2050 while denying that Lysippos had anything to do with the Delphian group, tries to prove that one figure in it shows the influence of Praxiteles, another that of Polykleitos, and a third that of Skopas. She believes that the sculptor of the Agias had seen the original bronze statue, the work of Lysippos, which stood in Pharsalos. However, we may leave any such conclusion to one side, and judge between the Agias and the Apoxyomenos solely on the merits of the two statues.

The differences between them appear to us too great to be reconciled on any such principles as those just rehearsed, for their style and technique seem to represent two distinct periods of art. If one is to be rejected, the connection of the Agias with Lysippos certainly rests on better evidence than does the Apoxyomenos. By separating them completely, it is possible both to assign to Lysippos the early date which other evidence points to, and to remove the Apoxyomenos entirely from the fourth century B. C., thus explaining its later modeling, comparatively expressionless features, body-build (which shows the use of three planes, instead of two), and other Hellenistic details. We should, then, see in its original a work not by Lysippos at all, but by some pupil or later member of his school, a work retaining merely traces of the style of the master. In thus eliminating the Apoxyomenos we are justified in following Homolle’s lead in assigning the statue of Agias to Lysippos, in spite of arguments which have been adduced against attributing it to Lysippos and in spite of recent criticism of the inscriptions of the Delphian bases, by which Wolters tries to prove that the inscription on the base of the statue of Agias, and consequently the Agias itself, antedate the inscription and dedication at Pharsalos.2051 We may, therefore, until further discoveries prove the contrary, consider it as the centre of our treatment of that sculptor. Whether the Apoxyomenos is to be explained as emanating from the immediate environment of Lysippos, or is to be regarded as a work illustrating the last phase of his development, or the innovation of another master—in any case it seems to us clearly to belong to an age essentially different from that which conceived the Agias.2052

As the Agias is a statue of a victor in the pankration, we can learn from it how Lysippos represented such an athlete. In giving up the Apoxyomenos, we must also give up statues of athletes which have hitherto been assigned to Lysippos on the basis of their resemblance to it, and the future ascription of statues of this class must be based on stylistic resemblances to the statue of Agias. Thus, for example, we should give up the statue of a youth in Berlin, and the two statues of athletes represented in lunging attitudes in Dresden, which Furtwaengler, on the basis of the Apoxyomenos, believed were copies of originals by Lysippos,2053 and the Roman male head in Turin, published by A. J. B. Wace,2054 whose original is somewhat later than that of the Apoxyomenos. On the basis of the Agias, on the other hand, we may regard as Lysippan the statue of an athlete in Copenhagen,2055 and perhaps the Parian marble statue of an athlete from the Palazzo Farnese now in the British Museum,2056 with copies in Paris and Rome.2057 This latter statue Furtwaengler ascribed to the school of Kalamis of the fifth century B. C., on account of the similarity of its style to that of the Apollo-on-the-Omphalos (Fig. 7B) and of its motive to that of the Lansdowne Herakles (Fig. 71 and Pl. 30); however, A. H. Smith finds it very similar to the Agias, and so rightly refers it to the fourth century B. C.

THE HEAD FROM OLYMPIA.

Impressed by its remarkable likeness to the head of the Agias, I hazarded the opinion some years ago,2058 that the much discussed Pentelic marble head from Olympia (Frontispiece and Figure 69)2059 was Lysippan, Fig. 69.—Marble Head, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. and attempted to bring it into relation with the statue of the Akarnanian pancratiast (whose name I restored as Philandridas), which Pausanias2060 says was the work of Lysippos. Since then, after a careful revision of the evidence, this earlier opinion has become conviction, and I now have no hesitancy in expressing the belief that in this vigorous marble head we have to do with an original work by Lysippos himself. It will be our task briefly to rehearse the reasons for making such an ascription, despite the serious and weighty objections which might be raised against it.

At first this head was ascribed with surprising unanimity to the school of Praxiteles,2061 and subsequently, after the discovery of the Tegea heads, with almost equal unanimity to that of Skopas. Treu, who first published the head,2062 pointed out its near relationship to the Hermes of Praxiteles, which appeared to him to be obvious, notwithstanding the injured condition of the chin, nose, mouth, and brows. He found the general proportions, the shape of the cranium and forehead, and the form of the cheeks and mouth the same in both, while the differences, such as the deeper cut and wider opened eyes with their γοργόν expression, the hair, and the fact that the head is harder, leaner, and bonier than that of the Hermes, were all explained by the different character given to the statue of a victor or Herakles. Many other archæologists, as Boetticher,2063 Laloux and Monceaux,2064 and Furtwaengler,2065 have also seen sure signs of the hand of Praxiteles or his school in the graceful attitude, delicate chiseling, and finish of the work. Still others,2066 however, found every characteristic of Skopas in this head. Even Treu in his later treatment of the head found it more Skopaic than Praxitelian, and yet, by a careful analysis,2067 he conclusively showed that the formation of the eyes, the opening of the mouth, and the treatment of the hair were so different in the heads from Tegea (and especially in that of the Herakles, Fig. 73) as to preclude the possibility of assigning them and the head from Olympia to the same sculptor, and so declared for some independent sculptor among the contemporaries of Skopas. However, he did not see Lysippos in this allied but independent artist, though he admitted the resemblance of the head in question to that of the Agias, as also Homolle,2068 Mahler,2069 and other critics have done.

THE OLYMPIA HEAD AND THAT OF THE AGIAS.

A detailed comparison of this head with that of the Agias will show wherein the wonderful resemblance—so striking at first glance—consists and will disclose its Lysippan character. Neither head is a portrait, nor even individualized; the Agias could be no portrait, for Agias was the great-grandfather of Daochos, who enlisted the services of his contemporary Lysippos in erecting his statue, and he won his victory in the pankration more than a century before this statue was set up.2070 A glance at the head from Olympia also clearly discloses its ideal character; for it is no portrait of Philandridas, but the victor κατ’ ἐξοχήν in the pankration. The small head of the Agias—under life-size—first arrests attention as the chief characteristic of the whole statue and (taken with the other proportions of the body) as the chief mark of its Lysippan origin. As Homolle says, it is not that small heads are not found outside the school of Lysippos or before his day—for Myron can furnish examples of them—but it is only with Lysippos and after him that we see a conscious intention of having the proportions thus reduced. Now the head from Olympia is also less than life-size,2071 but as the head alone is preserved, we can only assume that the proportions it bore to the body were similar to those we see in the statue of Agias. The conformation of the crania of both is, as in Attic works, round, with small, only slightly projecting occiputs, as opposed to the squareness of Polykleitan heads, which are longer from front to back and flatter on top—showing how Lysippos in this respect departed from the creator of the Doryphoros. This cranial conformation is almost identical in the two heads, as is clearly shown in Fig. 70, where one is drawn in profile over the other.

Fig. 70.—Profile Drawings of the Heads of the Agias and the Philandridas.

The head of the Agias is turned slightly upward and to the left. Treu found traces of the use of a file on the back of the neck of the head from Olympia, which show from their position, what also was clear from the muscles of the throat, that this head also was inclined somewhat to the left and upward, possibly more than that of the Agias. The outlines of the face—lean and bony in both—are oval, in the head from Olympia somewhat broader, rounder, and fleshier toward the chin. In both the forehead is remarkably low, with a low depression or crease in the middle, and with a prominently projecting superciliary arcade, which breaks the continuous line from forehead to nose very perceptibly. This line is concave above and below, but convex at the projection itself, though this is less prominent in the Agias. The powerful framing of the eyes, which are deep-set and thrown into heavy shadows by the projecting bony structure of the brows and the overhanging masses of flesh, the eyeballs slightly raised and peering eagerly into the far distance, the slight upward inclination of the head, and the prominent forehead drawn together, all combine to give both heads (though young and vigorous) a pensive, even a sad look of heroic dignity, a look seemingly of one who takes no joy nor pleasure in victory, though it is not mournful. This humid and pensive expression was doubtless a characteristic of works of Lysippos—it was, as we know, present in his portraits of Alexander—but he did not treat it with as great intensity as did Skopas.

The eyeballs in both heads are strongly arched, though the inner angles are not so deep as in Skopaic heads; the raised upper lids form a symmetrically narrow and sharply defined border over the eyeball, and in neither head is this lid covered by a fold of skin at the outer corners, as in the Tegea heads; the mass of flesh at the outer corners is heavier in the head from Olympia, and the expression of the eyes is more free and defiant than in the more meditative Agias. In both, the cheek bones are high and prominent. The elegant contour of the lips of the Agias is wholly wanting in the head from Olympia, in which the lips are broken off, like the nose and the chin, but it is clear that the lips were slightly parted, just showing the teeth—not, however, as in the Tegea examples, as if the breath were being drawn with great effort. The look of pensiveness is also increased by the open lips. The contour of the jawbone is not so visible as in the Agias, where it is clearly discernible beneath the closely drawn skin, giving the face a look of greater leanness, as of an athlete in perfect training.

In both heads the swollen and battered ears, though small, are prominent, and in both the hair is closely cropped, as becomes the athlete. The hair of the Agias does not show so much expression as is displayed in that of some Lysippan heads, nor the fine detail we should expect from Pliny’s statement that Lysippos made improvements in the rendering of the hair2072—for it is in great measure only sketched out. In Lysippan portraits of Alexander the hair is generally expressively treated, and this is often the case in early Hellenistic heads.2073 However, we should not expect an elaborate treatment of the hair in the statue of a pancratiast. The head from Olympia also shows great simplicity in this regard. As in Skopaic heads, the hair is fashioned into little ringlets ruffled straight up from the forehead in flat relief, but here the curls are shorter and more tense. It covers the temples and surrounds the ears as in the Agias, but it is not, as there, bounded by a round, floating line across the forehead, nor divided into little tufts modeled in relief radiating in concentric circles from the top of the head. While lacking in detail, the hair of the Agias is treated carefully, and with the greatest variety. Narrow bands, perhaps the insignia of victory, despite their small size, encircle both heads; in the Agias the band is dexterously used to heighten the effect of variety in the hair by alternately flattening and swelling it here and there. In neither head is there any sign of the use of the drill to work out the tufts of the hair; only the chisel was used.2074

Finally, the whole expression of these two ideal heads is one of force and energy, of heroic dignity tempered by pensiveness and pathos, which is, in the head from Olympia at least, even a little dramatic. Both heads, while ideal, show close observation of nature in modeling and expression; and both show the predilection of Lysippos for types in which force and energy predominate, and his indifference to the softer and more delicate types of manly beauty so characteristic of his contemporary, Praxiteles.

In the foregoing comparison, we have tacitly assumed that this marble head is from an athlete statue, and, moreover, that it, as the Agias, represents a victor in the pankration, though many have seen in it the representation not of a victor, but of a youthful Herakles.2075 The swollen ears and the band in the hair might pass equally well for either, just as the fact that it was unearthed near the ruins of the Great Gymnasion (if it were necessary to assume that the statue once stood there) might be adduced as evidence for either interpretation; for statues of athletes Fig. 71.—Head of the Statue of Herakles (Pl. 30). Lansdowne House, London.as well as those of Herakles and Hermes (as we have shown in Ch. II)2076 adorned palæstræ and gymnasia. That the head is of marble and slightly under life-size seems to lend some support also to the belief that it is a fragment of a statue of Herakles, on the assumption that statues of victors in the Altis were uniformly of bronze, an assumption, however, not supported by the facts, as will be shown in Chapter VII. So some have seen the heroic features of the youthful hero in the γοργόν of the eyes, the energetic forehead, closely cropped hair, muscular neck, and almost challenging inclination of the head seemingly corresponding with an energetic raising of the left shoulder.2077 In Chapter III we saw that swollen ears were of little use in determining whether a given head belongs to the statue of a victor or to one of Herakles, since they formed no personal characteristic, but only a professional one common to athletes and to gods, if these latter were concerned with athletics.2078 Where personal attributes are absent, it is often difficult, therefore, to determine whether an ideal athlete or Herakles is intended, for it may be the hero in the guise of the athlete, or an athlete in the guise of the hero. The head under discussion, then, may furnish merely another illustration of the process of assimilation of type which we have already discussed. Thus it is not surprising that some have regarded this head as that of a youthful Herakles. Yet such a view is wrong; for, apart from all considerations which we shall adduce to identify it with the Akarnanian pancratiast, and in the absence of distinguishing attributes, if we compare it with another Lysippan head from a statue generally recognized as that of a Herakles—the famous Pentelic marble one in Lansdowne House, London (Pl. 30 and Fig. 71),2079 which Michaelis long ago characterized as “unmistakably in the spirit of Lysippos”—we can see how fundamentally different is the whole spiritual conception of the two, and how differently an athlete (even if highly idealized) and a hero are treated by the same sculptor. If we once recognize a victor in the head from Olympia, then the swollen ears, the fierce, barbarous look of the eyes, and the half-painful expression of the mouth, all concur in convincing us that we here have to do with a victor in boxing or the pankration, the two most brutal and dangerous contests.

IDENTIFICATION OF THE OLYMPIA HEAD.

PLATE 30

Statue of Herakles. Lansdowne House, London.

Having established, then, the Lysippan character of the head and the probability that it comes from the statue of a boxer or pancratiast, we shall next discuss the evidence for identifying it with one of the monuments mentioned by Pausanias in his periegesis of the Altis. He names only five statues of victors by Lysippos: those of Troilos,2080 victor in the two- and four-horse chariot-races; of Philandridas2081 and of Polydamas,2082 victors in the pankration; of Cheilon,2083 victor in wrestling, and of Kallikrates,2084 victor in the hoplite-race. Of these, the only two which can come into consideration are those of the two pancratiasts; and one of these, that of Polydamas, can at once be eliminated; for this small head can have had nothing to do with the pretentious monument mentioned by Pausanias in these words: ὁ δὲ ἐπὶ τῷ βάθρῳ τῷ ὑψηλῷ Λυσίππου μέν ἐστιν ἔργον, μέγιστος δὲ ἁπάντων ἐγένετο ἀνθρώπων, κ. τ. λ. Fragments of the base of this monument have been recovered, and it stood in a part of the Altis2085 too far removed from the spot where the statue of Philandridas stood, or from that where the marble head was found. Our choice is limited to the statue of the Akarnanian, the tenth in the series of 168 victors2086 named by Pausanias in his first ephodos.

We can determine very closely the position of these first few statues in the Altis. Pausanias begins his enumeration ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ ναοῦ τῆς Ἥρας, in the northwest of the sacred enclosure.2087 He is often loose in his employment of words to denote locations, and especially so in that of the terms ἐν δεξιᾷ and ἐν ἀριστερᾷ, which must sometimes be interpreted from the viewpoint of the spectator, and sometimes from that of a given monument. We shall show in Chapter VIII that these words in this connection must be taken as referring to the temple pro persona, and consequently to the southern side of the Heraion. The marble head was found in this neighborhood, in the wall of some late Byzantine huts behind the southern end of the stadion-hall of the Great Gymnasion, 23.50 meters north of its southeastern corner and 5 meters east of its back wall,2088 and consequently very near the Heraion. Inasmuch as the inscribed tablet from the base of the statue of Troilos,2089 the sixth statue mentioned by Pausanias, and the inscribed base of the monument of Kyniska,2090 the seventh, were both found in the ruins of the Prytaneion nearby, and the basis of the statue of Sophios,2091 the twenty-second in the series, was discovered also in this part of the Altis, in the bed of the Kladeos,2092 we can conclude that all four monuments originally stood near together, and in the order named by Pausanias, along the southern side of the Heraion. The remarkably good preservation of the surface of the marble head points to the fact that it was set up in a sheltered place.2093 Furthermore, the unfinished condition of the back hair, which is only roughly blocked out, so that not even the contour of the locks is indicated, shows that the statue was intended to be set up against a solid background, i. e., in front of a wall, niche, or column.2094 From this fact we may conclude that the statue of Philandridas, and perhaps those of some of the other victors first mentioned by Pausanias, stood on the southern stylobate of the Heraion, over against the columns of the peristyle.

THE DATES OF PHILANDRIDAS AND LYSIPPOS.

The date of the victory of Philandridas is not recorded, but it probably must lie within the years of the activity of Lysippos, who made the statue.2095 On the principle which has been sufficiently demonstrated in my monograph de olympionicarum Statuis, that statues of nearly contemporaneous victors were grouped together in the Altis, as well as those of the same family and state, or those who had been victorious in the same contest, I have already in that work2096 proposed Ol. 102 or Ol. 103 ( = 372 or 368 B. C.) as the probable date of his victory, as his statue stands among those of victors, none of whom could have won later than Ol. 104 ( = 364 B. C.). The first six named by Pausanias are Eleans and the dates of their victories fall between Ols. 94 and 104 ( = 404 and 364 B. C.); the sixth, Troilos, is known to have won his two victories in Ols. 102 and 103.2097 None of the next seven Spartans—among whose statues that of Philandridas was placed—can be dated later than Ol. 97 ( = 392 B. C.), while most of them belong to the close of the fifth century B. C. Sostratos of Sikyon won in the same contest in which Philandridas did in Ol. 104 ( = 364 B. C.);2098 and doubtless his two other known victories should be assigned to the two succeeding Olympiads. To bring Philandridas down as far as Ol. 107 ( = 352 B. C.) is unwarranted, since no statue of so late a date stood in this vicinity. On the other hand, to place his victory earlier than Ol. 102, is also out of the question, owing to the inexpediency of dating Lysippos so early. Doubtless, therefore, his statue by Lysippos was placed in the Spartan group about the same time that the image of Troilos, by the same sculptor, was placed among the Eleans. This is an independent argument, then, for so early a date for Lysippos.2099

Percy Gardner, in the discussion of the date of this artist,2100 has shown how slight is the evidence for any date later than 320 B. C. The date of the second Olympic victory of Cheilon of Patrai, whose statue was by Lysippos, can not be later than 320 B. C.2101 Pausanias quotes the inscription on the base of the statue to the effect that Cheilon died in battle and was buried for his valor’s sake by the Achæan people. He infers the date of his death by reference to the date of Lysippos as either 338 B. C. (Chæroneia) or 322 B. C. (Lamia). In another passage, VII, 6.5, he says that the Olympic guide told him that Cheilon was the only Achæan who fought at Lamia. Gardner justly remarks that either of these dates, the two occasions in the lifetime of Lysippos when the Achæans took part in an important war, fall within the dates of the artist’s activity.2102 The dates of the two hoplite victories of Kallikrates of Magnesia, on the Meander, whose statue was also the work of Lysippos, must be left indeterminate.2103 Gardner also shows that the wish not to separate Lysippos from the Apoxyomenos has been the real reason which has influenced so many archæologists to extend his activity to the end of the fourth century,2104 and to explain away the evidence for an earlier date offered by the statue of Troilos, who won his second victory in 368 B. C. If we once for all give up the Apoxyomenos, the difficulty of an early dating disappears, as does also the theory that Skopas could have strongly influenced the youthful Lysippos as a master would influence a pupil, and it becomes clear that this influence must have been mutual, that of one great contemporary upon another. Although Lysippos worked longer, as is attested by his work for Alexander and his generals, he could have been but little if any younger than either Skopas or Praxiteles, from both of whom he learned. We have already quoted Homolle2105 as saying that an analysis of the style of the Agias discloses the mixed influences of Praxiteles and Skopas, as well as the independent work of Lysippos, in the pose, proportions, and whole type of the figure.

Lysippos was a great reformer in art, breaking away from Argive and Polykleitan traditions, even though he called the Doryphoros as well as Nature his master, and though the influence of Polykleitos is visible in the body of the Agias, just as that of Skopas in the treatment of its forehead, eyes, and mouth, and in the intensity of its expression. Evidently he was strongly affected by the work of his great predecessors and contemporaries, but developed at the same time new and independent tendencies. Thus the Philandridas must have been—just as the lost statue of Troilos—an early work of the master, whereas the Agias was the work of his mature genius. The difference between the two can thus be explained by the lapse of time between them, and by the influences that surrounded the youthful artist; but the similarities between them are, at the same time, striking, and there is little resemblance in either to the Apoxyomenos. This is another link in the chain of evidence that the latter work could not have been produced by the same artist; for artists do not radically change their style after many years of work, and Lysippos must have been at least fifty years old when he created the Agias.

The identification of this marble head with that of the victor statue of the Akarnanian pancratiast by Lysippos raises two questions which we shall briefly examine: whether the statues in the Altis were ever made of marble, and whether Lysippos ever worked in that material. The first of these questions will be left for the following chapter; the second will be discussed in the present connection.

LYSIPPOS AS A WORKER IN MARBLE, AND STATUE “DOUBLES.”

To regard a marble statue as an original work of Lysippos, who has been looked upon almost universally as a sculptor in bronze exclusively, seems at first sight to be baseless. Pliny certainly classed Lysippos among the bronze-workers, for in the preface to his account of bronze-founders2106 he tells us that this artist produced 1,500 statues, and doubtless we are to infer that the historian regarded them all as being made of metal. He further2107 speaks of Lysippos’ contributions to the (ars) statuaria, and it seems clear that this term, as the modern title of Book XXXIV, is to be taken in its narrow sense of sculpture in bronze as opposed to sculptura,2108 that in marble. How firmly the belief is established that Lysippos worked only in bronze can be seen from the following words of Overbeck: “Zu beginnen ist mit wiederholter Hervorhebung der durchaus unzweifelhaften und wichtigen Tatsache dass Lysippos ausschliesslich Erzgiesser war.”2109 That Lysippos was preëminently a bronze-worker, and that his ancient reputation was due chiefly to his bronze work, can not be doubted. But to say that he never essayed to produce works in marble, as so many other Greek artists did who were famed as bronze-workers,2110 is, as one writer has lately expressed it, a kindisches Vorurtheil.2111 That marble work was done in his studio, if not by his hand, is well attested by the reliefs from the base of the victor statue of Polydamas mentioned above, which have been generally referred to Lysippos’ pupils.2112 These are too damaged to be used as exact evidence of his style, but the legs of Polydamas himself, in the central relief, so far as their contour can be made out, are thin and sinewy, as we should expect in Lysippan work, and this relief doubtless would have been regarded as the work of the master himself, if it had not been taken for granted that he worked only in bronze. But for the same assumption some critics would have seen an original from the hand of Lysippos in the statue of Agias at least, if not in the others of the Delphian group.2113 It will be interesting to rehearse some of the arguments by which the statue of Agias has been adjudged a copy.2114

It has been generally assumed that the original group of statues at Pharsalos was of bronze (though we have no proof that it may not have been of marble), while the one at Delphi was copied almost, if not quite, simultaneously in marble2115—so faithfully, indeed, that even the proper marble support to the figure of Agias was omitted. While Homolle notes the absence of this support as evidence of the marble statue being an exact copy of the original bronze, Gardner argues that this proves a free imitation, where the support was not needed.2116 The inexact modeling of the hair, since hair can not be rendered so perfectly in marble as in bronze, has been adduced as a sign that the marble statue was a copy of the bronze original. This in itself is a weak argument, since the slight and sketchy treatment of the hair of the Hermes of Praxiteles—which is, for the most part, merely blocked out2117—might with just as good reason be used as evidence that that statue is only a copy, especially as we know that Praxiteles also worked in bronze.2118 The omission of the artist’s signature on the base of the Agias has also been taken to indicate that some pupil of Lysippos (Lysistratos, for example) did the work of transference in the master’s studio under his supervision and doubtless from his model.

Despite all such arguments, which prove little, it must be admitted that the careless finish of the Delphian statue is not what we should expect in a masterpiece by so renowned a sculptor as Lysippos, as the statue can not be said to be a first-rate work of art. But that it was made under the direct supervision of Lysippos can hardly be questioned. It seems reasonable to believe that Daochos, who employed the great artist in the one case, would not have trusted a mere copyist in the other, or one who was free to indulge his individual taste in details,2119 especially as the statue was to be placed in so prominent a place as Delphi. He probably gave the orders for the two statues at the same time, and Lysippos must have had the oversight of the Delphian one. So it seems best to regard the statue of Agias as a “double,” and not as a copy in the later sense of the word. The custom of making such doubles goes back at least to the middle of the sixth century B. C. Thus the statue of the Delian Apollo by Angelion and Tektaios, known as the “Healer” (Οὔλιος),2120 had a “double” in both Delphi2121 and Athens.2122 Similarly the Philesian Apollo of Branchidai near Miletos, by the elder Kanachos,2123 had a double in Thebes known as the Ismenian Apollo, which Pausanias says differed from the one in Miletos neither in form nor size, but only in material, for it was of cedar-wood,2124 while the Milesian one was of bronze. Furtwaengler2125 has demonstrated that contemporary doubles of works by Polykleitos, Pheidias, and Praxiteles existed. The case of the statues of the athlete Agias at Pharsalos and at Delphi is paralleled by that of the Olympic victor Promachos, who had statues, probably alike, both at Olympia and in his native city Pellene.2126 A double of the base of the Nike of Paionios at Olympia was discovered at Delphi,2127 and a fine head in the collection of Miss Hertz in Rome is from the same original.2128 A Polykleitan head in the British Museum, similar to that of the Westmacott Athlete (Pl. 19), seems to be a contemporary replica of an original of the fifth century B. C.2129 Such examples (and many more could be cited) show the difference between contemporary “doubles” and the later copies of Greek masterpieces. The former are Greek originals in a very true sense, made, as we assume the Agias was, under the direct supervision of noted sculptors. In this sense only the Delphian statue should be called a copy.

HEAD OF A STATUE OF A BOY FROM SPARTA, AND THE ART OF SKOPAS.

We shall next discuss the beautiful Pentelic marble head of a boy, with a lion’s scalp drawn over the top so that the muzzle comes down over the forehead, which is said to have been discovered near the Fig. 72.—Marble Head of a Boy, found near the Akropolis, Sparta. In Private Possession in Philadelphia, U. S. A. Akropolis at Sparta in 1908 (Fig. 72). This head was for a time in the University Museum, Philadelphia, and later was exhibited at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. At last accounts it was in private possession in Philadelphia. It has been published as the head of a youthful Herakles by my colleague, Professor W. N. Bates, in the American Journal of Archæology.2130 Of its style he says: “The points of resemblance which the Philadelphia Heracles bears to the heads from the Tegean pediments are so many and so striking that they must all be traced back to the same sculptor; and that he was Skopas there can be little doubt.” He therefore concludes that it is “probably a very good copy of a lost work of Skopas.”2131 A little later, Dr. L. D. Caskey, of the Museum in Boston, found these resemblances hardly close enough, in view of the influence of Skopas on later Greek sculpture, to justify so definite an attribution.2132 He found them confined to the upper part of the face, while he believed that the lower portion resembled heads which could be assigned to Praxiteles or his influence, and consequently he pronounced the head “an eclectic work in which features borrowed from Skopas and Praxiteles have been combined with an unusually successful effect.”

As Dr. Bates points out, there is no recorded statue of Herakles by Skopas which corresponds with this head. The stone one mentioned by Pausanias as standing in the Gymnasion at Sikyon2133 has been thought by the authors of the Numismatic Commentary on Pausanias to be reproduced on a Sikyonian copper coin of the age of Geta, now in the British Museum.2134 Many statues and busts scattered in European museums, which represent a beardless Herakles and show Skopaic influence, have been traced back to this original.2135 However, the coin represents the hero wearing a wreath, and so, if it was copied from the original in the Gymnasion, the latter could not have been the prototype of the head under discussion.

It is now universally acknowledged that all constructive criticism of the art of Skopas must be based on a study of the heads found at Tegea. Besides those discovered in 1879, and now in the National Museum in Athens,2136 two other male heads (in addition to the torso of a female figure draped as an Amazon, and a head on the same scale which probably belongs to it, as both are of Parian marble, representing probably Atalanta of the East pediment) were discovered by M. Mendel in his excavations of the temple of Athena Alea in 1900–1901, and referred to the pedimental groups described by Pausanias.2137 As one of these (Fig.73) is characterized by a lion’s scalp worn as a helmet, the hero’s face fitting into the jaws, its teeth showing above his forehead, it has been regarded as the head from a statue of Herakles, although Pausanias mentions no such statue in his enumeration of the figures composing the group of the Eastern pediment, and although it is difficult to explain the presence of the hero in the group of the Western pediment, which represented the battle between his son Telephos and Achilles. Mendel considers this head to be inferior in workmanship to the others, and so refers it to the school of Skopas rather than to the master himself, and designates it “un travail d’atelier.” In describing it, however, he says: “tous ces caractères, qui sont ceux des têtes du Musée central, se retrouvent dans nôtre tête d’Héraclés.”2138 Here we have a head of a youthful Herakles (or of some hero who has borrowed his attribute of the lion’s skin—perhaps Telephos), which, if not by Skopas himself, is still a work of his school reproducing all his characteristics; consequently, of all these heads from Tegea, it is with this one chiefly that we should compare the head from Sparta similarly covered with a lion’s scalp.

Fig. 73.—So-called Head of Herakles, from Tegea, by Skopas. National Museum, Athens.

Though badly injured, it is still possible to see in this head of the so-called Herakles found at Tegea, both in full view and in profile, the characteristic Skopaic expression of passion, and to discover the means by which the artist effected it. The expression is due in great measure to the upward direction of the gaze, and to the heavy overshadowing of the deep-set eyes. It is further enhanced by the contracted brow, dilated nostril, and half-open, almost panting, mouth, whose parted lips clearly disclose the teeth. The structure of the head is in keeping with the strength of character portrayed; the skull is very deep from front to back, and its framework is massive and bony; the face is broad and short and the chin is heavy; everything emphasizes the impression of a virile and muscular warrior violently engaged in the fray. The subjects of the two pedimental groups—the Kalydonian boar hunt and the battle between Achilles and Telephos—justified the expression of unrestrained violence which we see in this and the other male heads, and gave the sculptor an opportunity to represent his heroes in the excitement of action and danger. To effect this intensity of expression Skopas relied mainly on the treatment of the eye. In one of the heads (the unhelmeted one in Athens) the gaze is not turned upwards as in the Herakles, nor are the neck-muscles strained as in the others, and yet the expression is even more violent than in them. Thus it is the modeling of the flesh about the eye which is the real distinguishing feature of Skopas’ work. In describing the helmeted head in Athens, E. A. Gardner says:

“The eyes are set very deep in their sockets, and heavily overshadowed, at their inner corners, by the strong projection of the brow, which does not, however, as in some later examples of a similar intention on the part of the artist, meet the line of the nose at an acute angle, but arches away from it in a bold curve. At the outer corners the eyes are also heavily overshadowed, here by a projecting mass of flesh or muscle which overhangs and actually hides in part the upper lid. The eyes are very wide-open—with a dilation which comes from fixing the eyes upon a distant object—and therefore suggest the far-away look associated with a passionate nature.”2139

COMPARISON OF THE TEGEA HEADS AND THE HEAD FROM SPARTA.

It is to the facial characteristics in the Tegea heads that Dr. Bates calls attention in basing his argument for the Skopaic origin of the head from Sparta: the forehead horizontally divided by a median line, the swelling, prominent brow, the deep-set eyes with their narrow lids—only 2 mm. wide—embedded in the projecting flesh at the outer corners, and the parted mouth. He also sees a resemblance in the small round curls bunched together above the ears. But if there are resemblances (especially in the modeling of the eyes) there are also great differences observable in the Tegea heads and the one from Sparta. Let us confine our comparison of the latter with the Herakles of the Tegea pediment, though the comparison with any of the other male heads would lead to substantially the same results.

In the first place the structure of the two heads in question is very different. As the head from Sparta is broken in two at the ears and the whole back part is missing, we can not tell whether it had the great depth of the one from Tegea. But of the massive, bony framework of the latter there is little trace in the former. In the Tegea example we are struck with the squareness of the head and the breadth of the central part of the face; the sides do not gradually converge toward the middle, but seem to form distinct planes. The distance between the eyes is also in keeping with the breadth of the skull as measured between the ears; the breadth of the face almost equals its length from the top of the forehead to the chin, and this fact, together with the massive, prominent chin, gives an element of squareness to the whole.2140 On the other hand, the head from Sparta has a long, narrow face whose sides softly converge toward the middle in beautiful curves about the cheeks; its cheek-bones are not so high nor so prominent as those of the other; it ends in a delicate, almost effeminate chin, which slightly retreats and gives the whole lower part of the face an oval structure, thus recalling Praxiteles and fourth-century Attic works. The length of the face is accentuated by the considerable height to which the head rises above the forehead, in contrast with the flatness of the skull in the example from Tegea. The eyes are not so wide-open; they are longer and not so swollen nor compressed toward the centre; if we view the two heads from the side, we see that the eye-socket in the Tegea head is larger and appreciably deeper than in the one from Sparta.

Apart from these surface differences in the structure of the head and face, it is in the resultant expression that we see the greatest divergence from the Skopaic type. This seems to me to be fundamentally different in the Sparta head. In the Herakles, as in all the other Tegea male heads, and even in those of the boar and the dogs, the really characteristic feature, which differentiates them from all other works of Greek sculpture, is the passionate intensity of their expression. The one unforgettable impression left on the spectator by them all is this expression of violent and unrestrained passion, which the sculptor has succeeded in imparting to the marble. This is what marks him as the master of passion and the originator of the dramatic tendencies carried to such lengths in the Hellenistic schools of sculpture; it is this which explains Kallistratos’ characterization of his works as being κάτοχα καὶ μεστὰ μανίας.2141 The head from Sparta shows only a little of this intensity. Notwithstanding the similar upward gaze and slightly parted lips, the intention of the artist seems to have been to portray the hero in an attitude of expectancy, tempered by a look almost of calmness. The look is deeply earnest, but not violent; it is even melancholy. It is this last feature, the delicate and compelling melancholy of the face, which impressed me most on first viewing it. This is further enhanced by the full, soft modeling of the lower face, that gives to the whole a delicate, almost effeminate character, which strongly reminds us of Praxitelean heads. In fact, the shape of the lips and the modeling of the flesh on either side of the mouth, together with the soft, dimpled chin, have little in common with the massive strength and remarkable animation of the Tegea heads. As Dr. Caskey has intimated, if we had only the lower portion of the face for comparison, we should be inclined to ascribe it to the influence of Praxiteles. If we considered the upper part only, resemblances to Skopaic work seem well marked; but if we take into account the expression of the face as a whole, we see that it lacks the most essential of Skopaic features, the look of passionate intensity. Consequently we shall find it difficult to bring the head into such close relation to that artist; for here there is little analogy to the vigorous warrior types of the Tegea pediments. For its quieter mien it might be better to compare it with the head of Atalanta,2142 though none of the gentle pathos or eagerness of the Sparta head is there visible. The Atalanta, though full of vigorous life, utterly lacks the unrestrained passion so characteristic of her brothers; her eyes are not so deeply set, nor so wide-open; they are narrower and longer, and are not over-hung at the outer corners by heavy masses of flesh.2143 In speaking of the absence of these rolls of muscle, E. A. Gardner notes a curious peculiarity: “This is a clearly marked, though delicately rounded, roll of flesh between the brow and the upper eyelid, which is continued right round above the inner corner of the eye, to join the swelling at the side of the nose, which itself passes on into the cheek.”2144 He detects this same peculiarity in certain other Skopaic heads, notably in the Apollo from the Mausoleion and the Demeter from Knidos, though it is quite lacking in the Tegea male heads. It all goes to show that Skopas was not strictly consistent in his treatment of the eye. The lower face of the Atalanta is also longer and more oval than that of the male heads, and thus shows Attic rather than Peloponnesian influence. If it is difficult, then, to conceive of the Atalanta and the male heads as the work of the same sculptor, the contrast, both in structure and expression, between these two heads of Herakles, the one from Tegea, the other from Sparta, makes it more difficult to assume the same authorship for both; for here we can not explain the difference as the contrast between the types of hero and heroine; here we are comparing two heads which are supposedly of the same hero.

THE STYLES OF SKOPAS AND LYSIPPOS COMPARED.

Fig. 74.—Attic Grave-Relief, found in the Bed of the Ilissos, Athens. National Museum, Athens.

In view, then, of the differences enumerated I should hesitate to assign a Skopaic origin to the head from Sparta. In the lower part of the face, with its small mouth and delicate chin, I see signs only of Praxitelean influence; in the upper part I am much more inclined to see affinities to the art-tendencies of Lysippos, as we now know them from the statue of Agias. In the present state of our knowledge it is not difficult to separate works of Praxitelean origin from those of Skopas; but it is a very different thing to distinguish those of Skopaic origin from those of Lysippos; here the line distinguishing the two masters is much finer and harder to draw. Before the discovery of the Tegea heads, the deep-set eye,2145 prominent brow, and “breathing” mouth were looked upon as characteristic features of Lysippos, as they were known to us from representations of Alexander, especially on coins. We now know that these traits belonged to Skopas to a much greater extent. When the Agias was found, and before its true authorship had been determined, Homolle, as we have seen, had at first classed it as showing the manner of Lysippos, only later to see more of Skopas than Lysippos in it. Such a conclusion was natural so long as we regarded the Apoxyomenos as the key to Lysippan art. By assigning these traits definitely to Skopas, we were compelled to view the work of Lysippos as conventional and somewhat lifeless in comparison. But with the assumption that the statue of Agias represented true Lysippan characteristics, we were forced to recognize that the same traits belonged to Lysippos also, though to a less degree, since the energy of the Tegea heads was absent from the features of the Agias and their fierceness was here replaced by a look of quiet melancholy. The study of such allied works as the beautiful and excellently preserved Lansdowne Herakles (Pl. 30 and Fig. 71), the athlete on the Pentelic marble stele found in the bed of the Ilissos in 1874, and now in the National Museum in Athens (Fig. 74),2146 the so-called Meleager in the Vatican (Fig. 75),2147 and other copies of the same original (e. g., Figs. 76, 77), also shows how closely the type of Lysippos approached that of Skopas. Long ago I expressed the view2148 that these and similar works should be assigned to Lysippos rather than to Skopas, to whom most critics had referred them. Thus, after the discovery of the Tegea heads, scholarly opinion began to follow the arguments of Furtwaengler in bringing the Lansdowne Herakles into the sphere of Skopas.2149 But Michaelis, as far back as 1882, commenting on the characteristically small head, Fig. 75.—Statue of the so-called Meleager. Vatican Museum, Rome. short neck in comparison with the mighty shoulders, and long legs in proportion to the thick-set torso, had declared: “Without doubt the statue offers one of the finest specimens, if not absolutely the best, of a Herakles according to the conception of Lysippos.”2150 Now opinion varies again; only those who believe that the Agias is Lysippan class the Herakles as a Lysippan work.2151 Of the Meleager, Graef2152 gives eighteen copies besides the one in the Vatican. This number shows how common an adornment it was of Roman villas and parks. Some of these copies have a chlamys thrown over the arm, e. g., the Vatican example, and belong to imperial times, while others without the mantle, e. g., the torso in Berlin,2153 are older. In addition to the Vatican example we reproduce two other copies, the beautiful Parian marble head now placed on the trunk of a Praxitelean Apollo in the gardens of the Medici in Rome (Fig. 76),2154 and the statue without arms or legs and without the chlamys, found in 1895 near Santa Marinella, 30 miles from Rome, and since 1899 in the Fogg Art Museum at Harvard University (Fig. 77),2155 one of the most beautiful of the many replicas. At first the original of these copies was supposed to be Lysippan, being identified with the Venator at Thespiai mentioned by Pliny as the work of Euthykrates, the son and pupil of Lysippos,2156 but after the discovery of the Tegea heads it was almost universally referred to Skopas.2157 Here again the Skopaic group of Graef has been broken by P. Gardner2158 and others, and the Meleager, like the Herakles, has been given to Lysippos.

Fig. 76.—Head of the so-called Meleager. Villa Medici, Rome.

Let us analyze a little further wherein the difference between the closely allied art of Skopas and Lysippos lies. We saw that it was chiefly the formation of the eye and its surroundings which characterized Fig. 77.—Torso of the so-called Meleager. Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, U. S. A. Skopaic work—the depth of the balls in their sockets, and the heavy masses of flesh above the outer corners. This was in harmony with the breadth of brow and the massive build of the Tegea heads. In the Agias and similar works the treatment of the eye is somewhat different. The head of the Agias is of slighter proportions than the heads from Tegea; in conformity with the Lysippan canon it is below life-size, and consequently has no such heavy overshadowing of the outer corners of the eyes. Moreover, as we shall see, this overshadowing is also relatively less in the statue of the Delphian athlete. The formation of the eye is thus described by E. A. Gardner:

“The inner corners of the eye are set very deep in the head and very close together; the inner corners of the eye-sockets form acute angles, running up close to one another and leaving between them only a narrow ridge for the base of the nose; thus they offer a strong contrast to the line of the brow, arching away in a broad curve from the solid base of the nose and forming an obtuse angle with it, such as we see in the Skopaic heads.”2159

The resultant expression is therefore somewhat different from that of the heads from Tegea; while we still see animation and even intensity in the face of the Agias, we see it in a modified degree. The far-away look of the Tegea heads is still present, but it appears to be fixed on a nearer object, and so the look of intensity is tempered; it is also lightened by the fact that the overshadowing of the eyes at the outer corners is less heavy. But even this latter so-called Skopaic trait, though it is absent in the Agias, is certainly present in other Lysippan heads. Besides being prominent in representations of Alexander the Great on coins,2160 it is seen in busts of the conqueror, especially in the splendid one from Alexandria in the British Museum.2161 In the latter example we see just such heavy rolls of flesh as we note in the Skopaic heads. It shows that this trait, introduced by Skopas, was used at times with equal effect by Lysippos. We have already noted how in one example, at least, Skopas himself laid it aside—in the Atalanta. Its presence on Lysippan heads shows that too much stress can be laid on this feature in deciding whether a given piece of sculpture is to be referred to Skopas. This trait complicates the whole problem of the style of the two masters.

THE SPARTA HEAD COMPARED WITH THAT OF THE PHILANDRIDAS.

As the Agias is considered by most critics to be a contemporary copy of the original statue at Pharsalos, perhaps it will be more just to compare the head from Sparta under discussion with the original marble head from Olympia, which we have ascribed in the earlier part of the present chapter to the statue of Philandridas by Lysippos. Such a comparison will, of course, show certain differences, but marked resemblances as well. We shall see that these resemblances are confined to the upper part of the face. In both we note the same low forehead with a corresponding depression or crease across the middle; the similarly bulging brow which breaks very perceptibly the continuous line from forehead to nose, concave above and below and convex at the swelling itself; the same powerfully framed and deep-set eyes thrown into shadows by the projecting bony structure of the brows and the overhanging masses of flesh. The eyeballs in both are similarly long and narrow, though they are slightly arched in the Philandridas just as in the Tegea heads, and not so close together as in the Agias, but their inner angles are farther apart and not almost hidden by the flat bridge of the nose when viewed straight from the front. In this respect they are strikingly like those of the Sparta head.2162 The raised upper lids in both form symmetrically narrow and sharply defined borders over the eyeballs. These borders, in each case, are not partially hidden by the folds of skin at the outer corners, as they are in the Tegea heads; and yet the masses of flesh projecting from the brows are almost as heavy as in the latter. In both the heads from Olympia and Sparta the upper lids slightly overlap the under at the outer corners. The eye-sockets in both seem to be equally deep and the cheek-bones similarly high and prominent. We remark in the Philandridas the gradual converging of the sides of the face toward the middle, a trait which we have already observed in the head from Sparta as in contrast with the more angular formation with lateral planes so characteristic of the Tegea male heads. The flatness of the nose and the curves which it makes with the brow on either side are very similar in the two heads under discussion. In both, the hair is treated in the same simple and sketchy manner, being fashioned into little ringlets ruffled back from the temples in flat relief quite in the Skopaic manner, even if the curls seem shorter and more tense.

When we come to a consideration of the lower part of each face, we immediately detect differences. While both faces end in an oval, this is broader, heavier, and more bony in that of the Philandridas, as we should expect in the case of a more mature man. Consequently here the mouth is larger and firmer. The elegant contour of the lips observable in the Agias is also found, to a less degree, in the head from Sparta, whose lips are fuller and more sensuous, but can not be traced in the Philandridas owing to the damaged condition of the mouth. It is clear, however, that the lips of the latter were also slightly parted, just showing the teeth, but not as in the Tegea heads, as if the breath were being forced through them with great effort.

It is, however, in the expression of these two faces that we see the greatest resemblance. In the Philandridas, the powerful framing of the eyes, the slightly upward gaze of the balls, and the contracted forehead combine to give it a pensive, even melancholy, look of dignity, a look seemingly of one who takes no joy or pleasure in victory, though, as we have already mentioned,2163 it is earnest rather than mournful. The almost identical treatment of the eye and its surroundings gives the still more youthful head from Sparta a similar expression. Homolle’s analysis of the expression of the face of the Agias would apply with equal fitness to the mood portrayed in both the heads we are discussing: “L’expression qui résulte de ces divers traits, c’est, dans une figure jeune et vigoureuse, un air pensif ou lassé, une certaine mélancolie, qui ne va pas à la tristesse morne ou à la méditation profonde, mais qui reste plus loin encore de la joie insouciante de la vie et de la pure allégresse de la victoire”.2164 Preuner remarked that a verse of the epigram found on the base of the statue of Agias, which runs καὶ σῶν οὐδείς πω στῆσε τροπαῖα χερῶν, is almost an exact copy of the words of Herakles in the Trachiniae of Sophocles.2165 In these words the dedicator of the statue ends the recital of his ancestor’s exploits with a melancholy reflection on the vanity of his glory. They suggest with no less truth the expression of both the heads we are discussing. This expression of pensiveness tinged with melancholy is enhanced in both by the slightly parted lips. We can see the same expression carried much further in many of the portraits of Alexander which go back to originals by Lysippos, and we know from Plutarch that this sculptor was chosen by the conqueror to make his portraits, because Lysippos alone could combine his manly air with the liquid and melting glance of his eyes.2166 But how different is the delicately indicated pathos of these heads from the violent and unrestrained, even panting, expression of the Tegea sculptures! Here there is no trace of the μανία which Kallistratos said characterized the works of Skopas. If it be objected that the expression of the Philandridas is more dramatic than that of the head from Sparta, its fierce, almost barbarous, look of defiance may well be explained by the fact that here is represented a victor from Akarnania, a country noted among the other Greek states for anything but culture and refinement.

THE SPARTA HEAD AN ECLECTIC WORK AND AN EXAMPLE OF ASSIMILATION.

It is, then, in consequence of these resemblances to Lysippan work, and because of the differences between it and the Tegean heads, that I am led to see more of Lysippos than of Skopas in this beautiful head from Sparta. An analysis of its style permits us to discover in it the mixed influences of Praxiteles, of Lysippos, and of Skopas. It seems to me necessary, therefore, in view of this mixture of tendencies, to regard it as an eclectic work, in which the unknown artist has combined Lysippan and Praxitelean elements chiefly; and that he was also under the influence of Skopas is evinced by the peculiarities mentioned in the treatment of the eyes and hair;2167 but even in the modeling of the eyes, I believe that his chief debt was to Lysippos. The fineness of surface modeling, commented on by both Professor Bates and Dr. Caskey, recalls the delicacy of execution in detail which is mentioned by Pliny as characteristic of Lysippan art.2168 It surely points to a date for the work not much if at all later than the end of the century which was made glorious in the history of sculpture by the labors of these three great masters.

In the preceding account I have tacitly assumed with Professor Bates that the head from Sparta represents a beardless Herakles. But, as Dr. Caskey remarks, one might hesitate to accept this identification if it were not for the attribute of the lion’s skin above the forehead, for here there is little indication of the strength so characteristic of later representations of the hero. Dr. Caskey, however, observes that a head of Herakles, now in the British Museum, which some have regarded as an original by Praxiteles, is even more boyish than this one. However, it is very doubtful if the Sparta head should be referred to a statue of Herakles at all. Pausanias mentions only three statues of Herakles in Sparta, to any one of which it seems futile to try to refer the head under discussion; thus in III, 14.6, he speaks of an ἄγαλμα ἀρχαῖον to which the Sphairians, i. e., lads entering on manhood, sacrificed, as standing on the road to the Δρόμος, outside the city walls; in the same book, 14.8, he says that an image of the hero stood at the end of one of the two bridges across the moat to Plane-tree Grove, i. e., the boys’ exercise-ground; and again in this book, 15.3, he says that an ἄγαλμα ὡπλισμένον of Herakles stood in the Herakleion close to the city wall, whose attitude (σχῆμα), was suggested by the battle between the hero and Hippokoön and his sons. The same writer enumerates only three other statues of Herakles in Lakonia. One of these was in the market-place of Gythion (III, 21.8), another in front of the walls of Las beyond Gythion (III, 24.6), and the third on Mount Parnon near the boundaries of Argolis, Lakonia, and Tegea (III, 10.6). The head under discussion is more probably only one more example of the idealizing tendency of athletic Greek art, which assimilated the type of victor to that of god.2169 In the case of the Agias the sculptor plainly wished to raise the victor to the ideal height of the hero. The same idealization is visible in the head ascribed to the statue of Philandridas. In both these heads the ears, while small, are battered and swollen; the remains of the ears in the head from Sparta are too badly damaged to indicate whether these were swollen or not. But even if they were preserved and were in that condition, they would not be a distinguishing factor in determining whether the head belonged to the statue of a victor or of Herakles. In our consideration of the Olympia head we saw by a comparison with the Lansdowne Herakles, a statue universally recognized as that of the hero, how fundamentally different were the two in their whole conception and how differently a highly idealized athlete and a hero were treated by the same sculptor. The same might be said of the boyish head from Sparta, when compared with a genuine head of Herakles. For this reason, and because of the resemblance in expression between the Philandridas and the head from Sparta, I am inclined to believe that the latter, instead of being a representation of a youthful Herakles, is really the idealized portrait of an athlete, probably that of a boy victor, either in the boxing or wrestling match,2170 assimilated in form to that of the hero.2171

CHAPTER VII.
THE MATERIALS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS, AND THE OLDEST DATED VICTOR STATUE.2172

Figures 78–80.

It has been assumed pretty generally by archæologists that the victor statues set up in the Altis at Olympia were uniformly of bronze. Scherer, in his inaugural dissertation de olympionicarum Statuis, which appeared in 1885, was the first to discuss the question fully,2173 and his arguments and conclusions have been followed, for the most part, by later investigators. Thus Dittenberger and Purgold state unequivocally that these statues were “ausnahmslos aus Bronze”,2174 while more recently Hitzig and Bluemner, in their great commentary on Pausanias, have again pronounced the dictum that “die Siegerstatuen waren durchweg von Erz”.2175 Others, however, have not been quite so sweeping in their generalization. Thus Wolters believes that these statues, because they were set up in the open, were “der Regel nach” of bronze,2176 and Furtwaengler and Urlichs assume that they were “fast ausschliesslich aus Bronze”.2177

THE CASE FOR BRONZE.

The arguments adduced by Scherer and others in defense of the contention seem at first sight, although inferential in character, quite conclusive. In the first place, it has been pointed out that all the statuaries mentioned by Pausanias in his victor periegesis,2178 if recorded at all in Pliny’s Historia Naturalis, appear there in the catalogue of bronze founders as workers in bronze κατ’ ἐξοχήν, while none of them is known exclusively as a sculptor in marble. As Hagelaïdas is the first in point of time, who flourished from the third quarter of the sixth century B. C. to the second quarter of the fifth,2179 Scherer believed that all statues from his date down—posteriorum temporum—were of bronze; and as Rhoikos and Theodoros, the inventors of bronze founding, flourished about Ols. 50 to 60 ( = 580 to 540 B. C.),2180 he believed that bronze might have been used up to their date. In the next place, the excavated bases, which have been identified as those of victor monuments, show footprints of bronze statues. Thirdly, actual bronze fragments, indubitably belonging to victor statues (of which two are attested by inscriptions), were found during the excavations of the Altis. These consist of the following:

(a) An inscribed convex piece of bronze of imperial times, “anscheinend vom Schenkel einer Bronzestatue herruehrend.”2181

(b) A similar inscribed fragment of the same period.2182

(c) The remarkable life-size portrait head of a boxer or pancratiast, which we have already discussed and reproduced (Fig. 61 A and B).2183

(d) A foot of masterly workmanship (Fig. 62) ascribed by Furtwaengler2184 to the end of the third century B. C. Its position shows that the statue of which it was a part was represented in motion, and consequently it has been assigned to a victor statue.

(e) A beautifully modeled right arm, somewhat under life-size, supposedly from the statue of a boy victor.2185

(f) A right lower leg of excellent workmanship, assigned by Furtwaengler to the same period as fragment e.2186

Still other bronze fragments of statues found at Olympia may have belonged to statues of victors, especially to those of boys.2187 The small number of such fragments recovered—Scherer wrongly thought there was none—is explained by assuming that all of these statues were of bronze, and consequently were destroyed by the barbarians in their inroads into Greece during the early Middle Ages, when this metal was much prized.2188 Another argument for believing that these statues were of bronze is the silence of Pausanias concerning the materials employed in them; for, in his enumeration of 192 such monuments, he mentions the material of only two statues, those of the boxer Praxidamas of Aegina2189 and of the Opuntian pancratiast Rhexibios,2190 and he mentions these because of their great antiquity, peculiar position in the Altis apart from the others (near the column of Oinomaos), and the fact that they were made of wood.2191 Furthermore, in his book on Achaia there occurs this passage in reference to the statue of the victor Promachos, which was set up in the Gymnasion of Pellene: καὶ αὐτοῦ [Προμάχου] καὶ εἰκόνας ποιήσαντες οἱ Πελληνεῖς τὴν μὲν ἐς Ὀλυμπίαν ἀνέθεσαν, τὴν δὲ ἐν τῷ γυμνασίῳ, λίθου ταύτην καὶ οὐ χαλκοῦ.2192 Most critics have inferred from these last words, “the one in the Gymnasion being of stone and not of bronze,” that, although Pausanias says nothing about the material of statues of victors in the Altis (barring the two just mentioned), by implication all these statues were of bronze; and they point out the fact that other writers furnish no evidence concerning the material used in them—an argument ex silentio to the same effect. Besides these arguments many others have been urged on purely a priori grounds; e. g., that, since these statues stood in the open air, subject to all kinds of weathering, they must have been made of bronze;2193 that metal statues would have been cheaper and more easily prepared than those of marble;2194 that the later Peloponnesian schools of athletic sculpture, which were characterized by their predilection for bronze-founding, would nowhere have been more prominently in evidence than at Olympia; etc.

Thus the case for the use of metal in these statues seems very well substantiated, and, for the reasons given, it can not be reasonably doubted that the vast majority of these monuments were made of bronze. But that they were not exclusively of metal, and that there were many exceptions to the general rule, not only can be conjectured on good grounds, but can be proved by discoveries made at the excavations. We shall briefly consider, then, each of the foregoing arguments in turn, and see whether, in the light of the accumulated evidence, they are really as well founded as they appear to be.

THE CASE FOR STONE.

As for the first point, that the statuaries mentioned by Pausanias appear only in Pliny’s catalogue of bronze founders, we must remember that Pausanias himself says2195 that he is making only a selection of the victor monuments in the Altis, those of the more famous athletes. Therefore, the 192 monuments (of 187 victors)2196 which he does mention must be only a fraction of the multitude of such monuments which once stood at Olympia. Pliny, to be sure, says that it was the custom for all victors to set up statues in the Altis;2197 but this refers only to the privilege, of which many victors could not or did not avail themselves on account of poverty, early death, or for other reasons.2198 Still, the number of such dedications must have been very great. Manifestly, therefore, we should not base an argument on the number mentioned. There must, then, have been many other artists employed at Olympia, some of whom may well have been workers in marble. Besides, of the statuaries actually named by Pausanias, many do not appear at all in Pliny’s work, and many of these may have been sculptors exclusively in stone. Of the names found in Pliny, six at least—Kalamis, Kanachos, Eutychides, Myron, Polykles, and Timarchides—appear both in the list of bronze-workers and in that of marble-sculptors.2199 Similarly, in answer to the second argument that the excavated bases show footprints of bronze statues, we must admit that only a fraction of the bases which once supported statues in the Altis have been recovered. Not one-fifth of the victors mentioned by Pausanias are known to us through these bases.2200

The fact that actual remains of bronze statues have been excavated at Olympia is matched by the fact that remnants of marble statues have also been found; and it does not seem reasonable, in the light of the evidence adduced by Treu, Furtwaengler, and others, to reject these as fragments of actual victor statues. These fragments include the following:2201

(a, b) The two life-size archaic helmeted heads (Fig. 30) which we have ascribed to hoplite victors.2202

(c, d, e) Fragments of statues of boy victors: c = trunk with left upper leg, three-fifths life-size (Fig. 78);2203 d = breast, one-half life-size;2204

e = upper part of legs of a statue, two-thirds life-size.2205 Besides these Treu also adduces fragments of four different boy statues, all of which are less than life-size.2206

The reticence of Pausanias as to the material used in these statues Fig. 78.—Small Marble Torso of a Boy Victor, from Olympia. Museum of Olympia. is merely in accord with his custom, for he very rarely mentions the materials of monuments, and apparently only where monuments of bronze and stone or other materials stand close together in a circumscribed area, as for instance, in enumerating the various monuments in the Heraion at Olympia.2207 The only inference, therefore, to be drawn from Pausanias’ statement about the statue of Promachos mentioned is that this particular statue of a victor at Olympia was of bronze. We are not justified in going any further. Besides this stone statue at Pellene we have other actual notices of marble statues of Olympic victors outside Olympia, as those of Arrhachion at Phigalia2208 (Fig. 79) and of Agias by Lysippos at Delphi (Pl. 28 and Fig. 68). If they existed outside Olympia, there is no reason why they should not have existed in the Altis also, e. g., the Lysippan marble head found there, which we assigned in the preceding chapter to the Akarnanian victor Philandridas (Frontispiece, and Fig. 69). Many of the older statues, like that of Arrhachion, conformed with the “Apollo” type, as we have shown in Ch. III,5 and doubtless many such at Olympia were of marble.

Reinach’s argument that stone statues in Greece, because of their patina of color, were intended to be placed under cover in the porticoes or cellas of temples and elsewhere, while bronze ones were meant to stand in the open air, has been sufficiently combatted by H. Lechat,2209 who argues that the use of paint in Greek architecture and on temple sculptures proves the contrary. As the paint was burnt in, it was reasonably durable, and if it did not prove so it was readily renewed. At Olympia, among several examples, we may cite the marble Nike of Paionios, which stood in the open in the space to the east of the temple of Zeus2210 (see Plans A and B), while, on the other hand, a bronze statue of Aphrodite stood within the Heraion.2211 The argument that metal statues were cheaper than marble must also be questioned.2212 In the earlier part of the present work we saw that, for economy’s sake, many victors set up small bronze statuettes instead of statues at Olympia, numbers of which have been recovered. That such dedications were common elsewhere is shown by the countless athlete statuettes—especially diskoboloi—which are to be found in all European museums.2213 For similar reasons victors would choose in place of bronze the less durable and cheaper stone, as in the cases of Arrhachion and Promachos cited, or even wood, as in those of Rhexibios and Praxidamas. Still others, especially boy victors, would set up small marble statues, two-fifths to two-thirds life-size, as the fragments of the seven examples collected by Treu and already enumerated above show.

Thus we see that the contention that the victor statues at Olympia were exclusively of bronze, in the light of the evidence adduced, is untenable.

THE STATUE OF ARRHACHION AT PHIGALIA.

In his description of Arkadia, Pausanias mentions seeing the stone statue of the pancratiast Arrhachion in the market-place of Phigalia. He describes it as archaic, especially in pose, the feet being close together and the arms hanging by the sides to the hips; and adds that he was told that it once bore an inscription which had become illegible in his day.2214 This Arrhachion won three victories at Olympia in the pankration in Ols. 52–54 ( = 572–564 B. C.).2215 Therefore his statue is one of the oldest victor monuments of which we have record. At so early a date, before individual types of victor statues had been developed, we should expect, in harmony with the description of Pausanias, that this statue would conform in style with the well-known archaic “Apollo” type, the most characteristic of early Greek sculpture, which, as we saw in Chapter III, is exemplified in the long series of statues found all over the Greek world, the oldest class being represented by the Fig. 79.—Stone Statue of the Olympic Victor Arrhachion, from Phigalia. In the Guards’ House at Bassai (Phigalia). example from Thera (Fig. 9), and one of the youngest by that from Tenea near Corinth (Pl. 8A).

In his commentary on the passage of Pausanias, Sir J. G. Frazer records that during a visit in May, 1890, he saw a recently discovered archaic stone statue in a field just outside Pavlitsa, a village on the site of the southeastern precincts of the old city of Phigalia, some 2.5 miles from the temple of Apollo Epikourios at Bassai. He thought that this statue agreed completely with Pausanias’ description of Arrhachion’s, even to the half-effaced inscription which he transcribed from its breast just below the neck.2216 Through the courtesy of Dr. Svoronos, of the National Numismatic Museum in Athens, I have been able to procure a photograph of the monument from K. Kouroniotis, the Arkadian Ephor of antiquities stationed at Bassai, and I present it herewith (Fig. 79). The statue is now cared for in the house of the temple guards. This statue, like all other examples of the series, represents a nude youth standing in a stiff, constrained attitude. It is badly mutilated and its surface is rough from weathering. Besides having lost its head, arms, and the lower part of the legs, it has been broken into two parts across the abdomen. The ends of curls on either side of the neck, extending a few inches over the breast, show that the head looked straight forward, thus following the usual law of “frontality,”2217 which precluded any turning of the body; for a median line drawn down through the middle of the breastbone, the navel, and the αἰδοῖα would divide the statue into two equal halves. The body shows the quadrangular form of the earlier examples, the sculptor having worked in flat planes at right angles to one another, with the corners merely rounded off. The remains of arms broken off just below the shoulders show that they must have hung close to the sides. The shoulders are broad and square, and display none of the sloping lines characteristic of other examples, as, e. g., the one from Tenea. From the breast down the body is slender, the hips being very narrow. The legs show the usual flatness and the left one is slightly advanced, as is uniformly the case in every one of the series. They are somewhat more separated than in many other examples. The αἰδοῖα form a rude pyramidal mass, not being differentiated as they are, e. g., in the statues from Naxos and Orchomenos2218 (Fig. 10). Some attempt at modeling is visible in the muscles of the breast and lower abdomen. In general, it may be said that the similarity in attitude of this statue to Egyptian works impresses us, as it does in all the examples of early Greek sculpture. As the subject of Oriental, especially Egyptian, influence on early Greek art has given rise to very diverse views, we shall make a short digression at this point to discuss this interesting question.

EGYPTIAN INFLUENCE ON EARLY GREEK SCULPTURE.

This question has been under discussion in all its bearings ever since Brunn, in 1853, tried to demonstrate the originality of the Daidalian ξόανα,2219 but, strangely enough, archæologists are not yet agreed as to its proper settlement. While some emphasize the spontaneous origin of Greek art, others quite as strongly advocate that the early Greek sculptor, at least, copied Egyptian models.2220 Thus Furtwaengler, who early assumed a Cretan origin for the “Apollo” type of statues,2221 later became convinced that it developed in Ionia through Greek contact with the colony of Naukratis in Egypt, which was founded in the middle of the seventh century B. C. He concluded that this plastic type “ist bekanntlich nichts als die Nachahmung des Haupttypus aegyptischer statuarischer Kunst”.2222 Similarly Collignon traces the archaic male type to Egyptian influence, and assumes that this influence from the Nile valley was exerted on the Greek artist before the latter half of the seventh century B. C.2223 On the other hand, H. Lechat, in his review of the evolution of Greek sculpture from its beginning, believes that the early sculptor owed but little to Egypt or the East.2224 Deonna entirely rejects the assumption of Egyptian influence, believing that all the so-called characteristics of early Greek statues can be explained as the result of natural evolution in Greece itself.2225 Von Mach also completely excludes all foreign influence when he says: “In her sculpture at least, Greece was independent of influence of any one of the countries that can at all come under consideration in this connection, Phœnicia, Assyria, and Egypt.”2226 But here, as in so many questions about Greek art, the truth must lie between the two extremes.2227 The economic conditions of early Greece certainly prove that the Greeks were dependent on outside peoples in many ways, and there is no a priori reason for denying this dependence in art. We clearly see Egyptian influence, for example, in the ceiling of the treasury of Orchomenos,2228 and that the Greeks learned many animal decorative forms as well as a correct observation of nature from Assyrian art is clear, if we study the best examples of the late period of that art, the reliefs from the palace of Assurbanipal at Nineveh (Konyonjik), now in the British Museum. Such decorative designs could be easily transmitted to the Greeks by the Phœnicians on embroidered fabrics. It seems reasonable, therefore, to assume that early Greek artists, especially in the Greek colonies to the east and south of Greece, were acquainted with earlier models and especially with those of Egypt. The Greeks themselves of a later date recognized this debt to Egypt. This is shown by many passages in Pausanias, which mention the similarity existing between early Greek and Egyptian sculptures,2229 and by the curious tale told by Diodoros about the Samian artist family of Rhoikos, according to which the latter’s two sons made the two halves of the statue of the Pythian Apollo for Samos separately, Telekles working in Samos and Theodoros in Ephesos. When joined together the two parts fitted exactly, just as if they had been made by one and the same artist. Diodoros adds that τοῦτο δὲ τὸ γένος τῆς ἐργασίας παρὰ μὲν τοῖς Ἕλλησι μηδαμῶς ἐπιτηδεύεσθαι, παρὰ δὲ τοῖς Αἰγυπτίοις μάλιστα συντελεῖσθαι.2230 Such a story is valuable in that it shows that the later Greeks believed that they had adopted the conventional Egyptian canon of proportions. If we compare any of the “Apollo” statues with Egyptian standing figures of any period of Egyptian art, as Bulle has done, the resemblances in detail between the two types will be found to be very striking. Thus from the Old Kingdom (Memphitic), which included the first eight dynasties of Manetho,2231 we may cite the painted limestone statue of Ra-nefer and the wooden one of Tepemankh in the Museum of Cairo (Fig. 80), two men prominent in the fifth dynasty;2232 or the wood statue of Ka-aper, the so-called Sheik-el-Beled, which represents the apogee of Memphitic art, and that of his “wife,” without legs or arms, the two statues being found similarly in a grave at Sakkarah (Memphis), and now being in the same museum.2233 From the Middle Kingdom, including the eleventh to the seventeenth dynasties,2234 we may mention the painted statue found at Dahshur and now in Cairo, which represents Horfuabra, the co-regent of Amenemhat III, who was one of the kings of the twelfth dynasty.2235 From the New Empire, including the eighteenth to the twentieth dynasties,2236 we cite the draped wood statue of the priestess Tui, a gem of Egyptian art, which was found in a grave near Gurna, and is now in the Louvre;2237 and lastly the draped alabaster statue of Queen Amenerdis (or Amenartas) in Cairo, the wife of the Aethiopian King Piankhi, who began to absorb Egypt by 721–722 B. C., just before the twenty-fourth dynasty.2238 After the early dynasties, the Egyptian type of statue was reduced to a fixed and mechanical canon, which was used over and over again with lifeless monotony. In all these statues, whose dates extend over a period of many centuries, we note the same technical characteristics which are observable in the Greek “Apollos,” with the exception that the latter are always nude and lifelike. These characteristics may be summarized thus: long hair falling down over the shoulders in a mass;2239 shoulders broad in comparison with the hips; arms hanging down stiffly by the sides2240 or crooked at the elbows;2241 hands closed, with the thumbs facing forward and touching the ends of the index fingers; the left leg slightly advanced and the soles placed flat on the ground; high ears,2242 and the upper body and head turned straight to the front.2243 Only minor differences in the two types appear. Thus the left foot is always further advanced in the Egyptian than in the Greek statues, so that the former appear to have less movement and life.2244 Since there is no trace of this type in Mycenæan art it seems impossible not to conclude that in some way, doubtless through Ionian sources, it was originally borrowed from Egypt. The imitation of the Egyptian models, however, was never slavishly done. The Greek artist immediately rendered the type his own by making it nude,2245 and by transmuting the abstract lifeless schema of the Egyptians into a highly individualized one characterized by life and vigor.2246 This Egyptian influence, it must be remarked, was operative only in the initial stage of Greek sculpture; it was soon lost, as the Greek artist came to rely upon himself. F. A. Lange has truly said: “Die wahre Unabhaengigkeit der hellenischen Kultur ruht in ihrer Vollendung, nicht in ihren Anfaengen”.2247

Fig. 80.—Statues of Ra-nefer and Tepemankh, from Sakkarah. Museum of Cairo.

After this digression we will return to the statue of Arrhachion. Dr. Frazer was unable to decipher the inscription upon the breast with certainty, but made out the following letters, the last four of which are plainly visible in the photograph: ΕΥΝΛΙΑΔ. He believed them to be archaic and the first instance of an inscription on this class of statues. He thought that the name was that of a man, which favored the view that the “Apollo” statues represented mortals rather than gods. The letters form a combination manifestly not Greek, and so may have no significance; it is even possible that they were engraved in modern times.2248 In any case we have the statement of Pausanias that the inscription was illegible in his day.

There seems little doubt, then, that this mutilated and weather-worn statue is the very one seen and described by Pausanias and referred by him to the victor Arrhachion.2249 It is presented here for two reasons. In the first place, it is the oldest dated Olympic victor statue in existence. Only three older ones are recorded, and none of these has survived to our time. These three are the statues of the Spartan Eutelidas at Olympia, who won the boys’ wrestling and pentathlon matches in Ol. 38 ( = 628 B. C.);2250 of the Athenian Kylon on the Akropolis, who won the double running-race in Ol. 35 ( = 640 B. C.);2251 of the Spartan Hetoimokles at Sparta, who won five times in wrestling at the beginning of the sixth century B. C.2252 The statue of Oibotas of Dyme, who won the stade-race in Ol. 6 ( = 756 B. C.), was not set up until Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.);2253 that of the Spartan Chionis, who won five running-races in Ols. 28–31 ( = 668–656 B. C.), was made later by Myron.2254 Pausanias’ statement (VI. 18.7) that the wooden statues of Praxidamas and Rhexibios, who won in Ols. 59 and 61 respectively ( = 544 and 536 B. C.), were the oldest at Olympia, is of course incorrect. In the second place, the statue of Arrhachion actually proves what has often been assumed, that some of the statues classed as “Apollos” are really victor monuments. As this question has provoked a good deal of discussion in recent years, I will briefly review the arguments by which the opinion has gradually gained acceptance.

EARLY VICTOR STATUES AND THE “APOLLO” TYPE.

As the earlier examples of the series were discovered under peculiar circumstances, they gave no clue to their meaning. Thus the “Apollo” of Naxos was found in the quarries of the island, while that from Orchomenos (Fig. 10) was first seen in the convent of Skripou, its exact provenience being unknown. From the first they were denominated “Apollos,” chiefly because of their long hair2255 and nudity,2256 while the existence of many small bronzes in the same schema dedicated to the god,2257 and cult statues of similar pose appearing on vase- and wall-paintings,2258 helped to make the identification more probable. Certain ancient texts, describing archaic statues of Apollo in this pose, were also cited as evidence, and it was pointed out that many of these statues were actually found in or near sanctuaries of the god. Thus Diodoros, in his description of the ξόανον of the Pythian Apollo made for the Samians by Telekles and Theodoros, which we have already mentioned, says: τὰς μὲν χεῖρας ἔχον παρατεταμένας, τὰ δὲ σκέλη διαβεβηκότα.2259 Probably the gilded image by the Cretan Cheirisophos in the temple of Apollo at Tegea was of this type.2260 The later type of “Apollo,” with the arms extended at the elbows, was doubtless followed in the statue of Apollo made for the Delians by Tektaios and Angelion,2261 and in the works ascribed to Dipoinos and Skyllis and their school. It would be easy to give an extended list of such “Apollo” statues found in sanctuaries.2262 We might instance one from Naukratis, Egypt;2263 one from Delos;2264 two from Aktion;2265 several from Mount Ptoion in Bœotia;2266 a copy of the head of the Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo (Pl. 7A) found in Kyrene.2267 Still others have been found in temenoi of temples, e. g., two in that of Apollo at Naukratis,2268 and one in that of Aphrodite there.2269

However, against this exclusive interpretation doubts have been raised with ever-increasing precision, until now we can predicate with certainty what Loeschke long ago assumed, that the more statues of the series there are found, the less probable will it become that they should all be ascribed to Apollo.2270 Conze and Michaelis first argued on the basis of Pausanias’ description of Arrhachion’s statue that this type was employed for victor statues.2271 Koerte’s objection to their view on the ground of the long hair was refuted by Waldstein, who demonstrated that athletes were not represented with short hair until after the Persian wars; he pointed out that the archaic grave-figures of the mortals Dermys and Kitylos discovered at Tanagra, which were sculptured in a constrained attitude analogous to that of the “Apollos,” had long hair.2272 We now know that the hair of some of the “Apollos” is short, which shows the irrelevancy of this argument,2273 and we also know that nudity characterizes many archaic statues of mortals. Nor do we learn much from dedications, for we have examples of statues of gods dedicated to other gods and even to goddesses.2274 Ex votos were often more concerned with the dedicator than with the god to whom the statue was dedicated. Doubtless the cult statues portrayed on vase-paintings are actually those of Apollo, for at this epoch other gods, such as Hermes and Dionysos, are bearded.2275

Moreover, that a more advanced schema for representing the god Apollo had already become fixed toward the end of the sixth century B. C., we know from ancient descriptions of the statue of the god made for the Delians by Tektaios and Angelion, which represented him in the usual archaic attitude, i. e., of the statue of Arrhachion, but with the notable difference that the forearms were outstretched.2276 That this was the recognized type in the early years of the fifth century B. C., is attested by the bronze statue of the god fashioned by the elder Kanachos of Sikyon for Branchidai, the pose of which is known from several statuettes and from a long series of Milesian coins.2277 For conservative reasons this favorite pose was kept for cult statues even into the fourth century B. C., as we learn from representations on coins of the golden statue of the god set up in the inmost shrine of the temple at Delphi.2278 But that many of the earlier examples of the “Apollo” series do represent the god, should not be denied. We agree with Homolle that the old appellation “Apollo,” after having received too much favor, has now by reaction become censured too severely, and in general should still be applied to those statues of the series which have been discovered in or near sanctuaries of the god, and in the absence of any other indication to the contrary, also to those which stand upon bases inscribed with dedications to him.2279 Such a statue was found on the island of Thasos at the bottom of the cella of the temple of Apollo at Alki and is now in Constantinople.2280 The colossal statue found on the island of Delos just south of the temple of Apollo,2281 and the huge torso discovered in Megara2282 may be referred to the god, for their size favors an ascription to a deity rather than to mortals. And many other examples of the type found in sanctuaries may very well represent Apollo and other gods.2283

That several of the series were also funerary in character is abundantly proved by the fact that they were discovered in the neighborhood of tombs. Thus the Apollo of Tenea (Pl. 8A) decorated a tomb in the necropolis of Tenea near Corinth.2284 Likewise the example from Thera (Fig. 9) was found in a rock-cut niche.2285 Another, now in the British Museum, was found in the dromos of a tomb on the island of Cyprus,2286 while a fourth was unearthed from the necropolis of Megara Hyblaia in Sicily.2287 The one found at Volomandra in Attika in 1900 was also found in an old cemetery.2288 These furnish proof enough of the sepulchral character of many of these statues. Such funerary monuments may, of course, have been been set up also in memory of victors.

We are now in a position, on the basis of Pausanias’ description of Arrhachion’s statue and the actual monument itself, to maintain with certainty what hitherto has been conjectured only, that although some of these archaic sculptures represent Apollo and other gods, sepulchral dedications, and ex votos in general, others were intended to represent athletes also. Doubtless the other early victor monuments recorded, such as the wooden statues of Praxidamas and Rhexibios, and those of Eutelidas, Kylon, and Hetoimokles, already discussed in Ch. III, conformed with the earlier type, while that of Milo, described by Philostratos,2289 conformed with the later. Certain examples of the series have already been ascribed to victors. Thus the marble head of Attic workmanship found in or near Athens and known as the Rayet-Jacobsen head (Fig. 22), has been referred to a pancratiast because of its swollen and deformed ears.2290 Certain statuettes of the same pose as the “Apollos” have been looked upon as copies of athlete statues.2291 So the early doubts2292 as to the meaning of these archaic sculptures have been resolved in many cases. We have added one well-attested example to show that they sometimes represented victor monuments.

CHAPTER VIII.
POSITIONS OF VICTOR STATUES IN THE ALTIS; OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS ERECTED OUTSIDE OLYMPIA; STATISTICS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR STATUARIES.2293

Plans A and B.

The first part of this final chapter is a special study in the topography of the Altis at Olympia. It is an attempt to fix, more or less exactly, the positions of victor statues erected there, so far as these can be determined from the data furnished by Pausanias, and from the locations of the inscribed fragmentary bases of the statues which have been recovered during the excavations at Olympia.

STATUES MENTIONED BY PAUSANIAS.

We shall first attempt to give the positions of the statues mentioned by Pausanias, who is our chief source of information. After describing the votive offerings (ἀναθήματα) at the end of Book V, he begins the enumeration of the monuments of “race-horses ... and athletes and private individuals” at the beginning of Book VI.2294 This description falls into two routes (ἔφοδοι), the first of which is concerned with the statues of 168 victors,2295 and the second with those of 19.2296 Both accounts also include many “honor” monuments erected to private persons. The first route begins at the Heraion in the northwestern part of the sacred enclosure, while the second begins—manifestly where the first ends—at the Leonidaion at its southwestern corner, and extends to a point near the so-called Great Altar of Zeus near the centre of the Altis (see Plans A and B).2297 Besides these meagre indications of his two routes furnished by Pausanias himself, we are fortunate in knowing exactly the position of one statue, that of Telemachos, the 122d victor mentioned, the base of which still stands in situ near the South wall of the Altis, a little southeast of the temple of Zeus, showing that the route passed before the eastern front of this temple and thence westward to the Leonidaion. With these data and with the help of some forty inscribed bases of statues and other monuments mentioned by Pausanias, many of which were found in or near their original positions, it is possible to trace yet more definitely his routes. Several attempts have been made, since the German excavations, to define topographically the positions of these statues, especially by Hirschfeld,2298 Scherer,2299 Flasch,2300 Doerpfeld,2301 and the present writer.2302

The position of several inscribed base-fragments of statues, corresponding with Pausanias’ order of presentation, should alone be sufficient to confute the doubts raised by some scholars that these routes through the Altis were not topographical.2303 But in any attempt to reconstruct them we must constantly be on our guard against assuming that Pausanias describes a continuous line or row of monuments, as both Hirschfeld and Scherer have done. Though here and there this may have been true, still, generally speaking, we must conceive of these statues as being strewn about the Altis in no other order than that they stood in groups, and that these groups had only a general direction; for we shall see that Pausanias sometimes returns to the same spot without mentioning it and often leaves long spaces unnoticed. Apart from the indication of such groups in the description itself, as attested by the use of such words as παρά, ἐφεξῆς, μετά, πλησίον, ἀνάκειται ἐπί, ἐγγύτατα, ὄπισθεν, μεταξύ, οὐ πόρρω, οὐ πρόσω, κ.τ.λ., I have already shown in my previous work that it is possible to reconstruct many other groups, for abundant proof is there given that statues of nearly contemporaneous victors were often grouped together, as were those of the same family or state, or those victorious in the same contest, or those whose statues were made by the same artist.2304 So, in general, we can group only certain statues in belts or “zones” around some building or monument which is still in situ. Further than this we can seldom go. W. Gurlitt has thus well expressed the difficulty of following these routes of Pausanias: “Jede folgende Statue ist nach der vorhergehenden orientirt zu denken ... Beziehungen auf frueher oder spaeter erwaehnte Monumente waren ueberfluessig ... wir sind ... auf wenige Fixpunkte angewiesen und verfallen daher leicht in den Fehler, die Wegrichtungen in den Plan zu schematisch einzuzeichnen.... Das Hin und Her auf den viel verschlungenen Wegen der Altis koennen wir nicht mehr controllieren”.2305 In his description of the scattered altars (V, 14.4–15.12), Pausanias had not the same problem to meet as in that of the victor statues. As there was so little continuity in describing the altars, which were strewn all over the Altis, he had to introduce many other monuments to make their locations known; but in the case of the victor statues there was great continuity, and consequently such indications would have been superfluous.2306 And, in general, owing to the number and variety of monuments crowded together in the circumscribed area of the Altis, he was not compelled to describe Olympia with such definite detail as Athens. That these victor statues, however, are described in topographical order is not only attested by the internal evidence of Pausanias’ words,2307 but also by the finding of many of their bases in the order of his presentation. With this introductory warning, let us take up the routes of Pausanias in detail.

The First Ephodos of Pausanias.

Pausanias begins his enumeration in the northeastern part of the Altis: ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ ναοῦ τῆς Ἥρας2308—words which have been the subject of much discussion as to whether they are to be understood of the temple pro persona, i.e., the southern side,2309 or of the viewpoint of one facing it, i.e., the space (especially the northern or right hand half) before the eastern front.2310 From the immediate whereabouts of Pausanias we get no clue; for at the end of Book V (27.11) he says that he is in the middle of the Altis, and yet in the following paragraph (27.12)—evidently added as a transition from the account of the altars to that of the victors—he mentions the trophy of the people of Mende, in Thrace, which he says he nearly mistook for the statue of the pancratiast Anauchidas (131), and this, as we shall see, stood near the South wall of the Altis far from the centre. Doerpfeld’s contention, therefore, that Pausanias approached the Heraion from this point, and that consequently the words ἐν δεξιᾷ must refer to its eastern front, is untenable, and we are left dependent on the meaning of these words as gathered from other passages in Pausanias’ work. An examination of several such passages seems to be convincing that they are used here of the Heraion pro persona.2311 Furthermore, the finding of the inscribed tablet from the base of the statue of Troilos (6) and the pedestal of that of Kyniska (7) in the ruins of the Prytaneion, i. e., not far from the western end of the Heraion, and the base of that of Sophios (22) in the bed of the Kladeos still further west,2312 makes it reasonable to conclude that the first statues mentioned (VI, 1.3–3.7), those of the Spartan group (Kyniska-Lichas, 7–14), all of the fifth century, B. C., flanked on either side by statues of the fourth, mostly of Eleans (Symmachos-Troilos, 1–6, and Timosthenes-Eupolemos, 15–28), originally stood in the order named by Pausanias along the southern front of the temple.2313

Leaving the Heraion, we get no further fixed point until we arrive opposite the eastern front of the temple of Zeus. For here around the foundation of the statue of the Eretrian Bull—still in situ 32 meters east of the northeastern corner of the temple (see Plans A and B)2314—have been found fragments of the pedestals of the statues of Narykidas (49) and Hellanikos (65) to the south, of Kallias (50) and Eukles (52), beneath that of Kallias, to the north, of Euthymos (56) and Charmides (58) close together to the east.2315 So it is clear that the series of statues from Narykidas to Charmides (49–58, P., VI, 6. 1–7.1) stood in this neighborhood. Now the statues of the family of Diagoras, the Rhodian athlete, stood together (59–63), as Pausanias says (VI, 7.1–2); one of them, that of Eukles (52), seems to have been moved from its original position later, as we learn from a scholiast on Pindar’s seventh Olympian ode,2316 who, on the authority of the lost works of Aristotle and Apollas on the Olympic victors,2317 enumerates these statues in an order different from that adopted by Pausanias, showing that a change in their positions must have taken place some time between the date of Aristotle and that of the Periegete.2318 The statues of Alkainetos and his son Hellanikos (64–65) must also have stood together. Inasmuch as the victors from Euthymos to Lykinos (56–68) are, with one exception, all pugilists or pancratiasts and of the fifth century B. C., they must have been grouped together, with the family groups of Diagoras and Alkainetos in the centre.2319 We may also add the statues of Dromeus and Pythokles2320 (69–70) of nearly the same date, and we can also extend the group in the other direction; for the same scholiast says that the statue of Diagoras stood near that of the Spartan Lysandros (35 a).2321 Pausanias (VI, 3.14 and 4.1) says that the statue of Lysandros stood between those of Pyrilampes and Athenaios (35–36). Thus we can conclude that the 36 statues (35–70, VI, 3.13–7.10) stood in the zone of the Eretrian Bull, extending perhaps across the Altis to the vicinity of the Echo Colonnade along its eastern boundary.

It would follow, then, that the intervening statues from Oibotas to Xenophon (29–34, P., VI, 3.8–3.13) stood somewhere between the Heraion and the Eretrian Bull. It is idle to discuss the route between these two monuments more definitely.2322

Our next fixed point is the Victory of Paionios, whose foundation is still standing in its original position, 37 meters due east of the southeast corner of the temple of Zeus.2323 For, of the next few statues mentioned, the base of that of Sosikrates (71) was found “somewhere” east of the temple, that of Kritodamos (80) before the “Southeast Building,” and that of Xenokles (85), 4 meters to the northeast of the Victory base, presumably near its original position.2324 Pausanias groups the three Arkadian athletes, Euthymenes-Kritodamos (78–80, P., VI, 8.5); then, after naming four statues of victors from other states, he mentions two more Arkadians together, Xenokles and Alketos (85–86, VI, 9.2); and he continues by saying that the statues of the Argives Aristeus and Cheimon (87–88, VI, 9.3) stood together. One more statue, that of Phillen or Philys2325 of Elis (89), is named before he comes to the chariot of Gelo. Thus we may conclude that the series of statues denoted by the numbers 71–89 (P., VI, 8.1–9.4) stood to the south of the Eretrian Bull in the parallel zone of the Victory.

We next come to the series of statues mentioned between the chariots of Gelo and Kleosthenes (90–99). The position of the bases of these chariots is practically certain. In describing the statues of Zeus in Book V, Pausanias says he is proceeding north from the Council-house (23.1), and first mentions a statue of Zeus set up by the Greeks who fought at Platæa; in describing the victor statues he says that the chariot of Kleosthenes stands behind this statue of Zeus (P., VI, 10.6). After describing the Zeus of Platæa, he mentions a bronze inscribed tablet as standing in front of it (V, 23.4), which recorded the thirty years’ treaty of peace between Sparta and Athens, and then says that the statue of the Zeus of the Megarians stands near the chariot of Kleosthenes (23.5). As he is proceeding north, this Megarian Zeus must have stood north of the Platæan one; thus in one group we have the two statues of Zeus and the chariot of Kleosthenes. Immediately to the north he next mentions the chariot of the Syracusan tyrant Gelo (90), which he says is near the statue of the Zeus of the Hyblæans (23.6). Now in coming south, in the athlete periegesis, he names eight statues between these chariots. Doerpfeld2326 has identified the base of the Platæan Zeus with a large pedestal to the northwest of that of the victor Telemachos (122) found in situ near the South Altis wall,2327 a position which is in harmony with the description of the statues of Zeus; just behind it he has identified two large foundations near together as those of the two chariots. So the eight intervening statues stood here. Of the statues between the chariot of Kleosthenes and the base of the statue of Telemachos, the base of that of Tellon (102) was found in the East Byzantine wall near the South Altis wall; that of Aristion (115) nearby, embedded in the same wall; that of Akestorides (119), whose name I have inserted in the lacuna in the text of Pausanias (VI, 13.7),2328 just northeast of the base of Telemachos.2329 Thus the series of statues from that of Gelo to that of Agathinos (90–121a, P., VI, 9.4–13.11) can be grouped in the zone of the Chariots.

As the fragment of the base of the statue of the Athenian pancratiast Aristophon (123) was found near the base of Telemachos, but to the east of it, and likewise that which supported the equestrian monument of Xenombrotos and Xenodikos (133–134) still further to the east near the Echo Colonnade,2330 we can conclude that the twenty-one statues from Aristophon to Prokles (123–138, P., VI, 13.11–14.13), mostly of the fifth century B. C., stood near the South Altis wall to the east (and not to the west of the base of Telemachos, where all other investigators have wrongly placed them),2331 and thus form a group which we can call the zone of Telemachos. So we conclude that the long list of statues from Pyrilampes to Prokles (35–138), nearly two-thirds of all those mentioned in the first ἔφοδος of Pausanias, stood in the space to the east and southeast of the temple of Zeus, grouped in the parallel zones of the Bull, Victory, Chariots, and Telemachos.

On the other hand, the statues beginning with the two of Aischines (139) and extending to that of Philonides (154 a) (P., VI, 14.13–16.5) must have stood to the west of the base of Telemachos and along the South Terrace wall some 20 meters south of the temple of Zeus, where many of the following pedestals were found in the order named by Pausanias: that of Aischines (139) was found in the Council-house; that of Archippos (140) nearby between the South Terrace wall and the north wing of the Council-house; that of Epitherses (147) opposite the sixth column of the temple from the west, some eleven paces from the South Terrace wall, and the fragment of the base of the honor statue of Antigonos (147 f) very near it; the bronze foot of one of the statues of Kapros (150) was found in the South Terrace wall, 24.40 meters from the southwest corner of the temple; and lastly, the base of the “honor” statue of Philonides (154 a), Alexander’s courier, was found in the southwest corner of the Altis at the extreme west end of the South Terrace wall, almost, if not exactly, in its original position.2332 Thus Pausanias, after coming south to the statue of Telemachos, first goes eastward as far as the statue of Prokles, then returns, repassing the two chariots on the way without remark, and then continues westward to the southwestern corner of the Altis. All statues west of that of Telemachos are of the fifth and fourth centuries B. C., with the exception of one, that of Eutelidas (148), who won in Ol. 38. This is the oldest statue in the Altis, despite Pausanias’ statement,2333 and it doubtless originally stood in the area occupied later toward the middle of the fifth century B. C. by the temple of Zeus, but was then transferred to its new position south of the temple.

After the statue of Philonides, there are still 19 statues of victors and “honor” men to dispose of in this first ἔφοδος, those from Brimias to Glaukon (155–169, P., VI, 16.5–16.9). Of these statues, the base of that of Leonidas of Naxos (155a), the founder of the great building just outside the southwestern corner of the Altis named after him, was discovered in a Byzantine wall before the eastern end of the north front of that building, while that of Seleadas (159) was unearthed within the ruins of the same building; the base which supported the group-monument of Polypeithes and Kalliteles (160–161)—which, owing to the early dates of their victories, some time between Ols. (?) 66 and 70 ( = 516 and 500 B. C.), must have stood originally in the area later occupied by the temple of Zeus, like that of the above-mentioned Eutelidas—a little to the south of the Byzantine church, between the bases of the statues of Leonidas and Glaukon; two fragments of the base of the statue of Deinosthenes (163) have been found, one east of the apse of the church, the other in the ruins of the Palaistra further north; and lastly, that of Glaukon, built into late walls northwest of the church.2334 As the statue of Philonides stood at the extreme western end of the South Altis wall, and as most of these fragments were found in the vicinity of the Leonidaion, it would be natural to conclude that the majority of these later statues stood in the spaces just outside the West Altis wall. But at the end of the first ἔφοδος (VI, 17.1) Pausanias says that he has so far named statues “within the Altis”; hence most investigators have placed these 19 statues either west of the temple of Zeus or in the space at the southwestern corner of the Altis. A little further on we shall see that many other victor statues, not mentioned by Pausanias, stood just outside the West Altis wall, and it is doubtful whether his words ἐν τῇ Ἄλτει (VI, 17.1) should be taken thus literally, especially on any theory of his use of earlier accounts in the final compiling of his own. If they were “within” the Altis, they could scarcely have stood to the west or southwest of the temple of Zeus, for the second ἔφοδος, as we shall see, passed there.

A better alternative can be found. In describing the Leonidaion (V, 15.2), Pausanias says that this building stood “outside the sacred enclosure at the processional entrance into the Altis ... separated from this entrance by a street; for what the Athenians call lanes, the Eleans name streets.”2335 Now Doerpfeld has shown that inside the West Altis wall and parallel to it—just south of the base of Philonides’ statue—is a line of bases ending in the later South wall of the Altis, so that this West wall and row of pedestals form a cul de sac (see Plan B).2336 It is clear that no such row of statues would have been placed leading up to a dead wall; therefore these statues must have stood there before the wall was built, and must once have formed the eastern boundary of a broad street skirting the eastern side of the Leonidaion, which was twice as wide as later, when the wall cut off half its breadth and made it a “lane,” though the older name “street” was retained. The later Roman enlargement of the Altis is well known. The long row of pedestals to the south of and parallel to those already discussed as standing along the line of the South Terrace wall, westward of the base of Telemachos, once constituted the southern boundary of the “Processional Way” (ὁδὸς πομπική), which ran from the Leonidaion to where it debouched into the Altis at its southeastern corner. Originally outside the Altis, they were later, together with the road itself, included in it. The pedestals, then, in the above-mentioned cul de sac, and also the fourteen (among them that of Metellus Macedonicus; see Plan B) that adorned the south side of the Processional Way, may be the remains of some of these last statues mentioned by Pausanias.

The Second Ephodos of Pausanias.

We next come to the second ἔφοδος, which is introduced by these words: Εἰ δὲ ἀπὸ τοῦ Λεωνιδαίου πρὸς τὸν βωμὸν τὸν μέγαν ἀφικέσθαι τῇ δεξιᾷ θελήσειας, τοσάδε ἔστι σοὶ τῶν ἀνηκόντων ἐς μνήμην.2337 The Leonidaion, the site of which was still in dispute till after the close of the excavations, was finally identified by Treu2338 with the so-called Suedwestbau, as had been already assumed by many investigators.2339 The site of the Great Altar, however, is still undetermined. The elliptical depression to the east of the Pelopion, whose dimensions (125 feet in circumference) agree with the figures of Pausanias2340 for the prothysis, or lowest stage of the altar, identified with it by most scholars,2341 must now be given up since the more recent excavations of Doerpfeld, which prove it to be the remains of two prehistoric dwelling houses with apse-like ends.2342 Nor can the remains of walls lying between the Heraion and the Pelopion, formerly supposed to be those of an altar, any longer be referred to the Great Altar (as Puchstein and Wernicke referred them)2343 since Doerpfeld’s recent discoveries. So we are dependent on the words of Pausanias alone for its location, who says that it stood “equidistant from the Pelopion and the sanctuary of Hera, but in front of both,”2344 therefore somewhat northwest of the elliptical depression nearer the centre of the Altis.2345 Our problem, then, is to find Pausanias’ route between these two points, and here again, as at the beginning of the first ἔφοδος, we must rightly interpret the words ἐν δεξιᾷ. Michaelis, in his article on the use of ἐν δεξιᾷ and ἐν ἀριστερᾷ in Pausanias’ work, made these words refer to the southern side of the Processional Way, i. e., to the side at the right of Pausanias, who was facing east after arriving at the Leonidaion.2346 Thus the statues already mentioned along the South Terrace wall (Aischines to Philonides, 139–154a) would now be on his left side. On this interpretation both Hirschfeld and Doerpfeld had the second ἔφοδος follow the Processional Way eastward parallel to the first—thus including the line of pedestals, which we have referred to the end of the first—and then, near the Councilhouse, curve northward in front of the temple of Zeus, which virtually would be a repetition of the first ἔφοδος. On this theory Doerpfeld2347 wrongly explained the first route as containing statues ἐν τῇ Ἄλτει, while the second was outside the older Altis, and so, though equally long, contained fewer statues. But against this interpretation it must be urged that the Periegete is describing the Altis of his day, when the road in question was included within its boundaries, and that the Great Altar and the two last statues mentioned (187, 188) as standing near the pillar of Oinomaos were always inside.2348 And neither this Processional Way nor the space before the eastern front of the temple of Zeus were localities for “unimportant mixed statues.”2349 Furthermore, if he had merely retraced his steps after arriving at the Leonidaion—and he says nothing of returning—he would not have begun a new route2350, but would have said something like this: Εί δὲ ὀπίσω ἀναστρέψας ἀπὸ τοῦ Λεωνιδαίου πρὸς τὸν βωμὸν αὐθις ἀφικέσθαι τῇ δεξιᾷ θελήσειας.2351 So it is simpler to conclude that the new route wound around the western and northern sides of the temple of Zeus over the temple terrace.2352 As no building is mentioned on the way, and as the north side of the temple would probably have been called ἀριστερὰ πλευρά (in accordance with the usage discussed above in connection with the Heraion), and as the Pelopion faces southwest, the words ἐν δεξιᾷ can refer only to the right hand of Pausanias, i. e., the right side of the road followed. If we assume that these words originally stood after τοσάδε ἔστι σοί and were transferred by a later copyist, the difficulty is resolved.2353

Of the nineteen victor statues in this second route (170–188, VI, 17.1–18.7) no bases have been found.2354 But of the three “honor” statues included, one base, that of the rhetorician Gorgias of Leontini (184a), was recovered 10 meters northeast of the temple of Zeus, and so probably not very far from its original position;2355 for Pausanias mentions only three more statues, before he comes to the last two in this ἔφοδος, which two stood in this vicinity. The parts of the Altis to the west and north of the temple were unimportant till the time of Alexander the Great, and were, therefore, remarkably free of monuments. In the whole description of Pausanias, we know of only three altars (those of Aphrodite, the Seasons, and the Nymphs) and a wild olive tree (the “Olive of the Beautiful Crown”) to the west of the temple (V, 15.3), and only of the votive offerings of a certain Mikythos or Smikythos to the north of it (V, 26.2).2356 As the statue of Gorgias stood among the “unimportant mixed statues” already mentioned (184–186), these must have stood somewhere north of the temple near its eastern end. Finally, the two ancient wooden statues of Praxidamas and Rhexibios (187–188, P., VI, 18.7) are mentioned by themselves as near the column of Oinomaos, which Pausanias elsewhere2357 says stood near the Great Altar of Zeus to the left of a road running south from it to the temple. Pausanias, after describing these “mixed” statues, may have finally left the route thus far followed and introduced these last two statues as quite distinct from the second ἔφοδος.2358 But he does not seem to have gone far from his route, for immediately after ending his account of the victor statues, he begins his account of the Treasuries, which lay beyond the Great Altar farther north.2359 (Plans A and B.)

Thus Pausanias ends his second route somewhere short of the Great Altar, and it appears after all to be only a continuation of the first, forming with it one unbroken “Rundgang,” though in quite a different sense of the word from that intended by Doerpfeld.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

From a study of these two routes, and a comparison of the dates of the victorious athletes,2360 we can draw the following conclusions as to the positions of the victor statues mentioned by Pausanias as standing in the Altis at Olympia:

1. The twenty-eight oldest statues—exclusive of the five already mentioned as having been removed from the area of the later temple of Zeus2361—dating from Ol. 58 ( = 548 B. C., Pythokritos, 128 b) to Ol. 76 ( = 476 B. C., Theognetos, 83), i. e., approximately down to the date of the founding of the temple,2362 stood in the space between the eastern front of the temple and the Echo Colonnade, or to the south of it near the South Altis wall. Only one statue (that of Protolaos, 48) stood as far north as the Eretrian Bull. Thus the southeastern part of the Altis was the oldest part dedicated to victor statues.

2. After this space was mostly filled, the next statues, those dating from Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C., Kallias, 50) to Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C., Eubotas, 75), i. e., from about the time of the foundation of the temple to near the date of the battle of Aigospotamoi, fifty-one in number, stood between the Heraion and the Victory of Paionios; only one stood as far south as the Altis wall, while seven stood around the Chariots, ten around the Victory, twenty around the Bull, and the rest further north (including 176, 185 of the second ἔφοδος, which stood north of the eastern end of the temple). Diagoras and his family (59–63), boxers and pancratiasts, had their statues near the older famous boxer Euthymos (56); Alkainetos and his sons (64–66), boxers, besides many other pugilists, had theirs near the Diagorids; Tellon (102) had his near that of his compatriot Epikradios (101); later Achæans had theirs near that of their countryman Oibotas (29), and Spartans near that of Chionis (111); some, as the three victors from Heraia (176, 177, 32),2363 stood far apart only apparently, for the last one had his statue near the Bull, and so not far from the other two, though these are named in the second ἔφοδος.

3. From near the date of the battle of Aigospotamoi, down to about the birth of Alexander the Great, i. e., from Ol. 94 to Ol. 106 ( = 404 to 356 B. C.), thirty-six statues filled in the intervals left among these older statues; fifteen stood near the Heraion; five between it and the Bull, seven around the Bull, five around the Victory, one near the Chariots, and three along the South Altis wall. Euthymenes and Kritodamos (78, 80) had their monuments near that of their older countryman (79), whose statue was made by Myron; the Ephesians, Pyrilampes and Athenaios (35, 36), had their statues beside that of their benefactor Lysandros (35 a).

4. After Alexander’s time, in consequence of the recent building of the Philippeion, Leonidaion, and Theekoleon to the west of the Altis, the western side of the temple of Zeus (and, to a lesser extent, the northern) became important, and henceforth statues surrounded the temple on all sides. Of the thirty-three statues of this epoch, nine stood to the west of the temple, four to the north, and seven to the south, while the rest stood either to the east, or, perhaps, near the Heraion. We shall see also that many later statues, known to us from inscriptions only, stood outside the Altis, to the west and northwest.

STATUES NOT MENTIONED BY PAUSANIAS, BUT KNOWN FROM RECOVERED BASES.

Having established these data, it is not difficult, from the positions of the many inscribed fragmentary bases found at Olympia and referred to victor statues not mentioned by Pausanias, from the approximate dates of the victories as gained from the age of the inscriptions, and by again employing the system of groups already mentioned, to state quite definitely where many of these other statues stood. Pausanias, who mentions 187 victors with 192 monuments in his two ἔφοδοι, expressly states that he enumerates only those “who had some title to fame or whose statues were better made.”2364 The reasons for his selection and the fact that he mentions the statue of no athlete certainly later than the middle of the second century B. C. (although we know from inscriptions that statues were set up far into the third century A. D., at least)2365 have been subjects of much discussion, but hardly concern us here.2366 The three latest statues of victors mentioned by Pausanias, whose dates are fixed, may be given: those of Kleitomachos, who won παγκράτιον and πύξ in Ols. 141 and 142 ( = 216 and 212 B. C.);2367 of Kapros, victor in παγκράτιον and πάλη in Ol. 142 ( = 212 B. C.);2368 and of Akestorides, victor πώλων ἅρματι sometime between Ols. 142 and 144 ( = 212 and 204 B. C.).2369 Still later statues of victors named by Pausanias, whose dates can not be exactly determined, are those of Sodamas, who won παίδων στάδιον some time between Ols. 142 and 145 ( = 212 and 200 B. C.);2370 of Amyntas, victor in παίδων παγκράτιον in Ol. (?) 146 ( = 196 B. C.);2371 of Timon, victor in πένταθλον in Ols. 146 or 147 ( = 196 or 192 B. C.);2372 and of Lysippos, victor in παίδων πάλη some time between Ols. 149 and 157 ( = 184 and 152 B. C.).2373 Of the first century A. D., Pausanias mentions three victors without statues: Artemidoros, who won παγκράτιον in Ol. 212 ( = 69 A. D.);2374 Polites, victor in στάδιον, δίαυλος and δόλιχος in Ol. 212;2375 and Hermogenes, victor in στάδιον twice, δίαυλος once, and as ὁπλίτης thrice, in Ols. 215, 216, 217 ( = 81–89 A. D.).2376 The words of Pliny, Olympiae, ubi omnium qui vicissent statuas dicari mos erat2377 refer, of course, as we have already pointed out, only to the privilege and not to the actual fact, for many victors would have no statues, as it was necessary for them or their relatives or city-states to meet the expenses of their erection.2378 No more is the rest of his statement to be taken literally, i. e., that those victors who were victorious three times had the right to erect portrait statues in their honor; for we have, as has already been shown, at least one exception.2379 Besides we know that portrait statues were practically unknown before the fourth century B. C. Most of the victor statues were mere types—those of Hermes and Herakles being common—without individualized features, simply representing the various contests by position or some characteristic, e. g., the helmet and shield for “hoplite” victors.2380

Five of these inscriptions have been referred to the sixth and fifth centuries B. C.2381 Of these the inscribed base of Pantares was found near the South Altis wall, and the statue must originally have stood east of the temple of Zeus, near the chariot of Gelo (90), for these two were the only victors from Gela, and won in the same kind of contest and at nearly the same date.2382 The statues of Phrikias of Pelinna and Phanas of Pellene, both representing victors in the heavy-armed race, to which I have ascribed the two archaic marble heads (Fig. 30), the former found west of the temple of Zeus and the latter to the south of it, must originally have stood in the area of the later temple and then have been removed.2383 That of an unknown victor, whose name ended in ... αδας,2384 the two fragments of whose base were found, one near the Heraion and the other to the east of the temple of Zeus, should have stood near the statues of the only other pancratiasts of a similar age, either near those of Dorieus (61), who won in Ols. 87 to 89 ( = 432 to 424 B. C.), and Damagetos (62), who won in Ols. 82 and 83 ( = 452 and 448 B. C.), in the zone of the Bull, or near that of Timasitheos (82), who won some time between Ols. (?) 65 and 67 inclusive ( = 520 and 512 B. C.), in the zone of the Victory. Lastly, the second inscribed base of Xenombrotos (133), found near the Council-house outside the South Altis wall, doubtless once stood near the first (the epigram from which is preserved by Pausanias, VI, 14.12), along this wall to the east of the base of Telemachos.2385

No inscribed fragments of bases dating from the fourth century B. C. have been found.

Beginning with the third century B. C., we shall see that most of the recovered bases were found either in the western part of the Altis, in the neighborhood of the Philippeion, Theekoleon, and Leonidaion, on both sides of the West Altis wall, or still farther west and northwest, especially in or near the Palaistra and Prytaneion. We have already seen that most of the statues named by Pausanias dating from Alexander’s time stood to the west (and north) of the temple of Zeus. As Pausanias enumerates only statues ἐν δεξιᾷ of his route around the temple to the Great Altar, these statues farther west and northwest are omitted from his account. Of the four bases of statues referred to the third century, all belong to Elean victors; three were found west and northwest of the Prytaneion and beyond, showing that these statues once stood in the vicinity of this building, and the fourth was found farther south, by the Palaistra, where it probably stood. Thus the base of the wrestler Nikarchos, son of Physsias, was found in a late wall west of the Prytaneion;2386 that of the statue of an unknown victor, son of Taurinos, was found at the southeast corner of the Palaistra;2387 that of another unknown victor, the son of ... phinos, was found in the Nordwestgraben;2388 the base of the statue of Thersonides, son of Paianodoros, victor κέλητι πωλικῷ, was found northwest of the Prytaneion, between the Roman baths and east hall of the Gymnasion.2389

Of the four statues referred with certainty to the second century B. C., all but one were found to the west of the Altis, in a region ranging from the Philippeion, northwest of the temple of Zeus, to the Leonidaion southwest of it. Two of them were found outside the West Altis wall, between the Leonidaion and the Byzantine church. Thus the base of the statue of D ... gonos, twice victor in πύξ, was found outside the apse of the Byzantine church and west of the West Altis wall;2390 the fragments of that of an unknown boy victor in wrestling or the pankration were found in the East Byzantine wall;2391 that of an unknown victor, συνωρίδι τελείᾳ (twice), and ἅρματι τελείῳ, was found south of the Philippeion.2392 The fragment of the base of the statue of another unknown victor in wrestling, the son of the Elean Aigyptos, was found to the northeast of the Leonidaion.2393

Of the seven bases referred to the second and first centuries B. C., three were found in or near the Byzantine church, showing that such statues may have stood in the Greek building which was later converted into the church.2394 Two more were found near the southwest corner of the Altis, and therefore may once have stood near the statue of Philonides, which Pausanias mentions as standing in that vicinity. Two others stood farther away, one inside the Prytaneion, the other northeast of the temple of Zeus. Thus the base of an unknown victor, the son of Aristotle, συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, was found in front of the north side of the Byzantine church;2395 that of Aristodamos, the son of Aleximachos of Elis, was found in the floor of the church;2396 that of an unknown victor was found northeast of the temple of Zeus;2397 that of a victor συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, whose name ended in ... chos, the son of the Elean Nikodromos, was found southwest of the Altis before the West Altis wall;2398 the base of two unknown victors from Elis were found respectively in the Prytaneion2399 and northwest of the Byzantine church,2400 while that of another Elean, Antigenes, the son of Jason, victor συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, was found in the southwest corner of the Altis.2401

The positions of the twenty-four bases (belonging to monuments of twenty-two victors) with certainty referred to the first pre-Christian century were very scattered. One large Pentelic marble bathron, supporting the monuments of seven victors of the family of Philistos, must have stood just south of the Philippeion, where most of the fragments were found. The bases of the statues of two other sons and a grandson of the same victor have been recovered, and doubtless stood near by, thus forming a family group of ten, outnumbering that of Diagoras (59–63 and 52) mentioned by Pausanias. The omission of so important a monument in the description of the Periegete has, of course, been used as an indication of his employment of earlier lists. Of the other bases, two were found outside the South Altis wall, west of the Council-house, and two east of it; two east of the temple of Zeus (one of them that of the youthful Tiberius, afterwards Roman emperor, which must have stood near the Eretrian Bull, where it was found); one southwest of the temple, along the South Terrace wall, pointing to a position among the statues there named by Pausanias; one east of the Byzantine church, pointing to a position south of the Theekoleon, two to the northwest of the Altis in the vicinity of the Prytaneion; while the others were found scattered all the way from the northeastern part of the Altis to the bed of the Kladeos. Thus over half (13) of these statue-bases were found in the west and northwest of the Altis and beyond; the space to the east of the temple of Zeus—called frequentissimus celeberrimusque by Scherer—seems now not to have been greatly prized. Most of these victories were gained in hippic contests. Horse-racing had early been discontinued, but was revived at the end of the first century B. C., when members of the imperial family, emulating the earlier triumphs of the princes of Sicily and Macedonia, became competitors. Thus Tiberius won in the chariot-race, and a few years later his nephew Germanicus in the same event. The list of these bases of victor statues of the first century B. C. and their provenience follows. A fragment of the base of the victor Agilochos, son of Nikeas of Elis, victor κέλητι πωλικῷ, was found in the East Byzantine wall.2402 One fragment of the bathron of the family group of the Elean Philistos,2403 victors in hippic contests, was found southwest of the Pelopion, while four others were discovered south of the Philippeion; the base of the statue of Philonikos, a son of Philistos, was also found south of the Philippeion,2404 and that of another unnamed son was discovered to the west of the Prytaneion,2405 while the place of finding of that of Charops, the son of Telemachos, has not been recorded.2406 The base of the monument of Aristarchos was found east of the Byzantine church,2407 that of Damaithidas, son of Menippos of Elis, a victor συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, west of the Council-house (south building),2408 and that of Thrasymachos (or Thrasymedes) in the Nordostgraben.2409 A fragment of the base of the statue of Demokrates of Antioch in Karia was found in the bed of the river Kladeos,2410 that of a victor whose name began with Demo..., northeast of the Prytaneion,2411 while that of Thaliarchos, the son of Soterichos of Elis, victor πὺξ παίδων καὶ ἀνδρῶν, was found east of the Council-house.2412 Bases from two statues of Menedemos, son of Menedemos of Elis, victor συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, were found, one east of the temple of Zeus, the other inside the Heraion.2413 Lykomedes, the son of Aristodemos of Elis, victor συνωρίδι πωλικῇ, also had two statues; the base of one was found in front of the West Byzantine wall on the south side of the temple of Zeus, that of the other in the Westgraben.2414 The front part of the base of the statue of Archiadas, the son of Timolas of Elis, who won κέλητι πωλικῷ, was discovered southwest of the temple of Zeus, on the Terrace wall.2415 That of an unknown victor in the δίαυλος, the son of ... krates of Miletos, was found near the Osthalle,2416 while that inscribed with the name of Tiberius Claudius Nero of Rome, who won a victory τεθρίππῳ just before the end of the century, was found south of the Eretrian Bull.2417

Nineteen inscribed base-fragments have been referred to the post-Christian centuries, thirteen to the first, three to the second, and three to the third. The spaces around the temple of Zeus (especially its eastern front) are again the favorite ones. Thus the bases of three statues were found east of the temple (one in situ), two near its southeastern corner, three at the northeastern corner (one, that of Germanicus Cæsar, the nephew of Tiberius, just to the north of the Eretrian Bull, and so originally standing here near that of his uncle), while another stood opposite the fifth column from the east on the north side of the temple. Most of these statues must have been passed by Pausanias in his first ἔφοδος, which is, perhaps, another evidence of his dependence on older lists in compiling his own. Two other bases were found to the southwest of the temple, one of them near its corner, and the other nearer the corner of the Altis, i. e., near the base of the statue of Philonides (154a). Thus eleven statues stood near the temple. Of the others, four were found in the vicinity of the Palaistra (one inside in situ), one to the northeast of the Prytaneion, another northeast of the Byzantine church, while the two remaining ones were found in the eastern part of the Altis, near the entrance to the Stadion and before the Echo Colonnade respectively. The base of the last statue of a victor known to have been erected at Olympia, that of Valerios Eklektos of Sinope, previously mentioned, was found in situ in the Palaistra. We append a detailed list of these bases, giving the provenience of each.

Of the first century A. D., the fore part of the base of the monument of Germanicus, son of Nero Claudius Drusus, was found east of the temple of Zeus, north of the Eretrian Bull;2418 the base of that of Gnaios Markios was found opposite the southeast corner of the temple;2419 that of Markos Antonios Kallippos Peisanos, son of M. Antonios Alexion of Elis, who won κέλητι πωλικῷ in Ol. 177 ( = 72 A. D.), was found in the West Byzantine wall at the southwest corner of the temple.2420 The base of the monument of Polyxenos, son of Apollophanes of Zakynthos, victor in πάλη παίδων, was discovered at the southwest corner of the Altis far from its probable original location;2421 that of P. Kornelios Ariston, son of Eirenaios of Ephesos, victor in παγκράτιον παίδων in Ol. 207 = 49 A. D.), in front of the north wall of the Palaistra;2422 the marble plate from that of Tiberios Klaudios Aphrodeisios of Elis (?), who won κέλητι τελείῳ in Ol. 208 ( = 53 A. D.), was unearthed near its semicircular base, which was found in situ east of the temple.2423 Four fragments of the base of the monument of the boy pancratiast Nikanor, son of Sokles of Ephesos, were recovered east of the temple, and another one near its southeastern corner.2424 The base of that of Markos Deida of Antioch, victor in πάλη παίδων in Ol. 219 ( = 97 A. D.), was found southeast of the temple;2425 that of an unknown victor in the δίαυλος and as ὁπλίτης (three times) in the North Byzantine wall;2426 that of Hermas, son of Ision of Antioch, a victor in παγκράτιον, between the West Altis wall and the southeastern corner of the Palaistra;2427 that of Diogenes, son of Dionysios of Ephesos, victor σαλπίγγι five times, before the centre of the Echo Colonnade.2428 The inscribed fragments of the bronze legs of the statues of two unknown victors have also been excavated, the one near the starting-place in the Stadion,2429 the other near the fifth column from the east on the north side of the temple of Zeus.2430

Of the second century A. D., we have the following bases: that of Kasia M[nasithea], daughter of M. Betilenos (or Vetulenos) Laitos of Elis, who won ἅρματι πωλικῷ, was found northeast of the Prytaneion;2431 the upper part of the pedestal of the quadriga of L. Minicius Natalis of Rome, victor ἅρματι τελείῳ in Ol. 227 ( = 129 A. D.), was unearthed in the east wall of the Palaistra.2432 The base of the statue erected to the herald P. Ailios Artemas of Laodikeia (in Phrygia?) was found 20 meters north of the northeastern corner of the temple of Zeus.2433

Of the third century A. D., i. e., after the time of Pausanias, we have these bases: that of P. Ailios Alkandridas, son of Damokratidas of Sparta, twice victor in (?) πάλη, was found northeast of the Byzantine church;2434 that of Theopropos of Rhodes, who won κέλητι, was unearthed east of the temple of Zeus, just south of the basis of the Nike of Paionios;2435 the base of the statue of Valerios Eklektos of Sinope, victor as κῆρυξ in Ols. 256, 258–260 ( = 245, 253–261 A. D.), was found in situ in the Palaistra.2436 We should add for this century also the inscribed bronze diskos, the votive (not victor) offering of Poplios (Publius) Asklepiades of Corinth, which was found 2.5 meters south of the Southwest gate of the Altis.2437

A study of these inscriptions shows that the practice of setting up victor statues decreased in the fourth and third centuries B. C., but was revived in the second and first, only to decrease again after the first century A. D. On the other hand, the inscriptions show that the number of “honor” statues correspondingly increased. Of the later statues, most were erected to Eleans; names of victors from Sicily and Italy, and from the older Greek states, as Sparta and Athens, are rare, being replaced by those from Asia Minor and the newer towns of the Greek mainland. This falling off of interest in the games was largely due to professionalism. In the second century B. C., we begin to read in the inscriptions of περιοδονῖκαι, i. e., victors winning prizes at all the four national games, a sure indication of the professional spirit. Even Pausanias mentions two such victors.2438

From these inscribed base-fragments, we have knowledge of 61 victors (63 monuments)2439 who had statues erected to them, though they are not named in the lists of Pausanias. Of the 192 monuments mentioned by Pausanias, 40 are known to us from recovered fragments of bases and statues. So if we assume the same ratio between known and unknown for those not mentioned by Pausanias, we should have the proportion 40 : 192 : : 63 : x, where x would equal 302, making a grand total of 494 monuments, which number can not be far from the actual number of victor statues adorning the Altis.2440

OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS ERECTED OUTSIDE OLYMPIA.

In Chapter I, we showed that frequently statues or other monuments were erected in their native towns as a part of the honor paid to Olympic victors. We shall now give a list of all such monuments set up in various parts of the Greek world which are known to us from notices in ancient literature and from inscriptions.2441 These, like the statues in the Altis, range in date from the seventh century B. C. to the fourth A. D., and offer still greater variety in the kinds of dedication. It will be best to arrange the list as far as possible chronologically and in numerical sequence, adding the authorities for the dates of the various victories in the footnotes.2442

Victors with monuments of the seventh century B. C.:

1. Chionis, of Sparta.2443 Besides his statue by Myron and the tablet containing a list of his victories at Olympia mentioned by Pausanias (VI, 13.2), the same writer records a similar tablet in Sparta, erected near the royal tomb of the Agids, likewise set up by his townspeople (III, 14.3). The Spartan tablet, like the monuments in his honor at Olympia, was doubtless set up long after the victory, about Ols. 77 or 78 ( = 472 or 468 B. C.).

2. Kylon, of Athens.2444 Pausanias records that a bronze statue of this victor stood upon the Athenian Akropolis, erected, as he supposes, in honor of his beauty and reputation as an Olympic victor (I, 28.1). Kylon was the leader of the well-known conspiracy of 632 B. C., when he tried to make himself tyrant of Athens.2445 Furtwaengler has proposed the theory that this monument was not set up in honor of Kylon by the Athenians, as Pausanias says, but that it was a dedication by his family after his Olympic victory.2446 A. Schaefer,2447 however, more justly believed that the statue was an expiatory offering for the massacre of Kylon’s companions on the Akropolis,2448 set up in the time of Perikles, the date of which would account for the “beauty” of the statue. Still another scholar2449 believes that Pausanias’ remark was called forth by the epigram on the statue.2450

3. Hipposthenes, of Sparta.2451 Pausanias records that a temple was dedicated to him in Sparta, where he received divine worship (III, 15.7). It has been argued that the words of Pausanias (l. c.) show that Hipposthenes here was worshiped only in the character of Poseidon, whose epithet was ἵππιος (cf. P., I, 30.4).2452

Of the sixth century B. C.:

4. Hetoimokles, son of Hipposthenes of Sparta.2453 Pausanias mentions a statue of this victor at Sparta (III, 13.9).

5. Arrhachion, of Phigalia.2454 Pausanias records the stone statue in the archaic pose, and with weathered inscription, erected to this victor in the market-place at Phigalia (VIII, 40.1), which we have discussed at length in the preceding chapter (Fig. 79).

6. Kimon, the son of Stesagoras, of Athens.2455 Aelian mentions αἱ Κίμωνος ἵπποι χαλκαῖ, very true to the originals, in Athens,2456 which seem to have been set up in honor of his three chariot victories at Olympia. His first victory was won when he was in banishment at the hands of the tyrant Peisistratos, son of Hippokrates. Having entered his horses under the tyrant’s name for the second contest, he was in consequence recalled, and a third time entered them and won under his own name.2457 The pseudo-Andokides confuses this older Kimon with the younger, when he calls the latter an Olympic victor.2458 Similarly a scholiast on Aristophanes2459 confuses him with Megakles, who won a victory τεθρίππῳ in Ol. 47 ( = 592 B. C.).2460

7. Philippos, son of Boutakides, of Kroton.2461 The people of Egesta in Sicily erected a shrine over his grave in their town, and paid him divine honors on account of his beauty, in which he surpassed all his contemporaries.2462

Of the fifth century B. C.:

8. Astylos, or Astyalos, of Kroton.2463 Besides mentioning his statue by Pythagoras of Rhegion at Olympia, Pausanias in the same passage (VI, 13.1) mentions another in the temple of Lakinian Hera near Kroton, which his fellow-townsmen pulled down in anger, because he had called himself a Syracusan in order to please the Sicilian tyrant Hiero.2464 Collignon believes that the statue at Kroton was also a copy of the work of Pythagoras at Olympia.2465

9. Euthymos, son of Astykles, of Lokroi Epizephyrioi in South Italy.2466 In addition to his statue at Olympia by Pythagoras, mentioned by Pausanias (VI, 6.4–6),2467 we know of another statue by Pythagoras set up in Lokroi in honor of this victor.2468 According to Kallimachos, both statues were struck by lightning at the same time. Other writers tell wondrous tales of this boxer.2469

10. Theagenes, son of Timosthenes, of Thasos, one of the most famous Olympic victors.2470 Besides his statue at Olympia by Glaukias of Aegina (VI, 11.2 and 9), Pausanias says that he knows of many other places in Greece and elsewhere where images of this victor were set up (VI, 11.9), and records one at Thasos to which the Thasians sacrificed as to a god (VI, 11.6). The story which he tells about this Thasian statue being scourged and falling on the enemy of Theagenes is also recounted at greater length by Dio Chrysostom2471 and is mentioned by Eusebios.2472 Lucian says that the statue cured fevers, just as did that of Polydamas at Olympia.2473 Studniczka has argued that the statues at Thasos and elsewhere were set up to honor the hero and not the victor.2474

11. Ladas, of Sparta.2475 Two fourth-century epigrams celebrate the fleetness of Ladas, and the second names Myron as the statuary of a bronze statue of him.2476 Pausanias mentions a statue of the same victor in the temple of Apollo Lykios in Argos (II, 19.7). Whether the latter statue was identical with the one named in the epigram can not be finally determined.2477 Pausanias refers to a stadion of Ladas, situated between Mantinea and Orchomenos in Arkadia, in which Ladas practiced running (VIII, 12.5), and also to his grave between Belemina and Sparta (III, 21.1).

12. Kallias, son of Didymias of Athens.2478 Apart from his statue at Olympia made by the Athenian painter and sculptor Mikon, mentioned by Pausanias (VI, 6.1),2479 there was a dedication to him at Athens, as we learn from the preserved inscription, which enumerates his thirteen victories at Olympia and elsewhere.2480

13. Diagoras, son of Damagetos, of Rhodes, the most famous of Greek boxers.2481 In addition to his statue at Olympia by Kallikles, son of Theokosmos of Megara, mentioned by Pausanias (VI, 7.1–2) as standing among the group of statues of his sons and grandsons, we learn from the scholiast on Pindar, Ol. VII, Argum., who quotes Gorgon as his authority,2482 that this ode, which celebrated the Olympic victory of Diagoras, was attached in golden letters to the walls of the temple of Athena at Lindos.

14. Agias, of Pharsalos.2483 We have already, in Ch. VI, discussed the group of marble statues set up at Delphi by Daochos of Pharsalos in honor of his ancestors who had won in various athletic contests, which was discovered by the French excavators there in 1894. We there mentioned that Preuner found the same metrical inscription which appeared on the base of the statue of Agias, the best preserved of the group (Pl. 28 and Fig. 68), in the journal of Stackelberg,2484 who had copied it in the early part of the nineteenth century from a base in Pharsalos which has since disappeared. This Thessalian inscription contained the additional words that Lysippos of Sikyon was the sculptor. In both inscriptions the victories of Agias at Olympia and elsewhere are noted. Thus we know of two statues of Agias, one at Delphi, the other at Pharsalos, both presumably by Lysippos. Preuner also thinks that a third statue may have stood in Olympia.

15. Cheimon, of Argos.2485 In mentioning the statue of Cheimon at Olympia by the sculptor Naukydes of Argos, Pausanias, in the same passage (VI, 9.3), records another which once stood in Argos, but was later removed to the temple of Peace in Rome.2486

16. Leon, son of Antikleidas (or Antalkidas), of Sparta.2487 A fragment of Polemon2488 mentions a statue of this victor. It may have stood in Olympia, as Foerster without good grounds assumes, or it may have stood elsewhere.

17. Eubotas (Eubatas or Eubatos), of Kyrene.2489 Besides his statue at Olympia recorded by Pausanias (VI, 8.3), we learn of another set up at Kyrene by the victor’s wife for his devotion.2490

18. Promachos, son of Dryon, of Pellene in Achaia.2491 Pausanias not only mentions a bronze statue of this victor at Olympia (VI, 8.5–6), but also records one of stone dedicated likewise by his townsmen in the Old Gymnasion of Pellene (VII, 27.5).

Of the fifth or fourth centuries B. C.:

19. An unknown victor, of Argos or (?) Tegea.2492 Aristotle mentions an inscription from a statue of an Olympic victor in two passages of his Rhetoric.2493 This epigram was repeated by Aristophanes of Byzantion,2494 who wrongly ascribed it to Simonides.2495 Where this statue stood can not be determined.

Of the fourth century B. C.:

20. Kyniska, daughter of Archidamos I, of Sparta.2496 Pausanias, before mentioning the monumental group at Olympia by Apellas of Megara, which consisted of the statues of Kyniska and her charioteer standing beside a huge bronze chariot and horses (VI. 1.6), and the small bronze chariot by the same sculptor, set up in her honor in the vestibule of the temple of Zeus (V, 12.5), records that there was a shrine in Sparta at Plane-tree Grove, near the youths’ exercise ground, erected to the heroine Kyniska (III, 15.1). This latter dedication, therefore, was not properly a victor monument, though Pausanias in the same book says that Kyniska was the first Greek woman to train horses and to win a prize at Olympia (III, 8.1).

21. Euryleonis, a victress of Sparta.2497 Pausanias says that she had a statue in her native city near the so-called Σκήνωμα, “Tent” (III, 17.6). Curtius has suggested that this may be the small building mentioned by Thukydides as the place where King Pausanias took refuge when pursued by the ephors.2498

22. Archias, son of Eukles, of Hybla.2499 An epigram in the Greek Anthology2500 speaks of a statue of this victor at Delphi.

23. [Phil]okrates, son of Antiphon, of Athens (deme of Krioa).2501 An inscribed base of the statue of this victor has been found in Athens.2502

24. An unknown victor. An inscribed base, found near the Portico of Attalos in Athens, records the victories of an unknown athlete at several games, including one in the παγκράτιον ἀνδρῶν at Olympia.2503

25. Phorystas, son of Thriax (or Triax), of (?) Tanagra.2504 The inscribed base of the statue of this victor, giving Kaphisias of Bœotia as the sculptor, has been discovered in the ruins of Tanagra.2505 His brother Pammachos won παγκράτιον παίδων at Nemea, and had a statue at Thebes, the work of Teisikrates, the inscribed base of which has been recovered.2506

Of the fourth or third centuries B. C.:

26. Aristophon, son of Lysinos, of Athens.2507 Besides his statue at Olympia, set up at the cost of the people of Athens, mentioned by Pausanias (VI, 13.11; cf. VI, 14.1), we have the inscription from the base of another which was set up on the Athenian Akropolis.2508

27. Attalos, father of King Attalos I,2509 of Pergamon.2510 The inscribed base of his great victor monument, erected by Epigonos, has been dis- covered at Pergamon.2511

Of the second century B. C.: none.

Of the first century B. C.: none.

Of the first century A. D.:

28. Xenodamos, of Antikyra in Phokis.2512 Pausanias mentions a bronze statue of this victor in the Old Gymnasion at Antikyra (X, 36.9). G. Hirschfeld2513 had objected to the statement of Pausanias, in the passage cited, “that this was the only Olympiad omitted in the Elean register,” because of its inconsistency with other passages which state that in the 8th Olympiad,2514 in the 34th,2515 and in the 104th,2516 the games were celebrated by intruders, and not by the Eleans, and hence these Olympiads were regarded as invalid and were not entered in the Elean registers. However, as Frazer points out,2517 the case with Ol. 211 was different. It was doubtless celebrated by the Eleans themselves and its validity was not questioned, but either it was never entered in the register, or, if entered, was later struck out. Africanus (cf. Philostratos)2518 says that the celebration of this Olympiad, which should have fallen 65 A. D., was deferred two years to favor Nero, who in 67 A. D. received prizes in six events, including the ten-horse chariot-race.2519 The Eleans, later being ashamed of thus favoring the tyrant, probably removed Ol. 211 from the register after his death. It may be that for the same reason statues of victors of that Olympiad were not set up in the Altis, which would explain why that of Xenodamos was set up in his native city, where Pausanias saw it. Not finding his name in the Elean register, Pausanias would reason that this victory fell in the disgraced Ol. 211.2520

28a. Titos Phlabios Artemidoros, son of Artemidoros, of Adana in Kilikia.2521 The inscribed marble tablet from the base of the statue which this victor erected in Naples in honor of his father Artemidoros, son of Athenodoros, is preserved. It contains a list of his own many victories in παγκράτιον and πάλη in games held in Greece, Italy, Asia Minor, and Egypt. Though the statue was erected to his father, the long inscription shows that it was intended quite as much to celebrate his own athletic prowess.2522

29. Titos Phlabios Metrobios, son of Demetrios, of Iasos, Karia.2523 The inscribed base of his statue has been found in Iasos.2524

30. Sarapion, of Alexandria, Egypt.2525 Pausanias mentions two statues of this victor, which stood on either side of the entrance to the Gymnasion in Elis known as the Maltho. He adds that they were erected by the Eleans in gratitude for the bestowal of corn in a time of famine (VI, 23.6). He is not to be confounded with other victors of the same name.2526

Of the second century A. D.:

31. Markos Aurelios Demetrios, of Alexandria, Egypt.2527 His son, M. Aurelios Asklepiades, dedicated a statue to him in Rome, the inscription from the base of which has been recovered.2528

32. Unknown victor, from Magnesia ad Sipylum, in Lydia.2529 His statue in Magnesia is known from the recovered inscribed base.2530

33. Kranaos or Granianos, of Sikyon.2531 Pausanias mentions a bronze statue of this victor as standing in the precincts of the temple of Asklepios, on the hill of Titane, near Sikyon (II, 11.8).

34. Titos Ailios Aurelios Apollonios, of Tarsos.2532 A statue of this victor stood in Athens, as we learn from its preserved inscribed base.2533

35. Mnasiboulos, of Elateia in Phokis.2534 His fellow citizens erected a bronze statue in honor of his repelling the robber horde of the Kostobokoi, who overran Greece in the days of Pausanias (X, 34.5). The statue stood in “Runner” street.

Of the third century A. D.:

36. Aurelios Toalios, of (?) Oinoanda, Lykia.2535 The inscribed base of the statue of this victor has been found in Oinoanda.2536

37. Aurelios Metrodoros, of Kyzikos.2537 The inscribed base of his statue was found in Kyzikos, and is now in Constantinople.2538

38. Valerios Eklektos, of Sinope.2539 Besides his monument at Olympia, which was erected immediately after 261 A. D.,2540 we know, from an inscription, of another statue dedicated to him in Athens some time between 253 and 257 A. D.2541

Of the fourth century A. D.:

39. Klaudios Rhouphos, also called Apollonios the Pisan, son of Klaudios Apollonios, of Smyrna.2542 We learn from an inscription found in the Baths of Titus in Rome that his statue stood in the council-chamber of the Guild of Athletes of Hercules at Rome.2543

40. Philoumenos, of Philadelphia, in Lydia.2544 The closing verse of an inscription belonging to the base of his statue is preserved in Panodoros.2545 Where the statue stood can not be determined.

Of unknown dates:

41. Ainetos, of (?) Amyklai.2546 Pausanias mentions the portrait statue of this victor at Amyklai (III, 18. 7). He says that he expired even while the crown was being placed on his head.

42. Nikokles, of Akriai in Lakonia.2547 Pausanias mentions a monument (μνῆμα) erected in his honor at Akriai, between the Gymnasion and the sea-wall (III, 22.5).

43. Aigistratos, son of Polykreon, of Lindos in Rhodes.2548 A statue of this victor was set up at Lindos, as we learn from the preserved inscription on its base found there.2549 He is called in the inscription the first Lindian victor at Olympia.

44. An unknown victor, of (?) Delphi.2550 The inscribed base of his statue, with remains of the dedication, was found many years ago at Delphi by Cockerell.2551

We have records of other monuments erected to victors, but it is not clear whether the victories recorded were won at Olympia or elsewhere. We list the following three doubtful cases, which have already been noted in earlier chapters:

1. Epicharinos. Pausanias mentions the statue Ἐπιχαρίνου ὁπλιτοδρομεῖν ἀσκήσαντος, by the sculptor Kritios, as standing upon the Athenian Akropolis (I, 23.9). The inscribed base of this monument was found in 1839, between the Propylaia and the Parthenon.2552 The inscription states that the statue was the joint work of Kritios (thus correcting the spelling Κριτίας of Pausanias) and Nesiotes. It was, therefore, a work of the first half of the fifth century B. C., the date of the sculptors of the Tyrannicides (Fig. 32). Ross added the word ὁπλιτοδρόμος after the name in the inscription. Michaelis,2553 however, has inserted the name of the victor’s father. Wilamowitz2554 went further and assumed that Polemon, from whom Pausanias derived the account, had already falsely restored the inscription and that the statue did not represent Epicharinos, but another victor. This theory has been rightly controverted by many scholars.2555 It is clear that Pausanias got his information from the monument, and not from the inscription.

2. Hermolykos, son of Euthoinos or Euthynos. Pausanias mentions the statue of the pancratiast Hermolykos as standing on the Akropolis at Athens (I, 23.10). This was probably Hermolykos the pancratiast, who is recorded by Herodotos as having distinguished himself at the battle of Mykale in 479 B. C., and as having been afterwards killed in battle at Kyrnos in Euboia and buried at Geraistos.2556 Some scholars have advocated the theory that the portrait statue here mentioned by Pausanias was none other than the statue which stood on the Akropolis on the base which was discovered in 1839, dedicated by Hermolykos, the son of Diitrephes, the work of the sculptor Kresilas,2557 and that the Periegete mistook the latter for the one mentioned by Herodotos.2558 However, Frazer finds this explanation “arbitrary and highly improbable,” and believes that the base in question supported the statue of Diitrephes, pierced with arrows, also mentioned by Pausanias (I, 23.3).2559 Kirchhoff distinguished not only the statue of Hermolykos mentioned by Pausanias and the dedication of Hermolykos revealed by the recovered base, but both of these from the statue of the wounded man mentioned by Pliny (H. N., XXXIV, 74). While J. Six assumed that Hermolykos, son of Diitrephes, dedicated the Kresilæan statue in honor of his grandfather Hermolykos, son of Euthoinos, and that Pausanias wrongly gathered from the inscribed base that the statue represented Diitrephes,2560 Furtwaengler believed that Diitrephes was the older warrior of the name, mentioned by Thukydides,2561 and that Pausanias, who knew nothing of him, wrongly connected his statue with the younger one of that name.2562

3. Isokrates, son of Theodoros, of Athens. The pseudo-Plutarch mentions a bronze statue of Isokrates, in the form of a παῖς κελητίζων, on the Athenian Akropolis.2563 As the orator was born in 436 B. C., his youthful victory among the horse-racers must have occurred about 420 B. C.

SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

We have found, then, from the literary sources examined, that there are at least 44 Olympic victors, to whom a total of 47 monuments were erected outside Olympia.2564 These monuments were of various kinds—1 inscribed tablet, 1 Pindaric ode engrossed on a temple wall, 3 temples or shrines, 37 statues (one of them apparently iconic), bronze horses (? quadriga), and 4 dedications which are not further described. Thus the bulk of these monuments, as of those at Olympia, consisted of statues. Of the 29 monuments erected to 27 victors in the pre-Christian centuries, 3 were dedicated in the seventh,2565 4 in the sixth, 13 (to 11 victors) in the fifth, 1 in the fifth or fourth, 6 in the fourth,2566 1 in the fourth or third, and 1 in the third. There is no record of such a dedication in the second and first centuries B. C. Of the 14 monuments erected to 13 victors known to belong to the post-Christian centuries, 4 (to 3 victors) belong to the first, 5 to the second, 3 to the third and 2 to the fourth; 4 others were set up to 4 victors whose dates can not be determined. Of other monuments mentioned (though not included in our figures) 3 may or may not have been erected to Olympic victors. We find that the greatest number of dedications was made in the fifth century B. C., just as we found was the case in regard to those at Olympia.2567 Of these victors, 10 also had monuments at Olympia. The total number of Olympic victor monuments, therefore, at Olympia and elsewhere of which we have record, amounts to 302.2568

STATISTICS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR STATUARIES.

In conclusion, we shall briefly summarize the number and dates of the sculptors of Olympic victor monuments who are known to us from all sources.2569 Pausanias names 52 such sculptors, who made 102 of the 192 monuments listed by him. Of the 42 “honor” statues erected in the Altis to 35 men, Pausanias mentions only two sculptors, Lysippos, who also appears among the victor statuaries, and Mikon of Syracuse, who does not.2570 Pliny names 24, or nearly one-half of the athlete sculptors mentioned by Pausanias.2571 No new name of an artist appears either on the inscribed bases found at Olympia and referred to the monuments recorded by Pausanias, or on the 63 bases discovered there, which can not be so referred. Of the 52 sculptors known to us from Pausanias and inscriptions, the dates can be assigned definitely or approximately thus: of the seventh century B. C., none; of the sixth century B. C., second half, 2; end, 2; of the end of the sixth and beginning of the fifth centuries B. C., 1; of the fifth century B. C., first half, 9; middle, 4; second half, 3; end, 2; of the fourth century B. C., first half, 11; middle, 1; second half, 2; end, 3; of the end of the fourth and beginning of the third centuries B. C., 3; of the third century B. C., first half, 1; second half, 1; end, 2; of the end of the third and beginning of the second centuries B. C., 1; of the second century B. C., first half, 2. No sculptor is named who lived certainly later than the second century B. C. In addition to these results, 1 sculptor can be assigned only roughly to the period subsequent to Alexander the Great, and the epoch of still another can not be determined. Of the 37 statues listed above as erected to Olympic victors outside Olympia—i. e.>, the major portion of the whole number of 47 monuments of various sorts set up in honor of 44 victors—the names of only four artists are known. Three of these—Myron, Pythagoras of Rhegion, and Lysippos—also worked at Olympia. The name, therefore, of only one new sculptor, Kaphisias of Bœotia, who lived in the fourth century B. C., can be added from this source, which makes the grand total of victor statuaries known to us 53.

PLAN A

THE ALTIS AT OLYMPIA
IN THE GREEK PERIOD
(THIRD CENTURY B. C.)
Adapted from Doerpfeld

zoom

PLAN B

THE ALTIS AT OLYMPIA
IN THE ROMAN PERIOD
(SECOND CENTURY A. D.)
Adapted from Doerpfeld

zoom

FOOTNOTES

1 Cf. Gardiner, pp. 8–9.

2 See infra, p. 228 and n. 2.

3 B. S. A., XI, 1904–5, fig. 7 and pp. 12–14. The horse also appears on clay documents from Knossos with royal chariots and also on tombstones and fragmentary frescoes of Mycenæ; for the latter, see Arch. Eph., 1887, Pl. XI. On the Libyan origin of the first horses introduced into Greece, see W. Ridgeway, The Origin and Influence of the Thoroughbred Horse, 1905, p. 480.

4 See the bull depicted on a seal from Praisos, to be mentioned below: Angelo Mosso, The Palaces of Crete, 1907, p. 218, fig. 98. The Italian Mission found at Hagia Triada the bones of a gigantic bull, and Mosso (cf. p. 216, n. 1) found the remains of one at Phaistos.

5 B. S. A., VII, 1900–1, pp. 94 f. and VIII, 1901–2, p. 74; Mosso, op. cit., pp. 216–218; H. R. Hall, Anc. History of the Near East, 1913, Pl. IV., 2; Mrs. R. C. Bosanquet, Days in Attica, 1914, Pl. II; Richter, Hbk. of the Classical Collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1917, p. 23, fig. 13. As Dr. Evans’ Atlas has not yet appeared, the plate in the text is taken from a watercolor by Gilliéron, in the museum of Liverpool.

6 It has often been pictured and described: e. g., Schliemann, Tiryns, 1885, Pl. XIII; Schuchhardt, Schliemann’s Excavations, 1891, pp. 119 f. and fig. 111; Tsountas-Manatt, The Mycenæan Age, 1897, p. 51, fig. 12; Perrot-Chipiez, VI, p. 887, fig. 439; Mosso, op. cit., p. 220, fig. 100; H. B. Walters, The Art of the Greeks, 1906, Pl. LIX; Springer-Michaelis, p. 113, fig. 242; Tiryns, Die Ergebn. d. Ausgrab. d deutsch. Instituts in Athen, II, 1912, Pl. XVIII.

7 On analogy with the Knossos fresco this figure, because of its white skin, should be that of a woman and not of a man, as the usual color of the latter is red. However, the charioteers painted white on frescoes discovered at Tiryns in 1910, which represent a boar hunt (see Rodenwaldt, A. M., XXXVI, 1911, pp. 198 f. and fig. 2, p. 201, restored; see also Tiryns, II, Pl. XII, in color) are regarded by Hall as youths and not women. He remarks that in Egypt young princes, who led the “sheltered life,” were often represented on monuments as pale, though red was the more usual color: see Hall, op. cit., p. 58 and n. 1; id., Aegean Archæology, 1914, p. 190 and fig. 74 on p. 192. Rodenwaldt interprets them as female: l. c.

8 XV, 679 f. F. Marx, Jb., IV, 1889, pp. 119 f., on the analogy to certain coin types, saw in this fresco a representation of river divinities.

9 Mosso, op. cit., p. 298, fig. 98.

10 See Mosso, p. 311, fig. 153.

11 Here the paved space measures only about 30 by 40 feet and the two tiers of seats would seat only 400 to 500 spectators: B. S. A., IX, 1902–03, p. 105, fig. 69; see Mosso, p. 315, fig. 154, and Baikie, The Sea Kings of Crete, 1913, Pls. XXI (before restoration), XXII (restored).

12 See Burrows, The Discoveries in Crete, 1907, p. 5. The one at Knossos maybe the “choros” wrought by Daidalos for Ariadne: Iliad, XVIII, 590–2.

13 B. S. A., VIII, 1901–2, pp. 72–4, fig. 39 (arm); Pls. II, III; Baikie, op. cit., Pl. XIX; H. R. Hall, Aegean Archæology, Pl. XXX, 2; Mosso, op. cit., p. 222, fig. 102; cf. Burrows, op. cit., p. 21; Bulle, p. 49, fig. 7; Springer-Michaelis, p. 103, fig. 228.

14 Remains of copper wire with gold foil twisted around it still adhere to the head of one statuette.

15 See Mosso, op. cit., p. 221, fig. 101; B. S. A., VII, 1900–01, p. 88.

16 Hall, Aegean Archæology, pp. 55–6. Though discovered in 1889 in a bee-hive tomb near Sparta, these famous cups are obviously importations from Crete, the work of an artist of the late Minoan I period. Similarly, the lion-hunt on the dagger-blade from Mycenæ is akin to Cretan art, if not its product. These cups have been often pictured: e. g., Arch. Eph., 1889, Pl. IX; Schuchhardt, Pl. III (App., pp. 350 f.); B. C. H., IV, 1891, Pls. XI-XII (in color), XIII-XIV; Tsountas-Manatt, op. cit., pp. 227–8, figs. 113–114; Perrot-Chipiez, VI, Pl. XV (in color) and pp. 786–7, figs. 369–370; H. B. Walters, op. cit., Pl. V; Mosso, op. cit., pp. 223 f., figs. 103, a, b, and 104, a, b, c; Hall, op. cit., Pl. XV. 1, and cf. id., Ancient History of the Near East, pp. 54–5, n. 1; Springer-Michaelis, pp. 104–5, figs. 230 a, b; J. H. Breasted, Ancient Times, 1916, fig. 140, opp. p. 234.

17 This interpretation of the scene has been compared with the design of a lion and goat on the short sword-blade from the chieftain’s grave at Knossos: see Burrows, op. cit., p. 88 and cf. pp. 136–7. Here there are two successive scenes; first the agrimi (wild goat) is startled and springs away; then the lion is represented triumphant at the end of the chase with one paw on the beast’s hind quarter and the other raised to strike: see Evans, Prehistoric Tombs of Knossos, 1906, p. 57, fig. 59; cf. also bronze inlaid dagger-blade from Mycenæ, showing hunting scenes on each face; Perrot-Chipiez, VI, Pl. XVII, 1 (panther hunting wild ducks, in color), XVIII, 3–4, (lion-hunt by men and lions chasing gazelles, in color); cf. Tsountas-Manatt, op. cit., pp. 200–2; Springer-Michaelis, Pl. V, 2a, b, 3; Schuchhardt, op. cit., p. 229, fig. 227; cf. Burrows, op. cit., p. 136.

18 Op. cit., pp. 224–5.

19 See Boeckh, p. 319, on Pyth., II, 78. The same word occurs also in an inscription on a late relief from Smyrna, which shows horsemen pursuing bulls, leaping on their backs and seizing their horns; C. I. G., II, 3212; also in an inscription from Sinope: ibid., III, 4157 (line 5); an inscription from Aphrodisias calls such men ταυροκαθάπται; ibid., II, Add., 2759b. The evidence shows that Gardiner, p. 9, n. 2, is wrong in connecting the taurokathapsia with the hunting-field instead of with the circus. He cites the Smyrna relief above mentioned (in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, no. 219), which, however, should be interpreted as an acrobatic scene. See J. Baunack, Rhein. Mus., XXXVIII, 1883, pp. 293 f., who discusses bull-fighting in Thessaly and Rome and quotes five inscriptions of Hellenic times to show that beast fights were common in Asia Minor.

20 Cf. Mosso, op. cit., pp. 214–215.

21 Iliad, XVIII, 605–6 (= Od., IV, 18–19).

22 Iliad, XVI, 742–50.

23 Hdt., VI, 129.

24 No. 243; see Salzmann, Le Nécropole de Cameiros, Pl. LVII; Gardiner, p. 245, fig. 39.

25 E. g., on one found at Knossos in 1903: B. S. A., IX, 1902–3, p. 57, and fig. 35 on p. 56. Here the attitude of the boxer is almost identical with that on the pyxis to be described below. A fuller design of the same sort may be seen on a seal from Hagia Triada mentioned in B. S. A., IX, p. 57, n. 2.

26 Hall, Aegean Archæology, p. 33 (c. 1600 B. C.); for description, ibid., pp. 61–2.

27 Op. cit., p. 211. In this respect it should be compared with the relief on the archaic (sixth-century B. C.) Attic tripod vase from Tanagra, now in Berlin, which shows scenes of boxing, wrestling, and running: A. Z., III, 1881, pp. 30 f. and Pls. III, IV.

28 P., V, 8. 1, says Klymenos came from Crete fifty years after Deukalion’s flood and held games at Olympia; cf. VI, 21.6. Aristotle assigns the whole political and educational system of Sparta to a Cretan origin: Politics, II, 10f., 1271b., f.

29 See R. Paribeni, Rendiconti della R. Accad. dei Lincei, XII, 1903, fasic. 70, p. 17; F. Halbherr, ibid., XIV, 1905, pp. 365 f., fig. 1; Burrows, op. cit., Pl. 1; Mosso, op. cit., p. 212. fig. 93; Hall, Aegean Archæology, Pl. XVI (from cast in Museum of Candia, whence our plate); cf. id., Anc. Hist. Near East, Pl. IV., 5. A copy is in the Metropolitan Museum, New York: see Hbk. of Classical Collection, p. 16, fig. 8.

30 Detail of zone, Mosso, p. 213, fig. 94. The acrobat wears just such striped boots and bracelets as the man and women on the fresco from Knossos. The man binding the legs of the bull on the Vapheio cup wears similar apparel. Similar scenes of gymnasts vaulting over a bull’s back are seen on the seal of a bracelet found at Knossos in 1902: B. S. A., VIII, 1901–2, p. 18, fig. 43; Mosso, p. 214, fig. 95a; also on the intaglio of a ring in Athens: Mosso, p. 215, fig. 95b. Scenes of gymnasts with bulls at rest are common on seal impressions: e. g., on one from Mycenæ in Athens, Mosso, p. 217, fig. 97; on the one in Candia already mentioned, ibid., fig. 98; cf. Bosanquet, Excavations at Praisos, B. S. A., VIII, p. 252, who believes the bull has been surprised by a hunter.

31 Iliad, XXII, 308 f.

32 XXIII, 673.

33 B. S. A., VII, 1900–1, fig. 31, pp. 95 and 96; copied by Gardiner, p. 10, fig. 1.

34 We should bear in mind that the civilization pictured in the Homeric poems antedates 1000 B. C.

35 The Iliad,2 1900, II, p. 468.

36 Od., VIII, 158 f. (translated by Butcher and Lang).

37 Gardiner, p. 15, points out that there is no mention of a chariot-race in the Odyssey, merely because Ithaca was not a land “that pastureth horses,” nor had it “wide courses or meadowland.” The plains of Thessaly and Argos, the homes of Achilles and Agamemnon respectively, were, however, famed for their horses, and the plain of Troy was large enough for the chariot-race. The only other chariot-races mentioned in the Iliad are held in Elis: XI, 696 f.; XXIII, 630 f.

38 E. g., on certain sarcophagi: see Murray, Sarcophagi in the British Museum, Pls. II, III (one from Klazomenai).

39 The true hoplomachia described by Homer and later practised by the Mantineans and Kyreneans (cf. Athenæus, IV, 41, p. 154) should not be confounded, as Gardiner, p. 21, n. 3, remarks, with the later competition of the same name held at the Athenian Theseia and taught in the gymnasia, which was a purely military exercise like fencing: Plato, Laches, 182B and passim; Gorgias, 456D; de Leg., 833E; cf. Dar.-Sagl., s. v. Hoplomachia.

40 E. g., Leaf, in his Companion to the Iliad, 1892, p. 380; id., The Iliad, II, p. 417, note on line 621.

41 Iliad, XXIII, 634 f.; ibid., 621–3, where Achilles gives Nestor a prize because he will never again be able to contend in boxing, wrestling, hurling the javelin, or running. In Od., VIII, 103 and 128, leaping is substituted for chariot-racing.

42 E. g., Iliad, XXII, 163–4: “The great prize ... of a man that is dead”; XXIII, 630 f., where Nestor recalls victories in the games held by the Epeians at Bouprasion in Elis at the funeral of the local hero Amarynkeus. Bouprasion is also mentioned in Iliad, XI, 756, in Nestor’s story of the war between the Pylians and Epeians and of the war waged by his father Neleus on Augeas, for stealing four horses which had been sent to Elis to contend for a tripod.

43 Examples of panegyric games in honor of gods are found also in the Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo, I, 146 f.; in Pindar, Ol., IX. 6 (Zeus); P., VIII, 2.1 (Zeus) and schol.; and Hdt., I, 144 (Apollo) and schol.; etc.

44 P., VIII, 4.5. For other examples of funeral games, see references in Krause, p. 9, n. 3. He also shows that musical contests were funerary in character.

45 The scholiast on Pindar, Nem., Argum., Boeckh, p. 424 B, and Isthm., Argum., p. 514, calls the Nemean and Isthmian games funerary; Clem. Alex., Protrept., Ch. II, 34, 29 P. (quoted by Eusebios, Praep. evang., II, 6, 72 b. c.) says that all four great games were funerary in origin.

46 P., I., 44.8; Clem. Alex., Strom., I, Ch. 21, 137, 401 P.

47 P., II, 15.2–3; Apollod., III, 6, 4; Hyginus, Fab., 74; schol. on Pindar’s Nem., Argum. Here the umpires wore mourning garments because of the origin of the games; see Gardiner, p. 225.

48 Aristotle, Peplos, frag. = F. H. G., II, p. 189, no. 282; Clem. Alex., Protr., Ch. I, 2, 2 P. and Ch. II, 34, 29 P.; Hyg., Fab., 140. For a different story of the founding (to appease Apollo for not protecting the temple when Delphi was invaded by Danaos), see Augustine, de Civ. Dei, XVIII, 12; cf. schol. on Pind., Pyth., Argum.; Ovid, Met., I, 445f. The Pythia were reorganized by the Amphictyons as a funeral contest in honor of the soldiers who fell in the first Sacred War.

49 Cf. P., V, 13.1–2; Clem. Alex., l. c.

50 V, 7.6–9.

51 See Strabo, VIII, 3.30 (C.354–5); Pindar, Ol., II, 3 f.; VI, 67 f.; X, 25 f.; Diod., IV, 14 and V, 64. According to Pindar, ll. cc. and the scholiast on Ol., II, 2, 5, and 7, Boeckh, pp. 58–9, Herakles, the son of Zeus, instituted the games in honor of Zeus; but Statius, Theb., VI, 5 f., Solinus, I, 28 (ed. Mommsen), Hyg., Fab., 273. Clem. Alex., Strom., I, Ch. 21, 137, say it was in honor of Pelops. On the traditional connection of Herakles with Olympia, see E. Curtius, Abh. d. k. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, philos.-histor. Kl., 1894, pp. 1098 f.; Busolt, Griech. Gesch^2, 1893, I, pp. 240 f. On legends of the early history of Olympia, see Krause, Olympia, oder Darstellung der grossen olympischen Spielen, 1838, pp. 26 f.

52 Cf. Frazer, II, pp. 549–50; Krause, p. 9, n. 3; from these two many of the following examples are taken. Cf. also Rouse, pp. 4 and 10; Koerte, Die Entstehung der Olympionikenliste, Hermes, XXXIX, 1904, pp. 224 f.; Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, 1841, pp. 9 f. (Pythian), 112 f. (Nemean), 170 f. (Isthmian); Gardiner, pp. 27 f.; see also Ridgeway, Origin of Tragedy, 1910, pp. 36, 38, and cf. J. H. S., XXXI, 1911, p. XLVII. Since the simple theory of the origin of the Olympic Festival in the funeral games in honor of Pelops does not explain all the legends of the games nor all the peculiar customs of the festival, and because of the inadequate character of the literary evidence (the earliest mention of it being a Delphic oracle quoted by Phlegon, F. H. G., p. 604; cf. Clem. Alex., Protrept, II, 34, p. 29), it has been attacked by F. M. Cornford (in Miss Harrison’s Themis, pp. 212 f.) and others. These scholars have tried to find the origin of the Olympic games rather in a ritual contest of succession to the throne, the honors extended to a victor being held to prove his kingly or divine character. The theory was first proposed by A. B. Cook, The European Sky God, Folk Lore, 1904, and has recently been elaborated by Frazer in his Golden Bough,3 III, pp. 89 f., who has attempted to harmonize it with his earlier funeral theory. The inadequacy of the newer theory has been shown by E. N. Gardiner, The Alleged Kingship of the Olympic Victor, B. S. A., XXII, 1916–18, pp. 85 f. For a review of his paper, see also J. H. S., XXXVIII, 1918, pp. XLVII.

53 V, 13.2.

54 According to the same scholiast, on 1. 149; Boeckh, p. 43.

55 Cf. C. I. G., II, 1969, ἀγὼν ... ἐπιτάφιος θεματικός.

56 Hdt., VI, 38.

57 P., III, 14.1.

58 Thukyd., V, 11.

59 Plut., Timoleon, 39; Diod. Sic., XVI, 90.1.

60 Aulus Gellius, X, 18.5.

61 Arrian, Anabasis, VII, 14. Games were held every four years in honor of Antinoos, the favorite of Hadrian, at Mantinea: P., VIII, 9.8.

62 Strabo, XIV, 1.31 (C. 644.)

63 P., IX, 2, 5–6; he says that they were celebrated every fourth year and that the chief prizes were for running.

64 Philostr., Vit. Soph., II, p. 624; Heliod., Aethiop., I, 17; Aristotle, Constit. of Athens, 58; cf. P., I, 29.4. Games were also held in the Academy in honor of Eurygyes: Hesych., s. v. ἐπ’ Εὐρυγύῃ ἀγών.

65 Dennis, Cities and Cemeteries of Etruria,3 1883, I, p. 374 (Corneto); II, pp. 323 and 330 (Chiusi).

66 On the Etruscan origin of the ludi funebres, see Val. Max., II, 4.4; Tertullian, de Spect., 12; Servius ad Virg., Aen., X, 520. For the Etruscan origin of the munera gladiatorum, see Tertull., op. cit., 5; Athenæus, IV, 39 (quoting Nikolaos of Damascus); cf. Strabo, V, 4.13 (C. 250). They were first introduced into Rome in 264 B. C. in honor of D. Junius Brutus; Livy, XVI (Epit.); and are frequently mentioned: e. g., by Livy, XXIII, 30, 15; XXXI, 50, 4; XXXIX, 46, 2; XLI, 28, 11; Polyb., XXXII, 14, 5; Serv., ad Aen., III, 67 and V, 78; Suetonius, Julius, 26; etc. See Dar.-Sagl., II, 2, pp. 1384 f., 1563 f.

67 Page 28; he quotes P. W. Joyce, Social History of Ireland, II, pp. 435 f.

68 V, 17.5–19.10. The description of the throne (P., III, 18.9 f; cf. Apollodoros, I, 9.28) is merely summary, as Pausanias only mentions the games represented on it without describing them in detail.

69 The best reconstruction of the scenes on the chest is by H. Stuart Jones: J. H. S., XIV, 1894, pp. 30–80 and Pl. I (repeated by Frazer, III, Pl. X, opp. p. 606). See also Robert, Hermes, XXIII, 1888, pp. 436 f.; Pernice, Jb., III, 1888, pp. 365 f.; Studniczka, Jb., IX, 1894, pp. 52 f., n. 16; Collignon, I, pp. 93–100; Furtw., Mw., pp. 723–32.

The best attempt to reconstruct the scenes on the throne is by Furtwaengler: Mw., fig. 135, opposite p. 706; text, pp. 689–719; cf. the best of the older attempts by Brunn, Rhein. Mus., N. F., V, 1847, p. 325; id., Kunst bei Homer, pp. 22 f.; id., Griech. Kunstgesch., 1893, I, pp. 178 f. Cf. also Klein, Arch.-epigr. Mitt. aus Oesterr.-Ungarn, IX, 1885, pp. 145 f.; against Klein, see Pernice, as above, p. 369. Cf. Collignon, I, pp. 230–2; Murray, I, pp. 89 f.

70 If we followed Pausanias’ account that this was the very chest made to save the infant Kypselos, father of Periandros and future tyrant of Corinth, and that it was dedicated at Olympia by the Kypselid family (for the story, see Hdt., V, 92), the chest would belong to the eighth century B. C., and must have been dedicated before 586–5 B. C., when the Kypselid dynasty ended at Corinth; see Busolt, Griech. Gesch.,2 I, pp. 638 and 657. However, the chest at Olympia had nothing to do with the legendary one, but was merely a richly decorated offering to the gods, the work of a Corinthian artist of the end of the seventh or beginning of the sixth century B. C., and one who knew the epic poems well.

71 Vasen, 1655; Perrot-Chipiez, IX, p. 637, fig. 348 (departure of Amphiaraos); p. 639, fig. 349 (chariot-race); Gardiner, p. 29, fig. 3; Frazer, III, p. 609, fig. 77; Baum. I, fig. 69; and see Robert Annali, XLVI, 1874, pp. 82 f.; Mon. d. I., X, 1874–1878, Pls. IV, V. The discovery of this vase at Cerveteri (Caere) in 1872 proved the Corinthian workmanship of the chest.

72 Micali, Monumenti per servire all’historia degli antichi popoli Italiani^2, 1833, Pl. XCV; described by Jahn, Archaeol. Aufsaetze, pp. 154 f. (quoted by Frazer, III, p. 610). For scenes representing the departure of Amphiaraos and a four-horse chariot-race, see also an Attic-Corinthian vase in Florence: Perrot-Chipiez, X, pp. 109 and 111, figs. 78, 79 ( = Thiersch, Tyrrhenische Amphoren, Pl. IV); the latter also gives us the oldest representation of a Greek stadion.

73 A. Z. XLIII, 1885, Pl. VIII; Gardiner, p. 30, fig. 4 (one side).

74 Cited by Gardiner, pp. 30–31; Inghirami, Mon. Etr., 1821–1826, III, 19, 20; Schreiber, Bilder-atlas, Pl. XIII, 6; M. W., I, Pl. LX, fig. 302b.

75 Reproduced by Gardiner, p. 21, fig. 2.

76 Cf. on this topic, Gardiner, pp. 31–2; cf. B. S. A., XXII, 1916–18, p. 86, where, in speaking of the disputed origin of the custom of funeral games, he says: “It is at least conceivable that it originated from different causes in different places and among different peoples.”

77 See a list of twenty-five local Olympia in Smith’s Dictionary of Antiquities,3 1891, II, pp. 273 f., s. v. Olympia, taken from Krause, Olympia, pp. 202 f. Dar.-Sagl., IV, i, pp. 194 f., list 34 local Olympia. Most of these lesser Olympia are known to us only from inscriptions and coins. Peisistratos appears to have founded annual Olympia at Athens, when he began to build the Olympieion; Pindar seems to allude to them in Nem. II, 23 (cf. schol. ad loc.); they were reorganized magnificently by Hadrian in A. D. 131; Spartianus, Vit. Hadriani, 13. Cf. Gardiner, p. 229.

78 Lysias, Paneg., notes this fact, when he says that Herakles restored peace and unity by instituting the games. Pausanias speaks similarly of the restoration of the games by Iphitos and Lykourgos: V, 4.5 f.

79 P., V, 1.3; 3.6; Strabo, VIII, 3.33 (C.357).

80 The decree governing the festival was inscribed on a diskos, which dates probably from the seventh century B. C., and was preserved in the Heraion down to the time of Pausanias. On it the names of Iphitos and Lykourgos were legible down to Aristotle’s day: P., V, 20.1; Plut., Lycurgus, I. 1. Phlegon, F. H. G., III, p. 602, and a scholion on Plato, de Rep., 465 D, mention Kleosthenes; cf. Louis Dyer, Harvard Classical Studies, 1908, pp. 40 f.; Gardiner, p. 43, n. 1.

81 For a discussion of the sources and history of this register, originally compiled near the end of the fifth century B. C. by Hippias of Elis (Plut., Numa, I, 4; cf. Mahaffy, J. H. S., II, 1881, pp. 164f.), and revised by various later writers from Aristotle and Philochoros to Phlegon of Tralles and Julius Africanus, see Juethner, Ph., pp. 60–70. From it a complete list of stade-runners was copied by the church-historian Eusebios from Africanus, who had brought it down to 217 A. D.

82 V, 8.6.

83 Mentioned by P., V, 4.6 and elsewhere; for the mythical account see P., V, 7.6–8.5 (from Herakles to Oxylos); V, 8.5, and V, 9.4 (revived under the presidency of Iphitos and the descendants of Oxylos). Phlegon, F. H. G., III, p. 603, says that the games were discontinued for 28 Olympiads from the time of Herakles and Pelops to that of Koroibos. Velleius Paterculus, I, 8 (ed. Halm), dates the revival under Iphitos, 793 B. C. Strabo, quoting Ephoros, says that the Achæans controlled Olympia to the time of Oxylos; for his mythical account of the games, see VIII, 3.33 (C. 357). On presidents of the games being elected from the Eleans, see P., V, 9.4–6.

84 Especially by Xenophon, Hell., III, 2.31; VII, 4.28. Pausanias omits all evidence of the part played by Kleosthenes in the truce. See Gardiner, pp. 44 f.

85 See Doerpfeld, A. M., XXXIII, 1908, pp. 185 f.

86 Recently E. N. Gardiner has argued that the worship of Zeus came directly from Dodona to Olympia before it had reached Crete and that Cretan elements in the cult first appear at Olympia in the VIII century B. C. He believes that the worship of Hera reached Olympia from Argos later than that of Zeus, toward the end of the VIII century B. C., when he supposes the Heraion was built as a joint temple to both deities; B. S. A., XXII, 1916–18, pp. 85–86.

87 On his cult see P., V, 13.2, and scholion on Pindar, Ol. I, 146 and 149, Boeckh, p. 43. After being reduced to the rank of hero, Pelops still kept his own precinct in the Altis throughout antiquity.

88 On the history of Olympia, see Gardiner, pp. 38 f.

89 For the legends connected with the origin of the three, see Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, and the various articles in Dar.-Sagl.

90 Schol. on Pindar, Pyth., Argum., Boeckh, p. 298.

91 On the Sacred or Krisaian War (590 B. C.), see Bury, History of Greece, 1913, pp. 158–9. The first Pythiad was reckoned from 586 (not from 582 as Bury and others state): see Frazer, V, p. 244; Boeckh, Explic. ad Pind., Ol., XII, pp. 206 f.

92 See Strabo, IX, 3.10, (C. 421); P., X, 7.4–5; schol. on Pind., Pyth., Argum., Boeckh, p. 298. Ovid’s idea (Met., I, 445) that boxing, running, and chariot-racing existed from the first, is wrong. On the Pythian games, see Gardiner, pp. 208 f.

93 On the Nemean games, see Gardiner, pp. 223–6. As no proper excavations have been made on the site, our knowledge of the games is confined almost entirely to literary evidence.

94 P., II, 15.3, and VI, 16.4, mentions a winter celebration. The scholiast on Pindar’s Nem., Argum., Boeckh, pp. 424–5, says that it was a τριετής held on the 12th of the month Panemos, and so it was a summer and not a winter celebration. On theories of two celebrations, see Frazer, II, pp. 92–3.

95 They were not held in midsummer as some have maintained: see Thukyd., VIII, 9–10; Unger, Philologus, XXXVII, 1877, 1–42; Nissen, Rhein. Mus., XLII, 1887, pp. 46 f. On the Isthmian games, see Gardiner, pp. 214 f.

96 For the nine-day celebration of the Great Panathenaia, see A. Mommsen, Feste der Stadt Athen, 1898, p. 153; cf. Gardiner, pp. 229 f.

97 See Mommsen, op. cit., pp. 278 f., and Heortologie, 1864, pp. 269 f. In recent years victor lists of the Theseia have been found: C. I. G., II, 444–450, esp. 447; for two other fragments, see A. M., XXX, 1905, pp. 213 f, and Beilag, a and b (c = C. I. G., above). For other lists of victors of local games, see A. M., XXVIII, 1903, pp. 338 f. (Oropos, Samos, Larisa). For vase-paintings of the athletic exploits of Theseus, see Harrison, Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens, 1890, pp. XCVIII f.

98 See Ol., IX, 89; XIII, 110; Pyth., VIII, 79.

99 Iliad, XXIII, 262–70; cf. XXII, 163–4, where the prizes were slave women and tripods.

100 Ibid., 700–5.

101 Ibid., 653–6.

102 Ibid., 740–51.

103 Op., 653–9; cf. Scut., 312–13.

104 Iliad, XI, 700; XXIII, 264; Hesiod, Scut., 312. It is thus represented on a Dipylon vase: Mon. d. I., IX, 1869–73, Pl. XXXIX, 2; on the Corinthian vase representing the funeral games of Pelias and Amphiaraos: ibid., X, Pl. V B; on the François vase, and on many others.

105 Iliad, XXII, 164; cf. Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCXLVII.

106 Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLVI.

107 On an amphora by Nikosthenes: Klein, Griech. Vasen mit Meistersignaturen,2 1887, Pl. XXXI.

108 Iliad, XXIII, 702, as above.

109 Hdt., I, 144.

110 Ion, ap. P., VII, 4.10.

111 Aristeid., I, p. 841 (ed. Dindorf).

112 Polemon ap. schol. on Pindar, Ol., VII, 153, Boeckh, pp. 180–1.

113 On the above-mentioned Corinthian vase: Mon. d. I., X, Pls. IV, V; on the chest of Kypselos: P., V, 17.11.

114 In the Iliad, as above.

115 P., III, 18.7–8.

116 A. Z., XL, 1882, p. 333; B. C. H., VI, 1882, p. 118.

117 B. C. H., IX, 1885, p. 478.

118 P., IX, 10.4; Hdt., I, 92.

119 See Carapanos, Dodone et ses Ruines, 1878, pp. 40, 41, and 229, and Pl. XXIII, 2.2 bis, 3, 4.

120 P., X, 7.6.

121 P., IV, 32.1.

122 On the tripod, see Reisch, pp. 6–7 and 58–9; Rouse, pp. 150–1 and 355; most of the above examples have been taken from these writers.

123 Nem., X, 45 f.; cf. schol. on Ol., VII, 153, Boeckh, pp. 180–1.

124 C. I. A., II, 2, 965. On the value of bronze, cf. Reisch, p. 6.

125 Schol. on Pindar, Ol., VII, 152, Boeckh, p. 180.

126 Ibid., Ol., VII, 156, Boeckh, p. 181.

127 Pindar, Ol., IX, 89–90.

128 Ibid., Nem., IX, 51; X, 43 f.

129 Ibid., Nem., X, 44; schol. on Ol., XIII, 155 and VII, 156, Boeckh, pp. 288 and 156, and Explic. ad Olymp., IX, 102, p. 194.

130 C. I. A., III, 1, 116.

131 Schol. on Pindar, Nem., X, 64, Boeckh, p. 504; cf. C. I. A., II, 2, 965.

132 A. G., XIII, 8.

133 I. G. A., 525; B. M. Bronzes, 257.

134 For many of these examples, see Reisch, pp. 57 f. (and notes), and Rouse, pp. 150–1.

135 At the Panathenaia a golden crown was given the victorious harpist, a hydria to the torch-racer, and an ox to the victor in the pyrrhic chorus: C. I. A., II, 2, 965. Weapons were given at Delos: C. I. G., II, 2360; a golden crown was given at the Pythian games in Delphi to the city which furnished the finest sacrificial ox: Xenophon, Hell., IV, 4.9; here also golden crowns and arms were presented for soldiers’ contests: Xenophon, ibid., III, 4.8 and IV, 2.7.

136 VIII, 48.2.

137 Foerster, 7.

138 Frag., (= F. H. G., III, p. 604).

139 V, 7.7; cf. Pindar, Ol., III, 24 f.

140 Ol., III, 13 f.

141 Pseudo-Aristot., de mirab. Auscult., 51; schol. on Aristoph., Plutus, 586; Suidas, s. v. κοτίνου στεφάνῳ.

142 P., V, 15.3; cf. Theophrastos, Hist. Plant., IV, 13, 2; Pliny, H. N., XVI, 240.

143 Schol. on Pindar, Ol., III, 60, Boeckh, p. 102.

144 Pseudo-Aristot., l. c.; schol. on Pindar, Ol., III, 60, and VIII, 12, Boeckh, pp. 102 and 189.

145 Weniger, Der heilige Oelbaum in Olympia, 1895.

146 P., X, 7.5; Marmor Parium, 53 f. On the reason why the laurel was the prize for a Pythian victory, see P., X, 7.8; cf. VIII, 48.2 (as above); schol. on Pindar, Pyth., Argum., Boeckh, p. 298. On the Delphian laurel, see also Pliny, H. N., XV, 127; Dio Cass., LXIII, 9. Virgil crowns his victors with laurel: Aen., V, 246 and 539.

147 Aelian, Var. Hist., III, 1; schol. on Pindar, Pyth., Argum., Boeckh, p. 298.

148 See Gardiner, p. 208, fig. 27, a coin in the British Museum: B. M. Coins, Delphi, 38.

149 Anacharsis, 9; see also C. I. A., III, 116; Kaibel, Epigrammata graeca, 1878, no. 931.

150 Nem., IV, 88; Ol., XIII, 32 f.; Isthm., II, 16, VIII, 64.

151 Schol. on Pindar, Nem., Argum., Boeckh, p. 426.

152 E. g., P., VIII, 48.2; cf. Plut., Qaest. conviv., V, 3.3; Timoleon, 26.

153 Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, pp. 197 f.; schol. on Isthm., Argum., Boeckh, p. 514.

154 See B. M. Coins, Corinth, 509–12; 564; 602–3 (603 = Gardiner, p. 214, fig. 28); 624; cf. I. G., II, 1320, and Gardiner, p. 222, n. 2.

155 P., II, 1.7. Curtius, Peloponnesos, II, p. 543, believes that the pine was not a fir, but the Pinus maritima; Philippson, in the Zeitschr. d. Gesellsch. fuer Erdkunde zu Berlin, XXV, 1890, pp. 74 f., believes that it was the Pinus halepensis Mill.

156 See Droysen, Hermes, XIV, 1879, p. 3; Head, Historia Nummorum, pp. 146 f.; Imhoof-Blumer and O. Keller, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Muenzen und Gemmen, Pl. VI, 8; VII, 2; IX, 9–12; XXV, 19.

157 VIII, 48.2.

158 See Tarbell, Class. Phil., III, pp. 264 f.; he traces its origin to Delos and its popularity to the restoration of the Delian festival by the Athenians in 426 B. C.

159 Mentioned by Phanias, ap. Athen., VI, 21 (232 c.)

160 Op., 654 f.; cf. P., IX, 31.3. The spurious epigram in A. G., VII, 53, may have been engraved on this tripod set up in the temple on Mt. Helikon.

161 P., X, 7.6.

162 C. I. A., IV, 373^79; another is mentioned ibid., I, 493.

163 Hdt., V, 60.

164 Hdt., I, 144.

165 Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 72 f.

166 See Rouse, pp. 153 f.

167 V, 12.8.

168 VI, 19.4.

169 Cf. Rouse, p. 160 and Reisch, p. 62 and n. 1.

170 See Rouse, l. c.; for the inscription, I. G. A., 370.

171 II, 29.9.

172 I. G. A., XIII, 449; see discussion of both stones in J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, pp. 2 f.

173 In Ol. 255 ( = 241 A. D.); Foerster, 739; Inschr. v. Ol., 240–1.

174 See Bronz. v. 0l., p. 179.

175 E. g., the inscribed lead weight of the seventh or sixth centuries B. C., found at Eleusis and dedicated by Epainetos: C. I. A., IV, 2, 422^4; cf. Arch. Eph., 1883, pp. 189–91.

176 Bronz. v. Ol., Textbd., p. 180; Tafelbd., Pl. LXV, 1101 a.; cf. another from the Cyrenaica in the British Museum: B. M. Bronzes, no. 326.

177 C. I. G., I, 243; C. I. A., III, 1, 124; Rhein. Mus., XXXIV, 1879, p. 206; on prize torches, see A. G., VI, 100, and cf. Kaibel, Epigr. gr., 1878, 943.

178 Kallim., XLIX; A. G., VI, 311; cf. Reisch, pp. 62 and 145–6, figs. 13, 14; Rouse, pp. 162–3.

179 See Reisch, p. 62, and n. 4. The flutist Straton dedicated his flute at Thespiai in the third century B. C.: C. I. G. G. S., I, 1818; a harpist his harp at Athens: C. I. A., III, 112.

180 P., VI, 10.6–7.

181 P., VI, 9.4.

182 P., VI, 12.1

183 P., VI, 10.8.

184 P., VI, 16.9.

185 P., V, 12.5; the monument consisted of bronze horses only.

186 P., VI, 16.6.

187 E. g., chariots and drivers, Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. XV, 248, 248a, 249, 250; Textbd., pp. 39–40; chariots without drivers, ibid., Tafelbd., Pl. XV, 252, 252a, 253; Textbd., p. 40; charioteers without chariots, ibid., Pl. XVI, 251; Textbd., p. 40; horses belonging to two-wheeled chariots, ibid., Pl. XVI, 254, 254a; Textbd., pp. 40–1.

188 Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. XXV, 498 f.; Textbd., p. 68.

189 Bronz. v. Ol., l. c.; he is followed by Reisch, p. 61; Rouse, p. 166, however, thinks that they would have been an “artistic blunder.”

190 E. g., Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. XXV, 503 f.; Textbd., p. 69.

191 Ibid., Pl. XXV, 510; some are older than the date of the introduction of the mule-car race, Ol. 70 ( = 500 B. C.), and some may have been used as bases for animal figures: e. g., Pl. XXV, 509; Textbd., p. 69.

192 Rouse, p. 165, suggests, though without evidence, that they may have been offered before the contest with a propitiatory sacrifice.

193 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 71.

194 Ibid., XXXIV, 78: fecit et quadrigas bigasque, etc.

195 Ibid., XXXIV, 63 and 64: fecit et quadrigas multorum generum.

196 P., VI, 12.1.

197 Either in Ol. 69 ( = 504 B. C.) or 70 ( = 500 B. C.) or before 67 ( = 512 B. C.): Hyde, 126; Foerster, 778 (undated).

198 P., VI, 14.4.

199 The father won κέλητι in Ol. 66 or 67 ( = 516 or 512 B. C.): Hyde, 120; Foerster, 129 and 149a; P., VI, 13.9; the sons won in the same event in Ol. 68 ( = 508 B. C.): Hyde, 121, and pp. 50–51; Foerster, 152; P., VI, 13.10.

200 VI, 2.1–2; he won in the heavy-armed race and in charioteering in Ols. (?) 83, 84, ( = 448, 444 B. C.): Hyde, 12; Foerster, 211a; Foerster believes that the two statues represented Lykinos and his charioteer, and that they stood in the chariot, which is not mentioned by Pausanias.

201 So Foerster, l. c.; see also Robert, O. S., p. 176; Rutgers, p. 144; and Klein, Archaeol.-epigr. Mitt, aus Oesterr.-Ungarn, VII, 1883, p. 70. For an improbable view, see Brunn, I, p. 479.

202 P., VI, 12.1.

203 Pliny, H. N., XXIV, 75.

204 Ibid., XXXIV, 78.

205 Ibid., XXXIV, 19.

206 Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. XV, 255–7; XVI, 258; Textbd., p. 41; terra-cotta horses, ibid., XVII, 267–75; Textbd., pp. 43–4.

207 See Rouse, p. 167.

208 Pindar, Pyth., V, 34 f.

209 C. I. A., IV, 2, p. 89, 373^99; cf. Arch. Eph., 1887, p. 146 (inscribed base reproduced).

210 Mentioned by the pseudo-Plutarch, Vit. X Orat., IV (Isokrates), 42, p. 839 c

211 Pindar’s Pyth. XII celebrates the victory of Midas of Akragas in flute-playing; he won in Pyth. 24 and 25 ( = 490 and 486 B. C.)

212 H. N., XXXV, 58; both at Corinth and Delphi.

213 Strabo, VIII, 6. 20 (C. 378); Aristeid., Isthm., 45; Livy, XXXIII, 32. Dio Chrysostom has graphically described the crowds of spectators who still frequented the Isthmia in the first century A. D.: Orat., VII (Διογένης ἢ περὶ ἀρετῆς); VIII (Διογένης ἢ Ἰσθμικός); cf. Gardiner, p. 173.

214 Plutarch, Solon, 23; Diog. Laert., 1, 55: etc.

215 For a list of victors, see Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen und Isthmien, pp. 209 f.

216 See Julian, Epist., XXXV.

217 See Monceaux on the excavation of the temple of Poseidon, Gaz. arch., IX, 1884, pp. 358 f.

218 Lucian, Nero, 2, says Olympia was the “most athletic” of all; Bacchylides, XII, emphasizes the athletic character of Nemea.

219 The boys’ pentathlon was introduced in the fifty-third Nemead ( = 467 B. C.) and the pankration for boys earlier: cf. Pindar, Nem., V (in honor of the boy pancratiast Pytheas of Aegina; cf. Bacchylides, XIII); VII (in honor of the boy pentathlete Sogenes of Aegina, who won in Nem. 54); IV and VI (in honor of two Aeginetan boy wrestlers). The horse-race for boys is mentioned by P., VI, 16.4. Races in armor were also important: Ph., 7.

220 See Gardiner, pp. 223 f.; list of victors in Krause, op. cit., pp. 147 f.

221 X, 9.2 (Frazer’s transl.).

222 See Foucart and Wescher, Inscriptions recueillies à Delphes, 1863, no. 469; Haussoulier, B. C. H., VI, 1882, pp. 217 f.; Couve, ibid., XVIII, 1894, pp. 70–100. One is in honor of the Corinthian singer Aristonos, who composed a hymn to Apollo, found at Delphi: ibid., XVII, 1893, pp. 563 f. A Samian flutist, Satyros, gained a prize without contest and recited a choral ode called Dionysos in the stadion, and played an air from Euripides’ Bacchae on the lyre; ibid., XVII, pp. 84 f. Native towns erected statues to musical victors: C. I. G., I., nos. 1719–20. One inscription records the rules to be observed by runners, who could not drink new wine, etc.: J. H. S., XVI, 1896, p. 343 and Berliner Philolog. Wochenschr., XVI, 1896, p. 831 (June 27); cf. Frazer, V, p. 260. The base of a statue of a boy wrestler has been found: A. Z., XXXI, 1874, p. 57.

223 X, 9.2–3; on Phaÿllos, see Foerster, 794 (undated).

224 H. N., XXXIV, 59.

225 Ibid., §57.

226 On Pyth., IX, Argum., Boeckh, p. 401 B.

227 XXIV, 7.10.

228 To be discussed infra, in Ch. V.

229 II, 1.7.

230 I. G. B., nos. 120, 133, 148.

231 C. I. G., II, 2888.

232 P., VIII, 38.5; cf. Reisch, p. 39, n. 1.

233 P., I, 23.9; C. I. A., I, 376; I. G. B., 39.

234 P., I, 23.10.

235 P., I, 24.3; cf. Reisch, p. 39.

236 Pseudo-Plutarch, Vit. X Orat., already mentioned.

237 P., I, 18.3 and IX, 32.8; cf. Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 79.

238 Contra Leocr., p. 51 (ed. Reiske, p. 176.)

239 Cf. Furtwaengler, A. M., V, 1880, pp. 27 f.

240 C. I. A., I, 419; he won in Ol.77 ( = 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208.

241 C. I. A., II, 3, 1303.

242 Aelian, Var. Hist., IX, 32. Reisch, p. 39, ascribes these to the monument of the older Kimon, who won in chariot-racing three times at Olympia: Hdt., VI, 103; Plut., Cato Major, 5; Foerster, 124 and 132.

243 C. I. A., II, 3, 1300.

244 Ibid., 1301; cf. C. I. G., I, 233.

245 Ibid., 1305, 1312.

246 Ibid., 1302.

247 Ibid., 1304.

248 Ibid., 1323.

249 Ibid., 1313.

250 Ibid., 1314.

251 Ibid., 1318–20.

252 The Ἑλλανοδίκαι, mentioned by P., V, 9. 4 f. and elsewhere; sometimes he calls them merely οἱ Ἠλεῖοι: e. g., VI, 13.9.

253 E. g., P., VI, 13.9, says that the Eleans allowed Pheidolas to dedicate a statue of his mare; in VI, 3.6, he says that they allowed the wrestler Kratinos to set up a statue of his trainer.

254 XXXIV, 16. See infra, pp. 54 and 354.

255 VI, 1.1.

256 Inschr. v. Ol., p. 236.

257 Bronz. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 19 f. (nude youths with lost attributes so that they can not be named with certainty); Tafelbd., Pl. VIII, 47 (the oldest); VII, 48 = F. W., 352 (Apollo, following Overbeck, Gr. Kunstmytk., III, Apollon, p. 35, fig. 6); VIII, 49 = F. W., 353; VIII, 51–4 and 57 (the latter is a boxer of the fifth century B. C. = Fig. 2 in text); VI, 50; VI, 59 (right arm of a fifth-century B. C. diskobolos); VI, 63 (right lower leg). Purgold, Annali, LVII, 1885, pp. 167 f., makes these diskoboloi decorative in character.

258 De Ridder, no. 747.

259 Ibid., no. 746.

260 Ibid., no. 636.

261 Carapanos, Dodone et ses Ruines, 1878, Pl. XI, 1 and 1 bis (probably not Atalanta, as Carapanos suggests on p. 31, no. 4).

262 B. C. H., XXI, 1897, Pls. X and XI.

263 A. M., XV, 1890, p. 365.

264 Jb., I, 1886, pp. 163 f., and Pl. IX; II, 1887, pp. 95 f.

265 Carapanos, op. cit., Pl. XIII, 1.

266 E. g., see E. von Sacken, Die antiken Bronzen des k. k. Muenz- und Antiken-Cabinetes in Wien, 1871, Pl. 37, fig. 4, and Pl. 45, fig. 1; cf. J. H. S., I, Pl. V, fig. 1, text, pp. 176–7. See lists, from which many of the above examples are taken, in Reisch, p. 39, and Rouse, pp. 172 f.

267 The seven fragments collected by Treu, which are two-fifths to two-thirds life-size: Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 2, (= Fig. 78, infra) and Textbd., p. 216, no. 241; Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 3, 4 and Textbd., p. 216, n. 4 and fig. 242.

268 V, 27.2–3.

269 Reisch, pp. 39 f., gives examples of these for chariot victories at the Panathenaia and the games at Oropos, which latter were imitated from the Panathenaia.

270 V, 16.3: καὶ δὴ ἀναθεῖναί σφισιν ἔστι γραψαμέναις εἰκόνας. Rouse, p. 167, n. 9, shows that these words do not mean “statues of themselves with their names engraved on them,” as Frazer translates, but painted reliefs.

271 Benndorf, Griech. und Sicil. Vasenbilder, I, Pl. IX, pp. 13 f.

272 I, 22.7. Reisch, p. 40, believes this represented a Panathenaic victor.

273 H. N., XXXV, 99. Cf. E. Kroker, Gleichnamige griechische Kuenstler, 1883, p. 35.

274 Ibid., §75.

275 Ibid., §63.

276 Ibid., §141.

277 Ibid., §106.

278 Ibid., §71.

279 Ibid., §130.

280 Ibid., §144.

281 P., VI, 14.13. He won the pentathlon twice some time between Ols. 126 and 132 ( = 276 and 252 B. C.): Hyde, 139; Foerster, 451 and 456; the inscription on one has been recovered: Inschr. v. Ol., 176.

282 P., VI, 3.11. His victories in running races occurred in Ols. (?) 95, (?) 97 and 99; ( = 400, 392 and 384 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 33; Foerster, 307, 315, 316. The inscription from the base of one is preserved in A. G., XIII, 15.

283 P., VI, 2.1–2; Hyde, 12; Foerster, 211a.

284 P., VI, 15.10; he won the pankration and wrestling match in Ol. 142 ( = 212 B. C.): Hyde, 150; Foerster, 474, 475.

285 P., VI, 1.4; he won in the two- and four-horse chariot-races in Ols. 102, 103 ( = 372 and 368 B. C.): Hyde, 6; Foerster, 338, 345; for the inscription on its base, see Inschr. v. Ol., 166. P. Gardner, in J. H. S., XXV, 1905, p. 245, infers that he had only one victory, in 372 B. C.

286 P., VI, 2.2; he won in Ols. (?) 86, 87 ( = 436, 432 B. C.): Hyde, 13; Foerster, 250, 256.

287 P., VI, 14.12; Inschr. v . Ol., 170; ibid., no. 154 belongs to the victory mentioned by Pausanias. He won κέλητι in Ol. (?) 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Hyde, 133; Foerster, 327.

288 E. g., Deinomenes set up a chariot-group to his father Hiero: P., VI, 12.1; Glaukos had a statue dedicated by his son: VI, 10.3; Menedemos set up a statue to his father of the same name: Inschr. v. Ol., 214; the sons of Hiero II, the son of Hierokles, of Syracuse, set up in honor of their father two statues by the Syracusan statuary Mikon, one on horseback, the other on foot: P., VI, 12.2 f.; Hyde 105a and pp. 44–5; another of the same Hiero was set up at Olympia by his sons: VI, 15.6; Hyde, 147a; these latter, however, are “honor” and not victor statues.

289 E. g., Hermokrates dedicated a statue to his son Kleitomachos of Thebes: P., VI, 15.3 f.; he won in pankration and boxing in Ols. 141 and 142 ( = 216, 212 B. C.): Hyde, 146; Foerster, 472, 476. The epigram by Alkaios (= Minor) of Messenia is preserved in A. G., IX, 588. For inscriptions after the time of Augustus, see Inschr. v. Ol., 215 (Menedemos to his son of the same name); 216 (Aristodemos to his son Lykomedes of Elis); Foerster, 550; Inschr. v. Ol., 218 (Timolas to his son Archiadas of Elis); Foerster, 535; etc.

290 E. g., Klaudia Kleodike to her son M. Antonios Kallipos Peisanos of Elis: Inschr. v. Ol., 223; Foerster, 568.

291 E. g., Diodoros to his brother Nikanor of Ephesos: Inschr. v. Ol., 227; he won the pankration in Ol. 217 ( = 89 A. D.): Foerster, 666.

292 E. g., Loukios Betilenos (= Vetulenus) set one up to T. Klaudios Aphrodeisios of Elis (?): Inschr. v. Ol., 226. He won κέλητι in Ol. 208 ( = 53 A. D.): Foerster, 634; two Eleans set up statues, one, M. Antonios Peisanos, to Germanicus Caesar, adopted son of the Emperor Tiberius (Foerster, 612), the other, Gnaios Markios, to Tiberius or Germanicus: Inschr. v. Ol., 221 and 222.

293 E. g., Mikon the trainer to an unknown Samian boxer: P., VI, 2.9; Hyde, 19 and pp. 29–30; Foerster, 804.

294 P., VI, 3.8; cf. VII, 17.6 and 13 f.; Afr.; Hyde, 29; Foerster, 6.

295 P., VI, 6.2; he won some time between Ols. (?) 93 and 103 ( = 408 and 368 B. C.): Hyde, 53; Foerster, 355.

296 P., VI, 17.2; he won some time between Ols. (?) 114 and 132 ( = 324 and 252 B. C.): Hyde, 172; Foerster, 354.

297 P., VI, 17.2; two of the victories in the stade-race fell in Ols. 129 and 130 ( = 264 and 260 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 173; Foerster, 440–2; 444–5.

298 P., VI, 17.4. He won the boys’ wrestling match some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 118 ( = 320 and 308 B. C.): Hyde, 178; Foerster, 377.

299 For the one at Olympia, see P., VI, 8.5; for the one at Pellene, id., VII, 27.5; he won in Ol. 94 ( = 396 B. C.): Hyde, 81; Foerster, 286. Similarly, Hiero II, King of Syracuse, had two statues honoris causa at Olympia set up by his fellow citizens: P., VI, 15. 6; Hyde, 147a.

300 Inschr. v. Ol., 169; cf. P., VI, 13.11; he won the pankration some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 130 ( = 320 and 260 B. C.): Hyde, 123; Foerster, 758 (undated).

301 Inschr. v. Ol., 186; cf. P., VI, 15.6; he won twice in boxing between Ols. (?) 144 and 147 ( = 204 and 192 B. C.): Hyde, 147; Foerster, 510 and 512.

302 Inschr. v. Ol., 224; he won the boys’ wrestling match in Roman days; Foerster, 823.

303 P., VI, 2.2–3; Thukydides, V, 49–50; he won in Ol. 90 ( = 420 B. C.): Hyde, 14; Foerster, 270.

304 Vol. II, p. 222.

305 So Scherer, p. 5. His evidence is from inscriptions of imperial days (e. g., Inschr. v. Ol., 218, 223, 227), when the dedicatory formula differed somewhat from that of earlier times.

306 Inschr. v. Ol., 147–8; cf. P., VI, 10.9; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 102; Foerster, 237.

307 VI, 3.6. He won sometime between Ols. (?) 120 and 130 ( = 300 and 260 B. C.): Hyde, 27; Foerster, 433.

308 VI, 8.3. He won the stade-race and the chariot-race in Ols. 93 and 104 ( = 408 and 364 B. C.) respectively: Afr.; Hyde, 75; Foerster, 277, 350.

309 P., VI, 14.6; he won in wrestling matches six times in Ol. (?) 61, and in Ols. 62, 63, 64, 65, 66 ( = 536–516 B. C.): Hyde, 128; Foerster, 116, 122, 126, 131, 136, 141.

310 P., VI, 13.2; Afr.; Hyde, 111 and p. 48; Foerster, 39, 41–6.

311 P., VI, 4.6; Hyde, 41 and cf. p. 36; Foerster, 384, 392.

312 P., VI, 5.1.; VII, 27.6; Afr.; Hyde, 47; Foerster, 279.

313 P., VI, 10.1; Hyde, 93 and p. 42; Foerster, 137.

314 The age of boy victors at Olympia seems to have been 17–20: see Inschr. v. Ol., 56, ll. II f. (referring to the order of the Augustalia, or Σεβαστὰ ἰσολύμπια, celebrated in Naples, which were modeled after those of Olympia, cf. C. I. G., III, 5805). Archippos of Mytilene won the crown for boxing at Olympia, Delphi, Nemea, and on the Isthmus among the men at not over twenty years of age: P., VI, 15.1; Inschr. v. Ol., 173; he won sometime between Ols. (?) 115 and 125 ( = 320 and 280 B. C.): Hyde, 140; Foerster, 757 (undated). Since Pausanias mentions this as a remarkable record, we should suspect his statement that the boy runner Damiskos of Messene was but twelve when he won the stade-race: VI, 2.10; he won Ol. 103 ( = 368 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 20; Foerster, 343. Another victor, of unknown date, Nikasylos of Rhodes, was disqualified when eighteen years old from entering the boys’ wrestling match because of his age, and so entered that of the men: P., VI, 14.1–2; Hyde, 125; Foerster, 787. He died at twenty. Such inconsistencies in Pausanias’ account show that the Hellanodikai exercised some discretion in their judgment, taking into consideration not merely age, but size and strength.

315 On maintenance at the Prytaneion, see Plato, de Rep., V, 465 D; Apology, 36 D; Plut., Aristeides, 27; Athenæus, VI, 32 (p. 237, quoting Timokles), and X, 6 (p. 414, quoting Xenophanes); R. Schoell, Die Speisung im Prytaneion zu Athen, Hermes, VI, 1872, pp. 14 f. (and Athenian inscription, pp. 30 f.) He concludes that this honor was given to Athenian victors only in the chariot-race at Olympia, and in gymnic contests at the other great games. Solon ordained that these meals be frugal, consisting of a barley loaf on common days and a wheaten one on festival days: see Athenæus, IV, 14 (p. 137 e).

316 C. I. A., II, 2, 965.

317 Dio Cassius, LII, 30, 5–6.

318 Suet., Octav., 45; cf. Gardiner, pp. 174–5.

319 P., VI, 13.1; Afr.; Hyde, 110; Foerster, 176–7, 181–2, 187–8.

320 P., VI, 18.6; Hyde, 186; Foerster, 317, 323.

321 P., VI, 3.11; Afr.; Hyde, 33; Foerster, 307, 315, 316.

322 P., VI, 2.6–7; Hyde, 16; Foerster, 309.

323 P., VI, 2.2–3; Thukyd., V, 49–50; Krause, Olympia, p. 144.

324 P., V, 21.3–4. Eupolos won in Ol. 98 ( = 388 B. C.): Foerster, 313. See Plans A and B.

325 P., V, 21.5; Kallipos won Ol. 112 ( = 332 B. C.): Foerster, 385.

326 P., V, 21.8 f.; on Straton, see Foerster, 570–1.

327 P., V, 21.16–17; see Foerster, 598 (for the Elean boy wrestler Polyktor, son of Damonikos); P., V, 21.15; Foerster 684 (for the boxer Didas and his antagonist Sarapammon, both Egyptians). On cases of bribery at Olympia, see Gardiner, pp. 134–5 and 174; Krause, Olympia, pp. 144 f.

328 P., V, 21.18.

329 P., V, 21.12–14.

330 Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum,2 II, 689; Cavvadias (Kabbadias), Fouilles d’Épidaure, I, 1891, p. 77, no. 238.

331 Ph., 45. He says that victories were bought and sold in his day and that the practice was encouraged by trainers. Cf. Gardiner, p. 219.

332 Lucian, Nero, 9. Cf. Gardiner, pp. 218–219

333 See Gardiner, p. 77.

334 Diod., XIII, 82; Foerster, 271 and 276. Suetonius says that Nero, on arriving in Naples after his tour of Greece, made his entrance in a chariot drawn by white horses through a breach in the city wall “according to the practice of victors at the Greek games,” and that he entered Rome in the triumphal chariot of Augustus dressed in a purple tunic and a gold-embroidered cloak through a breach in the wall of the Circus Maximus: Nero, 25. Though Plutarch says that victors could tear down part of the city walls (Quaest. conviv., II, 5.2), such extravagances seem to have been introduced late and not to have belonged to the great days of Greek athletics.

335 Cf. Waldstein, J. H. S., I, 1880, pp. 198–9.

336 Hdt., V, 47; cf. Eustath. on Hom., Iliad, III, p. 383, 43; Foerster, 138.

337 P., VI, 6.4 f.; Afr.; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207.

338 P., VI, 6.7–11; Strabo, VI, 1.5 (C. 255); Ael., Var. Hist., VIII, 18.

339 So Kallimachos apud Plin., H. N., VII, 152 (= S. Q., 494); he also states that two of his statues, one at Lokroi, the other at Olympia, were struck by lightning on the same day.

340 P., VI, 11.8–9; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 104; Foerster, 191, 196.

341 P., VI, 11.2.

342 P., VI, 9.8; cf. Suidas, s. v. Κλεομήδης; Foerster, 162; cf. Hyde, 90a (though there was no statue at Olympia).

343 VI, 9.6–8.

344 Thus P., VI, 11.9, says that statues of Theagenes were erected within and beyond Greece and could heal sickness. Lucian says that in his day the statues of both Theagenes on Thasos and of Polydamas of Skotoussa at Olympia cured fevers: Deorum Concilium, 12. Polydamas won the pankration in Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C.): Afr.; his statue by Lysippos was set up later: P., VI, 5.1; Hyde, 47; Foerster, 279. Gardiner has recently called attention to the fact that the evidence for the canonization of the five victors mentioned is mostly late, and he therefore doubts if it had anything to do with their victories at Olympia: B.S.A., XXII, 1916–18, pp. 96, 97.

345 Ll. 1161 f.

346 De Rep., V, 465 D. E.

347 De Rep., 620 B.; cf. Gardiner, pp. 129–130.

348 Xen., Hell., I, 5.19; P., VI, 7.4 f.; Hyde, 61; Foerster, 258, 260, 262.

349 Damagetos won in boxing (?) in Ol. 56 ( = 556 B. C): Hermipp., fr. 14 (= F. H. G. III, p. 39); A. G., VII, 88; Pl., H. N., VII, 119; Foerster, 108.

350 Hbk., pp. 215–216.

351 Ap. Athenæum, X, 6 (pp. 413–14); Gardiner, p. 79, has given a translation of his protest.

352 Ap. Athen., X, 5 (p. 413).

353 De Rep., 404 A.; 410 D. (cf. 535 D.).

354 Προτρεπτικὸς λόγος ἐπὶ τὰς τέχνας. For translation, see Gardiner, p. 188.

355 See Secchi, Mosaico Antoniniano, and Baum., I, p. 223, fig. 174.

356 VI, 1.1: ποιήσασθαι καὶ ἵππων ἀγωνιστῶν μνήμην καὶ ἀνδρῶν ἀθλητῶν.

357 See Dittenberger, Inschr. v. Ol., p. 239.

358 Pp. 272–3.

359 P., VI, 10.8; Hyde, 99 b and p. 44; Foerster, 77–9.

360 Inschr. v. 0l., 236; Foerster, 686. It was the custom also at Delphi to dedicate chariots; thus we have already mentioned that Arkesilas IV of Kyrene dedicated his chariot there after a Pythian victory in Ol. 78.3 ( = 462 B. C.): Pindar, Pyth., V, 34 f. An inscription tells us of a bronze wheel being dedicated to the Dioskouroi: I. G. A., p. 173, 43a.

361 E. g., Inschr. v. Ol., 142 (Pantares); 160 (Kyniska).

362 E. g., ibid., 143 (Gelo); 178 (Glaukon); 190 (son of Aristotle); 191 (Agilochos); 194 (son of Nikodromos); 197 (Antigenes); 217 (Lykomedes); 222 (Gnaios Markios); 233 (Kasia Mnasithea).

363 Thus ibid., 142, 143, 236.

364 Ibid., 178, 190 (supplied), 191 (supplied), 194, 197, 217, 227, 233 (supplied).

365 Ibid., 160.

366 Ibid., 177.

367 V, 21.1.

368 V, 25.1.

369 A. M., V, 1880, p. 29.

370 Inschr. v. Ol., 144; here in the renewed inscription occurs also the word ἀνέθηκεν; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207.

371 L. c., p. 31, n. 1; here he gives a list of the metrical exceptions of the fifth century B. C.; from inscriptions, that of Aineas, A. Z., XXXV, 1877, p. 38, no. 86; Foerster, 244 (an inscription not appearing in Inschr. v. Ol.), and Tellon, A. Z., ibid., p. 190, no. 91, and XXXVIII, 1880, p. 70 (= Inschr. v. Ol., 147–8); from Pausanias, that of Kleosthenes (wrongly Kleisthenes), VI, 10.6, and Damarchos, VI, 8.2. The list should he corrected as follows. From inscriptions: Tellon, boy boxer of Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 10.9; Inschr. v. Ol., 147–8; Hyde, 102; Foerster, 237; Kyniskos, boy boxer of Ol. (?) 80 ( = 460 B. C.): P., VI, 4.11; Inschr. v. Ol., 149; Hyde, 45; Foerster, 255; Charmides, boy boxer of Ol. (?) 79 ( = 464 B. C.): P., VI, 7.1; Inschr. v. Ol., 156 (renewed); Hyde, 58; Foerster, 763 (undated); ... krates, boy runner, Ol. (?) 93 ( = 408 B. C.): Inschr. v. Ol., 157; Foerster, 280. From Pausanias: Damarchos, boxer, who won before Ol. 75 ( = 480 B. C.) or after Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.): VI, 8.2; Hyde, 74 and p. 38; Foerster, 452.

372 E. g., the Cretan Philonides, courier of Alexander the Great, dedicated his portrait statue to the god: Inschr. v. Ol., 276; P., VI, 16.5; Hyde, 154 a.

373 Inschr. v. Ol., 144.

374 So Dittenberger, and Furtwaengler (l. c., p. 30, n. 2), following Roehl, I. G. A., on no. 388; Roehl believed that originally the word Lokroi or the name of the victor’s father appeared as the dedicator, and later, because the victor wished to remove the expense from his city or because his father died, Euthymos himself restored it; see discussion of Dittenberger, Inschr. v. Ol., pp. 249–520. The original inscription has ἔστησε.

375 Inschr. v. Ol., 264; Roehl, I. G. A., 589.

376 So Dittenberger, Inschr. v. Ol., p. 241, and no. 213; I. G. B., 72; Foerster, following the earlier dating of Dittenberger (A. Z., XXXV, 1877, p. 42, nos. 49–50), dates the two victories later, in Ols. (?) 200, 203 ( = 21 and 33 A. D.); nos. 614 and 619.

377 Inschr. v. Ol., 225, 228, 229–30, 231, 232.

378 Op. cit., pp. 240–1.

379 Furtwaengler, l. c., p. 30; Reisch, p. 37; Rouse, p. 167; Frazer, III, p. 624. Against the view that victor statues were first called votive in Roman days, see Purgold, A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, p. 89, on no. 390 (= inscription of Glaukon = Inschr. v. Ol., 178; however, he was a victor in chariot-racing).

380 E. g., by Scherer, p. 5; Kuhnert, Jahrb. fuer cl. Phil., Supplbd., XIV, 1885, p. 257, n. 7; Flasch, in Baum., II, p. 1096; cf. Dittenberger-Purgold, Inschr. v. Ol., p. 240; Frazer, III, pp. 623–4.

381 E. g., Ziemann, de Anathematis Graecis, 1885, p. 54.

382 Hermes, XIII, 1878, p. 437, n. 2.

383 Pp. 35 f.; followed by M. K. Welsh, B. S. A., XI, 1904–5, pp. 33–4.

384 E. g., Pythokles, who won the pentathlon in Ol. 82 ( = 452 B. C.), does not mention his contest on the base (Inschr. v. Ol., 162–3), nor does Pausanias give it (VI, 7.10); we learn it only from the Oxy. Pap.: see Robert O. S., p. 185; Hyde, 70; Foerster, 295.

385 On p. 36, n. 1, he points out that at Athens the usual dedication formula was omitted; e. g., in the inscription of the Isthmian victor Diophanes, C. I. A., II, 3, 1301, and in that of a Panathenaic victor, ibid., 1302. The presence of the word in an Athenian inscription referring to the Olympic victor Kallias rests on an uncertain restoration; ibid., I, 419; he won Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): P., VI, 6.1; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208.

386 Pp. 167 f.

387 Both Reisch, p. 36, and Dittenberger, op. cit., p. 240, agree also in opposing Furtwaengler’s Versnoth explanation.

388 Thus Pausanias mentions the “chariot, horses, charioteer and Kyniska herself”: VI, 1.6. Again he speaks of the “chariot and statue of Gelo”: VI, 9.4–5; in referring to the chariot of Kleosthenes by Hagelaïdas he says: “Along with the statue of the chariot and horses, he [Kleosthenes] dedicated statues of himself and the charioteer,” and even adds the names of the horses: VI, 10.6. In VI, 18.1, he mentions the group of Kratisthenes as “the chariot, Nike mounting it, and Kratisthenes”; in VI, 16.6 he speaks of “a small chariot and figure of the father of Polypeithes, the wrestler Kalliteles”; etc. Cf. Dittenberger, op. cit., pp. 239–40.

389 He won in Ol. 255 ( = 241 A. D.): Foerster, 739: Inschr. v. Ol., 241.

390 No dedication, however, is inscribed on it: I. G. A., 160; Bronz. v. Ol., on no. 1101, p. 180.

391 Chionis, a famous runner from Sparta, had a tablet, which listed his victories, set up beside his statue at Olympia: P., VI, 13.2; he won in Ols. 28–31 ( = 668–656 B. C.): Hyde, 111; Foerster, 39, 41–46. His statue was erected long after his death, in Ol. 77 or 78, and so probably the stele also: Hyde, p. 48. Deinosthenes, who won the stade-race in Ol. 116 ( = 316 B. C.), had a slab set up beside his statue at Olympia, on which was inscribed the distance between it and a similar one in Sparta: P., VI, 16.8; Afr.; Hyde, 163; Foerster, 403.

392 He won the chariot-race in Ol. 33 ( = 648 B. C.): Foerster, 51.

393 P., VI, 19.2; on the mistake of Pausanias, see Flasch, in Baum., II, p. 1104 B.

394 Or., XXXI, 596 R ( = 328 M).

395 H. N., XXXIV, 17.

396 H. N., XXXIV, 23–4. The subject of portrait honorary statues at Athens has been treated by L. B. Stenessen, de Historia variisque Generibus statuarum iconicarum apud Athenienses, Christiania, 1877; for all Greece by M. K. Welsh, Honorary Statues in Ancient Greece, B. S. A., XI, 1904–5, pp. 32–49.

397 See list in Hyde, Index on p. V.

398 King Hiero of Syracuse had five: Hyde, 147 a (= three) and 105a (= two); Antigonos Monophthalmos had three: Hyde, 103 d, 147 f, 151 b.

399 Archidamas III, son of Agesilaos: P., VI, 4.9; Hyde, 42 a; VI, 15.7; Hyde, 147 c; Areus, son of Akrotatos, P., VI, 12.5; Hyde, 105 b; VI, 15.9; Hyde, 148 a: Inschr. v. Ol., 308.

400 Demetrios Poliorketes, P., VI, 15.7; Hyde, 147 e; Inschr. v. Ol., 304; VI, 16.3; Hyde, 152 b.

401 Pyrrhos: P., VI, 14.9; Hyde, 128 a.

402 Hiero II: P., VI, 12.2 f. (two statues set up by his sons: Hyde, 105 a); VI, 15.6 (three statues, one set up by sons, two by fellow-citizens: Hyde, 147 a).

403 Philip II, son of Amyntas; Alexander the Great; Seleukos Nikator, son of Antiochos; Antigonos, son of Philip, surnamed Monophthalmos; these four princes had statues together: P., VI, 11.1; Hyde, 103 a, b, c, d. Antigonos had also other statues in different parts of the Altis: P., VI, 15.7; Hyde, 147 f; Inschr. v. Ol., 305; VI, 16.2; Hyde, 151 b. Antigonos Doson and Philip III had statues together: P., VI, 16.3; Hyde, 152 a. The Syrian king Seleukos Nikator had another statue at Olympia: P., VI, 16.2; Hyde, 151 c. Three of the Egyptian dynasty had statues: Ptolemy Lagi, P., VI, 15.10; Hyde, 149 a; Philadelphus, P., VI, 17.3; Hyde, 173 a; and another whose name is uncertain, P., VI, 16.9; Hyde, 166 a.

404 P., VI, 4.8; Hyde, 41 b.

405 P., VI, 17.7; Hyde, 184 a; Inschr. v. Ol., 293.

406 P., VI, 15.7; Hyde, 147 d.

407 P., VI, 14.9–10; Hyde, 128 b.

408 P., VI, 14.11 Hyde, 128 c in Ol. (?) 127 ( = 272 B. C.)

409 P., VI, 14.12; Hyde, 134 a; erected between Ols. (?) 103 and 115 ( = 368 and 320 B. C.).

410 P., VI, 16.5; Inschr. v. Ol., 276, 277; Hyde, 154 a.

411 P., VI, 14.9–10.

412 P., VI, 15.7; Hyde, 147 b.

413 P., VI, 15.2; Hyde, 143 a.

414 VI, 12.5. The date of his victory is unknown, but fell probably in Ol. 134 or 135 ( = 244 or 240 B. C.): Hyde, 105 c and pp. 44–5; Foerster, 463.

415 He won some time between Ols. (?) 99 and 102 ( = 384 and 372 B. C.): P., VI, 3.2–3; Hyde, 23 and pp. 30–1; Foerster, 335.

416 On the ancient custom of carrying off votive offerings and images from vanquished foes, see P., VIII, 46.2–4. He shows that Augustus only followed a long-established precedent. Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 36, in speaking of the great number of statues plundered from Greece by Mummius and the Luculli, quotes G. Licinius Mucianus (three times consul), who died before 77 B. C., to the effect that 73,000 statues were still to be seen at Rhodes in his time, and that supposably as many more were yet to be found in Athens, Olympia, and Delphi.

417 At the beginning of his description of Elis (V, 1.2), Pausanias says that 217 years had passed since the restoration of Corinth. As that event fell in 44 B. C., he was writing his fifth book in 174 A. D., i. e., in the reign of Marcus Aurelius. With this date other chronological references in his work agree. That the fifth book was written before the sixth is deduced from a comparison of V, 14.6 with VI, 22.8 f. Though the sixth book, therefore, can not have been composed earlier than 174 A. D., it may, of course, have been written much later. On the dates of the various books, see Frazer, I, pp. xv f. On the great importance of Pausanias for the whole history of Greek art, see C. Robert, Pausanias als Schriftsteller, 1909, p. 1.

418 Historia naturalis, Bks. XXXIV-XXXVI (ed. Jex-Blake).

419 This process has never been carried further nor with greater insight than in Furtwaengler’s great work, Meisterwerke der griech. Plastik, 1893.

420 In his Handbuch der Archaeologie der Kunst, 3d ed., 1848, by F. G. Welcker, p. 740.

421 Chapter VII, infra, pp. 321 f.

422 Cf. Furtwaengler-Urlichs, Denkmaeler griech. und roem. Skulptur (Handausgabe^3), 1911, p. 101.

423 Pro. Imag., 11, pp. 490 f.: Ἀκούω ... μήδ’ Ὀλυμπίασιν ἐξεῖναι τοῖς νικῶσι μείζους τῶν σωμάτων ἀνεστάναι τοὺς ἀνδριάντας, κ. τ. λ.; Scherer, pp. 10 f.; Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., p. 250.

424 VI, 5.1. On the statue, see E. Preuner, Ein delphisches Weihgeschenck, p. 26; for the recovered sculptured base, see Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 209 f.; Tafelbd., Pl. LV. 1–3. Polydamas won the pankration in Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C.), but his statue was set up long after, in the time of Lysippos: Afr.; Hyde, 47; Foerster, 279.

425 Inschr. v. Ol., 146; cf. Scherer, pp. 10–11. He won in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): P., VI, 6.1; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208.

426 Inschr. v. Ol., 159 (renewed); I. G. B., 86. Eukles won in Ols. (?) 90–93, ( = 420–408 B. C.): P., VI, 6.2; Hyde, 52; Foerster, 297.

427 The lost work of Aristotle is mentioned by Diogenes Laertios, V, 26. For the scholiast, see Boeckh, p. 158; and F. H. G., II, p. 183 (= Aristotle, fragm. 264), IV., p. 307 (= Apollas, fragm. 7).

428 Pollux, Onomastikon, II, 158, says that the cubit (πῆχυς) contains 24 δάκτυλοι or 6 παλασταί; it was therefore 18.25 inches and the finger 0.7 inch long. The Solonian cubit of 444 mm. gives 17.53 inches, the finger .73 inch, which makes Diagoros’ statue 6 feet 1.75 inches tall.Though the cubit was later lengthened to about 2 feet, the old size was retained for measuring wood and stone: cf. Boeckh, Metrologische Untersuchungen, 1838, p. 212.

429 Scherer, p. 11, gave its height as 6 feet and 5 inches.

430 Diagoras won in Ol. 79 ( = 464 B. C.): P., VI, 7.1; Hyde, 59; Foerster, 220; cf. Inschr. v. Ol., 151 (renewed); Damagetos in Ols. 82–3 ( = 452–448 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 7.1; Hyde, 62; Foerster, 253; cf. Inschr. v. Ol., 152.

431 Inschr. v. Ol., 165 (renewed); he won Ol. 82 ( = 452 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 13.6; Hyde, 115; Foerster, 376.

432 E. g., Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 147–8, Tellon, who won the boys’ boxing match in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 102; Foerster, 237; ibid., 155 (renewed), Hellanikos, boy boxer, who won in Ol. 89 ( = 424 B. C.): P., VI, 7.8; Hyde, 65; Foerster, 263; ibid., 158, boxer Damoxenidas, who won some time between Ols. 95 and 100 ( = 400 and 380 B. C.): P., VI, 6.3; Hyde, 54; Foerster, 319; ibid., 164, Xenokles, boy wrestler, who won some time between Ols. (?) 94 and 100 ( = 404 and 380 B. C.): P., VI, 9.2; Hyde, 85; Foerster, 308; ibid., 177, Telemachos, chariot victor some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 130 ( = 320 and 260 B. C.): P., VI, 13.11; Hyde, 122; Foerster, 513.

433 E. g., Inschr. v. Ol., 182, Thrasonides, who won κέλητι πωλικῷ in the third century B. C.

434 Furtw., Mp., p. 246, fig. 99; Mw., p. 447, fig. 69. See p. 155.

435 See Chapter VI., infra, p. 295.

436 H. N., XXXIV, 65.

437 Supra, p. 28 and n. 1; Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 216 f.; Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 2–4; cf. Furtwaengler, 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1890, pp. 147 f.; cf. infra, Ch. VII, pp. 324–5, c. d. e.

438 Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 29 f; Tafelbd., Pl. VI, 1–4, 9–10; cf. infra, pp. 162–3.

439 See Inschr. v. Ol., pp. 234–5; Bronz. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 10–12; cf. infra, p. 322 and notes 1–7.

440 Bronz. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 10–11; Tafelbd., Pl. II, 2, 2a; F. W., no. 323; etc.

441 Bronz. v. Ol., Textbd., p. 12; Tafelbd., Pl. IV, 5, 5a; F. W., 325.

442 Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkmaeler, p. 104. On nudity and athletics, see the article by Furtwaengler, Die Bedeutung der Gymnastik in der griech. Kunst, in Saemann’s Monatschr. fuer paedagog. Reform., 1905; W. Mueller, Nacktheit und Entbloessung in der alt-orient. und aelteren griech. Kunst, Diss. inaug., Leipsic, 1906.

443 The boxer Euryalos “first put a cincture (ζῶμα) about him,” in his bout with Epeios: Iliad, XXIII, 683. See also XXIII, 710; Od., XVIII, 67 and 76.

444 E. g., wrestlers on a black-figured amphora in the Vatican: J. H. S., XXV, 1905, p. 288, fig. 24; boxers, runners, and a jumper on a b.-f. stamnos in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris (no. 252): Gardiner, p. 418, fig. 142, from de Ridder, Cat. des vases peints, I, p. 160.

445 H. N., XXXIV, 18.

446 Ph., 17. This mantle was called τρίβων—the “worn,” hence was thin and coarse; Hermann-Bluemner, Griech. Privatalt., p. 175; etc.

447 P., I, 44.1; Eustath., on Iliad, XXIII, 683, p. 1324, 12 f. Dionys. Hal., Antiq. Rom., VII, 72, says that it was the Spartan Akanthos, who won in a running race, i. e., δόλιχος, in Ol. 16; so also Afr.; see P., V, 8.6; Foerster, 17. Orsippos won the stade-race in Ol. 15: Afr.; Eustath., l. c.; Dionys., l. c. Foerster, 16. But Didymos, schol. on Iliad, XXIII, 683, says that Orsippos won in Ol. 32 ( = 652 B. C.); similarly Etym. magn., p. 242, s. v. γυμνάσια; however, Boeckh, Kleine Schriften, IV, p. 173, has shown that Ol. 15 is right. Isidoros, in a confused passage, Orig., XVIII, 17.2, says that athletes were early girded and dropped the loin-cloth in consequence of a runner getting weary, whence a decree of the time of the archon Hippomenes at Athens (Ol. 14.2) allowed athletes to contend nude; the same story is told in the Schol. Venet. on the Iliad, XXIII, 683; see Foerster, 16.

448 A. G., App. 272; Cougny, Anth. Pal., 1890, III (App. nov.), p. 4, no. 24; P., I, 44.1, says that his tomb was near that of Koroibos.

449 C. I. G., I, 1050 (with Boeckh’s commentary on the loin-cloth); C. I. G. G. S., 52; Kaibel, Epigr. Gr., ex lapid. conl., 1878, no. 843; Frazer, II, p. 538. The schol. on Thukyd., I, 6, quotes four lines of it. The name was spelled Orrippos in the Megarian dialect.

450 Ph., 17. The story is told also by P., V, 6.7–8. Peisirhodos won in Ol. (?) 88 ( = 428 B. C.): P., VI, 7.2; Hyde, 63; Foerster, 314. This brings the change near the end of the fifth century B. C. For the spelling of the name of the victor, see Foerster, l. c.

451 I. 6. Here the historian is speaking of athletes in general; Dionysios, VII, 72 and P., I, 44.1, speak only of runners.

Scherer, p. 20, n. 1 (following Krause, I, pp. 405 and 501, n. 18) thought that the words of Thukydides (τὸ δὲ πάλαι) referred to the time antedating Ol. 15, and not later, and concluded that in wrestling (introduced in Ol. 18 = 708 B. C.) and boxing (introduced in Ol. 23 = 688 B. C.) the contestants were always nude. Boeckh, however, rightly concluded that the historian meant that in Ol. 15 only the runners laid off the loin-cloth, while other athletes did so just before his day: C. I. G., I, p. 554.

452 De Rep., 452 D. He says that the custom of nudity was introduced first by the Cretans and then by the Spartans.

453 Thus von Mach says (p. 240): “They were dedicatory statues representing events that had taken place in honor of the gods,” and adds that on such occasions persons were draped, except where such drapery would cause inconvenience, i. e., in gymnastic contests.

454 See Gardiner, p. 465, fig. 172.

455 E. g., the statue in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome: Helbig, Fuehrer, II, no. 973 (fig. 29, p. 557, restored); Guide, 597 (fig. 28); Joubin, p. 134, fig. 40; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 536.6; B. Com. Rom., XVI, 1888, Pls. XV, XVI, 1, 2, (two views) and XVIII (restored), pp. 335–365 (G. Ghirardini).

456 Pollux, III, 155, wrongly states that runners wore soft leathern boots (ἐνδρομίδες); these never appear on vases, as Krause, I, p. 362 and n. 5, and Gardiner, p. 273, point out, and were the usual footwear of messengers. Cf. Mueller, Arch. d. Kunst, §363, 6.

457 At Ephesos in Thukydides’ day: III, 104; earlier on Delos: Thukyd., ibid., and Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo, 146 f. Maidens and youths wrestled in the gymnasia on Chios: Athenæus, XIII, 20 (p. 566 e.); cf. Boeckh, C. I. G., II, text to no. 2214.

458 On athletic contests for women in Sparta, see Plutarch, Lykourgos, 14; Xen., de Rep. lac., I, 4. Aristoph., Lysistr., 80 f., says that the beauty and color of the Lakonian woman Lampito came from gymnastic exercises.

459 P., V, 6.7. He says that those who broke the Elean rule were thrown from Mount Typaion (a rock south of the river). Their exclusion was doubtless due to a religious taboo and not to modesty; Gardiner, p. 47. P., VI, 20.9, says that the restriction did not include maidens. As there is no other reference about unmarried girls at Olympia, it is probable that girls were not admitted; cf. Krause, Olympia, p. 54 and n. 9.

460 E. g., Kyniska, P., VI, 1.6, and other Spartan victresses, III, 8.1; Euryleonis, who won in a two-horse chariot-race in Ol. (?) 103 ( = 368 B. C.): P., III, 17.6; Foerster, 344; Belistiche, mistress of Ptolemy Philadelphus, was the first to win συνωρίδι πώλων in Ol. 129 ( = 264 B. C.): P., V, 8.11; Foerster, 443; Theodota, daughter of the Elean Antiphanes, won ἅρματι πωλικῷ in the first century B. C.: Inschr. v. Ol., 203; Foerster, 547.

461 P., VI, 20.9. The inscribed marble base of a statue of one of these priestesses has been found at Olympia: see Inschr. v. Ol., 485.

462 See P., V, 6.7–8.

463 However, we do not know if they were held in the same year as that of the Olympic festival, or at what time of the year. See L. Weniger, Klio, Beitraege zur alten Geschichte, V, 1905, pp. 22 f.

464 P., V, 162–4. These πίνακες were probably iconic (portrait) paintings. Holes have been found on columns of the Heraion to which they may have been attached. On the girls’ race, see B. B., text to no. 521 (Arndt).

465 It is a marble copy of an original bronze which is generally dated about 470 B. C., because of archaic reminiscences in the head. It represents a girl of about 14 years. See Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 364; Guide, 378, and references; F. W., 213; Bulle, pp. 304 f. Overbeck, II, p. 475, refers it to the school of Pasiteles. It is pictured in B. B., no. 521; Bulle, 142; Baum., III, p. 2111, fig. 2362; Springer-Michaelis, p. 224, fig. 412; von Mach, 73; Amelung, Museums of Rome, I, fig. 74; Reinach, Rép., I, 527.6; Clarac, Pl. 864, 2199. A similar statue is the torso in Berlin: Beschr. der Skulpt., no. 229; and cf. Kekulé, Annali, XXXVI, 1865, p. 66 (who points out the resemblance of the head of the Vatican statue to that of the figure by Stephanos, Pl. 12); Clarac, Pl. 864, 2200. The height of the Vatican statue is given by Bulle as 1.56 meters. Cf. also a statuette of a similar girl runner from Dodona: Rayet, I, Pl. 17, 3.

466 However, B. Schroeder believes that it is merely a victorious danseuse, and gives several examples of dancers from vase-paintings and the lesser arts: R. M., XXIV, 1909, pp. 109 ff. (figs. 1–3). In all of these lively motion is expressed and the free foot is raised high from the ground. When the curious little plat under the statue’s right foot (perhaps intended to represent the starting-stone at the stadion) is removed, the position of the statue does not fit the dance; see Bulle, p. 304, for discussion of this starting-stone.

467 VIII, 48.2; cf. Plut., Quaest. conviv., VIII, 4, I, (p. 982).

468 Bulle compares it with the Tuebingen hoplite-runner (Fig. 42) ready to start, though the quieter pose of the Vatican statue befits a girl rather than the impetuous energy of the man.

469 On the Διονυσίαδες, see P., III, 13.7; Hesychios, s. v.; cf. Theokr., XVIII, 22; Plut., Lycurgus, 14; Pauly-Wissowa, s. v. agones, I, p. 847; Reisch, p. 46, n. 4. Pauly-Wissowa, s. v. χιτών (III, 2, p. 2314) shows that the use of the chiton closed on one side was a Dorian, and especially a Spartan, custom.

470 On the running race at Kyrene, cf. Boeckh, Explic. ad Pind., Pyth., IX, p. 328. Plato, in his de Leg., VIII, 833, D, E, ordained for girls the three running races (στάδιον, δίαυλος, and δόλιχος); the youngest girls should run nude, the others (from 13 to 18) suitably dressed.

471 Suet., Domitian, 4; Dio Cassius, LXVII, 8.

472 Arndt believes it is Myronian in character: B. B., text to 521.

473 See Waldstein, J. H. S., I, 1880, pp. 170 f. On the style of wearing the hair in Greece, see the following works: K. O. Mueller, Handbuch d. Archaeol. d. Kunst^3, pp. 474 f; Bluemner, Leben u. Sitten der Griechen, I, pp. 76 f.; Home Life of the Ancient Greeks (transl. of preceding, by A. Zimmern), 1893, pp. 64 f; Dar.-Sagl., s. v. coma (Pottier), I, 2, pp. 1355 f.; Pauly-Wissowa, VII, 2, pp. 2109 ff. (Bremer); Baum., I, pp. 615 f; Guhl-Koner-Engelmann, Das Leben d. Gr. u. Roem.6, 1893, pp. 297 f; Amelung, Gewandung d. Gr. u. Roem., 1903; Helbig, Atti della R. Accad. dei Lincei, Ser. III, vol. V., pp. 1 f. (for the Homeric age).

474 Cf. the recurring epithet of Homer, κάρη κομόωντες Ἀχαῖοι; Helbig, Das homerische Epos^2, p. 236, n. 3; for examples of long hair in the epic, ibid., pp. 236 f. That the Homeric hair fell free over the shoulders and not in any conventional order has been proved against Helbig by H. Hofmann, Jb. f. cl. Philol., Supplbd., XXVI, 1900, pp. 182 f.

475 Eurip., Bacchae, 455; Aristotle, de Physiogn., 3, p. 38; pseudo-Phokylides, 212.

476 Aristoph., Equit., 580 and cf. 1121; Nubes, 14; Lysistrata, 561; etc.

477 Od., IV, 198; Euripides, Alkestis, 818–19; Aristoph., Plut., 572; Plato, Phaedo, 89 C; Athenæus, XV, 16 (p. 675 a); Hdt., I, 82; etc.

478 Aristoph., Aves, 911.

479 Ph., Imag., II, 32; Lucian, Dial. meretr., V, 3 (p. 290); etc.

480 Xen., de Rep. lac., Ch. XI, 3; cf. Plut., Apothegm. reg. et imperat., p. 754; and see Aristotle, Rhet., I, 9, p. 1397 a, 28; Plut., Lysandros, I; Lykourgos, 22; etc.

481 Hdt., VII, 208.

482 Aristoph., Aves, 1281–2: Lysias, XVI, 18; Lucian, Auctio vitarum, 2 (Pythagoreans).

483 Pollux, VI, 3.22; VIII, 9.107; Athenæus, XI, 88 (p. 494 f.): Hesychios, s. v. κουρεῶτις and οἰνιστήρια; Photius, Lex., p. 321.

484 Aischyl., Choeph., 6; P., I, 37.3; at Delphi, Dio Chrys., Or., XXXV, p. 67 R.

485 Eurip., Bacchae, 455.

486 Κρωβύλος and κόρυμβος are etymologically the same word: see Prellwitz, Etymolog. Woerterbuch d. griech. Sprache. It used to be assumed that κόρυμβος referred to the similar coiffure of young girls. On the κρωβύλος, see the following: K. O. Mueller, op. cit.3, p. 476, 5; id., Die Dorier, II, 266; Conze, Nuove memorie dell’ instituto archeol., pp. 408 f.; Helbig, Comment. philolog. in honorem Mommseni, 1877, pp. 616 f., and Rhein. Mus., XXXIV, 1879, pp. 484 f.; Schreiber, Der altattische Krobylos, A. M., VIII, 1883, pp. 246–273, and Pls. XI., XII.; id., IX, 1884, pp. 232–254 and Pls. IX, X; and after him, Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 644, Collignon, I, p. 363, and de Villefosse, Mon. Piot, I, 1894, p. 62; Klein, Gesch. d. gr. Kunst, I, p. 255; Studniczka, Krobylos und Tettiges, Jb., XI, 1896, pp. 248–291. Pauly-Wissowa, l. c., pp. 2120 f.; Dar.-Sagl., I, 2, pp. 1357–59 and 1571; etc. That the term κρωβύλος represented a way of wearing the hair and not a part of the hair has been proved by Hauser: Jh. oest. arch. Inst., 1906, Beiblatt, pp. 87 f. On other methods of dressing the hair, see Pauly-Wissowa, l. c., pp. 2112 f.

487 Ap. Athen., XII, 30 (p. 525).

488 Ibid., 5 (p. 512 c).

489 I, 6; cf. Aristophanes, Nubes, 984 and schol.; Equit., 1331.

490 See fragm. of Nikolaos of Damascus, (perhaps from the Lydiaka of Xanthos), F. H. G., III, p. 395, fragm. 62.

491 See Krause, p. 541, n. 6.

492 See Ant. Denkm., I, 1886, Pl. VIII, 3 b; etc.

493 See hero reliefs in A. M., II, 1877, Pls. XX-XXV. On early Corinthian vases, men are represented regularly with long hair.

494 E. g., on the bust of Apollo in the Glyptothek, Munich: von Mach, 449 (left); on the bearded man (Dionysos?) in the British Museum: id., 450 (right); and on the Apollo of Naples: id., 448: On the latter head the narrow band of the former two examples has become very broad.

495 Cf. Waldstein, op. cit., p. 177.

496 Mw., pp. 67 (on statues of Zeus, hair reaching the shoulders, a style later becoming typical of that god); p. 407 (the Argive school gave short hair to heads of Zeus); Mp., pp. 42 and 118; cf. Mw., p. 273.

497 Mw., p. 249. Furtwaengler gives an example of a short-haired Apollo of the school of Euphranor, ibid., p. 590.

498 Mp., p. 16. E. g., the Florentine gem: Furtwaengler, Antike Gemmen, 1900, Pl. XXXIX, no. 29.

499 Pp. 444 f.

500 A good example of this is seen on the Apollo of Tenea (Pl. 8 A).

501 Bulle, Pl. 225. He dates it in the middle of the sixth century B. C.

502 H. N., XXXIV, 16 (Jex-Blake’s transl.) The Latin of the last portion of this passage runs: Olympiae, ubi omnium qui vicissent statuas dicari mos erat, eorum vero qui ter ibi superavissent ex membris ipsorum similitudine expressa, quas iconicas vocant.

503 Hirt, Ueber das Bildniss der Alten, 1814–15, p. 7; Visconti, Iconographie grecque (1st ed. Paris 1808, Milan, 1824–26), Discours prelim., p. VIII, n. 4. They argued from Lucian’s pro Imag., 11, a passage already discussed supra, p. 45 and n. 3.

504 Scherer, pp. 9 f., and especially p. 13; Lessing, Laokoön, II, 13, made Pliny’s words a text for a famous passage.

505 For the latest discussion of Pliny’s passage, see Inschr. v. Ol., pp. 236 and 295–6 (the latter in reference to the inscribed base of the statue of Xenombrotos to be discussed a few lines infra).

506 Klein, quoted by Jex-Blake, p. 14, footnote to line 7, believes Pliny’s statement apocryphal, an idea escaping all scholars except, perhaps, Bluemner in his commentary on the Laokoön (p. 503). Evidently Pliny, or his source, is explaining the discrepancy between ideal and portrait statues as the result of an improbable rule, since the ancients applied little historical criticism to art, and hence did not distinguish between works representing types and those representing individuals. Dio Chrysostom, in his treatise Περὶ κάλλους (Orat., XXI, 1, p. 501 R), tries to explain the difference between early and late statues on the ground of physical degeneration in the latter.

507 Inschr. v. Ol, 170. He won in Ol. (?) 83 ( = 448 B. C.): P., VI, 14.12; Hyde, 133; Foerster, 327. This date follows the reasoning of Robert, O. S., pp. 180 f. Pausanias, l. c., mentions another monument of the victor, the inscribed base of which has been found: Inschr. v. Ol., 154, though Dittenberger wrongly refers it to Damasippos: Foerster, 812; Hyde, pp. 53–4. The same authority refers no. 170 to the middle of the fourth century B. C., or a couple of decades later, because of the lettering and orthography. The monument of no. 170 must, therefore, have been set up long after the victory—about a century later.

508 Dittenberger, Inschr. v. Ol., p. 296, compares two other inscriptions with no. 170, viz, no. 174 (in which the words ὧδε στάς occur) and C. I. G. G. S., I, 2470, l. 3 (where the words τοίας ἐκ προβολᾶς occur). However, as he says, these two refer to the poses of the statues of gymnic victors and not to portraits. Pausanias frequently uses the word εἰκών for ἀνδριάς (e. g., III, 18.7) of a victor, but this seems to be no indication of a portrait statue.

509 Cf. Dittenberger, op. cit., p. 296. Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 530, think the case of Xenombrotos may simply be exceptional.

510 VI, 3.11–12; he was three times victor in running races in Ols. (?) 95, (?) 97, and 99 ( = 400, 392, 384 B. C.); the latter date is attested by Afr.: Hyde, 33; Foerster, 307, 315, 316. For the epigram on the base of one of these statues, see A. G., XIII, 15.

511 VI, 4.1; he was three times victor in the pankration in Ols. 104, (?) 105, (?) 106 ( = 364–356 B. C.): Hyde, 37; Foerster, 349, 353, 359.

512 VI, 17.2; he was thrice victor in running races in Ols. 129, 130 ( = 264, 260 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 173; Foerster, 440–2, 444–5.

513 VI, 15.9; he was four times victor in the pankration, once in hoplite running, and once in the δίαυλος, at unknown dates: Hyde, 149; Foerster, 767–72. We can not say that his victories fell at a date when iconic statues were in vogue.

514 VI, 6.6; he won in Ols. 74, 76, 77 ( = 484, 476–2 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207; Inschr. v. Ol., 144.

515 E. g., VI, 13.3–4 and 8: Hermogenes, five times victor in running races in Ols. 215, 216, 217 ( = 81–89 A. D.): Afr.; Hyde, 111a; Foerster, 654–6, 659–660, 662–4; Polites, three times victor in running races in Ol. 212 ( = 69 A. D.): Afr.; Hyde, 111b; Foerster, 648–50; Leonidas, four times victor in running races in Ols. 154, 155, 156, 157 ( = 164–152 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 111c; Foerster, 495–7, 498–500, 502–4, 507–9; Tisandros, four times victor in boxing in Ols. (?) 60–3 ( = 540–528 B. C.), at a date too early for portraiture: Hyde, 119a; Foerster, 115, 119, 123, 124. There are other examples from the early fifth and the sixth centuries B. C.

516 Princ. Gr. Art, Ch. XI (Portrait Sculpture), pp. 165 f.

517 Gardner, p. 165, cites Bernouilli, Griech. Ikonogr., 1901, as listing 26 known portraits of Euripides and 32 of Demosthenes, and calls attention to the fact that 870 plates in the Bruckmann series, Griech. und Roem. Portraets (ed. Brunn und Arndt), from 1891 on, are of Roman portraits. On the subject of Græco-Roman portraits, see also Bernouilli, Roem. Ikonogr., 1882–94; Hekler, Greek and Roman Portraits, 1912; and the works of E. Q. Visconti, now antiquated: Iconogr. gr. (Paris, 1808) and Iconogr. romana (Milan, 1818).

518 XXXIV, 74. Pausanias mentions a portrait of Perikles without naming the artist, I, 25.1; cf. I. 28.2. The inscribed base was found in Athens in 1888: Ἀρχαιολογικὸν Δελτίον, 1889, pp. 36 f. (Lolling). A terminal portrait of Perikles, extant in several copies, has been identified as a copy of this work, e. g., one in the British Museum: B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 549; Furtw., Mp., Pl. VII, opp. p. 118 (profile, fig, 46, p. 119); Hekler, op. cit., Pl. 4 a.; F. W., 481. Another replica is in the Vatican: Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 276, and Nachtraege, II, p. 471; Visconti, Iconogr. gr., I, Pl. XV; B. B., 156; Hekler, op. cit., Pl. 4 b. However, Hitz.-Bluemn., I, p. 307, ad loc. Paus., think that the word ἀνδριάς used by Pausanias can not apply to a terminal bust; Furtw., Mp., p. 117, n. 4, says that the word does not necessarily mean a whole statue. Cf. Bernouilli, Jb., XI, 1896, pp. 107 f.; Furtw., Mp., pp. 117 f.

519 See I. G. B., 62, 63.

520 Philopseudes, 18 f.

521 Αὐτοανθρώπῳ ὅμοιον, §18.

522 A good example of a Roman copy (from the age of Hadrian) of an original iconic athlete statue in bronze from the end of the fourth century B. C., is a bearded head in the Museo Chiaramonti; its swollen ears and the deep furrow in the hair for the metal crown show that it is from the statue of a victor. See Amelung, Vat., I, p. 483, no. 257 and Tafelbd., I, Pl. 50; Arndt-Bruckmann, Gr. und Roem. Portr., Pls. 223–4.

523 XXXV, 153. Jex-Blake, p. 176, justly remarks that this invention had nothing to do with the custom of taking death-masks.

524 Xen., Symp., IV, 17: θαλλοφόρους γὰρ τῇ Ἀθηνᾷ τοὺς καλοὺς γέροντας ἐκλέγονται κ. τ. λ.; cf. Aristoph., Vesp., 544, and Athen., XIII, 20 (p. 565) and scholion.

525 XIII, 90 (p. 609 e, f); here he quotes a history of Arkadia by Nikias.

526 Athen., XIII, 20 (pp. 565 f and 566 a); cf., Theophr., apud Athen., XIII, 90 (pp. 609 f, 610 a).

527 Athen., XIII, 90 (p. 610a): here Athenæus is also quoting Theophrastos. In XIII, 20 (p. 565), he quotes Herakleides Lembos as saying that in Sparta the handsomest man and woman were especially honored.

528 Hdt., V, 47; Eustath. ad Iliad, III, p. 383, 43; Foerster, 138.

529 P., IX, 22.1.

530 P., VII, 24.4; cf., VIII, 47.3, for a similar custom at Tegea.

531 See O. Mueller, Die Dorier^1, 1824, II, p. 238 (quoted by Krause, I, p. 37, n. 19). For references to contests of beauty in Greece, see ibid., pp. 33–38.

532 On this subject, see the recent essay by W. H. Goodyear, Lessing’s Essay on the Laocoön and its Influence on the Criticism of Art and Literature, Brooklyn Museum Quarterly, Oct. 1917, pp. 228–9.

533 Thus we have Polykleitos of Argos and Patrokles, perhaps his brother; Naukydes of Argos and Daidalos of Sikyon, sons of Patrokles; the younger Polykleitos—who called himself an Argive—the brother of Naukydes; Alypos of Sikyon, the pupil of Naukydes; etc. Statues by all these sculptors except Patrokles are known to have stood in Olympia.

534 Hbk.2, p. 254.

535 His criticism of painting occurs in Poet., 1448a, 5, 1450a, 26, and Polit., V, 1340a, 35. In Eth., VI, 1141a, 10, he says that Pheidias and Polykleitos were masters in marble and bronze respectively. For a discussion of Aristotle’s æsthetics of painting and sculpture, see M. Carroll, in Publ. of Geo. Washington University, Philol. and Lit. Series, I, 1 (Nov., 1905), pp. 1–10; and for both Aristotle and Plato on art, see Kalkman, 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1890 (Proport. des Gesichts), pp. 3 f. and notes.

536 I, 5, 1361b; Oppian, Kyneget., I, 89–90, speaks of the similarly well-developed bodies of hunters.

537 Mem., III, 10.6–8. For his visit to the painter Parrhasios, see ibid., 10.1–5.

538 Following the suggestion of Klein, II, p. 143, and W. L. Westermann, Class. Rev., XIX, 1905, pp. 323–5. The latter gives several examples of similarly shortened forms of names and believes the passage in Xenophon emphasizes the fact that Polykleitos was employed at Athens. Plato frequently mentions Polykleitos by his full name: e. g., Protag., 328 C (sons of Polykleitos), 311 C (Polykleitos and Pheidias). P. Gardner justly observes that the statues of Polykleitos “however beautiful, are scarcely life-like:” Prince. Gk. Art., p. 15, n. 1; Grammar, p. 17.

539 II, 17: τὰ σκέλη μὲν παχύνονται, τοὺς ὤμους δὲ λεπτύνονται, κ. τ. λ.

540 See schol. on Plato, Amatores, p. 135 E; cf. Epiktetos, Encheir., Ch. 29.

541 P., VI, 10.5; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 97; Foerster, 240; cf. Krause, Olympia, pp. 302 f.

542 His date is uncertain: P., VI, 15.9; Hyde, 149; Foerster, 767–772.

543 P., VI, 3.2; he won at Olympia some time between Ols. (?) 99 and 102 ( = 384 and 372 B. C.): Hyde, 23; Foerster, 335.

544 P., I, 29.5: Hdt., VI, 92; IX, 75; cf. Krause, I, pp. 495–6.

545 E. g., Phaÿllos of Kroton was famed for his fleetness, his jumping, and his throwing the diskos. See Aristoph., Acharn., 212; Vespes, 1206; A. G., App. 297; cf. Hdt., VIII, 47; P., X, 9.2. He won at Delphi only.

546 E. g., Myron at Delphi: Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 57; Alkamenes, ibid., XXXIV, 72; etc.

547 656 E, 657 A.

548 Pliny, H. N., XXXVI, 39. These works were probably critical as well as descriptive.

549 E. g., of Pasiteles, XXXVI, 39; of Arkesilaos, XXXVI, 41; of Koponios, ibid.

550 18(70). In this passage he also gives similar judgments on several painters. On Cicero on art, see Grant Showerman, Proceed. Amer. Philol. Ass’n, XXXIV, 1903, pp. xxxv f. He shows that Cicero’s references to art proceed from his instinct as a stylist and not from any enthusiasm for art itself.

551 Imag., 6, p. 464. His eclectic statue is made up of works by Praxiteles, Alkamenes, Pheidias, and Kalamis.

552 Rhetorum praeceptor, 9–10. He spells the two first names Ἡγησίας, Κράτης.

553 XXXVI, 37. For careful judgments of Pliny’s work, see Jex-Blake, pp. xci f.: Kalkmann, Die Quellen der Kunstgeschichte des Plinius, 1898; Robert, Archaeologische Maerchen, 1886, pp. 28 f.; F. Muenzer, Hermes, XXX, 1895, pp. 499 f. (and Beitraege zur Kritik der Naturgesch. des Plinius, 1897); Botsford and Sihler, Hellenic Civilization, 1915, pp. 551–8 (= Translation by Jex-Blake of Pliny, XXXIV, 53–84 [sculptors], revised by E. G. Sihler); pp. 558–567 (= Pliny, XXXV, 15, and 53–97 [painters], revised by E. G. S.). For short estimate of Pliny’s work, see Mackail, Latin Literatures, 1895, p. 197.

554 See his characterization of the great Greek painters and sculptors in Inst. Orat., XII, Ch. 9.

555 Also in the work of H. Stuart Jones, Select Passages from Anc. Writers Illustrative of the Hist. of Gk. Sculpt., 1895; cf., A history of classical writers on art from Xenokrates to Pliny, in Jex-Blake, pp. xvi-xci; cf. Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Antigonos von Karystos (Kiessling and Wilamowitz, Philolog. Untersuchungen, IV, 1881), pp. 7 f.; P. Gardner, Principles of Greek Art, Ch. II, pp. 13 f. (Ancient Critics on Art); etc.

556 A. Pl., 2; Bergk, P. l. G., III^4, no. 149, p. 498. Theognetos won in Ol. 76 ( = 476 B. C.): P., VI, 9.1; Oxy. Pap., Hyde, 83; Foerster, 193 and 193 N.

557 H. N., XXXIV, 88. Kallias won in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): P., VI, 6.1; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208; Inschr. v. Ol., no. 146.

558 Ibid., XXXIV, 71.

559 Kalamis made the horses and jockeys, Onatas the chariot: P., VI, 12.1; Hiero won twice in the horse-race and once in the chariot-race in Ols. 76–78 ( = 476–468 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 105; Foerster, 199, 209, 215.

560 VI, 6.6. He won in Ols. 74, 76–7 ( = 484, 476–472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207.

561 VI, 4.4. He won in Ols. 81 and 82 ( = 456–452 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 38; Foerster, 202, 203.

562 VI, 9.3. He won in Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 88: Foerster, 285.

563 V, 27.3.

564 Bulle, p. 104, remarks that up to the present no single Roman copy can be proved to be that of an Olympic victor statue. This fact must be constantly borne in mind.

565 No. 6439; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 299–300 and fig.; Ausgr. v. Ol., V, Pls. XXI, XXII, and p. 14; Funde v. Ol., Pl. XXIII, and p. 16; Bronz. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 10–11; Tafelbd., Pl. II, 2 and 2a; Boetticher, Olympia, Pl. XI, 1; Baum., p. 1104 00, figs. 1296, a and b; F. W., no. 323; Bulle, 235 and fig. 154, on p. 501; von Mach, 482; B. B., 247.

566 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glyptothek,2 1910, no. 457, pp. 398 f.; Furtw., Mp., p. 291; Mw., p. 507; F. W., no. 216; B. B., 8; Bulle, 207 (front and side); Kekulé, A. Z., XLI, 1883, Pl. XIV, 3, p. 246; H. Schrader, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., 1911, p. 74; Hauser, R. M., X, 1895, pp. 103 f. Kekulé, because of its similarity to the Apollo of the West Gable, derived it from the art of the Olympia pediment sculptures; Flasch, Verh. d. 29sten Philologenversamml., Innsbruck, 1874, p. 162, and Brunn, Beschr. d. Glypt.5, no. 302, and Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1892, p. 658, classed it as Polykleitan; Bulle calls it Attic-Argive without Polykleitan influence, while Furtwaengler finds it Polykleitan-Attic. The latter gives several replicas, two of green and black basalt respectively, in the Museo delle Terme, and a marble head in the Museo Chiaramonti, no. 475. Bulle gives the height of the Munich head as 0.23 meter.

567 Αἰδώς; cf. decor, applied to the work of Polykleitos by Quintilian: Inst. Orat., XII, 9. 7–8; cf. also Vitruvius, de Arch., I, 2.

568 Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm. d. gr. und roem. Skulpt., Hdausgabe,3 1911, p. 102, n. 1. He adds that it is das Ideal von Reinheit, Unschuld, liebenswuerdig edler Groesse, eines der herrlichsten griechischen Originale, die uns erhalten sind. It is photographed ibid., figs. 30, 31. In the Beschr. d. Glypt., p. 399, he says it is das edelste und vollendetste Werk, das die Glyptothek besitzt—ihr kostbarster Schatz, etc.

569 Formerly in the Coll. Tyszkiewicz: B. B., 324, (two views); Bulle, 206 (two views); von Mach, 481 (two views); Mon. Piot, I, 1894, pp. 77 f. (E. Michon) and Pls. X, XI; S. Reinach, Têtes,[P2, looked in original] Pl. 72 and p. 58; Kalkmann, Prop. d. Gesichts, p. 27 (vignette); Collignon, II, Frontispiece and p. 169; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. XL; Furtw., Mp., pp. 290–1 and Pl. XIV; Mw., p. 507. The best illustration of the head is given by de Ridder, Les Bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1913, Pl. I (and text p. 8, on no. 4). It is 0.33 meter in height (Bulle).

570 Preface to Furtw., Mp., p. xiii.

571 So Furtw., l. c.; Bulle, however, sees in it only Attic work and finds it slightly coarser and harder than the Munich head described.

572 Invent. 5633; Bronzi d’Ercol., I, 73, 74; D. Comparetti e G. de Petra, La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni, 1883, XI, 1; B. B., 323 (two views); Rayet, II, Pl. 67; Furtw., Mp., p. 291; Mw., p. 508; the latter believes that it, like the preceding two heads, is Polykleitan and Attic.

573 Bedeutung der Gymnastik in d. gr. Kunst, 1905; cf. also Gardner, Sculpt., p. 23, and Hbk., p. 215.

574 Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkmaeler, already cited, p. 63, n. 3. (Translated under the title Greek and Roman Sculpture by H. Taylor, 1914; p. 119.)

575 See F. W. G. Foat, Anthropometry of Greek Statues, J. H. S., XXXV, 1915, pp. 225 f. (p. 226).

576 Plato, Phileb., 64 E, regarded μετριότης and συμμετρία as qualities of beauty and virtue; cf. Aristotle, Metaphys., X, 3.7, and Nicom. Eth., V, 5.14, 1133b. Vitruvius, de Arch., I, 2, makes symmetry in architecture a quality of eurythmia: Item symmetria est ex ipsius operis membris conveniens consensus ex partibusque separatis ad universae figurae speciem ratae partis responsus.

577 I, 2: Haec [eurythmia] efficitur, cum membra operis convenientia sunt, altitudinis ad latitudinem, latitudinis ad longitudinem, et ad summam omnia respondent suae symmetriae; cf. III, 1; Lucian, pro Imag., 14 (ῥυθμίζειν τὸ ἄγαλμα); Clem. Alex., Paedagog., 3.11 and 64 (εὐρυθμὸς καὶ καλὸς ἀνδριάς); Xen., Mem., III, 10.9 (ῥυθμός, of corselets); Plut., de Educ. puer., 11 (τῶν σωμάτων εὐρυθμία); Diod., I, 97. 6 (ῥυθμὸς ἀνδριάντων, i.e., rhythmic order or grace in statuary): id., II, 56.4.

578 Vitruv., III, 1: <proportio>, quae graece ἀναλογία dicitur. Proportio est ratae partis membrorum in omni opere totiusque commodulatio, ex qua ratio efficitur symmetriarum.

579 H. N., XXXIV, 65.

580 Op. cit., e. g., XXXV, 67 and 128.

581 Ueber die Kunsturteile bei Plinius, Ber. ueber d. Verhandl. d. k. saechs. Ges. d. Wiss. zu Leipzig, II, 1850, p. 131; cf. H. L. Urlichs, Ueber griech. Kunstschriftsteller (Diss. inaug., Wuerzburg, 1887).

582 Principles of Greek Art, 1914, p. 20 (= Grammar of Greek Art, 1905, p. 22).

583 Quoted by Gardner, op. cit., p. 22 (= Grammar, p. 23), from two papers by H. Brunn, Ueber tektonischen Styl in der griech. Plastik und Malerei, in Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1883, pp. 299 f., 1884, pp. 507 f. Overbeck, I, pp. 266–277, explains rhythm in art as the Ordnung der Bewegung, in accordance with the definition of Plato: τῇ δὴ τῆς κινήσεως τάξει ῥυθμὸς ὄνομα εἴη: de Leg., 665 A.

584 H. N., XXXIV, 58 (S. Q., 533): Numerosior in arte quam Polyclitus et in symmetria diligentior. The interpretation of this disputed passage depends, of course, on the meaning of numerosior, and whether we accept the curious statement of the manuscript that Myron surpassed Poykleitos in symmetry, or, by omitting the et (with Sillig), make it mean just the contrary and in harmony with the usual ancient view that symmetry was the salient characteristic of Polykleitan art. The passage, then, would contrast the symmetry of Polykleitos with the variety of Myron. This accords with Pliny’s use of numerosus elsewhere (e. g., XXXV, 130 and 138), which always refers to number. See Gardner, Hbk., p. 275 (note).

585 Op. cit., XXXIV, 65, he says: Nova intactaque ratione quadratas veterum staturas permutando.

586 Op. cit., XXXV, 67.

587 VIII. I. 47.

588 The Egyptians divided the front view of the body into 19 parts (or 21 parts and a quarter, including the height of the head-dress): Diod., 1, 98. See Lepsius, Monum. funéraires de l’Égypte (figure, reproduced in Dar.-Sagl, I, 2, p. 892, fig. 1125); cf. his Descript. de l’Égypte, IV, LXII; Wilkinson, History of Egypt, p. 113, Pl. IV; these references are given by Foat, op. cit., p. 225, n. 1.

589 Vitruv., I, 2. However, in thus following the statement of the Roman architect, it must be said that the attempt to recover and establish such a canon in Greek architecture is still unproved. The subject is complicated and has led to very different views. Thus, while many scholars have defended the theory of the canon (e. g., Pennethorne, Geom. and Optics of Anc. Arch., 1878; Penrose, in Whibley, Comp. to Gk. Stud.1, 1905, pp. 220–1; Ferguson, Hist. Arch., ed. 1887, I, p. 251; P. Gardner, Princ. Gk. Art., p. 21; Statham, Short Crit. Hist. Arch., 1912, p. 130), others are opposed, and believe that design in Greek architecture was a matter of feeling, and that the orders were first reduced to formulæ in Roman days (e. g., A. K. Porter, Med. Arch., 1909, I, 9; Goodyear, Greek Refinements, Studies in Temperamental Arch., 1912, esp. p. 83, quoting Joseph Hoffer from Wiener Bauzeitung, 1838). See on the subject a recent article by my pupil, Dr. A. W. Barker, in A. J. A., XXII, 1918, pp. 1 f., in which the above and other references are given.

590 Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 22–3, says: “Paradoxical as it may seem at first sight, the very freedom of Greek sculpture is to a great extent due to its close adherence to tradition.” He shows how the free play of imagination depends on external conditions and tradition.

591 E. g., Vitruv., I, 2; especially these words: Ut in hominis corpore e cubito, pede, palmo, digito, ceterisque particulis (partibus) symmetria est eurythmiae qualitas; also III, 1: Pes vero altitudinis corporis sextae <partis>; cubitum quartae; pectus item quartae, etc. Also Philostr., Imag., Proem.; the third-century A. D. (?) treatise called de Physiognomia; St. Augustine, de Civ. Dei, XV, 26. 1; the poet Martianus Capella, of the middle of the fifth century A. D., who says, VII, 739: septem corporis partes hominem perficiunt; etc.

592 Die Proportionen des Gesichts in der griechischen Kunst (= 53stes Berliner Wincklemanns programm, 1893).

593 Gestalt des Menschen, in Verh. d. Berl. Anthrop. Gesell., 1895. This work is based on the older investigations of C. Schmidt, Proportionsschluessel, 1849, and of C. Carus, Die Proportionslehre der menschlichen Gestalt, 1874. See also P. Richer, Canon des proportions du corps humain, 1893; E. Duhousset, Proportions artistiques et anthropométrie scientifique, Gaz. B-A., III, Pér. 3, 1 90, pp. 59 f.; E. Guillaume, art. Canon, Dict. de l’Acad. des B-A.; E. Gebhard, in Dar.-Sagl., I, 2, pp. 891–892; cf. Collignon, I, pp. 490 f.

594 F. W. G. Foat, op. cit., offers a scheme or typical design, based on wide data, which will serve as a universal basis for securing facts about any statue under examination.

595 On the influence of such canons of proportion on contemporary artists, see Balcarres, Evolution of Italian Sculpture, p. 128.

596 Cf. Vitruvius, quoted above. The scholion on Pindar, Ol., VII, Argum., Boeckh, p. 158, speaks of πηχῶν τεσσάρων δακτύλων πέντε as the height of the statue of Diagoras at Olympia, etc.

597 Vitruvius, de Arch., VII, Praef., 14, lists writers who praecepta symmetriarum conscripserunt. See V. Mortet, Rev. Arch., Sér. IV, XIII, 1909, pp. 46 f, and figs. 1 and 2. In this discussion of ancient canons he shows that the chief ratio was that of the head to the height of the body; the proportion of 8 heads to the body was that adopted by da Vinci and J. Cousin: 7 to 8 is found in the figures of the Parthenon frieze; a little under 7 in the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos.

598 See Furtw., Mp., pp. 49–52. As examples, he gives the statue of Apollo from the Tiber now in the Museo delle Terme: Mp., pp. 50–51, figs. 8 and 9; cf. R. M., 1891, pp. 302, 377 and Pls. X-XII; the Mantuan Apollo: cf. 50stes Berliner Winckelmannsprogr., p. 139, n. 61 (for replicas); etc.

599 For Polykleitos’ canon, see Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 55; S. Q., 953 f.; Furtw., Mp., p. 249.

600 So Pliny, op. cit., XXXV, 128; cf. J. Six, Jb., XXIV, 1909, pp. 7 f.

601 H. N., XXXIV, 61; see Jex-Blake, p. XLVIII.

602 H. N., XXXIV, 65.

603 However, other fourth-century artists, notably Praxiteles, used impressionism in the treatment of the hair: see Bulle, pp. 444 f.

604 In XXXIV, 80, he mentions Menaichmos, who wrote on the toreutic art probably in the fourth century B. C.; in XXXIV, 83 (cf. XXXV, 68), he mentions Xenokrates, of the school of Lysippos, who wrote books on art; he is probably identical with an artist of the same name known to us from inscriptions from Oropos and Elateia: I. G. B., 135, a, b (Oropos), c (Elateia); Arch. Eph., 1892, 52 (Oropos); the identity is doubted by Jex-Blake, p. xx, n. 2. In XXXIV, 84 (cf. XXXV, 68) he speaks of Antigonos, who wrote on painting and who was employed by Attalos I of Pergamon to work on the trophies of his victory over the Gauls. For Antigonos as a writer on the criticism of art, see Wilamowitz-Moellendorf, Antigonos von Karystos (Kiessling and Wilamowitz, Philolog. Untersuchungen, IV, 1881), Ch. I, pp. 7 f.

605 H. N., XXXIV, 55. According to the exact words of Pliny, the Canon and the Doryphoros were distinct works. It is probable, however, that Pliny’s words conceal the same statue under two names, his commentary on each coming from a different source: see Furtw., Mp., p. 229 and n. 4; Mw., p. 422 and n. 2; cf. Muenzer, Hermes, XXX, 1895, p. 530, n. 1.

606 Cicero, Brut., 86, 296. On the fame of the Doryphoros, see id., Orator, 2.

607 Instit. Orat., V, 12.21. In Philon’s treatise περὶ βελοποιϊκῶν, IV, 2, we read: τὸ γὰρ εὖ παρὰ μικρὸν διὰ πολλῶν ἀριθμῶν ἔφη γίνεσθαι, sc. Πολύκλειτος, (“Beauty,” he said, “was produced from a small unit through a long chain of numbers”), a description which rightly characterizes the Doryphoros. The system given by Vitruv., III, 1, hardly agrees with Polykleitan statues and so has been connected by Kalkmann, though on insufficient grounds, with the canon of Euphranor: see 50stes Berlin Winckelmannsprogr., 1890 (Proport. des Gesichts), pp. 43 f.; cf. H. Stuart Jones, op. cit., p. 129.

608 Guida Museo Napoli, no. 146; Collignon, I, Pl. XII, opp. p. 488; Bulle, 47 and analysis on pp. 97–102.

609 Kalkmann, op. cit., p. 53, gives the height as 1.98–1.99 m.; Bulle, p. 97 to no. 47, as 1.99 m.

610 In Rayet, I, Text to Pl. 29; reproduced in Études d’art antique et moderne, 1888, pp. 399 f.; cf. also Collignon, I, pp. 492 f. and P. Gardner, Principles of Greek Art, pp. 21 f.

611 De plac. Hipp. et Plat., 5.

612 B. B., 321; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 956; Guide, 617; F. W., 215; to be discussed infra, pp. 201–2.

613 Orat., XXXI, 89 f. (614 R).

614 In the present discussion we shall confine ourselves to the assimilation of mortal types to those of athletic gods and heroes, omitting the larger question of assimilation to divine types in general. A good example of the latter is afforded by P. VIII, 9.7–8. Here, in noting that the Mantineans worshipped Antinoos as a god by the erection of a temple and the celebration of mysteries and games, he says that images and paintings of the hero were in the Gymnasion there, the latter Διονύσῳ μάλιστα εἰκασμέναι.

615 Kabbadias, no. 218; Rev. Arch., III (1er Sér.), 1846, Pl. 53, fig. 2; Ph. Le Bas, Voyage archéologique (ed. Reinach), Pl. CXVIII, p. 107; B. B., 18; von Mach, 191; F. W., 1220; Reinach., Rép., II, i, 149, 10.

616 Marbres et Bronzes, p. 49.

617 Kabbadias, no. 219.

618 Formerly known as the Antinous: M. W., II, Pl. 28, 307; Clarac, IV, Pl. 665, 1514; Reinach, Rép., I, 367,2 (with restored arms); von Mach, no. 192; Amelung, Vat., II, no. 53 (pp. 132 f.) and Pl. 12; F. W., no. 1218; Baum., I, pp. 675 f. and fig. 737.

619 B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1599 and Pl. IV; Clarac, IV, Pl. 664, 1539; Reinach, Rép., II, i, 149, 1; Springer-Michaelis, p. 317, fig. 567. A corresponding replica from Melos is described by F. W., 1219; for a replica of the head (on a torso which does not belong to it) in the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican, see Amelung, Vat., I, no. 132 (p. 155) and Pl. 21; for others, see Koerte, A. M., III, 1878, pp. 98 f. The height is given in B. M. Sculpt. as 6 ft. 7–1/2 in. (without the plinth).

620 Amelung, Vat., II, p. 656 and Pl. 61; Furtw., Mw., p. 361, fig. 48. It is a marble copy of an original bronze of Myronian origin. Its height is 1.98 meters (Amelung).

621 Duetschke, IV, no. 416; M. W., II, Pl. 30, 329.

622 Ibid., no. 416; Koerte, A. M., III, 1878, p. 350, no. 72.

623 Duetschke, IV, no. 876; Clarac, 958, 2473; Conze, in A. A., 1867, pp. 105–6. Here Conze gives a list of which three reliefs and one statue represent dead men as Hermes.

624 Duetschke, IV, no. 46; Conze, l. c., p. 106 (mentioned in preceding note).

625 E. g., the well-known bust of the emperor Commodus with the attributes of Hercules in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome: Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 930; Baum., I, p. 398, fig. 432; Arndt-Bruckmann, Griech. u. roem. Portraets, 230; Hekler, Greek and Roman Portraits, 1912, Pl. 270 a; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 583, 7.

626 Not. Scav., 1885, p. 42; Ant. Denkm., I, I, 1886, Pl. V; Bulle, 75 and fig. 27, p. 141; B. B., 246; Helbig, Fuehrer, II., 1347, and references; Arndt-Bruckmann, Griech. u. roem. Portraets, Pls. 358–360; Hekler, Greek and Roman Portraits, Pls. 82–4; Collignon, II, p. 493, fig. 257; Murray, Hbk. Gr. Archæol., 1892, pp. 305 f., fig. 100; Lanciani, Ruins and Excavations of Anc. Rome, 1897, Pl. on p. 303; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 548, 7; cf. Furtw., Mp., p. 364, n. 2, and Mw., p. 597, n. 3. The height of the statue is 2.08 meters, or 2.37 meters to the hand (Bulle).

627 E. g., Philip V, Perseus, Alexander Balas (who usurped the Seleucid throne in 149 B. C.), Demetrios I (Soter), of Syria (who reigned 162–150 B. C.), and Antiochos II, (Theos, who reigned 261–246 B. C.), have been suggested.

628 See Imhoof-Blumer, Portraetkoepfe auf ant. Muenzen hellenischer und hellenisierter Voelker, 1885, Pls. I, 6; III, 24; V, 21; VI, 29 and 31.

629 A small replica of this famous statue may probably be seen in the bronze statuette in the Nelidoff collection: Wulff, Alexander mit der Lanze, 1898, Pls. I, II; Helbig, Fuehrer, II, p. 134, fig. 35. On supposed replicas, see Bernouilli, Das Bildniss Alex. d. Gr., p. 107; and Th. Schreiber, Studien ueber das Bildniss Alex. d. Gr., Abh. d. philolog.-histor. Cl. d. k. saechs. Gesellsch. d. Wissensch., XXI, 1903, no. III, pp. 100 f.

630 Kabbadias, 235; Collignon, in B. C. H., XIII, 1889, p. 498 and Pl. III; Bulle, 74.

631 Cf. the Farnese Herakles, Bulle, 72; etc.

632 Collignon, I, p. 253, fig. 122; see below, p. 119 and note 5.

633 E. g., in the Payne Knight bronze of the British Museum (B. M. Bronz., no. 209 and Pl. 1) and the Sciarra bronze (Collignon, I, p. 321, fig. 161; R. M., II, 1887, Pls. IV, IVa, V), which will be discussed in Ch. III, pp. 108, 119.

634 He won Ol. (?) 80 ( = 460 B. C.): P., VI, 4.11; Hyde, 45; Foerster, 255; Inschr. v. Ol. 149. Cf. Furtw., Mp., pp. 249 f.; Mw., pp. 452 f.

635 Mp., p. 255; an almost exact copy of the Eleusis statue is in the Museo Torlonia, no. 37.

636 Froehner, Les medaillons de l’Empire romain, 1878, p. 123; Furtw., Mp., l. c.

637 Mp., pp. 229 f., especially pp. 233 f.; Mw., pp. 422 f., especially pp. 426 f.

638 On an Argive funerary relief: see A. M., III, 1878, pp. 287 f. and Pl. XIII: this free adaptation of the Doryphoros dates from the middle of the fourth century B. C.; it will be treated later on in our discussion of the Doryphoros.

639 Cf. Ph., 16, (the palæstra of Hermes, the first known); Babr., 48,5 (παλαιστρίτης θεός). A trainer of professional athletes was called a γυμνάστης (a term sometimes applied to athletic gods): Xen., Mem., II, 1.20; Plato, de Leg., 720 E; etc.

640 E. g., Suppl., 189, 333; Agam., 513.

641 As in Iliad, XV, 428; XVI, 500; XXIV, 1. Eustathius in a scholion on the latter passage wrongly says that Aischylos called the ἀγοραῖοι θεοί “ἀγώνιοι θεοί.”

642 As in Hesychios, who says ἀγώνιοι θεοὶ = οἱ τῶν ἀγώνων προεστῶτες.

643 509, ὕπατος χώρας, “lord of Nemea.”

644 Ibid., ὁ Πύθιος ἄναξ.

645 515.

646 E. g. Plato, de Leg., 783 A; Pindar, Isthm., I, 60, Ol., VI, 79, and Pyth., II, 10 (of Hermes); Soph., Trach., 26 (of Zeus, the decider of contests); C. I. G., II, 1421 (of Hermes); cf. also Simonides, quoted by Athenæus, XI, 90 (p. 490); Aischyl., fragm. 384 (of Hermes); Aristoph., Plut., 1161 (of Hermes); C. I. G., I, 251; etc.

647 See Preller-Robert, Griech. Mythol.4, 1894, p. 415, n. 3.

648 Cf. Krause, pp. 169 f.; Preller-Robert, op. cit., pp. 415 f.; Urlichs, Skopas, p. 42; Nissen, Pompej. Stud., p. 168; Roscher, Lex., I, 2, p. 2369; S. Eitrem, in Pauly-Wissowa, VIII, pp. 786–7.

649 Pindar, Nem., X, 52–3; Oxy. Pap., VII, 1015, 8.

650 E. g., at Messene, P., IV, 32.1 (along with that of Theseus).

651 B. M. Sculpt., III, 2156; C. I. G., I, 250, and Neubauer, Hermes, XI, 1876, p. 146, no. 12; for the dedication of a torch to Hermes, see A. G., VI, 100.

652 C. I. A., II, 3, 1225–6; IV, 2, 1225b; 1226, b, c, d.

653 Inschr. Gr. Insul., III (Thera), 390; cf. Cougny, Epigr. Anth. Pal., III, 1890 (Appendix nova), p. 26, no. 168.

654 Schol. on Pindar, Ol., VI, 134, Boeckh, p. 148. He is represented as a wrestler in a bronze group from Antioch, with wings in his hair: R. Foerster, Jb., XIII, 1898, pp. 177 f., and Pl. XI (to be discussed infra., p. 233 and note 2).

655 Servius on Virgil’s Aen., VIII, 138.

656 I, 2.5.

657 V, 14.9 (Ἑρμοῦ ... Ἐναγωνίου).

658 VIII, 14.10. An inscription (Inschr. v. Ol., 184) records that a certain Akestorides of Alexandria Troas (whose name is left out of the text of Pausanias, VI, 13.7) won a victory at Pheneus, and this was probably at these games; on this victor, see Hyde, 119, and pp. 49–50.

659 V, 7.10.

660 Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 324; Guide, 331; B. B., 131; Bulle, 54; von Mach, 126 b; Baum., I, p. 458, fig. 503; Reinach, Rép., I, 526,8; Collignon, II. p. 124, fig. 60; Overbeck, I, pp. 380 f. and fig. 102; F. W., no. 465; A. Z., XXIV, 1866, Pl. CCIX, 1–2, pp. 169 f. (Kekulé) and Pl. 209, 1, 2; Annali, LI, 1879, pp. 207 f. (Brunn); Jb., XIII, 1898, pp. 57 f. and fig. 1 (Habich); J. H. S., XXVIII, 1907, p. 25, fig. 13; A. J. A., VII, 1903, pp. 445 f. (von Mach); Springer-Michaelis, p. 268, fig. 482; replicas in the Louvre (photo Giraudon, no. 1209), London (B. M. Sculpt. III, no. 1753), Duncombe Park, England (Michaelis, p. 295, no. 2), and elsewhere; for series, see J. Six, Gaz. arch., 1888, pp. 291 and Pl. 29, fig. 10 A.

661 Mw., p. 122; also Smith, B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1753.

662 First by Visconti, Mus. Pio Clem., III, p. 130; lately by G. Habich, l. c., and others.

663 H. N., XXXIV, 72; S. Q., 826. It was the only bronze work which the sculptor is known to have made, all his other works being in marble.

664 Kekulé (l. c.), Furtwaengler (l. c.), and others make the identification.

665 Long ago Turnebus (Advers., 1580, p. 486) explained the word in the sense of ἔγκρισις ἀθλητῶν, as used by Lucian, pro Imag., 11; cf., Cicero’s probatio, in his de Off., I, 144. Most modern commentators, however, refer the word to the statue, translating it “classical” or “chosen”: thus Urlichs, Chrest. Pl., 1857, p. 325; O. Jahn, Ueber die Kunsturteile des Plinius (Ber. saechs. Ges. d. Wiss., 1850), p. 125; H. L. von Urlichs, Blaetter f. d. bayr. Gymnasialsch., 1894, pp. 609 f., translates it “klassisch” or “mustergueltig,” i. e., serving as a pattern or standard. But the term was too well known as an athletic one for it ever to have been applied to a statue. The present participle, instead of the usual aorist (ἐγκριθείς), shows that Alkamenes’ statue represented an athlete in the act of undergoing selection. The old emendation into ἐγχριόμενος has been recently defended by Klein, Praxiteles, p. 50, who identifies Pliny’s statue with the Glyptothek Oil-pourer (Pl. 11); it is discredited by the occurrence of the epithet Encrinomenos as a Roman proper name, C. I. L., V, 1, 4429, which shows how familiar it was. See Jex-Blake, on the passage of Pliny.

666 Cf. Gardner, Hbk., p. 345; Helbig, l. c.

667 It seems to be a Hadrianic copy of an original which stood on the Athenian Akropolis.

668 Now in the Antiquarium, Rome: Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 1030; noted in B. Com. Rom., XXXVIII, 1910, p. 249, and fully discussed, ibid., XXXIX, 1911, pp. 97 f. (L. Mariani), and Pls. VI, VII (three views), and VIII (head, two views).

669 H. N., XXXIV, 80: Naucydes Mercurio et discobolo et immolante arietem censetur, etc.

670 Ueber den Diskoswurf bei den Griechen, 1892, p. 55. However, von Mach discusses a r.-f. deinos in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, which resembles the pose of the statue: A. J. A., VII, 1903, p. 447, fig. 1.

671 As in a vase by Douris: A. Z., 1883, Pl. II; Furtw., Berliner Vasen, no. 2283 A; also on a Hellenistic gem in Berlin: Furtw., Gemmen Katalog, no. 6911. Philostr., Imag., I, 24, says that the left foot was advanced.

672 Coin of Amastris: Schlosser, Numism. Zeitschr. (Vienna), XXIII, 1891, p. 19, Pl. 2, no. 35; a better reproduction by Imhoof-Blumer, in Sallet’s Zeitschr. f. Numism., XX, 1897, p. 269, Pl. 10, n. 2 (= Habich, p. 58, fig. 2); another in B. M. Coins (Pontus), Pl. XX, 7, pp. 87 and 21. On this and the Thracian coin, see also Habich, Hermes Diskobolos auf Muenzen, in Journ. internat. d’arch, num., II, 1898, pp. 137 f. Habich gives a gem showing the god with a kerykeion in the left hand, and a diskos in the right and with the right foot advanced: p. 61, fig. 3.

673 E. g., Michaelis, Jb., XIII, 1898, pp. 175–6. He looks upon the statue simply as that of a diskobolos.

674 In the National Museum, Athens, no. 13399: Staïs, Marb. et Bronz., pp. 353–354 and fig.; Arch. Eph., 1902, Pl. 17; Svoronos, Textbd., I, pp. 42–3; Tafelbd., I, Pl. VIII, no. 1; J. H. S., XXI, 1901, p. 351 (Bosanquet). This statuette is 0.25 meter in height and the base 0.09 meter (Svoronos).

675 Svoronos, p. 43, reproduces the coins of Amastris and Philippopolis.

676 Stuart Jones, Cat. Mus. Capitol., p. 288, no. 21 and Pl. 71; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 858; Guide, 509; B. B., 387; Furtw., Mp., p. 303 and n. 7; Mw., p. 525 and n. 1; Clarac, II, 859, 2170; Reinach, Rép., I, 525, 1; Lange, Motiv des aufgestuetzten Fusses, 1879, pp. 13 f. Helbig speaks of a replica in Paris, but confounds it with the type of the so-called Sandal-binder of the Louvre (Fig. 8). The Capitoline statue is 1.845 meters in height (Stuart Jones).

677 The motive of the “aufgestuetztes Bein” is more likely Lysippan than Skopaic, as Furtwaengler wrongly assumed.

678 Svoronos, Textbd., I, pp. 18 f. (with bibliography of all the objects down to 1903, on p. 15, n. 1.); Tafelbd., I, Pls. I and II (front and back); Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 302–304 and fig.; Bulle, 61; von Mach, 290; J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, Pls. VIII (head), IX (body, three views); H. B. Walters, Art of the Greeks, Pl. XVI; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LXXVIII; for bibliographical notice and discussion, see A. J. A., V, 1901, p. 465, and VII, 1903, pp. 464–5; Springer-Michaelis, p. 297, fig. 531; the best account of the statue in English is by Dr. A. S. Cooley, in Record of the Past, II, 1903, pp. 207–13 (with two illustrations). It is 1.94 meters in height, i. e., slightly over life-size (Svoronos).

679 J. H. S., XXI, 1901, pp. 205 f; he also briefly described all the bronzes found in A. A., 1901, pp. 17–19, (4 figs.), in Rev. des Ét. gr., XIV, 1901, pp. 122–6 (5 figs.), and in C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1901, pp. 58–63 (3 figs.) and 158–9 (3 Pls.). All the bronzes were published after cleansing in Arch. Eph., 1902, pp. 145 f., with Pls. 7–17 and figs. 1–18 in the text; see also Staïs, Les trouvailles dans la mer de Cythère, 1905; the last publication of all the pieces is by Svoronos, Textbd., I, pp. 1–86; Tafelbd., I, Pls. I-XX.

680 In his popular discussion of the bronzes in Monthly Review, June, 1901, pp. 110–127 (with 5 Pls., and 5 figs.). Similar praise is that of W. Klein, II, p. 403; he calls it die wundervollste aller uns erhaltenen Bronzestatuen des Altertums.

681 London Illustrated News, June 6, 1903 (with double-page plate).

682 Gaz. d. B.-A., XXV, Pér. III, 1901, pp. 295–301 (with 3 figures).

683 In a monograph entitled Ὁ Ἔφηβος τῶν Ἀντικυθήρων (pp. 1–42, and 6 figs.), Athens, 1903.

684 It was restored by the French sculptor André, who covered it with putty to conceal the jointures and the rivets which were used in welding the fragments together. He also colored it to resemble bronze. The method used in the restoration is certainly open to objection, but not to the extent asserted by certain scholars, e. g., by von Mach, who asserts that no Greek statue has received such unworthy treatment, and that the restoration makes it possible to refer the statue to almost any age or admixture of influences: Greek Sculpture, Its Spirit and Principles, p. 326. Much of the beauty of the statue, to be sure, is gone, but the style is not obscured. It has been restored too full, which gives it a sensuous appearance. For the statue, before restoration, see Svoronos, Textbd., p. 18, fig. 2; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, fig. on p. 304.

685 J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, pp. 152 f.; cf. Sculpt., pp. 244 f.; Hbk., pp. 532 f. In Chap. VI of the present work we shall follow the view which ascribes the Herakles to Lysippos: infra, pp. 298, 311. The Praxitelean and Lysippan influences in the bronze under discussion are noted by Richardson, p. 276.

686 Ibid., pp. 217 f.

687 For the former, see Amelung, Fuehrer, 249; von Mach, 327; Reinach, I, 452, 2. On the hem of the cloak is an Etruscan dedicatory inscription to one Metilius by his wife, containing the name of Tenine Tuthines as the bronze-caster: see Corssen, Sprache d. Etrusker, I, pp. 712 f. (quoted by von Mach). For the latter, see Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 5; Guide, 5; Mon. d. I., VI and VII, 1857–63, Pl. 84, 1; Annali, XXXV, 1863, pp. 432 f. (Koehler); Rayet, II, Pl. 71; B. B., 225; Bernouilli, Roem. Ikonogr., II, i, pp. 24 f., fig. 2; etc.

688 Text on pp. 115 f.; Klein, op. cit., pp. 403 f., believes that the enigma of its interpretation remains unsolved. He looks upon it as, perhaps, a pre-Lysippan work, a sort of Vorstufe to the Apoxyomenos.

689 Cf. Gardner, Hbk., p. 534.

690 On this gesture, see von Mach, op. cit., pp. 325–6.

691 Textbd., I, figs. 13–14, pp. 26–7. For the gem, see ibid., fig. 3, p. 22; Reinach, Pierres gravées, Pl. 56, 34.

692 H. N., XXXIV, 77. So Miss Bieber, Jb., XXV, 1910, pp. 159 f., following the suggestion of Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, ed. I, 1907, pp. 254 f. (view reiterated in ed. 2, 1910, p. 304), and Loeschke. Pliny says that the statue of Euphranor displayed every phase of Paris’ character, in the triple aspect of judge of the goddesses, lover of Helen, and slayer of Achilles. On this statue, of which we know so little, cf. the very different results reached by Furtwaengler (Mp., pp. 357 f.; Mw., pp. 591–2) and Robert (Hallisches Winckelmannsprogr., XIX, 1895, pp. 20 f.). Edw. Vicars, in the Pall Mall Magazine, XIX, 1903, pp. 551 f., followed by Dr. Cooley, believes that the bronze should be restored as Paris holding the apple of discord in the right hand.

693 Suppl. de la Gaz. d. B.-A., 1901, pp. 68 f., and 76 f.

694 VI, 100 f.; VIII, 372 f.; in the latter connection it is an adjunct to the dance.

695 Athenæus, I, 44 (p. 24 b), quotes the Pergamene Karystios (= F. H. G., IV, p. 359, fragm. 14) as saying that the women of Kerkyra played ball in his time. For Rome, cf. Hor., Sat., II, 2.11; Suetonius, Octav., 83; Pliny, Ep., III, 1.8; Seneca, de Brev. vit., 13; etc. On ball-playing, see Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, 1864, pp. 84 f.; L. Becq de Fouquières, Les Jeux des Anciens,2 1873, Ch. IX, pp. 176–199.

696 Athen., I, 25 (p. 14 d, e).

697 Athen., I, 25–26 (pp. 14 f, 15 a).

698 In his περὶ τοῦ διὰ σμικρᾶς σφαίρας γυμνασίου. Cf. Sidon. Apoll., V, 17; Martial, IV, 19; etc.

699 Athen., I, 34 (p. 19 a).

700 Athen., I, 26 (p. 15); cf., Eustath., on Od., VI, 115, p. 1553; only the Milesians were opposed to it: id., on Od., VIII, 372, p. 1601.

701 Theophr., Char., V, 9; Pliny, Ep., II, 17.12 and V, 6.27; Suetonius, Vit. Vespas., 20; etc.

702 B. S. A., X, 1903–4, pp. 63 f; cf., XII, 1905–6, p. 387.

703 The σφαιρεῖς are mentioned in C. I. G., I, 4, 1386, 1432; P., III, 14.6, mentions a statue of Herakles there, to which these youths sacrificed. Mueller, Die Dorier, 4, 5, § 2, classed these competitions as a sort of football.

704 Rev. des Ét. gr., XIV, 1901, pp. 445–8.

705 Helbig, Fuehrer, II, no. 1299; B. B., 413; Bulle, 44; Arndt-Amelung, Einzelaufnahmen, III, text to no. 1127; F. W., text to 1630; Rayet, II, text to Pl. 70, fig. on p. 5; Kekulé, Die griech. Skulpt.,2 fig. on p. 349 (the Germanicus on p. 348; cf. Bulle, p. 94, fig. 17); Loewy, Griech. Plastik, Pl. 94, fig. 176 a, p. 80. The statue is 1.83 meters high (Bulle). Head alone in Overbeck, II, p. 446, and cf. 456, n. 4; Arndt-Amelung, nos. 270–271. A fine herma-replica of the head is at Broadlands, England: Michaelis, p. 219, no. 9; Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 58, fig. 13 (three views). A poorer copy is in the Uffizi, Florence: Duetschke, III, no. 13; Arndt-Amelung, Einzelaufnahmen, 83–84.

706 Graef, Aus der Anomia, 1890, p. 69. Bulle finds the head similar to that of the Lemnian Athena and the body to that of the Farnese Anadoumenos of the British Museum (= Bulle, no. 49). Furtwaengler thinks that its relation to the Lemnia is not close enough to warrant us in assigning it to Pheidias: Mp., p. 57; Mw., pp. 86 and 742. On the basis of a Phokaian coin (Berlin example, Mp., Pl. VI, 19; copy in British Museum, B. M. Coins, Ionia, IV, 23), which represents a similar Hermes, he ascribes the statue to an Ionian artist and conjectures Telephanes mentioned by Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 68.

707 Helbig finds the head Myronian, but the body unconnected with any of the well-known artistic tendencies of his day.

708 As shown in the Germanicus copy; the right arm is wrongly restored in the Ludovisi statue. In the Germanicus the arm is bowed more at the elbow, the hand reaching the level of the temples.

709 Froehner, pp. 213 f., no. 184 (and bibliography); F. W., 1630; Rayet, II, Pls. 69 (statue), 70 (head); etc.

710 A. J. A., XV, 1911, Pl. VI and pp. 215–16 (Caskey); Jb., XXIV, 1909, Pls. I and II (from Munich cast), pp. 1 f. (Sieveking). For the Hermes of the Boboli gardens, see ibid., figs. 1 and 3, pp. 2 and 4; Arndt-Amelung., Einzelauf., 103–105; Duetschke, II, no. 84; Furtw., Mp., p. 230, Mw., p. 424. Another replica is in the Hermitage: Kieseritzky, Kat., no. 179; Sieveking, figs. 4–5, p. 5; Mp., p. 290, Mw., 506; another in the Torlonia Museum in Rome, no. 475: Sieveking, fig. 6, p. 5.

711 Gaz. d. B.-A., 1911, p. 251.

712 Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 230 and cf. p. 290; Mw., p. 424 and cf. p. 506.

713 See the Annual Report of the Museum of Fine Arts, 1898, p. 20. Mahler, Polyklet u. seine Schule, p. 27, no. 34, wrongly thought that it was a replica of the Doryphoros.

714 Froehner, no. 183, pp. 210 f. (bibliography on pp. 212–13; later bibliogr. in Klein, Praxitel. Stud., 1899, p. 4, n. 2); B. B., no. 67; von Mach, 238 b; Clarac, Pl. 309, no. 2046. Replica in Munich (with a head of Apollo not belonging to the torso): Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.2, 1910, 287 (with list of replicas); von Mach, 238a; Clarac, V, 814, 2048; Reinach, Rép., I, 487, 7; Klein, pp. 4 f.; one in London, in Lansdowne House: Michaelis, pp. 464f., no. 85 and Pl. opp. p. 464; Clarac, V, 814, 2048 A; Reinach, Rép., I, 487, 6; one in the Vatican: Reinach, Rép., I, 487, 5; head and torso in Athens: ibid., II, i, 153, 10; A. M., XI, 1886, Pl. IX (middle), pp. 362 f. (Studniczka); head in Copenhagen, formerly in the Borghese Coll., Rome: P. Arndt, Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, 1912, Pls. 128, 129, and text pp. 177 f., (fig. 95 = bronze restoration for the municipal Museum in Stettin, combining the Lansdowne body and the Fagan head in the British Museum; for the Fagan head see B. M. Sculpt., III, 1785).

715 See von Mach, 170; R. Kekulé, Die Reliefs an der Balustrade der Athena Nike, with Pls. 1–6.

716 From the Ekphrasis of Christodoros, A. G., II, vv. 297–302. It was first shown to be a statue of Hermes by Lambeck, de Mercurii statua, Thorn, 1860.

717 Pick, Die antiken Muenzen Nordgriechenlands, I, Pl. XVI, 25; cf. Froehner, p. 211.

718 Duetschke, IV, no. 151; J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, Pl. XVI, pp. 239 f. (Wace).

719 E. g., B. M. Bronzes, nos. 1200, 1202, 1207; for a herm in the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican, after a fourth-century B. C. type, see Amelung, Vat., I, p. 84, no. 65 and Pl. X.

720 B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1600 and Pi. III; Jb., I, 1886, p. 54, and Pl. 5, and fig. 1 (Wolters); Kalkmann, Proport. d. Gesichts, pp. 41 and 98; Furtw., Mp., Pl. XVIII. opp. p. 346; for a full discussion of this head, see the note by translator in Mp., pp. 346–7. The head is 11–1/2 inches high (B. M. Sculpt.).

721 Nissen, Pompej. Stud., p. 166.

722 H. N., XXXIV, 18.

723 E. g., one in Paris, in the Cab. des Médailles, no. 3350; Clarac, 666 D, 1512 F.

724 E. g., E. von Sacken, Die ant. Bronzen des k. k. Muenz-und Antiken-Cabinetes in Wien, 1871, Pl. 10, 4; a bronze Mercury in Paris, in the Cab. des Méd., Coll. Oppermann (0.20 m. tall): Furtw., Mp., p. 233, fig. 94, and Mw., p. 428, fig. 64; bronze statuette of Mercury in the British Museum with chlamys over the left shoulder: Mp., p. 232, fig. 93; Mw., p. 427, fig. 63.

725 Mp., p. 231, n. 3.

726 B. M. Bronzes, no. 1217.

727 Mp., pp. 288 f.; Mw., pp. 502 f.

728 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 165 (renewed); base pictured, Mp., p. 288, fig. 123; Mw., p. 503; fig. 90. Furtwaengler had ascribed the statue of Aristion to the younger Polykleitos; this was disproved by the date of Aristion’s victory, Ol. 82 ( = 452 B. C.), given by the Oxy. Pap.

729 Michaelis, p. 446, no. 35; Clarac, V, 946, 2436 A; Furtw., Mp., p. 289, fig. 124; Mw., p. 504, fig. 91.

730 XXIII, 660; cf. Od., XIX, 86: “By Apollo’s grace he hath so goodly a son”—meaning that Apollo gave increase of physical strength to men, just as Artemis did to women. Cf. Hesiod, Theog., 346–7.

731 V, 7.10.

732 Quaest. conviv., VIII, 4 (= p. 724 C, D.); here he also mentions a Gymnasion of Apollo at Athens.

733 Told by many writers: e. g., Apollod., II, 6.2.

734 P., X, 13.7, describes a group at Delphi representing Apollo and Hermes grasping the tripod before the fight; in VIII, 37.1 he mentions the same subject on a marble relief at Lykosoura, and in III, 21.8 says that Gythion was founded by the two after the contest, and that their images stood in the agora there. The subject was represented in the gable of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi: Frazer, V, p. 274 (in connection with P., X, 11.2). Stephani enumerated 89 existing works of art which represent this subject, of which 58 appear on black-figured, 18 on red-figured vases, 8 on marble reliefs, 3 on terra-cottas, and 2 on gems: Comptes rendus de la comm. impér. archéol., St. Petersburg, 1868, pp. 31 f.; Overbeck has added to the list: Griech. Mythol., III, Apollon, 1889, pp. 391–415.

735 The Choiseul-Gouffier statue: B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 209; Marbles and Bronzes, Pl. III; Specimens, II, Pl. V; Museum Marbles, XI, Pl. 32; F. W., no. 221; J. H. S., I, 1881, Pl. IV, and pp. 178 f., and cf., II, 1882, pp. 332 f. (Waldstein); von Mach, Pl. 67; Collignon, I, p. 403, fig. 208; Clarac, III, 482, 931 H, and p. 213: Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 85, 10; Conze, Beitr. zur Gesch. d. gr. Pl.2, 1869, Pl. VI; Springer-Michaelis, p. 234, fig. 429. The height of the statue is 5 feet, 10.5 inches (B. M. Sculpt.). The Apollo-on-the-Omphalos: Kabbadias, 45; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 23–24 and fig.; J. H. S., I, Pl. V, fig. 3; Collignon, I, p. 405, fig. 209; B. B., 42; von Mach, 66; F. W., 219; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 85, 7; Conze, op. cit., Pls. III-V, and text, pp. 13 f.; Murray, I, Pl. VIII, opp. p. 234 (both statues); torso in Munich, Arndt-Amelung, Einzelauf., nos. 849–50; for list of other copies, see A. M., IX, 1884, pp. 239–40.

736 Cf. B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 209 (A. H. Smith).

737 See Waldstein, p. 180; F. W., no. 219; A. M., IX, 1884, p. 248.

738 Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 85, 9; M. D., I, p. 47, no. 179; cf. F. W., 219. Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmythol., III. Apollon, p. 162, fig. 9.

739 A. M., I, 1876, Pl. X, and pp. 178 f. (Kekulé); Bulle, 105 (Left) and p. 208, fig. 47.

740 Published in J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, pp. 278–80 (Dickins); here, on p. 279, we have the fragment photographed with the lower parts of the Choiseul-Gouffier and Omphalos copies on either side; Dickins says that with the possible exception of the Athens statue this fragment shows the best workmanship of all the copies. Helbig, Fuehrer, no. 1268.

741 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 211; it shows the krobylos best.

742 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 210.

743 Braun, Vorschule d. Kunstmythol., Pl. V, (quoted by A. H. Smith).

744 Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. 54; discussed in Annali, L, 1878, pp. 61 f. (Brizio).

745 Cf. Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 859; Beulé, Monnaies d’Athênes, p. 271, quoted in Jb., II, 1887, p. 235, n. 54.

746 Jb., II, pp. 234 f.; on p. 234, the Athens statue and the figure from the Bologna krater are shown side by side.

747 Fuehrer, under no. 859 (the Capitoline replica), and especially under no. 1268.

748 Beitraege zur Gesch. d. gr. Pl.2, p. 19.

749 Roscher, Lex., I, p. 456.

750 A. M., IX, 1884, p. 244.

751 Mentioned by P., I, 3.4; this view has been upheld by Conze, l.c.; Murray, I, p. 235; cf. Furtw., l. c., and on the artist, see his article in Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1907, pp. 160 f.

752 S. Q., nos. 508–526.

753 Furtw., l. c.; the coin in the British Museum is pictured in J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, p. 205, fig. 2. Conze’s theory of identifying the type with the Alexikakos has been questioned among others also by Overbeck: I, n. 226, to pp. 280 (on p. 301).

754 Dionys. Halic., de Isocrate Judicium, III, p. 542 (ed. Reiske); S. Q., 531.

755 Op. cit., especially p. 182.

756 P., VI, 6.6. He won in the early fifth century, in Ols. 74, 76, 77 ( = 484, 476, 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207.

757 F. W., nos. 219 and 221. Clarac, Text, Vol. III, p. 213, leaves it in doubt whether it be Apollo or an athlete; however, he calls the Capitoline copy an athlete.

758 Published by Miss K. A. McDowall, J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, pp. 203–7 and fig. 1.

759 The untrustworthy character of the Torlonia copy has been shown by Overbeck, Kunstmythologie, III, Apollon, pp. 109 and 162. The Roman copy in the Capitoline is also inferior, and the legs are wrongly restored—for at that period in art there was little difference between the free and the rest leg; see Helbig, Fuehrer, no. 859; Stuart Jones, Cat. Mus. Capit., p. 287, no. 20 and Pl. 69; Conze, Beitraege zur Gesch. d. gr. Pl.2, Pl. VII; Clarac, 862, 2189; head in Arndt-Amelung, Einzelaufnahmen, Serie II, 452–4, p. 35.

760 Waldstein ascribed the original to Pythagoras, partly because this artist was famed for the detail of veins, sinews, and hair: see Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 59.

761 Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 223 f.; Tafelbd., Pl. LVII, 3–5. The original height was 2.60 meters.

762 Strena Helbigiana, 1900, p. 293; discussed also by Miss McDowall (l. c. and fig. 3, p. 206); a poor replica is in Munich: Furtw., Mw., p. 115, and fig. 21.

763 B. M. Coins, Troas, etc., Pl. XXXII, 1; McDowall, l. c., fig. 4, p. 207.

764 Bulle, 50, who gives the height 1.86 meters; von Mach, 115; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 547, 9; other references infra, on p. 152, n. 5.

765 Jh. oest. arch. Inst., VIII, 1905, pp. 42 f.; IX, 1906, pp. 279 f.; cf., Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., pp. 105–6, n. 1 (Engl. ed., p. 120).

766 Jh. oest. arch. Inst., XII, 1909, pp. 100 f. He thinks that the original may have been identical with the statue of Ἀπόλλων ἀναδούμενος standing before the temple of Ares at Athens, P., I, 8.4, and that the παῖς ἀναδούμενος of Pheidias at Olympia, P. VI, 4.5, also may have been an Apollo. He also interprets the figure of a charioteer entering a chariot on an Attic relief (Fig. 63), to be discussed later, as an Apollo: Jb., VII, 1892, pp. 54 f. For the relief, see B. B., 21; von Mach, 56; F. W., no. 97; infra, pp. 269 f.

767 Cf., Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 18 (Achilleae). On these “Achillean” statues (a generic name for statues of athletes leaning on their spears, from Achilles, the typical hero of ephebes), see Furtwaengler, Jahrbuecher f. cl. Philol., Supplbd., IX, 1877, p. 47, n. 11.

768 Jh. oest. arch. Inst., VIII, 1905, pp. 269 f. Miss McDowall, in the article already cited, p. 204, has also argued that there is no necessary connection between the quiver slung over the tree-support and Apollo.

769 Inschr. v. Ol., 162–3; Loewy, op. cit., X, 1907, pp. 326 f. Studniczka, ibid., IX, 1906, pp. 311 f., discusses the base and believes that the pose of the statue of Pythokles was the same as that of the Borghese Ares of the Louvre (von Mach, 125; F. W., 1298; Reinach, Rép. I, 133, 1–3; etc.), the weight on the left foot, i. e., essentially different from the Polykleitan pose.

770 R. M., XXVII, 1912, p. 37.

771 Duetschke, IV, no. 52 (= wrongly female); J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, Pl. XV (three views), and pp. 235 f. (Wace).

772 Mp., p. 247; Mw., pp. 448–449; he assigns it to the third quarter of the fifth century B. C.

773 Amelung, Rev. arch., II, 1904, p. 344.1; Wace, l. c., p. 237.

774 Both Schreiber, A. M., VIII, 1883, pp. 246 f., and Studniczka, Jb., XI, 1896, pp. 255 f., have shown that the hair arranged in the double plait, whether the κρωβύλος or not, is Attic, and that similarly the mass of locks over the ears is common in Attic works.

775 P., V, 7.9. In V, 7.7, the Idæan Herakles is said to have first crowned his brother as victor there; cf. V, 8.3–4. We have already (p. 10) spoken of the difference of opinion as to whether it was the Cretan (Idæan) Herakles, or the more famous son of Zeus and Alkmena, who founded the games. On the traditional connection of the hero with Olympia, see E. Curtius, Sitzb. d. k. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1894, pp. 1098 f.; Busolt, Gr. Gesch.,2 I, pp. 240 f.; Krause, Olympia, pp. 26 f.

776 With the river-god Acheloos, III, 18.16 (the contest pictured in relief on the throne of Apollo at Amyklai; cf. the same scene represented by the cedar-wood figures inlaid with gold on the treasury of the Megarians at Olympia, VI, 19, 12); with Antaios, IX, 11.6 (pictured in the sculptures of the gable of the Herakleion at Thebes); with Eryx, III, 16.4 and IV, 36.4.

777 P., V, 8.4.

778 P., V, 21.9; he won in Ol. 178 ( = 68 B. C.): Foerster, 570–1.

779 V, 21.10.

780 These victors were Kapros of Elis, who won in Ol. 124 ( = 212 B. C.): Hyde, 150; Foerster, 474, 475; he had two statues, the remains of which may have been recovered: see Bronzen v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pls. II, III; Aristomenes of Rhodes, who won in Ol. 156 ( = 156 B. C.): Foerster, 505–6; Protophanes of Magnesia ad Maiandrum (ad Lethaeum in P., l. c.), who won in Ol. 172 ( = 92 B. C.): Foerster, 538–9; Marion of Alexandria, who won in Ol. 182 ( = 52 B. C.): Foerster, 579–80; Aristeas of Stratonikeia, who won in Ol. 198 ( = 13 A. D.): Foerster, 609–10; Nikostratos of Aigeai in Kilikia, who won in Ol. 204 ( = 37 A. D.): Foerster, 621–2.

781 Two men entered later, but were disqualified: Sokrates, who won in wrestling (?) in Ol. 232 ( = 149 A. D.): Foerster, 704; and Aurelios Ailix, or Helix, of Phœnicia, who won the pankration in Ol. 250 ( = 221 A. D.): Foerster, 734. See Dio Cassius, LXXIX, 10; Philostr., Heroicus, III, 13 (p. 147, ed. Kayser); cf. Ph., 46 and note by Juethner, ad loc. Ailix won in both events on the same day at the Capitoline games in Rome, which no one had done before: Foerster, l. c. Frazer, III, p. 625.

782 Such victors were numbered in two ways; some authorities in the way mentioned above, e. g., Dio Cassius, l. c.; others numbered them δεύτερος, τρίτος, κ. τ. λ., e. g., Africanus; cf. Rutgers, pp. 73 f. and n. 1, and p. 97 and n. 2.

783 See F. Kindscher, Die herakleischen Doppelsieger zu Olympia, Jahn’s Archiv f. Phil. u. Paedag., II, 1845, pp. 392–411.

784 P., IV, 32.1 (statues of the three in the Gymnasion at Messene). He mentions, IX, 11.7, a Gymnasion and Stadion of the hero near the Herakleion in Thebes.

785 B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, pp. 455–6.

786 On the difficulty of distinguishing statues of victors from those of Herakles, see also Arndt, La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, Text, p. 138, to Pl. 94.

787 P., VI, 2.1.

788 Ch. VI, pp. 293 f., especially pp. 298–299.

789 La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, Pl. 117 (three views). It was formerly in the Tyszkiewicz collection.

790 See Arndt, l. c. Furtwaengler believed the head Praxitelean: see Roscher, Lex., I, 2, p. 2166 ll. 61 f. S. Reinach saw in it a mélange of Skopaic and Praxitelean elements: Gaz. d. B.-A., 3, Pér., XVI, 1896, II, p. 332 and fig. on p. 328; Têtes, Pl. 176, p. 139; he is followed by Arndt.

791 Antichita di Ercolano, Bronzi, I, Pls. 49 and 50; D. Comparetti e G. de Petra, La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni, 1883, Pl. VII, 3, p. 261, 4; Rayet, II, Pl. 66; B. B., no. 364; F. W., 1302. Similarly, the bronze head of a youth in Naples, with a rolled fillet, may be from the statue of a victor or of the hero: Invent., 5594; B. B., 365.]

792 For the Naples replica, see Comparetti e de Petra, Villa Ercolan., Pl. XXI, 3; Furtw., Mp. p. 234, fig. 95; Mw., p. 430, fig. 65; poorer copy in the Museo Chiaramonti of the Vatican (no. 139): Helbig, Guide, 69; B. B., 338; another in Broadlands, England: Michaelis, p. 220, no. 10; Mp., p. 235, fig. 96; Mw., p. 431, fig. 66. Graef had already conjectured the type to be that of a Polykleitan Herakles: R. M., IV, 1889, p. 215. He is followed by Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 23.

793 Amelung., Vat., I, p. 738, no. 636 and Pl. 79; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 108; Guide, 113; B. B., no. 609; Furtw., Mp., p. 341, fig. 146 (head, on p. 342, fig. 147); Mw., p. 575, fig. 109 (head, on p. 577, fig. 110). The group is 2.12 meters high (Amelung.).

794 Helbig, Guide, no. 242.

795 Helbig, ibid., no. 470; R. M., IV, 1889, p. 197, no. 12 (Skopaic).

796 It was found in Genzano: B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1731 and Pl. V, fig. 2; height, 1 foot, 4–7/8 inches; for references, see infra, p. 169, n. 8.

797 B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1732; Specimens, I, Pl. 57; Museum Marbles, III, Pl. 12. A similar head, half portrait and half ideal, appears on coins of Macedonia. Such filleted heads as nos. 1733 and 1740 of B. M. Sculpt. are probably from statues of Herakles. The statuette of a seated Herakles, ibid., no. 1726, with the lion-skin and wearing a laurel wreath tied on with a fillet (= Reinach, Rép., II, 1, p. 227, no. 3; J. H. S., III, 1882, Pl. XXV.) and inscribed as the work of Diogenes (I. G. B., 361), recalls the description of the pose of the Hermes Epitrapezios made by Lysippos for Alexander: Statius, Silv., IV, 6; cf. Martial, IX, 44.

798 B. M. Bronz., nos. 1254, 1276, 1292, etc.

799 B. M. Bronz., Pl. II (upper right-hand); text, no. 212.

800 Friedrichs, Kleinere Kunst, 1850; mentioned by Furtw., Mw., p. 525, n. 2.

801 III, nos. 9 and 19; no. 19 has swollen ears.

802 See Furtw., Mp., pp. 234 and 236; Mw., pp. 429 and 433. He gives as an example the Polykleitan ephebe head-type discussed supra, p. 95.

803 P., V, 8.4.

804 P., V, 15.5.

805 P., III, 14.7 (ἀφετήριοι).

806 P., II, 34.10.

807 Iliad, III, 237 (= Od., XI, 300); Homeric Hymn to the Dioskouroi, XXXIII, 3; Pindar, Isthm., I, 16 f.; Pyth., V. 9; etc. Kastor was famed also for throwing the quoit: Pindar, Isthm., I, 25.

808 Iliad and Od., ll. cc.; Simonides, frag. 8 (P. l. G., III, p. 390); Apoll. Rhod., Argon., II, 1 f.

809 Apoll. Rhod., op. cit., I, 146; Theokr., XXII, 2–3 and 34; Pindar, Pyth., XI, 61–2; Nem., X, 49–50; Isthm., V, 32–3; etc.; various Roman poets: see Bethe, in Pauly-Wissowa, V, I, pp. 1092–4.

810 R. M., XV, 1900, 1 f. (with illustrations).

811 I. G. A., 37.

812 B. M. Bronz., no. 3207; C. I. G. G. S., III, 1, 649; Rev. arch., Sér. 3, XVIII, 1891, Pl. 18, and pp. 45 f. (Froehner); Wochenschr. f. kl. Phil., VIII, 1891, p. 859; Gardiner, p. 317, fig. 73. Froehner reads the name “Exotra,” that of a woman victor.

813 I. G. A., 43 a (p. 173).

814 Duetschke, IV, no. 534. Another relief fragment in the Uffizi shows the upper part of the two with horses, each wearing the chlamys and pilleus and carrying spears: Duetschke, III, 446.

815 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 780; Museum Marbles, II, Pl. 11; cf. a similar relief, no. 781. The relief ibid., III, no. 2206, supposedly representing Kastor, has been pronounced a modern forgery by Treu: see F. W., 1006.

816 Ch. I, pp. 27 f. and 37 f.

817 This is the usual division of victor monuments: Scherer, pp. 21 f.; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 530; Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkmaeler griech. und roem. Skulptur, Handausgabe^3, 1911, pp. 104 f. (translation by H. Taylor, 1914, pp. 120 f.) Reisch, p. 40, divides Siegerbilder in Motiven von allgemeiner Geltung und Bilder in Motiven, die der speciellen Veranlassung der Weihung entlehnt sind—a division practically amounting to that of rest and motion statues, as we shall see.

818 Discussed infra in Ch. VII, pp. 334 f.

819 VIII, 40.1.

820 See infra, Ch. VII, pp. 327–8.

821 We know of one case, at least, where an “Apollo” (draped) was transferred to a relief—on a column drum of the old Artemision in Ephesos, now in the British Museum: J. H. S., X, 1889, Pl. III, pp. 4 f., and figs. 4a, 5 (Murray); Overbeck, I, p. 106, fig. 9; Richardson, p. 53, fig. 16. According to Herodotos, I, 92, most of these columns were the gifts of Crœsus, who reigned 560–546 B. C. On the whole series of “Apollos,” see W. Deonna, Les Apollons archaïques, 1909; cf. F. W., text to no. 14, pp. 9 f; B. M. Sculpt., I, pp. 82–3, with references; etc.

822 See Richardson, pp. 39 f.

823 Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 11–12 and fig.; B. C. H., X, 1886, Pl. V (two views) and pp. 98 f. (Holleaux); Collignon, I, p. 117, fig. 58; Deonna, op. cit., p. 161, no. 35; Richardson, p. 44, fig. 12. It is in the National Museum at Athens, where most of the “Apollos” are to be found. The sanctuary of Apollo Ptoios on Mount Ptoion, Bœotia, is mentioned by P., IX, 23.6, Hdt., VIII, 135, and other writers.

824 In Athens: Kabbadias, no. 8; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 10; Deonna, p. 227, no. 129; A. M., III, 1878, Pl. VIII; Collignon, I, p. 132, fig. 66; Gardner, Hbk., p. 131, fig. 16; Richardson, p. 39, fig. 5; B. B., no. 77C; von Mach, 12; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 76, 10; F. W., 14; Springer-Michaelis, p. 172, fig. 336; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 319, fig. 133.

825 Kabbadias, no. 9; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 9–10 (1.27 m. high); Annali, XXXIII, 1861, pp. 79 f. and Pl. E; Deonna, op. cit., p. 148, no. 26; B. C. H., V, 1881, Pl. IV, and pp. 319 f.; Collignon, I, p. 114, fig. 56; Overbeck, I, fig. 14; Gardner, Hbk., p. 166, fig. 29; Richardson, p. 40, fig. 8; B. B., 77A; von Mach, 11 b; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 509, fig. 260; F. W., 43; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 76, 11.

826 Kabbadias, no. 10; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 8 (1.30 meters high); Deonna, p. 153, no. 28; B. C. H., X, 1886, Pl. IV, and p. 66 (Holleaux); Collignon, I, p. 196, fig. 92; von Mach, 15a (left); Gardner, Hbk., p. 168, fig. 30; B. B., 12 (left); Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 76, 7. In another found at Mount Ptoion in 1903, the left arm is almost entirely broken away: B. C. H., XXXI, 1907, Pl. XX.

827 Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 10, no. 1558; Deonna, p. 217, no. 114, B. C. H., XVI, 1892, Pl. XVI (two views) and pp. 560 f. (Holleaux); von Mach, no. 13; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 321, fig. 134; Gardner, Hbk., p. 132, fig. 17; Richardson, p. 39, fig. 6; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 76, 1.

828 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschreib. d. Glypt.,2 pp. 49 f., no. 47; Gardner, Hbk., p. 158, fig. 26; Gardiner, p. 87, fig. 7; Richardson, p. 40, fig. 7; B. B., no. I; Bulle, 37 (right); von Mach, 14; Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., Pl. I, pp. 3 f; Mon. d. I., IV, 1847, Pl. XLIV; Baum., I, fig. 340; Collignon, I, p. 202, fig. 96; Springer-Michaelis, p. 174, fig. 338; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 401, figs. 187, 188; F. W., 49; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 76, 2. It is 1.53 meters high (Bulle).

829 Left: torso found in 1885: B. C. H., XI, 1887, Pl. VIII, and pp. 185 f. (Holleaux); Collignon, I, p. 198, fig. 49; Richardson, p. 41, fig. 9 (without the head); head found in 1903: B. C. H., XXXI, 1907, Pls. XVII-XVIII; entire figure, ibid., Pl. XIX; text, pp. 187 f. (Mendel); Kabbadias, 12; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 9 and fig.; Deonna, p. 156, no. 30. Right: Staïs, pp. 12–13, no. 20; Deonna, no. 35; Collignon, I, p. 315 and fig. 157 (two views); B. C. H., XI, 1887, Pls. XIII and XIV, and pp. 275 f., and X, 1886, fig. VI (without head) and pp. 269 f.; von Mach, 15b (right); Gardner, Hbk., p. 169, fig. 31; Richardson, p. 42, fig. 10 (two views); Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 77, 4 (without head); cf. II, 1, 18, 4 and 5.

830 See Holleaux, B. C. H., XI, p. 186, n. 1. Richardson, p. 41, wrongly thought that they were of marble, explaining the preservation of the arms by their presence; the arms, however, were formerly broken off and have since been readjusted to the statue.

831 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 206; Mon. d. I., IX, 1869–73, Pl. XLI; Annali, XLIV, 1872, pp. 181 f.; B. B., 51; von Mach, 16; Overbeck, I, p. 237, fig. 61; F. W., 89; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 81, 6. It is 3 feet 4 inches in height.

832 See Holleaux, B. C. H., X, 1886, p. 271; XI, p. 186; and cf. Vischer, Kleine Schriften, II. pp. 302 f.

833 B. B., no. 76.

834 See Holleaux, in B. C. H., XI, 1887, p. 178.

835 From the inscription on its thigh.

836 In the Athens Museum; it dates from the middle of the sixth century B. C.: Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 11, no. 1906 and fig. (1.78 m. high); Deonna, p. 133, no. 5; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, figs. 189–190; Kabbadias, Arch. Eph., 1902, pp. 43 f. and Pls. 3 and 4; Bulle, no. 37 (left), who gives its height as 1.79 meters.

837 See Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., text to Pl. I, p. 4.

838 Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., p. 4, ascribe it to the Cretan sculptors Skyllis and Dipoinos, who worked in Argos, Sikyon, and Corinth, or to their school.

839 Statue A: Fouilles de Delphes, IV, Pl. I; B. C. H., XXIV, 1900, Pls. XIX-XXI (front, side, and rear) and pp. 445 f. (Homolle); Gardner, Hbk., p. 155, fig. 25; Gardiner, p. 89, fig. 8; Springer-Michaelis, p. 174, fig. 337; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pls. IX, X. Statue B (fragmentary): Fouilles de Delphes, IV, p. 7, fig. 7; B. C. H., XXIV, 1900, Pl. XVIII. See also the following: Gaz. B.-A., III Pér., XII, 1894, pp. 444–6; XIII, pp. 32 f.; C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1894, p. 585; especially Homolle, l. c., pp. 445 f. (he exchanges B for A); cf. A. J. A., 1895, p. 115; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 77, 6 and 7.

840 VI, 10.5; the epigram reads:

Εὐτελίδας καὶ Χρυσόθεμις τάδε ἔργα τέλεσσαν

Ἀργεῖοι, τέχναν εἰδότες ἐκ προτέρων.

Damaretos of Heraia won two victories in the heavy-armed race in Ols. 65, 66 ( = 520, 516 B. C.); Theopompos two in the pentathlon in Ols. (?) 69, 70 ( = 504, 500 B. C.). Their monument was one in common: Hyde, nos. 94, 95 and pp. 42 f.; Foerster, 135, 140 and 168, 169.

841 P., VI, 15.8; he won in the boys’ wrestling match and in the pentathlon in Ol. 38 ( = 628 B. C.): Afr.; Hyde, 148; Foerster, 61, 62.

842 Hoplite victor in Ol. 68 ( = 508 B. C.): Foerster, 151.

843 Victor in three running races on the same day (τριαστής) in Ol. 67 ( = 512 B. C.): Afr.; Foerster, 144–6.

844 They won in boxing in Ol. 59 ( = 544 B. C.) and the pankration in Ol. 61 ( = 536 B. C.) respectively: P., VI, 18.7; Hyde, 187, 188, and p. 56; Foerster, 113 and 120. Pausanias, l. c., wrongly says that they were the oldest statues at Olympia.

845 He won the double foot-race in Ol. 35 ( = 640 B. C.): Afr.; P., I, 28.1; Foerster, 55.

846 He won five victories in wrestling at the beginning of the sixth century B. C.: P., III, 13.9; Foerster, 86–90. The statue of Oibotas of Dyme, who won the stade-race in Ol. 6 ( = 756 B. C.), was set up in Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.): Afr.; P., VI, 3.8; Hyde, 29; Foerster, 6; that of Chionis of Sparta, who won seven running races in Ols. 28–31 ( = 668–656 B. C.), was made by Myron, and consequently was erected in the fifth century B. C.: P., VI, 13.2; Afr.; Hyde, 111, and p. 48; Foerster, 39, 41–6: these two, therefore, did not necessarily conform with the “Apollo” type.

847 VI, 14.5 f; he won in Ol. (?) 61, and in Ols. 62, 63, 64, 65, 66 ( = 536–516 B. C.): Hyde, 128; Foerster, 116, 122, 126, 131, 136, and 141; Afr. gives the second victory as Ol. 62; see Foerster, 122.

848 Vit. Apoll. Tyan., IV, 28.

849 VI, 14.6–7.

850 Frazer, IV, p. 44, believes that this description may be imaginary, concocted from stories of Milo’s feats of strength; but Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 601, cite Guttman, de olympionicis apud Philostratum, p. 7, Matz, de Philostr. in describ. imag. Fide, p. 33, and Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, 1890, p. 413, as believing that it was based on the appearance of the statue. Scherer, pp. 23 f., thought that Philostratos followed Pausanias in interpreting the attributes of the statue, and that the latter got his idea of the strength of the victor from the statue or from a cicerone. Pliny, H. N., VII, 19, says of Milo: Malum tenenti nemo digitum corrigebat. Aelian mentions Milo’s feat with the pomegranate in Var. Hist., II, 24 and de Nat. anim., VI, 55.

851 Cf. Philostr., l. c., ll. 27, 28: καὶ τὸ μήπω διεστὼς τῇ ἀρχαίᾳ ἀγαλματοποιίᾳ προσκείσθω.

852 Op. cit., p. 31.

853 Cf. P., VIII, 46.3.

854 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 75.

855 For the type, see the Payne Knight bronze statuette in the British Museum: B. M. Bronz., no. 209 and Pl. I; Frazer, IV, p. 430, fig. 45; the same type appears on Milesian coins. Cf. Brunn, I, 77. Frazer is against Scherer’s contention.

856 II, 2, pp. 601–2. See P., VI, 9.1 (statue of Theognetos).

857 H. N., XXXIV, 59.

858 Anachar., 9; cf. A. G., IX, 357.

859 No. 38; cf. for the left-hand figure, p. 83, fig. 11 (side view).

860 B. C. H., XVIII, 1894, pp. 44 f., Pls. V, VI (de Ridder); Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 547, fig. 332; A. de Ridder, no. 740, pp. 268–9, and Pls. III, IV. It is similar in pose to bronzes in the same museum, nos. 736 (= de Ridder, Pl. II, 1), 737 (= Pl. II, 3), and 738 (= Pl. II, 2). It is 0.27 meter high (Bulle).

861 It will be considered later on in this chapter: p. 119 and n. 3. It is 0.185 meter high (Bulle).

862 This statuette, showing Peloponnesian tendencies, is in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; it is 0.25 meter high (Bulle).

863 In the same way the pediment statues from Aegina differ from Attic works by straighter lines and more compact forms.

864 He won a chariot victory some time between Ols. (?) 98 and 101 ( = 388 and 376 B. C.): P., VI, 2.8; Hyde, 17 ( = 105 d; P., VI, 1.26); Foerster, 310.

865 He won in chariot-racing some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 130 ( = 320 and 260 B. C.): P., VI, 13.11; Hyde, 122; Foerster, 513. The date is from the lettering on the recovered base: Inschr. v. Ol., 177; cf. Hyde, p. 51. On such statues, cf. Reisch, p. 41.

866 The spelling Ηαγελαιδας occurs on two blocks, d, e, from the Praxiteles bathron at Olympia: Inschr. v. Ol., 631 = I. G. B., 30; for the whole Praxiteles bathron see Inschr. v. Ol., 266. Dittenberger and Purgold keep the reading Hagelaïdas. Possibly the spelling Ἁγελαίδα stands for ὁ Ἀγελαίδα; the MSS. of Pliny read Hagelades; see I. G. B., p. xviii, Add. to no. 30; Gardner, Hbk., p. 217, n. 1. On the sculptor, see Lechat, p. 380 and n. 4, and pp. 454 f.; Collignon, I, pp. 316 f.; Joubin, pp. 14 f., 83 f., 92 f., etc.; Brunn, pp. 63 f.; Gardner, Hbk., pp. 216 f.; and especially Pfuhl, in Pauly-Wissowa, VII, pp. 2189 f.

867 For Myron, see Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 57. Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 196, Mw., 379–80, thinks that the connection is not literally true, even if considerations of chronology are not against it, and derives the story of Hagelaïdas teaching Myron from the similarity between the work of the two. For Polykleitos, see Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 55. The tradition that Hagelaïdas was the master of Polykleitos has been unreasonably assailed by many scholars: e. g., by Robert, Arch. Maerchen, 1886, p. 97; Mahler, Polyklet u. s. Sch., 3912, pp. 6 f.; Klein, I, p. 340; cf. II, p. 143; cf. Springer-Michaelis, I, p. 210. Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 196, Mw., p. 380, believes it impossible because of chronological difficulties, and assumes a sculptor of an intermediate generation as the teacher of Polykleitos; he, followed by Mahler, l. c., and Klein, I, 340, names Argeiadas (mentioned in I. G. B., no. 30) as this intermediate artist. However, he admits that the statement is true in a general sense, since Polykleitos developed his canon from that of Hagelaïdas: cf. 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 149; Pfuhl, however, p. 2192, has shown that the relationship is perfectly possible.

868 To be mentioned infra, p. III and note 2.

869 Dio Chrysost., de Hom. et Socr., 1; here Mueller amends the MSS. reading ΗΠΟΥ to ΗΓΙΟΥ; E. A. Gardner, Class. Rev., 1894, p. 70, wrongly reads Ἡγελάδου.

870 Mp., pp. 53 and 196; Mw., pp. 80–81, and 380.

871 Wilamowitz has shown that it comes from Apollonios, son of Chairis, who lived circa 100 B. C., and that it goes back probably to the Chronica of Apollodoros of Athens, who lived in the middle of the second century B. C.: Aus Kydathen (Kiessling and Wilamowitz, Philolog. Untersuchungen, I, 1880), pp. 154 f. Kalkmann, in his Quellen der Kunstgesch. d. Plinius, p. 41, believes that the date which is given by Pliny (XXXIV, 49) for the floruit of Hagelaïdas, Ol. 87 ( = 423–429 B. C.), comes from the same Apollodoros.

872 Op. cit., pp. 41 and 65 f.; Pfuhl, p. 2194. Brunn, l. c., Overbeck, I, p. 140, and Robert, l. c., had assumed an earlier plague at the beginning of the fifth century B. C.; but the real occasion for the dedication of the Herakles remains obscure.

873 P., IV, 33.2.

874 P., VI, 8.6; Hyde, 82; Foerster, 142, 148.

875 P., VI, 14.11; Hyde, 132; Foerster, 133, 134.

876 P., VI, 10.6 f.; Hyde, 99; Foerster, 143. There is no reason for following Brunn in his contention that these statues were set up some time after the victories, as these dates fit the chronology of the artist outlined above.

877 A fifth-century type of statue occurs on these coins, representing the god standing with the left foot forward, the knee slightly bent, a thunderbolt held in the extended right hand and an eagle in the extended left: B. M. Coins, Pelop., Pl. XXII, nos. 1 and 6; Hitz.-Bluemn., I, 2, Muenztafel, III, 20 and 12; Springer-Michaelis, I, p. 211, fig. 393; Collignon, I, p. 318, figs. 158–159. Frickenhaus, quoted by Pfuhl, p. 2194, believes that the pose is seen also in the small bronze pictured in B. S. A., III, 1896–7, Pl. X, 1.

878 P., VII, 24.4. See B. M. Coins, Pelop., Pl. IV, nos. 12 and 17, and cf. 14; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 1, Muenztafel, IV, 16–17; Svoronos, Journ. int. d’arch. num., II, 1898, 302, Pl. 14, 11.

879 Furtwaengler, 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1890 (Eine argivische Bronze), pp. 152–153 and Pl. I (3 views); from which plate Gardner, Hbk., p. 221, fig. 49; Waldstein, J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, p. 131, fig. 1; Gardiner, p. 93, fig. 11; von Mach, 17 b; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 85, 1; cf. Frost, J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, pp. 223 f., and fig. 1, who compares its style and pose with a later bronze statuette found off Cerigotto (Arch. Eph., 1902, Pl. 14). Ligourió is on the site of the ancient Lessa: Curtius, Peloponnesos, II, 1852, p. 418. The bronze without the base is 135 millimeters high (Furtwaengler).

880 B. B., 302; Bulle, 43; Springer-Michaelis, p. 234, fig. 428; Furtw., Mp., p. 52, fig. 10 (upper part); Mw., p. 79, fig. 3; Overbeck, II, p. 473, fig. 228 b. It is 1.60 meters high (Bulle).

881 Listed by Furtwaengler, 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 139, n. 61. For the relation of these copies to each other, id., Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., XIV, 1894, pp. 81 f.; he ascribes them to Hegias.

882 B. B., no. 301; Bulle, 41; von Mach, 321; Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1846; Guide, 744; Baum., II, p. 1191, fig. 1391; Collignon, II, p. 661, fig. 346; Overbeck, II, p. 473, fig. 228, a; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 588, 9; F. W., 225; A. Z., XXXVI, 1878, Pl. XV, and pp. 123 f.; Annali, XXXVIII, 1865, Pl. D and pp. 58 f.; Kekulé, Gruppe des Kuenstlers Menelaos in Villa Ludovisi, 1870, Pl. II, 2, pp. 20 f.; Joubin, p. 87, fig. 15; Springer-Michaelis, p. 211, fig. 398. The best copy of the head of the statue by Stephanos is in the Lateran Museum, Rome: see Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 217, fig. 92; Mw., p. 405, fig. 62. The statue is 1.44 meters high (Bulle). For the inscription on the tree-trunk, see I. G. B., no. 374.

883 The best example is in Naples, the group being known, and probably correctly, since Winckelmann’s day, as Orestes and Elektra: B. B., no. 306; Kekulé, Gruppe d. Menelaos, Pl. II, 1; Bulle, 141 (height 1.44 meters); Collignon, II, pp. 662, fig. 347; Gardner, Hbk., p. 557, fig. 151; Clarac, V, 836, 2093; Reinach, Rép., I, 506.4. A sketch of the Naples Orestes and the Ligourió bronze, showing their great resemblance, is given by Furtwaengler, 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 137. A replica of the female figure is cited by Michaelis as in Marbury Hall, England: p. 503, no. 6; cf. Conze, Beitraege zur Gesch. d. gr. Pl.2, p. 25, n. 3.

884 E. g., the so-called group of Orestes and Pylades in the Louvre: von Mach, 323; Collignon, II, p. 663, fig. 348; Reinach, Rép., I, 161, 2 (= Mercury and Vulcan).

885 Kalkmann, 53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1893, pp. 77 f., thought that the Stephanos figure went back to an original by Pythagoras, the rival of Myron, which Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 49, rightly characterizes as “wide of the mark”; Pfuhl, p. 2197, Bulle, and others regard its ascription to the school of Hagelaïdas as probable, even if not capable of proof. Furtwaengler, 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 152, believes it was vermutlich ein Werk des Meisters (i. e., Hagelaïdas) selbst: on pp. 146–7 he pronounces the life-size marble torso of a statue of a nude man found in a wall over the ruins of the Palaistra at Olympia (Treu, A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, p. 45)—because of its resemblance in pose to that of the Ligourió statuette—a Roman school copy of an original bronze victor statue going back to Hagelaïdas.

886 E. g., the marble group formerly in the Boncompagni-Ludovisi collection, now in the Museo delle Terme, Rome: Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1314; Guide, 887; B. B., no. 309; von Mach, 322; Baum., II, p. 1193, fig. 1393; Springer-Michaelis, p. 454, fig. 834; Kekulé, Die Gruppe d. Menelaos, Pl. I; Schreiber, Bildw. d. Villa Ludovisi, p. 89, no. 69; Collignon, II, p. 665, fig. 349; F. W., 1560; Reinach, Rép., I, 506, 6.

887 V, 10.8.

888 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 72, and XXXVI, 16.

889 See Brunn, pp. 236–7 and 244–5.

890 Loeschke (Dorpaterprogr., 1887, p. 7, on the basis of an early suggestion of Furtwaengler in A. M., III, 1878, p. 194) and J. Six (J. H. S., X, 1889, pp. 109 f.), assumed two sculptors of the name of Alkamenes, ascribing the gable statues and that of Hera at Phaleron (mentioned by P., I, 1.5) to the elder one. Furtwaengler later retracted the theory of two artists and assumed but one (Mp., p. 90, n. 3; Mw., p. 122 and n. 6). Koepp has shown that the Hera is of no use in dating, since the story of Pausanias that the temple of Hera was destroyed by the Persians is an invention (Jb., V, 1890, p. 277). The idea of an elder Alkamenes based on the inscription on a herm recently found in Pergamon (A. A., 1904, fig. on p. 76) has also been refuted by Winter (A. M., XXIX, 1904, pp. 208–211, and Pls. XVIII-XXI), who has shown that the inscription and statue do not go so far back.

891 See Baum., pp. 1104 KK.

892 P. 243.

893 A. Z., XLI, 1883, pp. 141 f.

894 No. 135.

895 Arch. Stud. H. Brunn dargebr., pp. 67 f.

896 A. M., VII, 1882, pp. 206 f. He also found the style of the two pediments unlike.

897 A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, p. 78, n. (= Argive-Sikyonian); cf. Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 44–95; Tafelbd., Pls. IX-XVII (East Gable), XXII-XXXI (West Gable).

898 A. M., XII, 1887, pp. 374–5 (= Argive-Sikyonian); cf. R. M., II, 1887, pp. 53 f., where he excepts the four corner figures of the West Gable as Attic, because they are of Pentelic marble, and not Parian, like the others.

899 I, pp. 460–1.

900 I, p. 330 (= Elean).

901 For a discussion of the whole question of the artists, see Hitz.-Bluemn., II, i, pp. 329 f.; Frazer, III, pp. 512 f. For a restoration of the two groups, see Treu, Jb., III, 1888, Pls. 5, 6 (West), and ibid., IV, 1889, Pls. 8, 9 (East); whence Gardner, Hbk., p. 246, figs, 57 and 56 respectively; see also Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pls. XVIII-XXI; Textbd., pp. 114–137; Overbeck, I, Pl. opp. p. 309; etc.

902 Richardson, p. 101, fig. 49 (side), and p. 154 for the statement; Lechat, Au Musée, Pl. XVI; Bulle, pp. 462–3, figs. 135, 136; B. B., no. 461 (middle row, bottom); A. M., XII, 1887, pp. 372 f. (Studniczka); de Ridder, no. 467; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 679, fig. 347; it is 0.10 meter high (Graef., A. M., XV, 1890, p. 16, n. 1). For the figure of Apollo, see Bulle, no. 42; Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. XXII, and Textbd., p. 69; von Mach, 86 (statue), 446 (head). The original height was 3.10 meters (Bulle).

903 Mp., p. 53; Mw., p. 80; 50stes Bert. Winckelmannsprogr., pp. 140–1 and 148.

904 The torso was found in 1865, the head in 1888: torso, A. M., V, 1880, p. 20 and Pl. I, with wrong head (Furtwaengler); head, Arch. Eph., 1888, p. 81 and Pl. III; figure in outline, Collignon, I, pp. 374–5, figs. 191–2; Dickins, no. 698, pp. 264 f.; B. B., 461 b; Bulle, 40 and figs. 15, 14 on pp. 87–8 (from a cast); von Mach, 57; Overbeck, I, p. 205, fig. 48; Lechat, p. 452, fig. 38; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 588, 1; Springer-Michaelis, p. 217, fig. 403; Furtwaengler, A. A., 1889, p. 147, Mw., pp. 76, n. 2, and 81; Wolters, A. M., XIII, 1888, p. 226. Bulle dates it toward 480 B. C.

905 The same turn appears in the sixth-century Rampin head: Collignon, I, p. 360, fig. 182. It will be discussed later on, pp. 126–127.

906 Furtwaengler, 50stes Bert. Winckelmannsprogr., pp. 132 and 150; Mp., p. 19; Dickins, p. 265.

907 It is a dedication by Euthydikos: Collignon, I, Pl. VI (right), opp. p. 356; von Mach, no. 26 (right); Gardner, Hbk., p. 212, fig. 47; Bulle, 240; Lechat, Au Musée, p. 367, fig. 37; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 595, fig. 299; Richardson, p. 78, fig. 33; Springer-Michaelis, p. 207, fig. 390. Bulle gives it as half life-size.

908 Dickins, pp. 248 f., no. 689; Bulle, no. 198; B. B., 460; von Mach, 440 and 443 (left); Collignon, I, p. 362, fig. 184, and bibliog., note 3, p. 363; Overbeck, I, p. 206, fig. 49; Gardner, Hbk., p. 213, fig. 48; Lechat, p. 362 and Au Musée, p. 374, fig. 39; Furtw., 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 151; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pl. XIV; Arch. Eph., III, 1888, Pl. II. It is slightly under life-size.

909 Here again Furtwaengler ascribes it to Hegias, whose art he derives from Hagelaïdas.

910 Richter, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes in the Metropolitan Museum, p. 49, fig. 78; it will be discussed infra in Ch. IV, pp. 220–1.

911 See supra, p. 105 and n. 3.

912 On Chrysothemis, see Robert in Pauly-Wissowa, III, 2, p. 2521; Brunn, pp. 61–2; Overbeck, I, p. 140; Collignon, I, pp. 225 (= forerunners of Hagelaïdas and Polykleitos), and cf. p. 320. On Eutelidas, see Pauly-Wissowa, VI, 1, p. 1493.

913 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 55; others, e. g., P., VI, 6.2, call him an Argive. He belonged to a family of sculptors, some of whom worked in Sikyon and others in Argos.

914 Kyniskos: P., VI, 4.11; Hyde, 45; Foerster, 255; Inschr. v. Ol., 149; Pythokles: P., VI, 7.10; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 70; Foerster, 295; Inschr. v. Ol., 162–3; Aristion: P., VI, 13.6; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 115; Foerster, 376; Inschr. v. Ol., 165 (renewed); I. G. B., 92; Thersilochos: P., VI, 13.6; Hyde, 114; Foerster, 369.

915 H. N., XXXIV, 91. In the same book, § 72, Pliny mentions another pupil of Polykleitos, Aristeides, as the fashioner of chariot-groups. Pausanias merely mentions him in connection with improvements in the hippodrome at Olympia made by Kleoitas: VI, 20.14; see Pauly-Wissowa, II, pp. 896–7.

916 Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 226, makes Naukydes, Daidalos, and the younger Polykleitos sons of Patrokles, the brother of the great Polykleitos. Naukydes and Daidalos describe themselves as sons of Patrokles in two inscriptions: I. G. B., 86 and 88. Pausanias, however, calls Naukydes a brother of Polykleitos and son of Mothon: II, 22.7.

917 Cheimon: P., VI, 9.3; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 88; Foerster, 285; Baukis: P., VI, 8.4; Hyde, 77; Foerster, 318; Eukles: P., VI, 6.2; Hyde, 52; Foerster, 297; Inschr. v. Ol., 159 (renewed). Naukydes’ activity extended from Ol. 83 to Ol. 95 ( = 448–400 B. C.): Hyde, p. 39.

918 H. N., XXXIV, 49.

919 P., VI, 8.1; Hyde, 72; Foerster, 268.

920 P., VI, 6.2, expressly distinguishes between the elder and younger Polykleitos; in speaking of the statue of the boy wrestler Agenor, he says that Polykleitos, the pupil of Naukydes, “not the one who made the statue of Hera,” fashioned it. Robert, O. S., pp. 186 f., gives his activity as Ols. 98 to 103 ( = 388–368 B. C.).

921 Antipatros: P., VI, 2.6; Hyde, 16; Foerster, 309; Agenor: P., VI, 6.2; Hyde, 53; Foerster, 355; Xenokles: P., VI, 9.2; Hyde, 85; Foerster, 308; Inschr. v. Ol., 164; I. G. B., 90; Furtwaengler wrongly ascribed the statue of Xenokles to the elder Polykleitos and that of Aristion to the younger: Mp., pp. 224–5. Loewy had already assumed the eider for Aristion, Strena Helbigiana, p. 180, n. 4, and this was confirmed by the early dating of his victory in the Oxy. Pap.

922 P., VI, 16.7; Hyde, 162; Foerster, 515. On this sculptor, see Pauly-Wissowa, I, p. 2137; I. G. B., 475; Inschr. v. Ol., 318; etc.

923 Before 600 B. C.; Robert, in Pauly-Wissowa, V, pp. 1159 f.; cf. Collignon, I, pp. 131 and 222 f.; Overbeck, I, pp. 84 f.

924 P., VI, 9.1, f.

925 Antipatros of Sidon, in A. Pl. (XVI), no. 220; on Aristokles, see Pauly-Wissowa, II, p. 937; Robert, Arch. Maerch., pp. 95 ff.

926 Longpérier, Notice des bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1868, no. 69; de Ridder, Les bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1913, Pl. 2, 2, and p. 7; B. B., no. 78; Collignon, I, Pl. V, opp. p. 312; von Mach, 18 (two views); Overbeck, I, p. 235, fig. 60 (two views); Springer-Michaelis, p. 211, fig. 397; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pl. XI; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 84, 9. For bibliography, see Deonna, Les Apollons archaïques, p. 274. It is only 3 feet 4 inches tall. The Apollo Philesios, stolen from Miletos at the destruction of the city by Darius in 493 B. C. (Hdt., VI, 19; but P., VIII, 46.3, and later writers wrongly say by Xerxes; see E. Meyer, Gesch. d. Altertums,2 1912, III, p. 309), was restored from Ekbatana in Media in 306 B. C. by Seleukos Nikator (P., l. c., and cf. I, 16.3). It is also mentioned by P., II, 10.5. The genuineness of the Piombino statuette has been assailed, but Overbeck has proved it genuinely archaic: Griech. Kunstmyth., III, Apollon, 1889, pp. 22 f.; cf. Gesch. d. gr. Pl., I, pp. 234 f.

927 H. N., XXXIV, 75; cf. Jex-Blake ad loc., p. 60. Pausanias mentions a cedar replica of the Apollo at Thebes: II, 10.5 and IX, 10.2. See p. 336, n. 1.

928 P. Gardner, The Types of Greek Coins, 1883, Pl. XV, nos. 15–16; Collignon, I, p. 312, figs. 153–155; cf. B. Head, Historia Nummorum^2, 1911, p. 586; Overbeck, Apollon, pp. 23 f., and Muenztafel I, nos. 22 f. Also on gems: see M. W., I, Pl. XV, no. 61; B. M. Gems, no. 720; etc.

929 L. c.

930 B. M. Bronzes, no. 209 and Pl. I (middle); Specimens, Pl. 12; Annali, VI, 1834, Pl. D, fig. 4; Overbeck, I, p. 144, fig. 24, and Apollon, p. 24, fig. 5; Murray, I, p. 193, fig. 49; Rayet et Thomas, Milet et le golfe Latmique, Pl. 28, 2; Collignon, I, p. 313, fig. 156; Dar.-Sagl., I, p. 318, fig. 375; von Mach, 17 a; Springer-Michaelis, p. 183, fig. 350; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 475, fig. 242; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 80, 9; Fowler and Wheeler, Hbk. of Greek Archæology, 1909, p. 331, fig. 251; Furtwaengler, in Roscher, Lex., I, 1, p. 451; Frazer, IV, p. 430, fig. 45, Bulle, 28 (middle). A modern copy is in the Antiquarium, Munich: F. W., 51. It is 0.185 meter high (Bulle).

931 R. M., II, 1887, pp. 90 f. (Studniczka) and Pls. IV, IV a, V; Collignon, I, p. 321, fig. 161; Overbeck, I, p. 239, fig. 62; Michaelis in A. Z., XXI, 1863, pp. 122 f. (Anzeiger). It is 1.11 meters in height.

932 Collignon, I, p. 253, fig. 122; Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmythol., III, Apollon, p. 36, fig. 8; Fraenkel, in A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, pp. 84–91, and Pl. 7.

933 The small bronze also found there, 0.155 meter high, belongs to the same series: B. C. H., X, 1886, pp. 190 f., and Pl. IX. It greatly resembles the statuette from Naxos. For a list of replicas of the statue of Kanachos, see Rayet, Études d’archéologie et d’art, p. 164; etc.

934 On the style of Kanachos and the Apollo, see also Kekulé, Sitzb. d. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1904, I, pp. 786–801; O. Mueller, Kleine Schriften, II, p. 537; F. W., to no. 51; Brunn, pp. 74 f.; Collignon, I, pp. 310 f.; etc.

935 P., VI, 1.3 and 8.5; Hyde, 1, 2, 3, and 78; Foerster, 296, 300, 299, 290 and 305; on Alypos, see Pauly-Wissowa, I, p. 1711; Brunn, p. 280; B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 287 f.; and cf. P., X, 9.10.

936 P., VI, 13.7; Hyde, 116; Foerster, 291; on the sculptor, see Brunn, p. 277.

937 P., VI, 3.13; Hyde, 34; Foerster, 575; on the sculptor, see Brunn, pp. 292 and 419; cf. Hyde, p. 34.

938 Timon and Aigyptos, who won some time between Ols. (?) 98 and 101: P., VI, 2.8; Hyde, 17, 18; Foerster, 310, 301; Aristodemos, Ol. 98: P., VI, 3.4; Hyde, 25; Foerster, 312; Eupolemos, Ol. 96: Afr.; P., VI, 3.7; Hyde, 28; Foerster, 294. On Daidalos, see Pauly-Wissowa, IV, pp. 2006 f.; Robert, O. S., pp. 191 f.; Brunn, pp. 14 f.

939 P., VI, 3.5; Hyde, 26; Foerster, 325. On Damokritos, see Pauly-Wissowa, IV, p. 2070; Brunn, p. 105.

940 Deinolochos: P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 5; Foerster, 330; Hysmon: P., VI, 3.9; Hyde, 31; Foerster, 347; Kritodamos: P., VI, 8.5; Hyde, 80; Foerster, 337; Inschr. v. Ol., 167; I. G. B., no. 96; Alketos: P., VI, 9.2; Hyde, 86; Foerster, 320; Lykinos: P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 100; Foerster, 336. On Kleon, see Brunn, pp. 285; I. G. B., to no. 95.

941 Troilos: P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 6; Foerster, 338 and 345; Inschr. v. Ol., 166; the dates of his two victories, Ols. 102, 103, are known; Philandridas: P., VI, 2.1; Hyde, 10; Foerster, 393; his victory fell either in Ol. 102 or Ol. 103; Cheilon: P., VI, 4.6–7; Hyde, 41; Foerster, 384 and 392; P., because of the dating of Lysippos, inferred that this victor fell either at Chæroneia (338 B. C.) or Lamia (322 B. C.), both of which dates fall within the working years of the sculptor; see P. Gardner, J. H. S., XXV, 1905, p. 246; Polydamas: P., VI, 5.1; Hyde, 47; Foerster, 279; Africanus gives us the date of his victory as Ol. 93, though the statue was set up after the victor’s death; Kallikrates, of Magnesia on the Mæander: P., VI, 17.3; Hyde, 175; Foerster, 390 and 397 (for two victories). Lysippos made two honor statues for Pythes of Abdera: P., VI, 14.12; Hyde, 134 a.

942 Kallon: P., VI, 12.6; Hyde, 106; Foerster, 410; Nikandros: P., VI, 16.5; Hyde, 157; Foerster, 408 and 413 (two victories). On the sculptor, see Pauly-Wissowa, IV, p. 2013; Brunn, p. 407.

943 P., VI, 17.5; Hyde, 181; Foerster, 401. On Daitondas, see Robert in Pauly-Wissowa, IV, p. 2015 (who dates the sculptor at the beginning of the third century B. C., because of an inscribed base found at Delphi: I. G. B., 97; C. I. G. G. S., I, 2472); cf. Schmidt, A. M., V, 1880, pp. 197–8, no. 58; cf. Brunn, p. 418.

944 P., VI, 2.6 f.; Hyde, 15; Foerster, 424.

945 H. N., XXXIV, 51; cf. XXXIV, 78 (for his image of the Eurotas river); XXXV, 141 (as painter). The Tyche is mentioned by P., VI, 2.7. Many copies of this work in marble, bronze, and silver have been identified, especially a marble statuette in the Vatican: B. B., no. 154; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 362; F. W., 1396; von Mach, 256; etc. For a list of copies, see R. Foerster, Jb., XII, 1897, pp. 145 f.; cf. Amelung, Fuehrer d. Florenz, nos. 261–2; and P. Gardner, J. H. S., IX, 1888, pp. 75 f. and Pl. V (silver statuette). On the sculptor, see Robert in Pauly-Wissowa, VI, pp. 1532–3; Brunn, I, pp. 411 f.; II, p. 157 (painter); Overbeck, II, pp. 172 f.; Collignon II, pp. 485 f.; Murray^2, II, pp. 354 f. Robert, l. c., gives three other sculptors of the same name; cf. I. G. B., nos. 143 and 244–9; Homolle, B. C. H., XVIII, 1894, pp. 336 f.

946 Kratinos: P., VI, 3.6; Hyde, 27; Foerster, 433; Alexinikos: P., VI, 17.7; Hyde, 184; Foerster, 438. On the sculptor, see Pliny, XXXIV, 85; Brunn, p. 415.

947 P., V, 25.12–13.

948 P., V, 27.8 (= joint work of Onatas and Kalliteles).

949 P., V, 25.8 f. The base has been found in situ east of the temple of Zeus: Ergebn. v. Ol., Tafelbd., II, Pl. XVII, 12; Textbd., pp. 145 f. See Plans A and B.

950 P., VI, 12.1. Hiero won three victories in Ols. 76, 77, 78 ( = 476–468 B. C.): Oxy. Pap., Hyde, 105; Foerster, 199, 209, 215. The monument was dedicated in 467 B. C. after the death of the king. For the sculptor, see Brunn, p. 88.

951 P., VI, 9.4–5; Hyde, 90; Foerster, 180; Inschr. v. Ol., 143.

952 Philon: P., VI, 9.9; Hyde, 91; Foerster, 167 and 179; he won in Ols. (?) 72 and 73 ( = 492 and 488 B. C.); Glaukos (boy boxer): P., VI, 10.1–3; Hyde, 93; Foerster, 137; he won in Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.), but his statue was set up by his son at the beginning of the fifth century B. C.: Hyde, p. 42; Theagenes: P., VI, 11.2 f.; he won in Ols. 75 and 76 ( = 480 and 476 B. C.): Oxy. Pap., Hyde, 104; Foerster, 191, 196.

953 For the meaning of the word σκιαμαχεῖν, see infra, Ch. IV, p. 243 and n. 4.

954 Theognetos: P., VI, 9.1; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 83; Foerster, 193, 193 N; Epikradios: P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 101; Foerster, 228.

955 P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 103 and p. 44; Foerster, 519. On the sculptor, see Brunn, p. 96.

956 P., VI, 14.2; Hyde, 133; Foerster, 327. For the sculptor, see Brunn, p. 96.

957 Lechat, Au Musée, Pl. XV; Arch. Eph., 1887, Pl. III and pp. 43 f.; Bulle, 226 (two views); von Mach, 442, 443 (right); S. Reinach, Têtes, nos. 5 and 6; Overbeck, I, p. 198, fig. 44 (two views); Collignon, I, p. 304, fig. 151; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, pp. 526–7, figs. 271–2; E. A. Gardner, J. H. S., VIII, 1887, p. 191. While Overbeck and Lechat regard it as Attic, most scholars call it Aeginetan. The helmet is separately made and fastened on. Bulle dates it in the first decade of the fifth century B. C. It is 0.27 meter high (Bulle).

958 Comparetti e de Petra, La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni, 1883, Pl. VII, 1, p. 260; Collignon, I, p. 303, fig. 150; Mon. d. I., IX, 1869–73, Pl. XVIII; Kekulé, Annali, XLII, 1870, pp. 263 f.; von Mach, 441; F. W., 229; for its style, see Rayet, I, text to Pl. 26. Studniczka, R. M., II, 1887, p. 105, n. 47, believes that the closely allied colossal marble head in the Museo Torlonia (no. 501) in Rome is a copy of the colossal Apollo of Onatas at Pergamon, mentioned by P., VIII, 42.7. The head of the Zeus found at Olympia (Bronz. v. Ol., Pl. I, 1, 1 a) has been regarded as Aeginetan.

959 Collignon, I, p. 306; fig. 152 on p. 305.

960 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 206; etc. Brunn, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1872, pp. 529 f., referred it to the school of Kallon; cf. also Collignon, I, p. 302.

961 Gardner, Hbk., p. 169, fig. 31; von Mach, no. 15 (right); etc.

962 Aegina, das Heiligtum der Aphaia, 1906; see Tafelbd., II, Pls. 104 (West Gable), 105 (East Gable), (the pediment groups in colors); whence Gardner, Hbk., p. 226, Pls. 50–51; cf. also Springer-Michaelis, pp. 214–15, figs. 400 (West Gable), 401 (East Gable); fig. 399 gives an older arrangement of the West Gable statues, as set up in plaster in the Strasbourg Museum. Since Furtwaengler’s death new attempts at reconstruction have been made, notably by P. Wolters, Aeginetische Beitraege, and D. Mackenzie, in B. S. A., XV, 1908–09, pp. 274 f. and PI. XIX (East Gable). For various figures, see von Mach, nos. 78–83. See Furtwaengler-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.2, pp. 95 f. and figs. 74 f.

963 While Overbeck dates them about 500 B. C., Furtwaengler, Bulle, Gardner, and others date them about 480 B. C.

964 Hdt., VIII, 93.

965 P., X, 13. 10.

966 Furtw., op. cit., Tafelbd., Pl. 95, no. 82, and Textbd., pp. 248–9, and fig. 178 on p. 23; B. B., no 26; Gardner, Hbk., p. 229, fig. 52; it is from the north half of the gable.

967 Furtw., fig. 204, p. 248.

968 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glyptothek,2 no. 78; Furtw., op. cit., Tafelbd., Pl. 96, no. 32, and Textbd., pp. 223–4; the figure on our plate to the right = Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr., no. 77 and Furtw., op. cit., Pl. 96, no. 29, Textbd., p. 221. No. 78 should stand, however, in front of 77 as arranged by Furtwaengler, op. cit., Tafelbd., Pl. 104, and both should be placed in the south half of the West Pediment and not in the north. For the two figures in Fig. 21, see also von Mach, 78 (middle and right). For another figure (armed with helmet, shield, and spear) from the East Gable, see Bulle, 86 = Furtw.-Wolters, no. 86 (formerly no. 56).

969 Recently these sculptures, and especially the limestone (λίθος πώρινος) fragments, have been dated from 490 B. C., rather than from 480: see Svoronos, I, p. 92. The Akropolis was destroyed by Xerxes in 480 B. C., but it is problematical if with the completeness recorded by Hdt., VIII, 53; see Doerpfeld in A. M., XXVII, 1902, pp. 379 f.; Dickins, pp. 5 f. The next year Mardonios destroyed the city by fire: Hdt., IX, 13.

970 See von Mach, 25 f.; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, pp. 635 f.; for details, Lechat, Au Musée, and Schrader, Die archaischen Marmorskulpturen im Akropolis-Museum zu Athen, 1909. See also Dickins, op. cit.; Perrot-Chipiez, pp. 574 f. and p. 577, fig. 289 (= Au Musée, fig. 26), and p. 578, fig. 290 (= Au Musée, fig. 8); etc.

971 Mon. gr., VII, 1878 (publ. in vol. I, 1882), Pl. I and pp. 1–14 (A. Dumont); Mon. Piot, VII, Pl. XIV, and pp. 146–7 (Lechat); Rayet, I, Pl. 18; Collignon, I, p. 360, fig. 182; Reinach, Têtes, 3, 4; Bulle, 225; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 641, fig. 328.

972 So Richardson, p. 83, and others.

973 So Bulle; he dates it in the first half of the sixth century B. C., doubtless a little too early.

974 It is now in the National Museum at Athens: Kabbadias, no. 38; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 17; Arch. Eph., 1874, p. 484 and Pl. 71, Γ, a (Koumanoudis); Sybel, Kat. d. Skulpt. zu Athen, 1881, no. 2904; von Mach, 351; Overbeck, I, p. 202, fig. 46; Collignon, I, p. 385, fig. 200; F. W., 99; Conze, Die attischen Grabreliefs, I, 1890, Pl. IV, pp. 5–6; Kirchhoff and Curtius, Philolog. u. histor. Abh. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1873, pp. 156 f. (and two illustrations, one of a second fragment); Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 664, fig. 342.

975 The breadth of 14 inches at top would become 30 inches at bottom. A second fragment, apparently belonging to the first, contains a part of the leg: Arch. Eph., 1874, Pl. 71, Γ, b.

976 The same motive occurs on vases: e. g., Gerhard, I, Pl. XXII, and IV, Pl. CCLXXII.

977 This very low relief is the most perfect of the older Attic grave-stelæ, and dates from the second half of the sixth century B. C.: Kabbadias, no. 29; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 15 and fig. (2.40 m. high); Sybel, op. cit., no. 3361; Overbeck, I, p. 200, fig. 45; Conze, Die attischen Grabreliefs, I, Pl. II, 1, p. 4; B. B., no. 41 A; Baum., I, p. 341, fig. 358; Kekulé, Die ant. Bildw. im Theseion, no. 363; Springer-Michaelis, p. 195, fig. 371; F. W., no. 101. Overbeck dates it at the beginning of the fifth century B. C.; Richardson, p. 91 and fig. 43, about 525 B. C. For a duplicate stele from Ikaria, see A. J. A., V, 1889, Pl. I and pp. 9 f. (Buck); Conze, op. cit., I, Pl. II, 2.

978 Dickins, no. 692 and fig.; mentioned by Furtwaengler, A. M., V, 1880, pp. 25 and 32; discussed by R. Delbrueck, ibid., XXV, 1900, pp. 373 f., Pls. XV, XVI (bottom).

979 La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, 1896, Pls. 1, 2 (and text by Arndt); Reinach, Têtes, Pls. 1, 2; Rayet, Mon. gr., VI, 1877 (publ. in vol. I, 1882), Pl. I; id., Ét. d’archéol. et d’art, pp. 1–8 and Pl. I; Collignon, I, pp. 361, fig. 183; B. B., no. 116; Bulle, 197; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 643, fig. 329.

980 Collignon, I, p. 376, fig. 193; Bulle, fig. 128 on p. 440.

981 Brunn-Arndt, Gr. und roem. Portraets, Pls. XXIII-XXIV.

982 Gaz. arch., 1887, Pl. XI.

983 Cf. Arndt, La Glyptothèque Ny-Carlsberg, text to nos. 1 and 2.

984 Sammlung Sabouroff, 1883, I, Einleitung, p. 5.

985 Found in two fragments in 1822 and 1859–60: Dickins, no. 1342, pp. 275 ff., and fig.; B. B., 21; von Mach, 56; Overbeck, I, p. 203 and fig. 47; H. Schrader, A. M., XXX, 1905, pp. 305 f., and Pl. XI. Other references are given infra, p. 269, n. 9.

986 See Hauser, Jb., VII, 1892, pp. 54 f., who discusses the question of the sex of the figure at length.

987 So Hauser, l. c.; followed by Robinson, Cat. Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, no. 33.

988 E. g., Gerhard, I, Pls. XX and XXI.

989 See infra, Ch. V, pp. 269 f.

990 While Schrader (op. cit., p. 313) dates it in the last quarter of the sixth century B. C., Dickins finds it earlier than the remnants of the sculptures of the Hekatompedon and, because of the delicate carving of the drapery and hair, despite its Attic features, calls it “typically Ionian in its elaboration of detail.” However, I follow Overbeck’s date at the beginning of the fifth century B. C. (op. cit. p. 204), and believe that it represents a time near the close of Ionic influence on Attic art.

991 P., VI, 6.1; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208; Inschr. v. Ol., 146.

992 Of the Spartan hoplite and chariot victor Lykinos, who won two victories in Ols. (?) 83 and 84 ( = 448 and 444 B. C.): P., VI, 2.1; Hyde, 12; Foerster, 211 N; of the pancratiast Timanthes of Kleonai, who won in Ol. 81 ( = 456 B. C.): P., VI, 8.4; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 76; Foerster, 232; of the unknown Arkadian boxer, mentioned by P., VI, 8.5, who won in Ol. 80 or Ol. 84 ( = 460 or 444 B. C.): Hyde, 79, and pp. 39–41; cf. Foerster, 222 a, Hyde, 79 a; Inschr. v. Ol., 174; of the Spartan runner Chionis, who won in Ols. 28, 29, 30, 31 ( = 668–656 B. C.), but his statue was erected in Ol. 77 or 78 ( = 472 or 468 B. C.): P., VI, 13.2; Afr.; Hyde, 111 and p. 48; Foerster, 39, 41–6. On two statues of Lykinos, see infra, p. 187, n. 6.

993 Of the Elean boxer Satyros, who won two victories in Ols. (?) 102, 103 ( = 372, 368 B. C.): P., VI, 4.5; Hyde, 39; Foerster, 342, 348; of the boy boxers Telestas and Damaretos of Messene, who won some time between Ols. 102 and 114 ( = 372 and 324 B. C.): P., VI, 14.4; Hyde, 127; Foerster, 378; and P., VI, 14.11; Hyde, 130; Foerster, 373. On the sculptor, see Hyde, p. 35.

994 P., VI, 4.5; Hyde, 40; Foerster, 494.

995 P., VI, 12.8 f.; Hyde, 109; Foerster, 529; cf. Robert, Hermes, XIX, 1884, pp. 306 f. On the artist family of Polykles, his sons Timokles and Timarchides, Polykles Minor and Timarchides Minor, see Robert, l. c., pp. 300 f.; Hyde, pp. 45–47 and table on p. 46.

996 E. g., H. N., XXXIV, 73 (Boëdas); XXXIV, 78 (Euphranor); XXXIV, 90 (Sthennis). In XXXIV, 91, he gives a list of artists who made statues of sacrificantes.

997 In the Iliad, I, 450; VIII, 347; XV, 371; Aischylos, Prom., 1005 (ὑπτιάσμασι χερῶν); etc. On the attitude of prayer in Greek art, see L. Gurlitt, A. M., VI, 1881, pp. 158 f. (who tries to show that the gestures of prayer and adoration were distinct); Sittl, Die Gebaerden der Gr. und Roem., pp. 305 f.; cf. Conze, Jb., I, 1886, pp. 1–13 (on the Praying Boy of Berlin, Pl. 10.) See also Dar.-Sagl., I, pp. 80 f., s. v. adoratio.

998 V, 25. 5.

999 See article by P. Girard and J. Martha in B. C. H., II, 1878, pp. 421 f. (lists of inventories of objects consecrated there).

1000 Scherer, p. 33, shows that the gesture in such statues was meant to invoke victory rather than to pay thanks for one that had been gained.

1001 Scherer agrees with Philostratos, Vit. Apoll. Tyan., IV, 28, that the gesture of the right hand of the statue was one of prayer, and argues from it that many similar statues existed there: p. 31. Rouse wrongly assumes that all such statues were votive: p. 170.

1002 P., VI, 1.7; he won in Ol. (?) 79 ( = 464 B. C.): Hyde, 8; Foerster, 233.

1003 Ol. VII, Argum., Boeckh, p. 158.

1004 Fragm. no. 264 (= F. H. G., II, p. 183).

1005 Fragm. no. 7 (= F. H. G., IV, p. 307).

1006 Diagoras won in Ol. 79 ( = 464 B. C.): P., VI, 7.1 f.; Hyde, 59; Foerster, 220; Inschr. v. Ol., 151 (renewed). For the sculptor of the statue, Kallikles, see Robert, O. S., pp. 194 f. On Diagoras, see van Gelder, Gesch. d. alt. Rhodier, p. 435. Akousilaos won in Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.): P., l. c.; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 60; Foerster, 252.

1007 Beschr. d. Skulpt., Inv. 6306; A. M., VI, 1881, p. 158. Rouse, p. 171, following Scherer, pp. 31 f., doubts if this statue represents the attitude of any of the Olympic victor statues.

1008 She won two victories in Ols. (?) 96, 97 ( = 396, 392 B. C.): P., VI, 1.6 f.; Hyde, 7; Foerster, 326, 333; Inschr. v. Ol., 160 (here the name appears in the uncontracted form Ἀπελλέας).

1009 A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, pp. 151–2 (on no. 301 = Inschr. v. Ol., 160); he is followed by Foerster, l. c.

1010 H. N., XXXIV, 86.

1011 XXXIV, 70. For the motive, see the small bronze in Kassel, representing Aphrodite: Jb., IX, 1894, Pl. IX (two views), and pp. 248–50 (W. Klein), though its connection with Praxiteles must not be pressed; also bronze statuette in British Museum: Bulle, 1, pp. 332 f., and fig. 81.

1012 Described by R. von Schneider, Die Erzstatue vom Helenenberge, in Jahrb. d. Samml. d. oesterr. Kaiserhauses, XV, 1893; illustrated by E. von Sacken, Die ant. Bronz. d. k. k. Muenz.- und Antiken-Cabinetes in Wien, 1871, I, Pls. XXI-XXII, pp. 52 f., and cf. A. M., VI, 1881 p. 155 (Gurlitt).

1013 Cf. F. W., 1562.

1014 C. I. L., III, 2, 4815.

1015 Mp., p. 290; Mw., pp. 506–7.

1016 Beschr. d. ant. Skulpt., no. 2 (for history and bibliography); B. B., 283; von Mach, 273; Bulle, 64; Reinach, Rép., I, 459, 4; cf. Conze, Jb., I, 1886, pp. 1 f.; ibid., pp. 217 (Furtwaengler); ibid., pp. 219 f. (Puchstein); Springer-Michaelis, p. 341, fig. 614. A similar attitude of prayer appears on the figure of Phineus on a r.-f. Attic amphora in the British Museum: A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, pp. 143 f. and Pl. XII, 1 (Flasch). The statue is 1.28 meters high (Bulle).

1017 Loewy, R. M., XVI, 1901, pp. 391 f. and Pls. XVI-XVII, by a comparison with the Vatican Apoxyomenos (Pl. 29), and the Naples resting Hermes (von Mach, 237; Reinach, Rép., I, 367, 1), has shown its Lysippan character; cf. also Mau, l. c. in next note, Bulle, and others, who refer it to the same school; Bulle assigns it possibly to Boëdas, the pupil of Lysippos, who made a praying figure: Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 73; similarly Amelung, in Thieme-Becker, Lex. d. bild. Kuenstler, IV, p. 187, Gardner, Hbk., p. 452, and others.

1018 R. M., XVII, 1902, pp. 101 f.

1019 Muenchner Allg. Ztg., 1902, Nov. 29, Beilage, no. 297; cf., for his restoration of the arms, ibid., 1903, Beilage, no. 277, p. 445 (quoted by von Mach and Bulle, respectively).

1020 Jb., I, 1886, fig. on p. 217; reproduced in A. A., 1904, p. 75 (Conze); also on coins, Jb., III, 1888, pp. 286 f. and Pl. IX (Imhoof-Blumer).

1021 Rev. arch., Sér. IV, II, 1903, pp. 205–10, 411–12 (Lechat), and Pl. XV; reproduced in A. A., l. c. Babelon, C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1904, p. 203, thought that the stele represented a seer in liturgic attitude as on certain coins of Sikyon; he argued, therefore, that the Berlin statue did not represent an athlete.

1022 E. g., Levezow, de juvenis adorantis Signo, Berlin, 1808, p. 12; and Welcker, Das akad. Mus. zu Bonn, p. 42 (quoted by Gurlitt, op. cit. in the next note, p. 157); cf. Scherer, pp. 32–3.

1023 A. M., VI, 1881, pp. 154 f. (Gurlitt), and Pl. V (from cast in Berlin): it is 2.18 meters high and 1.11 meters broad.

1024 In the National Museum, Athens; discussed by Kekulé, Die antiken Bildwerke im Theseion zu Athen, 1869, no. 151; illustrated in Exped. scientifique de Morée, III, 1838, Pl. XLI (= from Aegina).

1025 See O. Jahn in Annali, XX, 1848, pp. 213 f. and Pl. K a (= Orestes); A. Z., XXX, 1872, p. 60, Pl. 46 (Heydemann); Gurlitt, op. cit., p. 156; cf. Sophokles, Aias, 815 f., to explain the scene.

1026 See Richter, Gk., Etrusc., and Rom. Bronz. in the Metropolitan Museum, 1918, no. 89 (7 inches high) and fig. on p. 59; Cat. Class. Coll., p. 115, fig. 73; published by Furtwaengler, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1905, II, p. 264, fig. 1 and Pl. IV (who considered it Etruscan and not Greek); Reinach, Rép., III, 24, 3. Richter, op. cit., no. 79 (11–3/4 inches high), and figs. on p. 53 (two views); Cat. Class. Coll., p. 91, fig. 54; Burlington Fine Arts Club, Cat. Anc. Gk. Art, 1904, p. 46, no. 36, and Pl. LIII; Reinach, Rép., IV, 370, 6.

1027 On the custom of athletes smearing themselves with oil and dust in the palæstra before entering the wrestling match, see Lucian, Anacharsis, sive de exercitationibus, 28.

1028 H. N., XXXV, 144.

1029 Several cited by L. Bloch, R. M., VII, 1892, pp. 88 f.; and especially one in A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, Pl. IV (red-figured krater by Euthymides from Capua, now in Berlin); Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, 1893, p. 570. Cf. Furtw., Mp., p. 259, Mw., p. 466.

1030 Cf. Brunn, Annali, LI, 1879, pp. 201 f.

1031 Michaelis, pp. 601–2, no. 9; Bulle, p. 109, fig. 19; Furtw., Mp., p. 257, fig. 107, Mw., p. 465, fig. 77. It is 1.68 meters high (Michaelis).

1032 It has the same foot position as that on the base of the statue of the boxer Kyniskos, by Polykleitos: Inschr. v. Ol., 149.

1033 E. g., by F. W., 462–4.

1034 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.,2 no. 302; B. B., 132 (= front view, from cast), 134 (left = back view), 135 (= head, from cast, two views); Bulle, 55; Mon. d. I., XI, 1879–83, Pl. VII; Brunn, Annali, LI, 1879, pp. 201 f. and Pl. ST, 1, 2; F. W., 462; Reinach, Rép., I, 522, 2; Clarac, V, 857, 2174; for replicas, Furtw., Mw., p. 466, n. 4 and Mp., p. 259, n. 4; Duetschke, IV, pp. 53 f. on no. 82; etc. It is 1.93 meters high with the plinth, 1.80 meters without (Furtw.-Wolters).

1035 The right arm is wrongly restored in the Munich statue; its proper restoration is given in a cast in Brunswick: Bulle, p. 112, fig. 20. Bulle, however, says that the Munich statue may be that of a boxer and not of an oil-pourer (wrestler).

1036 Pointed out by Kekulé, Ueber den Kopf des Praxitelischen Hermes, 1881, p. 8.

1037 H. N., XXXIV, 72; Klein, Praxiteles, 1898, p. 50; id., Arch.-epigr. Mitt. aus Oest., XIV, 1891, pp. 6–9. We have discussed it supra, p. 77.

1038 For the Marsyas in the Lateran Museum in Rome, see Bulle, no. 95, and text, pp. 183 f., and Helbig, Fuehrer, II, no. 1179. See Brunn, op. cit., p. 204.

1039 B. B., 557, text by Sieveking; described also by Furtwaengler, Beschr. d. Glypt.,2 p. 313.

1040 F. W., no. 463; Annali, LI, 1879, Pl. ST, 3; B. B., 133 (= front view), 134 (right = back view); Furtw., Mp., pp. 259–60, Mw., pp. 467–8; for list of replicas of this torso, see Mp., p. 259, n. 9, Mw., p. 467, n. 4. Brunn, op. cit., p. 217, thought it a copy of the Munich statue.

1041 One in Turin, F. W., 464; Duetschke, IV, no. 82; two statuettes in the Vatican (Braccio Nuovo), discussed by Bloch in R. M., VII, 1892, pp. 93 f.; Helbig, Guide, nos. 42 and 44.

1042 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.,2 no. 458; Clarac, Pl. 858, 2175; Furtw., Mp., pp. 263 f.; Mw., pp. 473 f. It is 1.54 meters high. A replica is in the Vatican: see Furtwaengler, l. c.; we shall treat it later in reference to the statue of the pentathlete Pythokles; Hyde, 70; Foerster, 295; Inschr. v. Ol., 162–3; see infra, p. 144 and n. 4.

1043 B. M. Bronzes, no. 514, on p. 71, and Pl. XVI; Specimens, I, Pl. 15; Reinach, Rép., II, 91, 7; Mon. gr., II, no. 23, Pl. XV and p. 1 (ascribing it to the Argive school). It forms the basis for a mirror.

1044 Furtwaengler, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1897, II, pp. 129 f. and Pl. 6 (influence of Kalamïs).

1045 B. C. H., X, 1886, pp. 393 f. (S. Reinach) and Pl. XII, 3 (this should be numbered XIV, 4; see text); Pottier et Reinach, Nécrop. de Myrina, Pl. XLI, 3, pp. 450 f. It is 0.205 meter high.

1046 E. g., F. W., 1798; relief found in 1830 in Hermione, now in Athens; it is of the second or third century B. C.

1047 E. g., on the stone of Gnaios: Jb., III, 1888, pp. 315 f., no. 3; Pl. X, no. 12; Furtwaengler, Die antiken Gemmen, 1900, Pl. L, no. 9, and Vol. II, p. 241; also on the gem pictured by Toelken, Erklaer. Verzeichn. d. ant. vertieft geschnittenen Steine d. preuss. Gemmensammlung, 1835, Klasse VI, 107 (= Die ant. Gemmen, Pl. XLIV, no. 24, and Vol. II, pp. 213); Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 260, n. 6, and Mw., p. 468, n. 4, who mentions it, believes that these gems correspond more nearly with the Dresden than with the Petworth athlete type.

1048 The strigil was a curved blade hollowed out inside with both edges sharp; the general form remained largely the same from the sixth century B. C., down into Roman days, though the curve and the handle changed. The commonest were of bronze or iron: see Dar.-Sagl., IV, 2, pp. 1532 f., s. v. strigilis (S. Dorigny); K. Friederichs, Kleinere Kunst und Industrie im Altertum, 1871, pp. 88 f. Examples in the Metropolitan Museum, New York, are given by Richter, in Gk., Etr. and Rom. Bronzes, nos. 855 f.; others (strigils and handles) are in the British Museum: B. M. Bronzes, nos. 320–326, 665, and 2420–2454, and figs. 74–75, p. 319; on the operation, see Kuppers, Der Apoxyomenos des Lysippos, 1874.

1049 E. g., on an amphora in Vienna: Schneider, Arch.-epigr. Mitt. aus Oest., V, 1881, p. 139, Pl. IV; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, I. p. 334, no. 25 and Pl. (right-hand fig.); on a kylix formerly in possession of Lucien Bonaparte, now in the British Museum, E 83: Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLXXVII, 2 (left-hand figure), and p. 50; Murray, Designs from Greek Vases, no. 58; others on which the athlete is cleansing the strigil and not the body are given by Hartwig in Jh. oest. arch. Inst., IV, 1901, p. 154 and figs. 178 (Peleus on krater from Bologna), 179 (athlete on B. M. vase mentioned above, E. 83, third figure from left, middle row), 180 (cup in Rome, Museo Gregoriano), 181 (jug, ibid.); Hartwig, pp. 153–4, mentions an athlete on a cup in the Museo Papa Giulio, Rome. For the motive of an apoxyomenos on a vase in the Louvre, see Hartwig, Die greich. Meisterchalen, pp. 24 f. and fig. 2a.

1050 H. N., XXXIV, 55, 62 and 76, respectively.

1051 Pliny, XXXIV, 86 and 87, respectively.

1052 A list is given by Furtw., Mp., p. 262, n. 2; Mw., p. 471, n. 1; a gem from the Hermitage is shown in Mp., p. 262, fig. 109; Mw., p. 471, fig. 79; = Die antiken Gemmen, Pl. XLIV, no. 19; cf. also ibid., no. 18; Hartwig, in the article cited in note 1 above, adds two more gems showing an athlete in a similar position, in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts: p. 155, figs. 183, 184. Here the youth, as Hartwig against the interpretation of Furtwaengler makes clear, is cleansing the strigil and not his body.

1053 So J. Sieveking, Die Bronzen der Samml. Loeb, 1913, Pl. 11, pp. 27 f.; cf. Burlington Fine Arts Club, Cat. Anc. Gk. Art, 1904, Pl. 50, B. 47, and von Duhn, Sitzb. d. Heidelberger Akad. d. W., Abt. 6, p. 9. It is 0.09 meter high.

1054 Von Mach, 235; F. W., 1264; Reinach, Rép., I, 515, 6 and 7; cf. II, 2, 546, 2; etc.

1055 H. N., XXXIV. 65.

1056 Infra, pp. 288 f.

1057 Amelung, Fuehrer, no. 25; Duetschke, III, 72 (1.93 meters high); B. B., 523–4 (text by Arndt); Bulle, p. 116, fig. 21; cf. Helbig, Guide, I, pp. 26 f., on nos. 42 and 44 (statuettes); Benndorf, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., 1898, Beiblatt, pp. 66 f.; Klein, Praxiteles, pp. 51 f.; Furtw., Mp., pp. 261–2; Mw., pp. 469–71; Bloch, R. M., VII, 1892, pp. 81 F., and fig. on p. 83 and Pl. III (head, two views). The right underarm and hand and the left underarm and part of the hand, the vase, and the basis, are all modern restorations.

1058 Die antiken Gemmen, Pl. XLIV, no. 17, and text, II, p. 212; Mp., p. 261, fig. 108; Mw., p. 470, fig. 78; Hartwig, in Berl. Phil. Wochenschr., XVII, Jan. 2, 1897, p. 31, corrects the mistake of Furtwaengler and Amelung that the athlete on the gem is cleansing the thigh and not the strigil itself.

1059 Arndt dates it about 400 B. C.; Furtwaengler ascribes it and the Dresden torso of the Oil-pourer, already discussed, to an Attic master of the end of the fifth or beginning of the fourth century B. C.

1060 Listed by Furtw., Mp., p. 262, n. 1; Mw., p. 470, n. 5. Especially the reduced mediocre copy in the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican: Helbig, Guide, no. 45; Clarac, 861, 2183; R. M., VII, 1892, pp. 92 f., and fig.

1061 Bulle, no. 60 (who dates it in the middle of the fourth century B. C., and considers it a copy of an original statue); Hauser, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., V, 1902, pp. 214 f. and fig. 68; Springer-Michaelis, p. 297, fig. 530; cf. A. J. A., VII, 1902, pp. 352–3, figs. 1 and 2. It is 1.925 meters high (Bulle).

1062 Babelon et Blanchet, Cat. des bronzes antiques de la Biblioth. Nat., 1895, no. 934, p. 411; it is 0.075 meter high.

1063 Discussed by P. Hartwig, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., IV, 1901, pp. 151–9, figs. 176 and 177 (four views of statuette), and Pls. V-VI (two views of the head). Without its base it is 0.679 meter high.

1064 It is in the Hamilton Coll.; see B. M. Cat. Engraved Gems, 1888, no. 335; cf. ibid., no. 432, a cut scarab from the Blacas Coll., representing a nude athlete seated on a rock, holding a lekythos and strigil suspended from the right hand.

1065 Bulle, no. 265; B. B., 601 (text by L. Curtius); H. Pomtow, Beitr. z. Topogr. v. Delphi, Pl. XII; Homolle, Société des Antiquaires de France, Centennaire 1804–1904, Pl. XII. The figures are life-size (Bulle).

1066 H. N., XXXIV, 59: Hic primus nervos et venas expressit.

1067 In the Louvre: Longpérier, Notice des bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1868 (reprinted 1879), no. 214; de Ridder, Les bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1913, Pl. 19, no. 183, and pp. 34 f.; Furtw., Mp., Pl. XIII, and p. 280, fig. 119; text, pp. 279 f.; Mw., Pl. XXVIII, 3 (middle), and text, pp. 492 f.; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 588, 3. It is 0.21 meter high. For the same style and conception, cf. a statuette from Cyprus in the Cesnola Collection, Metropolitan Museum, New York: Richter, Gk., Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes, p. 57, fig. 87 (two views). Here the left leg is the rest leg.

1068 Inschr. v. Ol., 164; base reproduced in Mp., p. 279, fig. 118; Mw., p. 491, fig. 85.

1069 See list, Furtw., Mp., pp. 281 f.; Mw., p. 493; a completer one by Lippold, Jb., XXIII, 1908, pp. 203–8.

1070 Amelung, Vat., II, pp. 414 f., no. 251, and Pl. 46; Furtw., Mp., p. 281, fig. 120; Mw., p. 494, fig. 86; Clarac, 856, 2168. As the head and torso are of different marbles, we really have parts of two copies of the same original. In reconstructing the statue, another copy in the Galleria delle Statue is better: Amelung, Vat., II, pp. 583 f., no. 392 and Pl. 56; it has a head of Septimius Severus upon it; the position of its feet is almost exactly that of the statue of Xenokles mentioned.

1071 Publ. by Miss A. Walton, A. J. A., XXII, 1918, pp. 44 f., Pls. I, II, and figs. 1–5 in the text; Matz-Duhn, Ant. Bildw. in Rom., no. 1000; von Duhn doubts whether the head belongs to the trunk. The statue was acquired by Wellesley College in 1905 from a Roman dealer.

1072 Copies of the head-type are listed by Furtw., Mp., p. 282; Mw., pp. 494–5.

1073 Invent., 5610; Bronzi d’Ercolano, I, Pls. 53–54, p. 187; Comparetti e de Petra, Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni, 7, 4; Furtw., Mp., p. 284, figs. 121 a, b; Mw., pp. 496–7, figs. 87–8; B. B., 339 (left).

1074 Mp., p. 283; Mw., p. 495.

1075 Amelung, Vat., II, p. 416.

1076 In the Museo Archeologico: Amelung, Fuehrer, no. 268 (and bibliography); B. B., 274–77; Bulle, 52–53 and 204–5 (head); von Mach, 123 (front and back views); Collignon, I, pp. 479 f. and figs. 247 (statue), 248 (head); Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 588, 2; Furtw., Mp., p. 285, fig. 122 (head); Mw., p. 499, fig. 89; Robinson, Cat. Boston Museum of Fine Arts, Suppl., no. 113; Springer-Michaelis, p. 272, fig. 488. It is 1.48 meters high (Bulle).

1077 Ueber die Bronzestatue des sog. Idolino (49stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1889), p. 10. He classed it stylistically with the Oil-pourer of Munich and the Standing Diskobolos of the Vatican, which Brunn had called Myronic. He later, however, renounced his Myronic theory and merely called it Attic, because of its resemblance to figures on the Parthenon frieze: Beilage zu den amtlichen Berichten aus den k. Kunstsamml., XVIII, no. 5, Juli, 1897, p. 73 (quoted by Richardson, p. 161, n. 8).

1078 Festschr. f. Benndorf, p. 175: here he assigns it not to Myron himself, but to his son.

1079 II, p. 30; he also admits its Polykleitan features.

1080 Polyklet u. s. Sch., pp. 70 f., 1902; he assigns it to an artist of the master’s circle.

1081 Mp., 286; Mw., p. 500.

1082 Cronaca, pp. 29–30, fig. 2 (= Supplemento di Bolletino d’Arte, Roma, XII, Fasic. V-VIII) 1918 (Lucia Mariani). Cf. review in A. J. A., XXIII, 1919, p. 319 and fig. 2; and also Mariani, Rend. della Reale Accad. dei Lincei, XXVI, 1918, pp. 125–138, and fig. in text.

1083 Matz-Duhn, Ant. Bildw., no. 1111; Furtw., Mp., p. 287; Mw., p. 502.

1084 See material collected by Stephani, Comptes rendus de la commiss. impér. archéol., St. Petersburg, 1873; cf. Fritze, de Libatione veterum Graecorum, Berl. Diss., 1893.

1085 II, pp. 416 f.

1086 No. 2723; Svoronos, Tafelbd., II, Pl. CXXI (CI is a poor copy of it); Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 240–242 (0.45 meter high; 0.57 meter broad). Staïs also regards it as an ex voto to Herakles.

1087 It is broken away, but its outline is clear.

1088 Kabbadias, 248; Staïs, op. cit., p. 86; Arndt-Bruckmann, Einzelaufnahmen, 627 and 628 (head alone); noticed in A. A., 1889, p. 147, and A. M., XIII, 1888, p. 231 (Wolters); ibid., XXXI, 1906, pp. 352 f. (von Salis); Jb., VIII, 1893, pp. 224 f., fig. 3 (restored), and Pl. IV (Mayer). It may be one of the statues seen by Pausanias in the temenos: I, 18.6. It is 1.50 meters high without the plinth (Mayer).

1089 Furtwaengler, Mw., p. 378, n. 3 (cf. Mp., p. 196, n. 1), p. 685, n. 2 and p. 737; he ascribes it to Kalamis or his school.

1090 H. N., XXXIV, 81; statue also mentioned, ibid., XXII, 44.

1091 In the National Museum, no. 12; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 362, 363 and fig. (0.09 meter high); three photographs, A. M., XXXI, Pl. XXII; a poor photograph in Carapanos, Dodone et ses ruines, 1878, Pl. XIV, 3, and p. 186.

1092 In the statuette it is bent, but its original horizontal position is indicated by the position of the hand.

1093 Two copies: Hettner, Die Bildw. d. koenigl. Antikensamml.,4 1881, nos. 70, 88; F. W., 1217; Furtw., Mp., pp., 310–11, figs. 131–2; Mw., pp. 534–5, figs. 97–8; Springer-Michaelis, p. 314, fig. 562; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 139, 5–6; M. W., II, 39, 459; Clarac, IV, 712, 1695.

1094 Listed, Mp., p. 310, n. 2; Mw., p. 533, n. 3; one, formerly in the Museo Boncompagni-Ludovisi, now in the Museo delle Terme, in Rome: Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 139, 7; B. B., 376; Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1308; Collignon, II, p. 265, fig. 131; von Mach, 197. The original must have been of bronze.

1095 H. N., XXXIV, 69. For discussion, see F. W., note on p. 421 (to no. 1217).

1096 In the Museo Chiaramonti, no. 297; Amelung, Vat., I, p. 509 and II, Pl. 53; Clarac, 479, 916.

1097 Cf. Beschr. d. Skulpt. zu Berlin, no. 44; a poor torso of the type is in the Museo Chiaramonti of the Vatican: Amelung, Vat., no. 295 and Pl. 52; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 173, 2.

1098 Michaelis, p. 609, no. 24; Specimens, I, Pl. 30; Mp., p. 163, fig. 65 (front), p. 162, fig. 64 (profile), from an old cast from the Mengs Collection in Dresden; Mw., Pl. XVI; other replicas, Mp., p. 161, n. 3.

1099 Cat. Class. Coll., pp. 214–17, and fig. 130 on p. 215.

1100 H. N., XXXIV, 76: Ctesilaus doryphoron et Amazonem volneratam (fecit). Bergk long ago proposed to alter this name to Kresilas (Zeitschr. fuer Alterthumswissensch., 1845, p. 962), and was followed by Brunn (I, p. 261)—an emendation accepted by most recent investigators. The argument derived from the Amazon of Kresilas, mentioned by Pliny, XXXIV, 53, and apparently repeated in the present passage, is strong. Jex-Blake, however, finds the name Ktesilaos a good Greek formation, though uncommon: see his note on p. 62.

1101 Mp., pp. 161 f.; Mw., pp. 332 f.

1102 It is plainly visible in the example from Petworth House, and in the poor one lately in the possession of the Roman dealer Abbati: B. B., 84 (from cast); Bull. del. Inst., 1867, p. 33 (Helbig); Mon. d. I., IX, 1869–73, Pl. XXXVI; Annali, XLIII, 1871, pp. 279 f. (Conze); it is also visible in the New York copy.

1103 As on an Attic fifth-century B. C. grave-relief from the Peiræus: Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 157 (who gives the height as 0.45 meter and the breadth as 0.32 meter); von Sybel, Kat. d. Skulpt. zu Athen., 1881, no. 171; Annali, XXXIV, 1862, p. 212; Conze, Die Attischen Grabreliefs, no. 929 and Pl. CLXXX; F. W., 1017; for similar reliefs, see Annali, 1862, Pl. M.

1104 Michaelis wrongly dated the original in the fourth century B. C.; Brunn first recognized its fifth-century character: Annali, XLVII, 1875, p. 31 (apud Leop. Julius).

1105 Ant. Denkm., I, 1, 1886, Pl. IV; B. B., no. 248; Bulle, 167; Collignon, II, p. 492, fig. 256; Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1350; Guide, 1051; Hekler, Greek and Roman Portraits, 1912, pp. 85–86; Gardner, Hbk., p. 536, fig. 146; Amelung, Museums and Ruins of Rome, I, fig. 156; Not. Scav., 1885, p. 223; Gaz. B.-A., XXXIII, Pér. 2, I, 1886, fig. on p. 427; Springer-Michaelis, p. 401, fig. 743; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 550, 10; Reinach classes it as an athlete or Herakles. It is 1.28 meters high (Bulle).

1106 Discussed infra, Ch. IV, pp. 254–5.

1107 For this reason Helbig wrongly assigned it to about 400 B. C.

1108 Ueber die griech. Portraetkunst, 1894, pp. 12 f. (and fig.).

1109 XXVII, 9.

1110 Philologus, LVII (N. F., XI), pp. 1 f. and 649 f. Kleitomachos won in Ols. 141, 142 ( = 216, 212 B. C.): P., VI, 15.3; Hyde, 146; Foerster, 472, 476. Cf. Suidas, s. v. Κλειτόμαχος. His statue was set up by his father, and his victory sung by Alkaios of Messenia: A. G., IX, 588.

1111 Cf. Petersen, R. M., XIII, 1898, pp. 93–5; this theory of Wunderer is also rejected by Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 609.

1112 Erected about 477 B. C.; Bulle, 84 (Aristogeiton) and 85 (Harmodios); etc.

1113 Discussed infra, Ch. IV, pp. 220–1 and n. 5 on p. 220.

1114 See Stephanos, Lex., s. vv. ταινία, ταινίδιον, ταινόω. This victor fillet is mentioned by Lucian in reference to the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos: Philops., 18.

1115 Xen., Symp., V, 9; Plato, Symp., 212 E; it appears often on statues of Dionysos: e. g., on one in Furtwaengler’s Samml. Sabouroff, Pl. XXIII; Dionysos is called Χρυσομίτρης in Soph., Oed. Tyr., 209. The fillet was used as a breast-band for women’s dresses: Pollux, VII, 65; etc.

1116 J. H. S., I, 1880, p. 177. In older days the athletic fillet was called μίτρα (Lat. mitella): Pindar, Ol., IX, 84; Isthm., V, 62 (of wool); Boeckh, Explic. ad Pind., p. 193. In the Iliad μίτρα was the kilt or apron worn around the waist under the cuirass (a ζωστήρ being worn outside): IV, 137; IV, 187; V, 857; etc. It was used also later as a wrestler’s girdle: A. G., XV, 44; and for women’s headbands: Alkm., I; cf. Eurip., Bacchae, 833. Athletes on vase-paintings representing palæstra scenes often wear the fillet: e. g., the wrestlers and other athletes on the Philadelphia r.-f. kylix pictured in Fig. 50, have red bands in their hair. Later the μίτρα was specially used of women; if of men, it was a sign of effeminacy: Aristoph., Thesmophoriazusae, 163. The home of the μίτρα appears to have been Asia, as it was commonly worn by Asiatics: see Hdt., I, 195; VII, 62 (head-dress); Virgil, Aen., IV, 216. We learn from Alkman that it came from Lydia to Greece: fragm. 23, verses 67 f. On it, see Bekker, Charikles, II, pp. 393 f., and Pauly-Wissowa, VII, 2, p. 2033 (Bremer).

1117 See F. W., on 322. It appears on the “Apollo” type of early sculpture, e. g., on the “Apollo” of Orchomenos (Fig. 7).

1118 Stud. z. Parthenon, 1902, pp. 1 f.

1119 VI, 2.2; Lichas won the chariot victory in Ol. 90 ( = 420 B. C.): Hyde, 14; Foerster, 270.

1120 P., V, 11.1.

1121 Bulle, no. 207; Furtw.-Wolters, Besch.,2 457; B. B., 8; here it was inlaid with silver.

1122 This may, however, be merely the remains of a wreath of gold: see Rayet, II, text to no. 67 (J. Martha).

1123 Bulle, no. 202; Lechat, p. 482, fig. 44. It is 0.23 meter high (Bulle).

1124 Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LIV; F. W., 322; Wolters thinks this is scarcely a victor fillet.

1125 This head, in the possession of Lord Leconfield, is a replica of the same original as the one in the Metropolitan Museum (Pl. 15); Michaelis, p. 609, no. 24. See discussion supra, pp. 144–5.

1126 Noted by Furtw., Mp., p. 161.

1127 P., VI, 1.7; he won in Ol. (?) 89 ( = 424 B. C.): Hyde, 9; Foerster, 796.

1128 A. M., XIX, 1894, pp. 137–9 (J. Ziehen); fig. in text. It is now in the Museum of the Peiræus Gymnasion.

1129 On such representations in art, see Stephani, Comptes rendus de la commission impériale archéologique, St. Petersburg, 1874, pp. 214–16.

1130 Παῖς ἀναδούμενος: VI, 4.5; S. Q., 757.

1131 Hermes, XXIII, 1888, pp. 444 f.; P., V, 11.3. Robert is followed by Kalkmann, Pausanias der Perieget, 1886, pp. 90 f.

1132 Cf. Frazer, IV, p. 11. Figures of athletes appear beneath the throne on vases: Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmythol., Pl. I, 9 and 16; Gerhard, I, Pl. VII. Flasch has tried to show that the throne figure did not represent Pantarkes: Baum., II, p. 1099, 2; cf. Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, 1890, p. 380.

1133 VI, 10.6. Pantarkes won the boys’ wrestling match in Ol. 86 ( = 436 B. C.): Hyde, 98; Foerster, 254.

1134 Amongst others it has been assumed by Loeschke, Der Tod des Pheidias (in Histor. Untersuch. zum Schaefer-Jubilaeum, Bonn, 1882), p. 36; Schoell, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1888, I, p. 37 (Der Prozess des Pheidias). Foerster, p. 19, n. 1, is against the identification. The παῖς ἀναδούμενος is omitted in my victor lists (de olympionicarum Statuis).

1135 The παῖς ἀναδούμενος is mentioned between victors nos. 38 and 39, i. e., in the Zone of the Eretrian Bull, while Pantarkes (98) is mentioned among the statues in the Zone of the Chariots: see infra, Ch. VIII, pp. 343 and 345, and Plans A and B.

1136 Cf. Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, pp. 378 f.

1137 Cf. Doerpfeld, Baudenkmaeler v. Ol., p. 21 and n. 1; Furtw., Mp., pp. 39–40; Frazer, l. c.

1138 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 501; Marbles and Bronzes, Pl. VI; B. B., 271; Bulle, 49; von Mach, 117; Springer-Michaelis, p. 259, fig. 461; F. W., 509; Annali, L, 1878, Pl. A and pp. 20 f. (two views) (Michaelis); Clarac, V, 858 C, 2189 A; M. W., I, Pl. 31, fig. 136; Reinach, Rép., I, 524, 2. The palm-trunk shows that the Roman artist intended to represent a victor in his copy. It is 4 ft. 10.25 in. high (Smith); 1.48 meters (Bulle).

1139 Brunn, following older writers such as Winckelmann, had pronounced it Polykleitan: Annali, LI, 1879, pp. 218 f.; cf. Murray, I, pp. 313 f. and Pl. IX. Kekulé called it Myronian: 49stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1889, p. 12; Gardner, Sculpt., p. 128, finds it unrelated to Polykleitos and defends its Attic origin. Everything about it—except the mode of tying the fillet—differs from the copies of Polykleitos’ statue, and especially the pose. Against Brunn’s view, see Michaelis, Annali, LV, 1883, pp. 154 f.

1140 So Bulle, Arndt (text to B. B., 271), Furtwaengler (Mp., pp. 244–5; Mw., pp. 444–5), Zimmerman (in Knackfuss-Zimmermann, Kunstgesch. des Altertums und des Mittelalters, I, p. 152), and many others.

1141 Cf. especially the resemblance of the statue to the youth on the West frieze: Michaelis, Der Parthenon, Pl. V, no. 9.

1142 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 55, praises it equally with the Doryphoros, and says that 100 talents were paid for it; in another passage he says that a like sum was paid by King Attalos for a picture of Dionysos by the Theban painter Aristeides: ibid., VII, 126; cf. XXXV, 24 and 100. A painting by Timomachos of Byzantium brought 80 talents: ibid., XXXV, 136.

1143 H. N., XXXIV, 56; here he quotes Varro, who was drawing probably from Xenokrates of Sikyon: see Jex-Blake, pp. xvi f.

1144 Listed by Furtwaengler, Mp., pp. 239 f.; the torsos, by Petersen, B. com. Rom., 1890, pp. 185 f.

1145 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 500; Marbles and Bronzes, Pl. IV; B. B., 272; von Mach, 114; F. W., 508; Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. XLIX (3 views); Rayet, I, Pl. 30; Collignon I, p. 479, fig. 253; Murray, I, Pl. X; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 547, 5. Michaelis, by a comparison with the Doryphoros, first showed that it was a copy of the Diadoumenos: Annali, L, 1878, pp. 10 f. It is 6 ft. 1 in. tall (Smith).

1146 Kabbadias, no. 1826; Bulle, 50; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. 35; von Mach, 115; Mon. Piot, III, 1896, pp. 137 f. (Couve), and Pls. XIV and XV; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 84–85 and fig.; B. C. H., XIX, 1895, pp. 460 f. (account of the Delian excavations by L. Couve) and Pl. VIII (the statue in its surroundings at the excavations); Springer-Michaelis, p. 277, fig. 498; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 547, 9. It is 1.86 meters high without the base (Couve).

1147 Discussed supra, on pp. 92–3.

1148 Mon. Piot, IV, Pls. VIII-IX; von Mach, no. 116 a; Furtw., Mp., p. 241, fig. 98; Mw., p. 439, fig. 68 (who called it the most beautiful of all the copies); Reinach, Rép., I, 475, 6. The right arm is wrongly restored.

1149 Listed by Furtwaengler, Mp., pp. 240–2; cf. Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 125 f.

1150 Hettner, Die Bildw. d. Antikensamml. zu Dresden, pp. 80 and 86; Annali, XLIII, 1871, Pl. V, pp. 281 f. (Conze); Furtw., Mp., Pls. X and XI; Mw., Pl. XXV; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. 36 (two views); F. W., 511.

1151 B. B., no. 340; Conze, Beitraege zur Geschichte d. griech. Pl.2, 1869, pp. 3 f., Pl. 2 (two views); F. W., 510.

1152 B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 2729 (Addenda); Mon. Piot, III, p. 145 (Couve); ibid., IV, p. 73 (Paris); Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. 37.

1153 J. H. S., VI, 1885, pp. 243 f. (Murray), and Pl. LXI.

1154 J. H. S., XXXIX, 1919, pp. 69 f., and Pl. 1 (two views), and p. 232 (with illustration of the palmette head-band).

1155 Mp., p. 246, fig. 99 (with original head); Mw., p. 447, fig. 69.

1156 Michaelis, p. 438, no. 3; Clarac, V, 851, 2180 A (headless); it is 1.49 meters high (Michaelis). He believes that it originally was an oil-pourer.

1157 Mp., p. 246; Mw., p. 448. It is 12 centimeters high (Furtwaengler).

1158 κοτίνου στέφανος, P., VIII, 48.2; cf. A. G., IX, 357; Aristoph., Plut., 586; Theophr., Hist. Plant., IV, 13.2. The custom of using the olive crown is probably very ancient, despite Phlegon’s statement that it was introduced in Ol. 7 ( = 752 B. C.): frag. 1 (= F. H. G., III, p. 604). Pindar says that it was introduced from the land of the Hyperboreans by Herakles: Ol., III, 14 f; Bacchylides calls it Aetolian: VII, 50 (γλαυκὸν Αἰτωλίδος ἄνδημ’ ἐλαίας). It probably goes back to some form of popular magic.

1159 B. B., no. 324; here small leaves are still remaining over the forehead.

1160 Bronz. v. Ol., II, 2 and 2 a. Here the leaves have disappeared. See pp. 254–5.

1161 B. C. H., V, 1881, Pl. III, text, pp. 65 f. (Pottier). Here is listed a number of funerary reliefs representing athletes, which list could easily be enlarged.

1162 Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1241; Guide, 977. On the motive, see Archaeol. Studien H. Brunn dargebr., 1893, pp. 62 f.

1163 The λημνίσκος (Lat. lemniscus) was merely the woolen fillet by which chaplets were fastened on; Hesychios says it is a Syracusan word; in any case it is used only by Roman writers and Greek writers of the Roman age; A. G., XII, 123; Plut., Sulla, 27; Polyb., XVIII, 46 (where στέφανοι and λημνίσκοι are differentiated, though they are usually interchangeable); C. I. G., III, 5361; C. I. A., III, 74. Pliny says that it was of Etruscan origin, H. N., XXI, 4, and that it was at first made of wool or linden-bark and later of gold; cf. XVI, 25. It was used at Rome at feasts, as a sign of special honor to guests: Plaut., Pseudolus, (line 1265); Livy, XXXIII, 33.2; Suet., Nero, 25. For the Roman use of the lemniscus for athletic victors and poets, cf. Cicero, Or. pro Sext. Roscio Amerino, 35, 100; Ausonius, Epist., XX, 6; etc. On the lemniscus, see Dar.-Sagl., III, 2, pp. 1099–1100.

1164 R. M., VI, 1891, p. 304, no. 3.

1165 Mon. Piot, XVII, 1909, Pls. II, III and pp. 29 f. (Merlin and Poinssot).

1166 B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1754; B. B., 46; Marbles and Bronzes, Pl. XXII; Collignon, I, fig. 255, on p. 500; Furtw., Mp., p. 252, fig. 105; Mw., p. 457, fig. 75 (back view); Springer-Michaelis, p. 275, fig. 495; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 546, 9. It is 4 ft. 11 in. high (Smith), i. e., 1.48 meters.

1167 Helbig, Cat. Coll. Barracco, no. 99, Pls. 38 and 38 a; id., Fuehrer, I, 1083; sketches of the Westmacott and Barracco copies in Kekulé, 49stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1889, Pl. IV.

1168 No. 254; Arch. Eph., 1890, pp. 207 f. (Philios) and Pls. X and XI. Bulle, 51, gives the Westmacott and Barracco examples side by side; in J. H. S., XXXI, 1911, Pl. II, we have the Westmacott, Barracco, and Eleusis copies together. Furtwaengler, Mp., pp. 250 f., Mw., pp. 453 f., Helbig, Cat. Coll. Barracco, p. 36, and Petersen, R. M., VIII, 1893, pp. 101 f., have added many more torsos and heads as copies or variants of the original.

1169 See Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 1083. Its soft expression and forms led Furtwaengler to derive it from the Praxitelean circle, from the period when Praxiteles was influenced by Polykleitos, and to believe that it represented a divinity, perhaps Triptolemos: Mp., p. 255 and n. 2.

1170 Burlington Fine Arts Club, Catalogue Anc. Gk. Art, 1904, no. 45, Pl. XXXIII; Furtw., Mp., p. 251, fig. 103; Mw., p. 454, fig. 73. It was formerly in the van Branteghem collection.

1171 For the Dresden head, see A. A., 1900, p. 107, figs. 1 a and 1 b.

1172 Furtw., Mp., p. 252, fig. 104; Mw., p. 455, fig. 74.

1173 First published by F. H. Marshall, J. H. S., XXIX, 1909, pp. 151–2 and figs. 1 a, b; more fully by E. A. Gardner, ibid., XXXI, 1911, pp. 21 f. and Pl. I and fig. 1.

1174 Nelson head: J. H. S., XVIII, 1898, pp. 141 f., and Pl. XI; B. B., 544; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. XXXIX; Capitoline Amazon: Mp., p. 132, fig. 53 (restored); Mw., p. 292, fig. 39. A head of the Capitoline type has been wrongly placed on the Pheidian Mattei torso in the Vatican: Mp., p. 133, fig. 54 (head); Mw., Pl. XI; B. B., 350; von Mach, 121; Reinach, Rép., I, 483, 1.

1175 B. B., 128 (original and cast).

1176 As, e. g., in the bronze head of a victor in Naples, already discussed (Fig. 25); B. B., 339.

1177 E. g., Furtwaengler and Collignon; the latter, I, pp. 499–500.

1178 Hypnos, pp. 30 f.; accepted by Wolters (apud Lepsius, Griech. Marmorstudien, p. 83, no. 164), Treu (A. A., 1889, p. 57), Collignon, Petersen, l. c., Kekulé (Idolino, p. 13), Furtwaengler (Mp., pp. 252–3, Mw., pp. 458–9 and 747), and others; see Philios, op. cit.

1179 E. g., by Philios (op. cit.), Amelung (Bert. Phil. Wochenschr., XXII, 1902, p. 273). This scraping motive is seen in the bronze statuette in the Bibliothèque Nationale, no. 934.

1180 This is inconsistent with the position of the hand in the Barracco copy, which is too far from the head. This was an older view of Helbig, Rendiconti della Reale Accad. dei Lincei, 1892, pp. 790 f.; refuted by Furtwaengler, Petersen, Helbig himself later (in the Fuehrer), and others.

1181 Quoted by E. A. Gardner, J. H. S., XXXI, pp. 25–6, as the theory of E. N. Gardiner.

1182 H. N., XXXIV, 55; for this theory, see Mahler, Polyklet u. s. Sch., p. 50.

1183 Michaelis, Der Parthenon, 1870, Block 131 (from the North frieze).

1184 F. W., 1665; Furtw., Mp., p. 256, fig. 106; Mw., p. 463, fig. 76; M. W., Pl. 70, 879; etc.

1185 For list, see Furtw., Mp., p. 254, n. 2. For a restoration of the original statue, see ibid., p. 250, fig. 102; Mw., p. 453, fig. 72.

1186 VI, 4.11; Inschr. v. Ol., 149; I. G. B., 50.

1187 Those of the Elean pentathlete Pythokles: Inschr. v. Ol., 162–3; I. G. B., 91; and the Epidaurian boxer Aristion: Inschr. v. Ol., 165 (renewed); I. G. B., 92. The feet of the Aristion were both flat upon the ground.

1188 That of the boy wrestler Xenokles of Mainalos: Inschr. v. Ol., 164; I. G. B., 90.

1189 In one of the Olympia Zanes: I. G. B., 95.

1190 On the Kyniskos basis there are no traces, as on that of Pythokles, to show that the original had been removed from the Altis and replaced by a copy long before Pausanias visited Olympia.

1191 O. S., p. 186, on the basis of the Oxy. Pap.; followed by Hyde, 45. Foerster’s date, Ol. (?) 86 ( = 436 B. C.), follows the earlier dating of Polykleitos by Robert, Arch. Maerchen, 1886, p. 107, i. e., before the discovery of the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus; see Foerster, 255. Robert later dated the birth of the sculptor about Ol. 75.4 ( = 477 B. C.). Thus, even if the Kyniskos were his earliest statue, it must have been erected some time after the victory. Furtwaengler dates the original of the Westmacott Athlete about 440 B. C.: Mp., p. 252.

1192 Bulle, Furtwaengler, E. A. Gardner, and others find the assumption of identity not completely convincing. Thus Furtwaengler looks upon the identification as “no far-fetched theory,” but says: “Unfortunately, however, absolute certainty can scarcely be attained” (Mp., pp. 249–50).

1193 VIII, 48.2; cf. Vitruv., de Arch., IX, 1 (p. 212).

1194 Homer mentions the palm: e. g., Od., VI, 163; the various kinds of palm are given by Theophr., Hist. Plant., II, 6.6 and 8.4. Its fronds (σπάθαι, cf. Hdt., VII, 69) were formed into victory crowns: Plut., Quaest. conviv., VIII, 4, p. 723.

1195 H. N., XXXV, 75.

1196 Arch. Stud. H. Brunn dargehracht, 1893, pp. 62 f.

1197 Mp., p. 256 and n. 1; Mw., p. 462 and n. 2.

1198 Cf. Waldstein, J. H. S., I, 1880, p. 187, n. 1.

1199 B. C. H., V, 1881, PI. III. See supra, p. 155.

1200 So Waldstein, l. c., p. 186.

1201 E. g., on a Panathenaic vase: Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. 48, e. g.

1202 Mentioned by Helbig, Guide, 977; discussed by Arndt in La Glyptothèque Ny-Carlsberg, text to Pls. XXI-IV. Arndt believes that the right arm with the palm in the hand is modern, like the head and left arm; they are of a different marble from the torso. The torso is a replica of a statue in the Villa Albani, Rome: op. cit., fig. 13; cf. Furtwaengler, Mw., p. 738 (= god type). On representing athletes in the act of placing wreaths on their heads with the right hand and holding palm-branches in the left, see Milchhoefer, and others, in the work already cited, Arch. Stud. H. Brunn dargebracht, pp. 62 f.

1203 VI, 10.4. The scholiast on Pindar, Pyth., IX, 1, Boeckh, p. 401, says that the hoplites ran with bronze shields.

1204 See supra, pp. 105, n. 3, and 116.

1205 P., VI, 13.7. He won in Ol. 81 ( = 456 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 117; Foerster, 184.

1206 Schol. on Pindar, Pyth., IX, Inscript. a. Boeckh, p. 401.

1207 Head A: Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 29 f.; Tafelbd., Pl. VI, 1–4; Ausgrab. v. Ol., V, 1881, pp. 12 f., Pls. XVIII (front), XIX (side); F. W., 316; Overbeck, I, pp. 198–9 and cf. p. 178. Head B: Bildw., pp. 31 f., and Pl. VI, 9–10; Ausgrab., p. 13; Overbeck, p. 178; F. W., 315.

1208 Bildw., Pl. VI, 5–6; fig. 30, on p. 30 in Textbd.; Ausgrab., V, Pl. XIX, 4 and p. 12; F. W., 317.

1209 Bildw., Textbd., fig. 31, on p. 30.

1210 Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., fig. 32, on p. 31.

1211 Ibid., pp. 31 f., and Pl. VI, 7–8; Ausgrab. v. Ol., V, Pl. XIX, 5 and p. 12; F. W., 319. Both the foot and arm are of Parian marble, like the head.

1212 Hyde, pp. 42–4; cf. Foerster, 151, 155; he also won the stade-race at Delphi: Pindar, Pyth., X, 12–16. Robert accepts my ascription: Pauly-Wissowa, VI, p. 1493. Liddell and Scott, Lexicon, s. v. Φρικίας (= “Bristle”), believe this to be the name not of the victor but of his horse, so called because of his long outstanding mane; cf. Herrmann, Opuscula, VII, 166 n. This is also the interpretation of Sandys, Odes of Pindar, Loeb Library, 1915, p. 291, n. 1.

1213 P., VI, 10.4–5; R. Foerster, Das Portraet in d. gr. Plastik, 1882, p. 22, n. 5.

1214 Treu, A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, pp. 48 f.; Bildw. v. Ol., p. 34 and n. 2. He explained the shield device of the ram and Phrixos by the fact that Eperastos traced his descent from that hero. Cf. Overbeck, I, p. 198.

1215 VI, 17.5; Hyde, 183 and p. 62; Foerster, 765 (undated).

1216 Preus. Jb., LI, p. 382; cf. Sammlung Sabouroff, Einleitung zu den Skulpturen, p. 5, n. 4; followed by Flasch, Baum., II, p. 1104 U f.

1217 V, 27.7.

1218 Textbd., pp. 31–2.

1219 Hyde, l. c. For the date, see Afr; Foerster, 144–6; he was the first Olympic τριαστής, i. e., he gained victories in three events on the same day (stade-, double stade- and hoplite-races).

1220 Matz-Duhn, Ant. Bildw., no. 1097; here it is called a diskobolos; Clarac, 830, 2085; Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 204; Mw., p. 392.

1221 Hauser, Jb., II, 1887, p. 101, n. 24, points out its resemblance to the Tuebingen bronze, but because of the tree-trunk does not regard it as a representation of a hoplitodrome. Furtwaengler, l. c., regards the helmet as belonging to the head, while others believe it alien thereto.

1222 No. 795; A. Z., XXXVI, 1878, Pl. XI and pp. 58–71; Gardiner, p. 105, fig. 17; cf. another in Copenhagen: Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLXXXI.

1223 P., VI, 3.10; he won the pentathlon some time between Ols. 94 and 103 ( = 404 and 368 B. C.): Hyde, 31; Foerster, 347.

1224 P., V, 26.3.

1225 V, 27.12.

1226 A. Z., XLI, 1883, Pl. XIII, 2 and pp. 227–8 (Milchhoefer).

1227 Inventar, no. 6306; mentioned by L. Gurlitt in A. M., VI, 1881, p. 158.

1228 Duetschke, II, no. 22; a very similar statue, no. 25, has no halteres; both are poor Roman copies.

1229 Bildw. v. Ol., p. 217; Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 3.

1230 So schol. on Pindar, Ol., VII, Argum., Boeckh, p. 158. He won in Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 7.1 f.; Hyde, 60; Foerster, 252.

1231 Matz-Duhn, Ant. Bildw. in Rom., no. 1096; J. H. S., II, 1881, p. 342, fig. 3. Thongs appear on both forearms of the Polykleitan statue, copies of which are in Kassel (Furtw., Mp., p. 246, fig. 99; Mw., p. 447, fig. 69), and on a headless one in Lansdowne House (Michaelis, p. 438, no. 3; Clarac, 851, 2180 A); similarly on the Lysippan boxer by Koblanos found at Sorrento, and now in Naples (Fig. 57; Kalkmann, Die Proport, des Gesichts in d. gr. Kunst = 53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1893, Pl. III); on the bronze statue of a boxer from Herculaneum in Naples; and on the delle Terme Seated Boxer (Pl. 16); etc.

1232 So interpreted, and rightly, by Waldstein (J. H. S., I, 1880, p. 186), and others; Juethner, pp. 68–9, thinks that the object here represented is a victor fillet, being too short for thongs.

1233 P. 26 and n. 2; against him, Reisch, p. 43; Hitz-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 577; etc. Oil-flasks of various kinds—lekythoi, aryballoi, alabastra, olpai—are mentioned repeatedly by Greek writers; e. g., λήκυθος, by Homer, Od., VI, 79; Aristoph., Plutus, 810; ἀρύβαλλος, Aristoph., Equites, 1094; Pollux, VII, 166 and X, 63; ἀλάβαστρον, Theokr., XV. 114; ὄλπη (of leather), Theokr., II, 156; etc.

1234 VI, 14.6.

1235 VI, 9.1. Theognetos won in the boys’ wrestling match in Ol. 76 ( = 746 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 83; Foerster, 193 and 193 N.

1236 We have already in the present chapter mentioned this “Apollo” in connection with the statuette from Piombino (Fig. 19); Studniczka, R. M., II, 1887, pp. 99–100, believed that it represented a victor. See supra, p. 119.

1237 E. g., on the bronze statuette from Naxos, now in Berlin: see supra, p. 119 and n. 5.

1238 Boy wrestlers especially wore caps in the palæstræ, but not at the games; we see them on the wrestler group in the palæstra scene on the r.-f. kylix in Munich (no. 795) already mentioned.

1239 Stuart Jones, Cat., pp. 65–6, no. 8; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 769; Guide, 418; B. B., 527 (and fig. 6 in text, by Arndt); Furtw., Mp., p. 204, Mw., p. 392. Helbig finds it Myronian, while Furtwaengler considers it Attic, but non-Myronic; for a copy in Stockholm, see B. B., figs. 7, 8, 9, in the text to no. 527.

1240 I, 17.2. Furtw., Mp., p. 204, n. 6, shows that the Athens head bears no resemblance to the Capitoline. Furthermore, heads on coins of Juba differ from both and show no trace of the complicated head-dress. A marble head from Shershel (= Cæsarea) seems to be an authentic portrait of Juba II: see Annali, XXIX, 1857, Pl. E, no. 2, and p. 194; and Waille, de Caesareae Monumentis, 1891, title page (vignette) and p. 92 (quoted by Helbig, Guide, l. c.).

1241 See B. B., text to no. 527, figs. 1, 2, 3.

1242 Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 972; Guide, 595; B. Com. Rom., XII, 1884, Pl. XXIII, pp. 245–253. The meaning is explained by a similar archaistic Parian marble relief in Wilton House, Wiltshire, England, where the youth stands before a statue of Zeus, washing his hands preparatory to making a thank-offering to the god who gave him victory: see Michaelis, p. 680, no. 48 and wood-cut on p. 681; Arndt, La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, text, fig. 33; F. W., 239; its inscription is not genuine. The same archaistic traits are seen on a votive relief to Zeus Xenios in the Museo delle Terme: Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1405; Arndt, op. cit., fig. 34; this is to be dated in the first century B. C., or A. D., because of its inscription: I. G. Sic. et Ital., no. 990.

1243 See Fabretti, de Columna Trajani, p. 267; Gardiner, p. 433, fig. 149; Schreiber, Bilderatlas, Pl. XXIV, no. 8. Cf. Krause, I, pp. 517 f.

1244 Cf. Reisch, pp. 42–3.

1245 Cf. Philostr., Heroicus, XII b (p. 315); τὰ δὲ ὦτα κατεαγὼς ἦν οὐχ ὑπὸ πάλης.

1246 Thus Furtwaengler calls the Ince-Blundell head that of a boxer statue: Mp., p. 173, and fig. 71 on p. 172; Mw., p. 348, and fig. 44 on p. 347.

1247 Cf. discussion by Gardiner, pp. 425–6.

1248 Gorgias, 515 E; Protag., 342 B. In the latter passage he says: καὶ οἱ μὲν ὦτά τε κατάγνυνται μιμούμενοι αὐτούς, καὶ ἱμάντας περιειλίττονται καὶ φιλογυμναστοῦσι καὶ βραχείας ἀναβολὰς φοροῦσιν, κ. τ. λ. The boxer’s swollen ears are mentioned by Theokritos, XXII, 45. The word ὠτοκάταξις seems to have meant a boxer whose ears were battered by the gloves: Aristoph., Fragm., 72; Pollux, II, 83 (whence Dindorf corrects the form ὠτοκαταξίας in Poll., IV, 144). For references, see Krause, I, pp. 516–17; and cf. J. H. S., XXVI, p. 13.

1249 E. g., on a fragment of a red-figured kylix in Berlin: J. H. S., XXVI, p. 8, fig. 2; Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, Textbd., p. 90, fig. 12; Gardiner, p. 438, fig. 153. Here one of the contestants in the pankration is bleeding at the nose.

1250 B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, pp. 455; cf., p. 457, where he speaks of le detail réaliste de l’oreille tuméfiée par les coups. For the statue of Agias mentioned, see infra, Ch. VI, pp. 286 f., and Pl. 28 and fig. 68. Cf. on this subject also Neugebauer, Studien ueber Skopas (in Beitraege zur Kunstgesch., XXXIX, 1913, p. 35, n. 172).

1251 Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., IV, Pl. II, 2, 2 a; F. W., 323; etc.

1252 See infra, Ch. VI., pp. 293 f.

1253 Fouilles de Delphes, IV, Pls. LXIII-LXIV.

1254 Ant. Denkm., I, 1, 1886, Pl. IV.

1255 Duetschke, III, no. 72.

1256 Gaz. arch., VIII, Pl. I, and p. 85 (Rayet); F. W., 461.

1257 B. B., no. 8.

1258 Bulle, no. 105 (right); and fig. 46 on p. 205.

1259 A. M., XVI, 1891, Pls. IV, V (two views).

1260 F. W., 505; Collignon, I, p. 495, fig. 252. As the swollen ears do not occur on other copies, they are here doubtless a modification by a late artist.

1261 La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, Pl. XXXVI (= copy of fifth century B. C.); XCIV (Herakles or athlete, from the Tyszkiewicz coll., Skopasian in character; = Reinach, Têtes, Pls. CL, CLI); XCV (similar to preceding, though later in style: Têtes, Pls. CLVI, CLVII); CXX (copy of head of athlete of the fourth century B. C.).

1262 Cat. Class. Coll., pp. 228 f.; fig. 141 on p. 231. Miss Richter points out its affinity to the Hermes and assigns it to the immediate influence of Praxiteles. This fragment of a statue appears to have been trimmed into its present shape in modern times. Miss Richter’s statement (p. 230) that swollen ears are a characteristic which applies in representations of heroes to Herakles alone is contradicted by what we shall say below about heads of Diomedes.

1263 Rayet, II, Pls. 64, 65 (head); B. B., 75; von Mach, 286; F. W., 1425; M. W., I, Pl. 48, 216; Reinach, Rép., I, 154, 1–4. Rayet calls the statue that of a hoplitodromos.

1264 Brunn, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1892, pp. 651 f.; Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.2, no. 304; B. B., 128 (left = original; right = cast); Furtw., Mp., p. 147, fig. 60 (from a cast with modern restorations omitted), and p. 150, fig. 61 (head, two views); text, pp. 146 ff.; Mw., Pls. XII, XIII; text, pp. 311 f.; Clarac, 871, 2219 and 633, 1438 A.; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. XVII (cast). Its Kresilæan origin has been shown by Brunn (l. c., pp. 660 and 673), Flasch (Vortraege an der 41sten Philologenversamml., 1891, p. 9, quoted by Furtwaengler), Loeschke and Studniczka (quoted by Furtwaengler) and Furtwaengler. It also shows Myronic traces. It stands 1.86 meters (without the base).

1265 Furtw., Mp., p. 151, fig. 62; Mw., Pl. XIV and p. 313. This and a head in private possession in England, B. B., 543 (three views), are the best and truest copies of the lost original.

1266 Froehner, Notice, 128; Bouillon, Musée des antiques (statues), Pls. II and III; Clarac, 314, 1438.

1267 Duetschke, II, no. 163; Amelung, Fuehrer, 210; B. B., 361; F. W., 458. It will be discussed further on in Ch. IV, pp. 180 f. The Berlin replica is given in Mp., p. 167, fig. 67; cf. text, p. 165, n. 2.

1268 Roscher, Lex., I, 2, p. 2163, fig.; Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 155, n. 2.

1269 R. M., IV, 1889, P. 197, no. 12 (B. Graef).

1270 B. M. Sculpt., III, 1731, and Pl. V, fig. 2; Marbles and Bronzes, Pl. XXI; Museum Marbles, II, Pl. XLVI; Specimens, I, Pl. LX; Collignon, II, p. 240, fig. 120; Wolters, Jb., I, 1886, Pl. V, fig. 2 and p. 54. Two other copies of the same original are the one in the Capitoline Museum, Rome, and one found in 1876 on the Quirinal and now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori there. B. Graef, R. M., IV, 1889, p. 189 f, and Pls. VIII (Capitoline bust) and IX (Quirinal bust), attributes the type to Skopas; he is followed by Collignon, II, p. 240, n. 1; cf. S. Reinach, Gaz. d. B-A., 3d Per., III, 1890, pp. 338 and 340. Wolters tried to show that it was Praxitelian. But the similarity between these heads and that of the Lansdowne Herakles (Pl. 30 and fig. 71), which we ascribe to Lysippos in Ch. VI, pp. 298, 311, is easily apparent.

1271 Amelung, Vat., I, p. 738, no. 636 and II, Pl. 79; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 108; Guide, 113; B. B., 609; Furtw., Mp., p. 341, fig. 146; p. 342, fig. 147 (head, two views); Mw., p. 575, fig. 109 and p. 577, fig. 110.

1272 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr., d. Glypt.,2 no. 245 (the so-called Lenbach head); Arndt-Bruckmann, Griech. und roem. Portraets, Pls. 335–6. See Furtw.-Wolters, for replicas in the Louvre, etc.

1273 B. B., 338; Helbig, Guide, 69 (= boxer).

1274 Comparetti e de Petra, La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni, 1883, Pl. XXI, 3; Furtw., Mp., pp. 234 f. and fig. 95; Mw., pp. 428 f. and fig. 65. Both Furtwaengler (l. c.) and B. Graef (R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 215 and 202) have shown the Polykleitan origin of the type. The former believes that it may have been copied from a statue of Herakles by the master, which is mentioned by Pliny (H. N., XXXIV, 56) as at Rome. For other replicas of the type, see Furtw., Mp., p. 234, n. 1; Mw., p. 429, n. 1.

1275 A. A., 1889, pp. 57–8 (Treu, who referred it to Polykleitos); Furtw., Mp., p. 92 and fig. 40; Mw., p. 124 and Pl. VI (he called it Pheidian).

1276 Museo Torlonia, Pl. 26, no. 104.

1277 Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.,2 no. 272; Arndt-Amelung, nos. 832 and 833 (text by Flasch).

1278 Chabrias, 3: Ex quo factum est ut postea athletae ceterique artifices his statibus in statuis ponendis uterentur, in quibus victoriam essent adepti; cf. Diod., XV, 33, 4 (who speaks of “statues”). This statue was erected in Athens after his campaign to aid Thebes against Agesilaos in 378 B. C.: Xen., Hell., V, 4.38 f. (though here Chabrias is not mentioned by name); Diod., XV, 32–33; Demosth., Contra Lept., 75–76 (p. 479); cf. Aristotle, Rhet., III, 10.7. Chabrias seems to have been the first to order his troops to assume a kneeling posture when receiving the charge of the enemy. These tactics when used against Agesilaos were so favorably regarded by the Athenians that his statues were represented in the attitude of kneeling.

1279 E. g., Reisch, p. 43.

1280 See Joubin, p. 46. It probably took place under the restored democracy of Kleisthenes. The assassination of Hipparchos took place in 514 B. C. Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 17, says that the group was set up in the year in which the kings were expelled from Rome ( = 509 B. C.).

1281 P., I, 8.5; cf. Marmor Parium, l. 70 (= C. I. G., II, 2374; F. H. G., I, pp. 533 f., etc.), and Lucian, Philopseudes, 18.

1282 Arrian, Anab., III, 16.18 (he says it was of bronze); Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 70; restored by Seleukos: Val. Max., II, 10, Extr. 1; by Antiochos: P., I, 8.5.

1283 B. B., nos. 326 (Aristogeiton), 327 (Harmodios), and 328 (head of Harmodios, two views); Bulle, 84, 85; von Mach, 58 (both statues) and 59 (Aristogeiton); Collignon, I, pp. 367 f. and figs. 189 (group) and 190 (head of Harmodios); relief from Athens showing the group, ibid., p. 369, fig. 88; Overbeck, I, p. 155, fig. 27; Baum., I. p. 340, fig. 357; Lechat, pp. 444–5, figs. 36, 37 (restored by Michaelis); R. M., XXI, 1906, Pl. XI; F. W., 121–4; Reinach, Rép., I, 530, 3 (Harmodios), and 5 (Aristogeiton); cf. II, 2, 541, 5 (group); Clarac V, 869, 2202 and 870, 2203 A; head of Harmodios, Annali, XLVI, 1874, Pl. G. The height is about 2 meters (Bulle).

1284 A. M., XV, 1890, pp. 1 f.; followed by Overbeck, I, pp. 152 f.; Frazer, II, p. 98. The difference is not only noticeable in the head structure and treatment of the hair, but in the whole character of the work. While Antenor’s work is stiff and lifeless, the Naples group is full of vigor. For the statue of Antenor (in the Akropolis Museum), see Ant. Denkm., I, 5, 1890, Pl. 53, and pp. 42 f. (Wolters); Overbeck, I, Pl. 25, opp. p. 152; Les Musées d’Athènes, I, Pl. VI; Jb., II, 1887, pp. 135 f. (Studniczka), and Pl. X, 1 (head); von Mach, 28; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, Pl. II.

1285 However, some archæologists still favor Antenor for this group: e. g., Wachsmuth, Die Stadt Athen, I, pp. 170 f.; II, 393–8; Collignon; Lechat, op. cit., and cf. B. C. H., XVI, 1892, pp. 485–9.

1286 Rhet. praecept., 9: ἀπεσφιγμένα καὶ νευρώδη καὶ σκληρά, καὶ ἀκριβῶς ἀποτεταμένα ταῖς γραμμαῖς. See Brunn, pp. 101–5; cf. Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 49.

1287 The best restoration is that of Meier in bronzed plaster in the Ducal Museum in Brunswick: Bulle, p. 172, figs. 38, a, b, c; here Aristogeiton has received a bearded head. For another restoration, in the Museum of Strasbourg, see Springer-Michaelis, p. 216, fig. 402, a, b.

1288 Bulletin of Museum of Fine Arts, III, 27; R. M., XIX, 1904, p. 163, Pl. VI (Hauser).

1289 A vase by Douris shows a warrior similar to Aristogeiton, but his onset is fiercer: Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, 1893, Pl. XXI, and Textbd., pp. 206 f. For other representations in art of the Tyrannicides, see Frazer, II, pp. 94 f.

1290 Darstellung des Menschen in der aelt. griech. Kunst, 1899, p. xi; cf. Richardson, p. 120, n. 2.

1291 Cf. Dickins, p. 265 (quoting the view of Furtwaengler).

1292 Furtwaengler, Sammlung Somzée, 1897, Pl. III. He ascribes it to Mikon and identifies it with the statue of the pancratiast Kallias at Olympia whose base has been found: Bildw. v. Ol. 146; Hyde, 50; see infra, in the section on Pancratiasts, p. 251. For the Pelops, see Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. IX, 2, and XI, 1 (head).

1293 I, 23.9. The inscribed base has been found: C. I. A., I, 376; I. G. B., 39.

1294 P., VI, 10.1–3; Hyde, 93; Foerster, 137.

1295 Ols. 72 to 76 ( = 492 to 476 B. C.); Hyde, p. 42.

1296 Cf. Bulle, p. 493, on no. 225.

1297 On the origin and early development of motion figures in Greek art, see Bulle, pp. 157 f., and the works cited on p. 674 (notes to p. 158); especially, J. Langbehn, Fluegelgestalten der aeltesten griech. Kunst, Diss. inaug., 1881; F. Studniczka, Die Siegesgoettin, Gesch. einer antiken Idealgestalt, 1898; E. Curtius, Die knieenden Figuren d. alt. griech. Kunst (29stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1869); Eadweard Muybridge, Human Figure in Motion, 1907; cf. also J. Lange, op. cit.

1298 In the Museo Archeologico, Florence: Bulle, no. 10.

1299 Cf. the realistic scenes of wrestling, boxing, and running, in relief on the archaic Attic tripod vase from Tanagra now in Berlin, dating from the second half of the sixth century B. C.: A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, pp. 30 f. (Loeschke) and Pls. 3 and 4. Cf. also scenes from the pentathlon on a Panathenaic amphora of the sixth century B. C. in Leyden: ibid., Pl. 9; etc.

1300 B. C. H., III, 1879, pp. 393 f. and Pls. VI-VII (Homolle), and V, 1881, pp. 272 f. (Homolle, on the artist and his father Mikkiades); von Mach, no. 32 (restored in the text opp. p. 26, fig. 1); Richardson, p. 51, fig. 15; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, pp. 300–1, figs. 122–3 and Treu’s restoration, p. 303, fig. 125; restored in Springer-Michaelis, p. 187, fig. 358; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 389, 5. Though first called an Artemis by Homolle (because of its resemblance to the so-called Oriental winged Artemis on a bronze relief from Olympia, von Mach, text, opp. p. 36, fig. 5), it has generally been called a Nike since its first ascription by Furtwaengler (A. Z., XL, 1882, pp. 324 f.), and brought into connection with a base in two parts found near the statue on Delos in 1880 and 1881, inscribed with the names of Archermos and his father Mikkiades. If the connection with the base were certain, the statue should be referred to the beginning of the sixth century B. C.; B. Sauer (A. M., XVI, 1891, pp. 182 f.), and others, have disputed the connection.

1301 Now in the National Museum, Athens: Kabbadias, no. 1; von Mach, 20; Springer-Michaelis, p. 174, fig. 340; Richardson, p. 43, fig. 11; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 645, 1. Its inscription should date it about 600 B. C. It is over 6 feet in height (including the base: von Mach).

1302 Bulle, pp. 157–8, fig. 33; de Ridder, no. 808. It is 0.123 meter high (Bulle). Cf. similar bronzes ibid., nos. 799–814, and also a flying harpy on a sixth-century B. C. Ionic vase in the University Museum in Wuerzburg: Bulle, pp. 159–160, fig. 34; Furtw.-Reichhold, Griech. Vasenmalerei, I, pp. 209 f. and Pl. 41; cf. also the very similar pose on the small bronze statuette in the British Museum of a winged Nike represented in violent motion: von Mach, 33; the marble torso of another in Athens: id., text, opp. p. 26, fig. 2; and the bronze winged Gorgon from Olympia (0.12 meter high): Bronz. v. Ol., Pl. VIII, no. 78, text, p. 25 (and for the type, cf. Roscher, Lex., art. Gorgonen in der Kunst, I, 2, p. 1710, ll. 67 f.).

1303 Nike of Archermos, 1891.

1304 Salzmann, Nécropole de Camiros, Pl. LIII; Bulle, pp. 161–2, fig. 35; cf. Brunn, Griech. Kunstgeschichte, I, p. 142. Its diameter is 0.385 meter (Bulle).

1305 See R. Kekulé and H. Winnefeld, Bronzen aus Dodona in den koenigl. Museen zu Berlin, Pl. II and pp. 13 f.; A. Z., XL, 1882, Pl. I and pp. 23–27 (Engelmann); Rayet, I, Pl. 17 (S. Reinach); Bulle, 83 (right). As the figure is only 0.143 meter tall, it seems to have decorated the rim of a bronze bowl. It may be later than the Tuebingen bronze (Fig. 42) and is certainly of a different school. The presence of a breastplate proves that it is meant for a warrior and not for a hoplitodrome.

1306 For a full discussion of this sculptor, see Lechat, Pythagoras de Rhegion, 1905; cf. S. Q., §§ 489–507.

1307 H. N., XXXIV, 59.

1308 VI, 4.3; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 38; Foerster, 202, 203.

1309 VI, 6.1; Hyde, 48; Foerster, 200.

1310 VI, 6.4 f.; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 56; Foerster, 185, 195, 207.

1311 VI, 7.10; Hyde, 69; Foerster, 183, 189.

1312 VI, 13.1; Oxy. Pap.; Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 59; Hyde, 110; Foerster, 176–7; 181–2; 187–8; Inschr. v. Ol., 145.

1313 VI, 13.7; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 117; Foerster, 184.

1314 VI, 18.1; Hyde, 185; Foerster, 193a.

1315 Reisch, p. 43, n. 4, wrongly assumed this to be one of the oldest statues of Pythagoras, since the same sculptor made the statue of the son Kratisthenes; but the son’s victory was probably only two Olympiads later than that of the father, as we have seen.

1316 VIII, 47; S. Q., 507. Diogenes repeats the tradition that there were two sculptors of the name, one from Rhegion, the other from Samos; also Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 59–60.

1317 J. H. S., II, 1881, pp. 332 f.; cf. his Essays on the Art of Pheidias, 1885, p. 323. The recovered base of Euthymos’ statue has no footmarks: Inschr. v. Ol., 144. Waldstein is followed in his ascription of the statues to Euthymos by Urlichs, Arch. Analekt., 1885, p. 9.

1318 B. B., no. 542 (two views); Furtw. Mp., p. 171, fig. 70; A. M., XVI, 1891, pp. 313 f. and Pls. IV, and V (two views), (P. Hermann).

1319 Mp., pp. 171–2; Mw., pp. 345–6.

1320 Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. II (head); Annali, XLVI, 1874, Pl. L. Arndt, La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, p. 62, doubts if the head belongs to the torso.

1321 Duetschke, II, no. 77 (= one of two statues); Mon. d. I., VIII, 1864–68, Pl. XLVI, 6–8, and Annali, XXXIX, 1867, pp. 304 f. (Benndorf); Arndt-Amelung, nos. 96–98; cf. A. Z., XXVII, 1869, pp. 106 f. and Pl. 24, 2 (Benndorf, Tyrannicides on a Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum, etc.), and XXXII, 1875, pp. 163 f. (Duetschke, group of two statues); Reinach, Rép. II, 2, 541, 6. Both Duetschke (A. Z., l. c.) and Furtwaengler (Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., VIII, 1888, p. 1448) have shown that it represents an athlete.

1322 Michaelis, p. 446, no. 36; Clarac, V, 856, 2180. Furtwaengler believes the statue later in style than the Louvre boxer.

1323 E. g., P. Hermann, op. cit., pp. 332–3; Arndt, text to B. B., no. 542.

1324 B. B., no. 361; Amelung, Fuehrer, 210; Duetschke, II, 163; Furtw., Mp., pp. 165 f. and fig. 66 (two views); Mw., pp. 339 f. and Pl. XVII (from a cast); F. W., 458. For three replicas of the Riccardi type, see Arndt, text to B. B., 542. Furtwaengler believed this head a prototype of the Diomedes of Kresilas known to us from copies in Munich (Pl. XXI); Mw., pp. 311 f. and Pls. XII, XIII; Mp., pp. 146 f. and figs. 60 (body), and 61 (head, two views); B. B., 128; Brunn, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1892, pp. 651 f.; in Paris: Froehner, Notice, no. 128; Clarac, 314, 1438; and elsewhere. See supra p. 169.

1325 Michaelis, p. 367, no. 152; Mp., p. 172, fig. 71; Mw., p. 347, fig. 44; A. Z., XXXI, 1874, Pl. III; F. W., 459. Kekulé was the first to class it as Myronian: Ueber d. Kopf des Praxitel. Hermes, p. 12, 1 (quoted by F. W., l. c.). Graef curiously found it Pheidian: Aus d. Anomia, p. 69, 63.

1326 H. N., XXXIV, 58; cf. Mp., p. 173.

1327 La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, Pl. XXXVI and p. 60; the other, unpublished, is mentioned ibid. He also adds the cast of a lost original statue of a boxer in the Royal Academy of Fine Arts in Copenhagen, whose head belongs stylistically to the same series: ibid., pp. 60–61, and figs. 30 (head), 31–32 (body). If the head and body belong together it is the only statuary type of the group.

1328 Kieseritzky, Kat. d. Ermitage, 1901, p. 27, no. 68; Furtw., Mp., p. 177, fig. 74; Mw., p. 353 fig. 46 (two views).

1329 Mp., p. 176, fig. 73; Mw., Pl. XX (two views).

1330 Text to B. B., no. 542; La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, text to Pl. XXXVI, p. 60.

1331 B. M. Sculpt., 1603, Pl. V, fig. 1; B. B., 224; F. W., 460.

1332 A. M., XXXVI, 1911, pp. 193 f., and Pl. VII (Athleten Kopf in Athen).

1333 H. N., XXXIV, 59.

1334 Brunn, pp. 133–4, connected Libyn and puerum, and believed that only one statue was meant by Pliny’s sentence, identical with Pausanias’ statue of Mnaseas. Stuart Jones, Select Passages from Anc. Writers Illustrative of the History of Gk. Sculpt., 1895, p. 57, makes two alterations in Pliny’s text, inserting et between Libyn and puerum, and replacing tabellam of the MSS. with flagellum. The boy holding the whip, then, is Mnaseas’ son Kratisthenes, the chariot victor mentioned by P., VI, 18.1. Stuart Jones follows Furtwaengler (Jahrbuecher fuer Class. Philol., 1876, p. 509) in having Pliny translate παῖδα of his Greek authority by puerum instead of filium.

1335 P. 44.

1336 Cat. no. 51; Benndorf, Griech. und Sicilische Vasenbilder, I, pp. 13 f. and Pl. IX.

1337 In his Chrestomathia Pliniana, 1857, p. 320.

1338 Rheinisches Museum, XLIV, 1889, pp. 264 f.

1339 Antigonos of Karystos, apud Zen., V, 82 (passage given by Jex-Blake, p. xxxix and n. 2).

1340 Ancient writers differed as to the authorship of the statue. Thus P. (I, 33.3), Mela (de Situ orbis, II, 3.6), Tzetzes (S. Q., 838–9), and Zenobios (l. c.), say that it was Pheidias, while Pliny (H. N., XXXVI, 17) and Strabo (IX, I. 17, C. 396) say Agorakritos. A fragment of the colossal head of the statue came to the British Museum in 1820: B. M. Sculpt., I, p. 460; also fragments of the figure on the base, described by P., I, 33.7, were found in 1890 and are now in the National Museum in Athens: Kabbadias, 203–14; Frazer, II, p. 457, fig. 40.

1341 See his Ueber einige Werke des Kuenstlers Pythagoras, in Verhandl. d. 40sten Versamml. deutscher Philologen u. Schulmaenner in Goerlitz, Leipsic, 1890 (pp. 329–336), p. 334.

1342 Archaeolog. Analekten, 1885, p. 9. Lucian, Anachar., 9, says that apples formed a part of the Delphic prize; Dromeus is also known to us as a Pythian victor. In Chrest. Plin., p. 320, L. von Urlichs had identified the nudus as Meilanion or Hippomenes with the apples with which he had beaten Atalanta; see S. Q., § 499, note a.

1343 H. N., XXXIV, 59: Syracusis autem claudicantem, cuius ulceris dolorem sentire etiam spectantes videntur. Gronovius, following Lessing, Laokoön, Ch. 2, identified it with a wounded Philoktetes: see Bluemner, Comm. zu Lessing’s Laokoön, pp. 508 f.; the words cuius ... videntur seem to have been derived from A. Pl., IV, 112, 1.4 (which refers to a bronze statue of Philoktetes): cf. Brunn, p. 134 and Jex-Blake, ad loc.

1344 Cf. Benndorf, Anz. d. Wiener Akad., 1887, p. 92; von Sybel, Weltgesch. d. Kunst, p. 139.

1345 Inschr. v. Ol., 146; Kallias won Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 6.1; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208.

1346 In the Plinian passage Leontiskos figures rather as an artist, probably through Pliny’s misunderstanding of some Greek sentence in his authority; see L. von Urlichs, Rheinisches Museum, XLIV, 1889, p. 261.

1347 P. 44.

1348 L. von Sybel, Athena und Marsyas, Bronzemuenze des Berliner Museums, 1879.

1349 This characteristic is expressed by the word αὐτάρκεια; cf. Plato, Phil., 67 A; Aristotle, Eth. Nicom., 1, 7.5–6 ( = 1097 b); etc.

1350 Marble copy of the Marsyas was found in 1823 on the Esquiline and is now in the Lateran Museum, Rome: Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1179; Rayet, I, Pl. 33; B. B., 208; Bulle, 95; von Mach, 65a; Baum., II, p. 1002, fig. 1210; Collignon, I, pp. 467 f. and fig. 234; F. W., 454; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 15, 6. It is 1.95 meters high (Bulle). It is wrongly restored and only the head can be considered approximately faithful to the original. Cf. another copy of the head of Parian marble in the Museo Barracco, Rome: Helbig, I, 1104; Reinach, Têtes, pp. 53 f. and Pls. LXVI-LXVII; F. W., 455. A fourth-century B. C. bronze statuette from Patras, now in the British Museum, appears also to give the motive of the original group in Athens mentioned by Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 57, and P., I, 24. 1: B. M. Bronzes, 269; Gaz. Arch., 1879, Pls. XXXIV-V and pp. 241 f.; A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, Pl. VIII (two views), pp. 91 f.; Rayet, I, Pl. 34; von Mach, 656; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 51, nos. 5 and 7. It is 0.75 meter high. For other representations, see G. Hirschfeld, Athena und Marsyas, 32stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1872, Pls. I and II. For a copy of the head of Athena in Dresden, see B. B., 591 (three views).

1351 Walter Pater, in his Greek Studies (in the essay on The Age of Athletic Prizemen), ed. 1895, pp. 309 f., calls the Diskobolos a work of genre. However, the Diskobolos can hardly be called a decorative statue, i. e., “a work merely imitative of the detail of actual life.” On p. 313 he rightly classes the Doryphoros as an “academic” work.

1352 It was formerly in the Palazzo Massimi alla Colonna, and hence is often called the Massimi Diskobolos: B. B., no. 567, cf. 256 (head from cast); von Mach, 63; Collignon, I, Pl. XI, opp. p. 472; H. B. Walters, The Art of the Greeks, 1906, Pl. XXX; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. XIII (head from cast); Overbeck, I, fig. 74, opp. p. 274; Reinach, Rép., I, 527, 1; for description, see M. D., 1098.

1353 Furtwaengler, Mp., pp. 168 f., Mw., pp. 341 f., lists three other copies of the head: one in Basel (cf. Kalkmann, Proport. des. Gesichts., 53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1893, pp. 73–74); one at Catajo (Mp., fig. 68; Mw., fig. 43; Arndt-Amelung, nos. 54–55); and one in Berlin (Mp., fig. 69).

1354 H. N., XXXIV, 58: (Myron) videtur ... capillum quoque et pubem non emendatius fecisse quam rudis antiquitas instituisset.

1355 B. B., nos. 631, 632 (restored from bronzed cast; text by Rizzo); Bulle, 98; Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1363; Boll. d’Arte, I, 1907, pp. 1 f. and Pls. I-III; cf. Zeitschr. fuer bild. Kunst, 1907, pp. 185 f. It is pieced together from fourteen fragments; the fragment of the right lower leg was found in 1910. Height to right shoulder, 1.53 meters (Bulle).

1356 Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 326; Guide, 333; von Mach, 62; Collignon, I, p. 473, n. 1; F. W., 451; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 545, 5.

1357 B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 250; von Mach. 61; Specimens, I, Pl. XXIX; Museum Marbles, XI, Pl. XLIV; Marbles and Bronzes of the British Museum, Pl. XLVII; F. W., 452; Reinach, Rép., I, 525, 5; Clarac, V, 860, 2194 B. It is 5 feet 5 inches tall (Smith).

1358 H. Stuart Jones, Museo Capitolino Cat., 1912, no. 50, p. 123, and Pl. 21; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 788; Guide, 446; Clarac, V, 858 A, 2212. It is 1.48 meters high from lower edge of base to the right hand (Jones).

1359 B. B., no. 566; von Mach, 64; Gardner, Sculpt., PI. XI; Gardiner, p. 96, fig. 13 (from a copy of the Munich cast in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford).

1360 Pl. no. 97; cf. Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. XII, and Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkmaeler, Pl. XXXIII.

1361 Philopseudes, 18; S. Q., §544; translation of H. Stuart Jones, Select Passages from Ancient Writers Illustrative of the History of Greek Sculpture, p. 69.

1362 For the late Roman one in the Munich Antiquarium, see B. B., text to Pl. 567, fig. 1; F. W., 453; for the one in Arolsen, see F. W., 1786.

1363 B. M. Gems, no. 742, Pl. G; also given in B. M. Sculpt., I, p. 91, fig. 5.

1364 Inst. orat., II, 13.10: Quid tam distortum et elaboratum quam est ille discobolos Myronis? si quis tamen, ut parum rectum, improbet opus, nonne ab intellectu artis abfuerit, in qua vel praecipue laudabilis est ipsa illa novitas ac difficultas?

1365 Translation by G. F. Hill, in his One Hundred Masterpieces of Sculpture from the Sixth Century B. C. to the Time of Michelangelo, 1909, p. 10.

1366 Enumerated above in Ch. III (Attic Sculptors), p. 129, n. 7. The Spartan Lykinos had two statues: P., VI, 2.1. As he won in both the hoplite-race and chariot-race, Foerster, 211 a, assumed that the two statues represented victor and charioteer, and that they stood upon the quadriga, which Pausanias does not mention. I follow Robert, O. S., p. 172, however, in assuming that the two statues represented the victor in the two events.

1367 H. N., XXXIV, 57.

1368 VI, 8.5; Hyde, 79 (Arkadian) and 79a (Philippos), and commentary on pp. 39 f.

1369 The interpretation of Murray, Class. Rev., I, 1887, pp. 3–4.

1370 The emendation of Loeschke, Dorpaterprogr., 1880, p. 9; accepted by Reisch, p. 44, n. 3, Richardson, p. 151, and others.

1371 Der Dornauszieher und der Knabe mit der Gans, 1876, p. 89, n. 30.

1372 Quoted by Jex-Blake, Add. to p. 46, 1.

1373 Select Passages from Anc. Writers Illustrative of the History of Gk. Sculpt., p. 66.

1374 Mayer, in A. M., XVI, 1891, pp. 246 f., showed that on vase-paintings of Myron’s time and on coins of Elaia, Aeolis, a woman is often represented as standing in the chest, while two men, Perseus and the carpenter, stand beside it.

1375 E. g., the statue of the boy boxer Athenaios of Ephesos was represented in motion, i. e., in the act of sparring, as we see from the footprints on the recovered base: Inschr. v. Ol., 168; he won some time between Ols. (?) 93 and 103 ( = 384 and 368 B. C.): P., VI, 4.1; Hyde, 36; Foerster, 419.

1376 See Grenfell and Hunt, Oxyrhynchus Papyrus, II, 1899, pp. 222 f.; Robert, O. S., Beilage, opp. p. 192; Diels, Hermes, XXXVI, 1901, pp. 72 f.; Koerte, ibid., XXXIX, 1904, pp. 224 f.; Weniger, Klio (Beitraege zur alten Gesch.), IV, pp. 125 f.; V, pp. 1 f. and 184 f.

1377 Late inscriptions mention “Pythian” and “Isthmian boys”: see F. M. Mie, Quaestiones agonisticae ad Olympia pertinentes, Diss. inaug., 1888, p. 48; Dittenberger, Sylloge,2 II, nos. 677–8; the ἀγένειοι and ἄνδρες at Nemea are mentioned by Pindar, Ol., VIII, 54. The boys in these contests were probably aged 12–16, the ἀγένειοι, 16–20 (cf. Roberts-Gardner, Greek Epigraphy, II, p. 166), and the men over 20 years old.

1378 For Olympia, see P., VI, 2.10; 6.1; 14.1–2; etc.

1379 C. I. G., I, 1590.

1380 Dittenberger, op. cit., II, no. 524: ἐφήβων νεωτέρων, μέσων, πρεσβυτέρων.

1381 I. G., II, 444. For the Panathenaia, see Suidas, s. v. Παναθήναια; Mommsen, Heortologie, 1864, p. 141; etc.

1382 P., V, 16.2.

1383 De Leg., VIII, 833 C, D.

1384 C. I. G., inscriptions relating to ephebes, e. g., I, 232; 1590; Dittenberger, de Ephebis atticis, 1863, p. 24; Dumont, Essai sur l’Ephébie attique, 1876, pp. 215–16. This classification is followed by E. Pottier, B. C. H., V, 1881, p. 69.

1385 Bussemaker, in Dar.-Sagl., I, Pt. 1, s. v. athleta, p. 517 (also quoted by Pottier), proposed the division into παῖδες, 12–16 years old, ἀγένειοι, 16–20, and ἄνδρες, from 20 on. Pollux, VIII, 105, and Harpokration, s. v. ἐπιδιετές, give the ephebe age as 18–20; Xen., Cyr., 1, 2.8, puts the age at 16 or 17 for the Persians.

1386 See Inschr. v. Ol., 56. On the whole subject, see Krause, pp. 262 f., especially p. 263, n. 3; Gardiner, pp. 271–2.

1387 VI, 1.3 to VI, 18.7. We also know of 61 other victors with 63 monuments from inscribed base fragments recovered at Olympia; these will be treated infra in Ch. VIII, pp. 353 f.

1388 See Ch. VIII, infra, p. 339 and notes 3–4.

1389 On Ol., IX, 150, Boeckh, p. 228; cf. Etym. magn., s. v. στάδιον, p. 743, 25.

1390 Thus Apollo beat Hermes in running at Olympia, P., V, 7.10; the Idæan Herakles instituted a race among his brothers, P., V, 7.7; and Endymion set his sons to run, and so instituted the boys’ running race there, P., V, 1.4. The running race appears in the Boread legend, Ph.,3; pseudo-Dio Chrysost., XXXVII, p. 296 (Dindorf); it was represented on the Kypselos chest: P., V, 17.10, and appears on many archaic vases. On the age of the event, see Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, 1864, p. 310 and III, 1881, p. 199. The Cretans and the Lacedæmonians sacrificed to Apollo δρομαῖος: Plut., Quaest. conviv., VIII, 4.4.

1391 See Ph., 3, for the four running races; cf., Plato, de Leg., 833 A, B.

1392 Iliad, XXIII, 740 f.; Od., VIII, 120 f. (in l. 121 it is called δρόμος). In some historic games, the stade-race remained the only event; e. g., at the Hermaia on Salamis: C. I. G., I, 108. For the stade-race, see P., I, 44.1; III, 14.3; IV, 4.5, etc. On its origin, see Ph., 5.

1393 Schol. on Aristoph., Aves, 292 (ed. J. W. White, 1914); P., V, 8.6. On its origin, see Ph., 6 and cf. Krause, pp. 345 f.

1394 Ch. 4.

1395 Suidas, s. v. δόλιχος; schol. on Aristophanes, Aves, 292 (= seven stadia); Boeckh, C. I. G., I, no. 1515, p. 703 (= ordinarily seven stadia); schol. on Soph., Electra, 691. See Krause, I, p. 348, n. 13; Grasberger, op. cit., I, pp. 312 f.

1396 Poll., III, 151; schol. on Aristoph., Acharn., 214; etc.

1397 P., passim; Oxy. Pap.; etc.

1398 Ph., 7. For two theories of its origin, see ibid.

1399 P., X, 7.5; Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen, und Isthmien, pp. 136 f.

1400 Cf. Plato, de Leg., I, p. 625 E. Thus the Cretans Ergoteles and Sotades won the distance race twice each; Ergoteles in Ols. 77 and 79 ( = 472 and 464 B. C.): P., VI, 4.11; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 46; Foerster, 206, 213; Sotades in Ols. 99, 100 ( = 384, 380 B. C.): P., VI, 18.6; Hyde, 186; Foerster, 317, 323. The Cretan Philonides, courier of Alexander the Great, had an honor statue at Olympia: P., VI, 16.5; Hyde, 154a. At the games at Trapezous over sixty Cretans entered: Xen., Anab., IV, 8, 27; cf. Krause, pp. 352 f.

1401 De Leg., VIII, 833 C.

1402 V, 16.3.

1403 V, 8.6; cf. IV, 4.5; VIII, 26.4. His statement about the antiquity of the event is corroborated by Plutarch, Quaest. conviv., V, 2.12, Ph. (= only event until Ol. 14), and Eusebios, Chronika, I, p. 193 (ed. Schoene). Gardiner, p. 52, believes that if the Olympic games developed from a single event, it was probably not from the stade-race, but from either the fight in armor or the chariot-race.

1404 P., V, 8.6, etc.; Foerster, 1.

1405 Discussed by Gardiner, pp. 52 and 272–3.

1406 III, 8 (= Dorieus of Rhodes, who won his second victory in Ol. 88 ( = 428 B. C.): P., VI, 7.1; Hyde, 61; Foerster, 260); V, 49 (= Androsthenes of Mainalos, who won his first victory in Ol. 90, = 420 B. C.: P., VI, 6.1; Hyde, 51; Foerster, 267).

1407 Dittenberger, Sylloge^2, I, no. 256 (= Agesidamos of Messenia, who won in Ol. 140, = 220 B. C.).

1408 V, 8.6; confirmed by Ph., 12, and Eusebios, Chron., I, p. 193 (ed. Schoene).

1409 L. c.; corroborated by Ph., 12.

1410 P., V, 8.9; Eusebios agrees with Pausanias, but Philostratos says Ol. 46 ( = 596 B. C.), l. c.

1411 P., V, 8.10; cf. III, 14.3. It was introduced at Delphi in 498 B. C.: see Gardiner, p. 70.

1412 On running races, see Krause, I, pp. 337 f.; Gardiner, Ch. XIII, pp. 270 f.; Dar.-Sagl., I, Pt. 2, pp. 1643 f.; Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, pp. 312 f.; etc.

1413 Fig. 37 left = Mon. d. I., I, 1829–33, Pl. XXII, 6b; cf. ibid., 4b, and X, 1874–78, Pl. XLVIII, f, and Panathenaic amphora in Dar.-Sagl., I, Pt. 2, p. 1643, fig. 2229. Fig. 36A = Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLIX, 1. Also cf. a sixth-century B. C. amphora in Munich, no. 498: Mon. d. I., X, Pl. XLVIII, m; Gardiner, p. 281, fig. 52; Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 129, fig. 92 (right); a fourth-century Panathenaic amphora: Gardiner, p. 283, fig. 53, from Stephani, Comptes rendus de la comm. impér. archéol., St. Petersburg, 1876, Atlas, Pl. I.

1414 Ph., 32: οἷον πτερούμενοι ὑπο τῶν χειρῶν.

1415 The first = B. M. Vases, B 609; Gardiner, p. 280, fig. 51; Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. XLVIII, e, 4; G. F. Hill, Illustrations of School Classics, 1903, fig. 390; the second (Fig. 37, right) = Mon. d. I., I, 1829–33, Pl. XXII, 7b; Gardiner, p. 279, fig. 50; Dar.-Sagl., p. 1644, fig. 2230. Cf. another in Mon. d. I., X, Pl. XLVIII, f, 6.

1416 National Museum, no. 761.

1417 Cf. Reisch, p. 46.

1418 On this mode of representing runners, see Schmidt in Muenchener archaeol. Studien zum Andenken A. Furtwaengler dargebracht, 1909, pp. 249 f. (especially p. 257).

1419 See Kalkmann, Jb., X, 1895, pp. 56 f, and fig. 4, p. 56 (= Gerhard, IV, 256; Murray, Designs from Greek Vases, V, 18) two runners; the interior of the same vase also represents such a runner: p. 61, fig. 7. Cf. also p. 58, fig. 5 (= Murray, X, 37; Mon. d. I., IV, 1844–48, Pl. XXXIII), representing Hermes on a r.-f. vase of the severe style; also p. 59, fig. 6; etc. Also cf. Juethner, p. 41, fig. 36a (a later r.-f. kylix in Munich, no. 803 A), showing a pentathlete running with an akontion. The following b.-f. vases, which show representations of such archaic runners, are taken from Perrot-Chipiez, X, 1914: the proto-Attic amphora of Nettos, p. 71, fig. 63 (= Ant. Denkm., I, Text, p. 46); cup from Aegina, p. 77, fig. 68 (= A. Z., XL, 1882, Pl. IX); Corinthian amphora, p. 103, fig. 74 (= Pottier, Vases antiques, Pl. LIX, E 855); the Gorgon on the François Vase, p. 165, fig. 108 (from Furtw.-Reichhold, Griech. Vasenmalerei, Pls. I-III); on neck of an amphora by Pamphaios in the Louvre, p. 388, fig. 233 (= Pottier, op. cit., Pl. LXXXVIII).

1420 Discussed (wrongly, I think, as Etruscan) by G. H. Chase: A. J. A., XII, 1908, pp. 287 f., Pls. VIII-XVIII (especially XII-XVIII); Pl. XV = Richardson, p. 69, fig. 27.

1421 Richter, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes, no. 46, fig. on p. 30; Museum Bull., 1911 (April), pp. 92 f., and fig. 5 (Richter); it is 4–5/8 inches tall.

1422 No. 1959. It will be discussed in our treatment of hoplitodromes infra, p. 209 and n. 2.

1423 Richter, no. 16, fig. on p. 10; Mus. Bull., 1909 (May), p. 78 (Robinson); it is 2–7/8 inches tall.

1424 Richter, no. 62, fig. on p. 43; Mus. Bull., 1913 (Dec.), pp. 268 f. and fig. 7 (Richter); it is 3–1/16 inches tall.

1425 Op. cit., pp. 65 and 74.

1426 Aegina, das Heiligtum der Aphaia, Pl. XCVI, nos. 32 and 3; in the Glyptothek these are nos. 78 and 82; see von Mach, Pl. 78 (middle).

1427 The Lapith G and the boy P: Treu, Jb., III, 1888, pp. 117 f., Pl. V (= Q and F in the new arrangement on Pl. VI); Kalkmann, op. cit., p. 75.

1428 Bulle, 180; it is 0.79 meter high.

1429 Ant. Denkm., I, Pt. 5, 1890, Pl. LVI (text, pp. 45–46, by Winter); B. B., no. 249; Bulle, 92 (two views) and 93; von Mach, 226; Helbig, Fuehrer, II, no. 1353; Guide, 1063; Collignon, II, p. 361, fig. 184; Gardiner, Sculpt., Pl. LXXIII; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 419, 7. It is 1 meter high (Bulle).

1430 E. g., Kalkmann, Jb., X, 1895, pp. 46 f., Pl. I and fig. I in text; he defends this view, ibid., XI, 1896, pp. 197 f.

1431 To the fifth by Kalkmann, Bulle, Furtwaengler (Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1907, Pt. II, pp. 219–220, = Hadrianic copy), and others; to the fourth by Winter, Collignon, and von Mach; Collignon, II, pp. 359 f., connects it stylistically with the so-called Ilioneus of the Glyptothek, represented in a similar pose (= Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr.,2 270; B. B., 432; F. W., 1263), and with the Hypnos in the Prado, Madrid (= Huebner, Die ant. Bildw. in Madrid, no. 39; Furtw., Mw., pp. 648 f.; Collignon, II, p. 357, fig. 181; F. W., 1287; for small replicas in bronze, see Winnefeld, Hypnos, p. 8, n. 2), and assigns all three to the fourth century B. C. and to Skopaic art. Amelung assigns the Subiaco youth to Hellenistic times: Mus. and Ruins of Rome, I, fig. 60.

1432 For a list of ten such interpretations, see de Ridder, Rev. arch., XXXI, Sér. 3, 1897, p. 265, n. 5; and B. Sauer, Der Knabe von Subiaco, Festgabe H. Bluemner ueberreicht, 1914, pp. 143 f., and note 1 on p. 143.

1433 E. g., by Bulle; Brizio, Ausonia, I, 1906, p. 21; cf. Winter, l. c.; etc. If a Niobid, he was probably wounded in the neck (cf. the one in Milan) and formed part of a group.

1434 By Lucas, Neue Jahrbuecher f. kl. Altertum, V, 1902, pp. 427 f; cf. Jh. oest. arch. Inst., IX, 1906, pp. 273 f.

1435 Formerly by G. Koerte, Jb., XI, 1896, pp. 11 f.; cf. the Pompeian wall-painting, ibid., p. 15, fig. 2; he has since given up this view: see Sauer, l. c.

1436 De Ridder, op. cit., the hands seem to have been placed wrong for this interpretation, though Helbig and Amelung find it possible.

1437 Petersen, Jb., XI, 1896, pp. 202 f.; such a motive was unknown to antiquity and is based on the wrong assumption that a marble hand holding a rope-like object, which was found in the same excavations, belongs to the statue: see Helbig, l. c.

1438 Sauer, in the publication mentioned, believes the riddle best solved by assuming that the figure formerly was part of a gable group; see the reconstruction (by Luebke), p. 145, fig. 4. He dates it in the second half of the fifth century B. C., contemporary with the Idolino.

1439 The fleetness of Ladas was often extolled, especially by late Greek and Roman writers: P, III, 21.1; Plut., Praecip. ger. reip., 10; Catullus, LV, 25; Juvenal, XIII, 97; Martial, II, LXXXVI, 8, and XC, 5; Seneca, Ep., LXXXV, 4; Solinus, 7; etc.

1440 A. Pl., IV, no. 53; here line 3 was added by Jacobs, and line 4 by Benndorf, from two parodies of the epigram in A. G., XI, 86 and 119; in the first parody ἄλλος stands for Λάδας and Περικλῆς for κάμνων. See Benndorf, de anthologiae Graecae Epigrammatis quae ad artes spectant, Diss. inaug., 1862, pp. 13 f., and Kalkmann, Jb., X, 1895, pp. 76–77 and notes. Studniczka (see next note) reads line 4: Λάδας, οἱ δ’ ἄλλοι δάκτυλον οὐ προέβαν.

1441 A. Pl., IV, 54. Benndorf corrects the Mss. reading of the last half of l. 2 as νεῦρα ταθεὶς ὄνυχι; others read the whole line: θυνὸν [= δρόμον] ἐπ’ ἀκροτάτῳ σκάμματι θεὶς ὄνυχα. On the two epigrams, see Studniczka, Myron’s Ladas, Ber. saechs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss., Philolog.-histor. Cl., 52, 1900, pp. 329 f. (especially pp. 333 f.).

1442 Reading φυσῶν ... θυμόν for φεύγων ... Θῦμον, “flying from wind-footed Thymos,” of Jacobs. On possible readings, see Studniczka, l. c., pp. 337 f.

1443 Sculpt., p. 69.

1444 See Kalkmann, op. cit., pp. 77–8; Reisch, p. 44; cf. Gercke, Jb., VIII, 1893, p. 115, on the meaning of the words πνεῦμα and ἆσθμα.

1445 Polyklet u. s. Sch., p. 17; von Mach, no. 289; B. B., 354.

1446 No. 249, 249 a; he fixes his victory in Ol. (?) 85 ( = 440 B. C.), because of the late dating of Myron by Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 49 (floruit Ol. 90 = 420 B. C.: cf. Brunn, I, 142 f.); Furtwaengler dated his activity within the first half of the fifth century B. C.: Mp., p. 182; Robert provisionally dates the victory of Ladas in Ol. (?) 76 ( = 476 B. C.), though he finds that Ols. 80 and 81 ( = 460 and 456 B. C.) are possible: see O. S., p. 184; here he dates the sculptor (?) 476–444 B. C.

1447 Cf. infra, Ch. VIII, p. 365, n. 1.

1448 Helbig, Fuehrer, I, nos. 913, 914; Guide, 573, 574; B. Com. Rom., IV, 1876, Pls. IX-X, pp. 68 f.; B. B., 353 (right and left); Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 540, 4, and for the torso, see II, 2, 541, 3 (= B. Com. Rom., Pl. XI).

1449 Helbig, 914.

1450 Helbig, 913.

1451 So Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 128, n. 1, Mw., p. 285, n. 3, and Helbig (3d ed.); on the other hand, Reisch (p. 46), B. B., and formerly Helbig (in the first edition of his Guide), have regarded them as wrestlers.

1452 The statuette and relief are pictured in Mon. ant., XI, 1901, Pl. XXVI, 2, and pp. 402 f. The statuette also in Arndt-Amelung, Einzelaufnahmen, no. 552, and Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 540, 6.

1453 Mp., pp. 126 f., and fig. 51; Mw., pp. 284 f., fig. 38; here the restored parts have been removed and his own restoration is given in an outline drawing. See also B. B., no. 129; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 322; Clarac, 837, 2099.

1454 Mentioned by P., I, 28.2 and I, 25.1; the inscribed base has been found (see Lolling, Ἀρχαιολογικὸν Δελτίον, 1889, p. 35, n. 2). The Perikles is exemplified by two inscribed copies: a terminal bust in London: B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 549 and fig. 23 on p. 289; Ancient Marbles in the British Museum, 1815, Pl. XXXII; A. Z., XXVI, 1868, Pl. II, fig. 1 and pp. 1 f. (Conze); Furtw., Mp., pp. 117 f., Pl. VII and fig. 46 (profile); Mw., Pl. IX and pp. 270 f.; F. W., 481; a terminal bust in the Vatican: Visconti, Iconogr. gr., 1824–26, I, Pl. XV and p. 178; B. B., no. 156; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 276; Arndt-Bruckmann, Griech. u. roem. Portraets, 413, 414: Bernouilli, Griech. Ikonogr., I, Pl. XI, p. 108; etc.

1455 H. N., XXXIV, 74; in this passage Pliny also mentions an Olympius Pericles. The Naples statue has been wrongly restored as a gladiator; it is pictured, minus the restorations, in Mp., p. 125, fig. 50; Mw., p. 282, fig. 37; cf. Clarac, 870, 2210 and 872, 2210. Furtwaengler connects this statue with the bronze one of a certain Diitrephes pierced with arrows, which Pausanias saw on the Akropolis, I, 23.3; a basis found there, inscribed with the name Kresilas, supported a votive offering of Hermolykos, the son of Diitrephes, to Athena: I. G. B., 46; C. I. A., I, 402 (Kirchhoff, who opposes the connection); cf. p. 373. The base shows that a figure stood upon it in the pose of another figure, which appears on a white-faced Attic lekythos in the Cab. des Médailles in Paris (Mp., p. 124, fig. 48), which Furtwaengler believes a free rendering of the Kresilæan statue.

1456 In Ols. 83, 84, 85 ( = 448–440 B. C.): Afr.; Foerster, 239, 245, 248. Krison is mentioned by Plato, Protag., 335 E, and de Leg., VIII, 840 A; Aristophanes of Byzantion (apud Zonaras, I, p. 451, and apud Hesych., s. v. Γρίσων); Plut., de adul. et amici Discr., 16; and de Tranqu. anim., 12; etc.

1457 Inschr. v. Ol., 157. He won Ol. (?) 80 ( = 460 B. C.): P. VI, 8.1; Hyde, 71; Foerster, 280.

1458 B. B., no. 321; Bulle, 164, and fig. 93 on pp. 361–2 (cast on round base in Erlangen); von Mach 72; Collignon, I, p. 417, fig. 215; Rayet, I, Pl. 35; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 956; Guide, 617; Zielinski, Rhein. Mus., XXXIX, 1884, pp. 116 f. (who refers the original possibly to Strongylion); F. W., 215. For replicas, see Gaz. Arch., 1881, p. 130; Rayet, text to Pl. 35; and Furtwaengler, Der Dornauszieher und der Knabe mit der Gans, 1876, pp. 7 f; Reinach, Rép., 1, 344, 6. It was called a runner first by Visconti, Opere varie, 1827–31, IV, Pl. XXIII, pp. 163 f., who has been followed by Collignon, Zielinski, Rayet, Reisch (p. 46), Richardson (p. 144), and others. It is 0.80 meter high (Bulle).

1459 E. g., Overbeck, II, pp. 182–185, and notes 10–24 on p. 186. On p. 183, fig. 186, he gives illustrations of the three principal copies—the marble one in the British Museum (a), the bronze statuette in Baron Rothschild’s collection in Paris (b), and the Capitoline bronze in Rome (c). He brings it into relation with the sculptor Boëthos, who is known to have made seated genre figures of boys, e. g., one in the Heraion at Olympia, P., V., 17. 4 (= S. Q., 1596).

1460 Von Mach, no. 86; cf. Kekulé, A. Z., XLI, 1883, p. 244, and F. W., 215.

1461 See B. M. Sculpt., III, pp. 109–110.

1462 See K. Woelke, Dornauszieher-Maedchen, Jb., XXIX, 1914, pp. 17–25, figs. 1, 2, etc.

1463 E. g., bronze statuettes, formerly in the Dreyfus collection in Paris, dating from the second half of the fifteenth century: Bulle, p. 364, fig. 94; Mon. Piot, XVI, 1909, Pl. XII, 3 (nos. 2, 3 = Italian bronzes of the same subject in the Louvre and in the collection of Charles Haviland; see text, by G. Migeon, pp. 95 f.).

1464 B. M. Sculpt., III, no. 1755 and Pl. VIII; Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. XXX; Annali, XLVIII, 1876, Pl. N (and pp. 124 f); A. Z., XXXV, 1877, p. 127, and XXXVII, 1879, p. 19, Pls. II, III; Rayet, Pl. 36; von Mach, 284; Bulle, p. 365, fig. 95; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 144, 2. It is 0.63 meter high (Bulle).

1465 Gaz. arch., 1881, Pls. IX-XI; Collignon, I, p. 420, fig. 216; Rayet, text to no. 36; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 143, 7. It is 9.5 inches tall.

1466 See Lange, Das Motif des aufgestuetzten Fusses, 1879, pp. 9 f.; Reisch, p. 46, n. 5; B. B., no. 67 (Paris copy); von Mach, 238a (Munich copy), 238b (Louvre copy). See supra, pp. 86–87.

1467 See E. N. Gardiner, J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, p. 281; on the race, see Gardiner, pp. 285–91, and J. H. S., l. c., pp. 280 f.; Krause, I, pp. 353–359; Dar.-Sagl., I, Pt. 2, p. 1644; etc.

1468 At Olympia, P., III, 14.3; Plut., Quaest. conviv., II, 5; Artemidoros, Oneirokritika, I, 63; Heliod., Aethiop., IV., init.; Oxy. Pap.; at Delphi, Krause, Die Pythien, Nemeen, und Isthmien, 1841, p. 26, no. 4; at the Panathenaia, Mommsen, Feste d. Stadt Athen, 1898, p. 70. On its origin, see Ph., 7.

1469 P., II, 11.8; X, 34.5. In the first passage Pausanias speaks of a victor who won the diaulos twice—once γυμνός, the second time σὺν τῇ ἀσπίδι. De Ridder, B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 211 f., discusses Hauser’s futile argument (Jb., II, 1887, pp. 95 f.) that the hoplite-runner covered the stadion four times, the first and fourth with helmet and shield, the second and third without the shield, and conclusively shows that the race was a diaulos. For Athens, see Aristoph., Aves, 291 f., and scholion. The race was four stades long at Nemea: cf. Ph., 7, and Juethner’s note (p. 196).

1470 Ph., 8; cf. also 24.

1471 VI, 10.4. In V, 12.8 he says that 25 shields for this race were officially kept in the nave of the temple of Zeus.

1472 We see shield, helmet, and greaves on the vase pictured in Dar.-Sagl., I, 2, p. 1644, fig. 2231; Baum., III, p. 2110, fig. 2360; on the b.-f. vases in Gerhard, IV, Pls. CCLVII, CCLVIII, and CCLXIII; on the b.-f. vases pictured in Schreiber, Bilderatlas, Pl. XXII, figs. 3 (sixth century B. C., = Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLVIII) and 5 (= amphora in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, II, B 608); we see no greaves on the r.-f. kylix in Berlin (Fig. 41); cf. Krause, pp. 354 f.

1473 Jb., II, 1887, pp. 95 f.; X, 1895, pp. 199 f.

1474 P., VI, 10.4.

1475 P., X, 34.5. Mnesiboulos won stade- and hoplite-races at Olympia in Ol. 235 ( = 161 A. D.): Afr.; Foerster, 712–713; cf. Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 582. He was also περιοδονίκης in both events.

1476 E. g., by Ph., 7.

1477 A bronze helmet found at Olympia, recently in the possession of the Bishop of Lincoln, is pictured in J. H. S., II, 1881, Pl. XI, 1.

1478 E. g., on the vase in Dar.-Sagl., I, 2, p. 1644, fig. 2231; on the Panathenaic vase in the British Museum, already mentioned, dating from the second half of the fourth century B. C.: B. M. Vases, II, B. 608; = Gardiner, p. 290, fig. 58; = Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. XLVIII, e, 3; = Baum, III, p. 2110, fig. 2361; here the runners are running with the feet flat on the ground.

1479 In the Cabinet des Médailles of the Bibliothèque Nationale, no. 523; Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, 1893, pp. 132–142, Pls. XV, 2 and XVI; Gardiner, p. 286, fig. 54, and J. H. S., XXIII, p. 278, fig. 7; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, I, p. 427, no. 58.

1480 No. 2307; Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLXI; J. H. S., XXIII, p. 277, fig. 6; Gardiner, p. 288, fig. 56; Dar.-Sagl., II, 2, p. 1644, fig. 2232; Jb., II, 1887, p. 105; cf. similar runners on a r.-f. kylix in the British Museum, E 22: Murray, Designs from Greek Vases, no. 18; Hoppin, Hbk., I, p. 372, no. 21.

1481 J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, p. 278, fig. 8; Gardiner, p. 287, fig. 55. It was formerly in Berlin.

1482 E 818; J. H. S., l. c., p. 285, fig. 12; Gardiner, p. 289, fig. 57; noted by Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, p. 373, no. 8; Hoppin, Hbk., I, p. 134, no. 69.

1483 For a reconstruction of the various phases of the armed-race from vase-paintings, see J. H. S., l. c., p. 279, fig. 9.

1484 See Gardiner, p. 291 and J. H. S., l. c., pp. 284 f. Perhaps this is the explanation of a kylix in Berlin (no. 4039), reproduced by Furtwaengler in Samml. Sabouroff, I, Pl. LIII.

1485 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix in Munich (no. 1240); J. H. S., l. c., p. 284, fig. 11; Gardiner, p. 292, fig. 59. This painting represents a palæstra scene, as is shown by the sponges on the wall.

1486 291.

1487 H. N., XXXV, 71.

1488 I, 23.9. In 1838 the inscribed base of this statue was found, the inscription being: Ἐπι[χ]αρῖνος [ἀνέ]θηκεν ὁ ... Κριτίος καὶ Νης[ι]ώτης ἐπο[ιησ]άτην: C. I. A., I, 376; Loewy, I. G. B., 39. This shows that Pausanias got his information about the pose from the statue itself and not from the inscription. It also gives us the right spelling of the artist’s name.

1489 First published, long after it had passed from the possession of Herr Tux to the University Collection, by Gruneisen in Schorn’s Kunstblatt, 1835, pp. 21 f., and separately the same year. See also Hauser in Jb., II, 1887, pp. 95–107; L. Schwabe, Jb., I, 1886, pp. 163 f., Pl. IX (= three views); de Ridder, B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 211 f. (reviewed in A. J. A., II, 1898, pp. 268 f.); Collignon, I, p. 305, fig. 152; Bulle, no. 89 (two views); Springer-Michaelis, p. 217, fig. 403a; Brunn, Griech. Kunstgesch., 1893, II, p. 249 f.; F. W., 90; Rouse, p. 174, n. 1; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 543, 5.

1490 Bulle, no. 86.

1491 Jh. oest. arch. Inst., V, 1902, pp. 165–70 and Pl. IV (three views). It was probably made in Campania. It is 0.07 meter high.

1492 M. D., 1097; Clarac, 830, 2085.

1493 Furtw., Mp., p. 204, and n. 4; Mw., p. 392, and n. 4. He believes that the helmet is not alien to the statue as some think, but points out that the head, which is much restored and is akin to the Perseus, is wrongly attached to the body. Hauser, Jb., II, 1887, p. 101, n. 24, because of the tree-trunk, does not believe that the statue represents a hoplite-runner; but Furtwaengler shows that the tree-trunk offers no objection to restoring a shield to the statue.

1494 Rayet, II, Pls. 64, 65 (head); B. B., no. 75; Bulle, 88; von Mach, 286; Reinach, Rép., I, 154 1–4; M. W., I, Pl. 48, 216; F. W., 1425; H. B. Walters, The Art of the Greeks, Pl. XLIX; Gardner, Hbk., p. 513, fig. 136; J. Six, De Beteekenis van het Leelijke in de Grieksche Kunst, p. 29; his theory has been contested by Kalkman, Jb., X, 1895, p. 64 and n. 50. The statue is 1.55 meters high (Bulle).

1495 Bulle, and also Klein (III, pp. 265 f.), believe that Agasias was no mere copyist, while Amelung (Becker-Thieme, Lex. d. bild. Kuenstler, I, 113) classes him as one. The inscription on the base of the statue dates it about 100 B. C.

1496 No. 1959; Arch. Eph., 1904, pp. 43–56 (Philios) and Pl. I; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, pp. 648–51 and fig. 333; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, Pl. on p. 20; Svoronos, I, pp. 89–96, and Tafelbd., I, Pl. XXVI (upper left corner); Bulle, 263; E. Schmidt, Muenchner archaeol. Stud. zum Andenken A. Furtwaengler, p. 254 and fig. 351; Lechat, p. 206, fig. 25. Its dimensions are 1.01 meters high and 0.72 meter broad. See p. 194.

1497 Bulle dates it loosely after the middle of the sixth century B. C.

1498 He shows that a similar type appears on Athenian dekadrachmai, which were struck soon after the date of the battle of Marathon, in any case before 480 B. C.; cf. Babelon, Journ. Int. d’arch. Num., 1905.

1499 A. Pl., I, 3, v. 2, and P. l. G., III, no. 153, p. 500. Cf. also the epigram quoted by Eustathius, in the scholion on the Iliad, XXIII, 621, p. 1320, and one by Lucilius, A. G., XI, no. 84. The five events are repeatedly mentioned by Greek writers: Ph., 3, 11, etc.; Artemidoros, Oneir., I, 55; many scholiasts, e. g., on Pindar, Isthm., 1, 35, Boeckh, p. 519, and Soph., Electra, 691. On the event, see P. Gardner, J. H. S., I, pp. 210 f.; Gardiner, Ch. XVII, pp. 359 f.; id., J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, pp. 54 f. (The Method of Deciding the Pentathlon); E. Myers, J. H. S., II, 1881, pp. 217 f.; F. Fedde, Der Fuenfkampf d. Hellenen, 1888, and Ueber den Fuenfkampf d. Hellenen, 1889; Heinrich, Ueber das Pentathlon d. Griechen, 1892; Pinder, Ueber den Fuenfkampf d. Hellenen, 1867; Krause, I, pp. 476–497, and 921 f.; Bluemner, in Baum., I, pp. 512 f; Legrand, in Dar.-Sagl., IV, 1, pp. 804 f., s. v. Quinquertium. On the order of events and method of deciding the victory, see Gardiner, pp. 362 f.

1500 Isthm., I, 26–27.

1501 Od., VIII, 103. In line 129 he mentions the diskos. Boxing was never a part of the later pentathlon.

1502 P., V, 8. 7; Philostratos, 12; in Ch. 3 he says that it was introduced by Jason.

1503 P., V, 9. 1.

1504 Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLIX. See supra, p. 192.

1505 It represents jumping, javelin-throwing, and diskos-throwing; it is a Panathenaic vase of the sixth century B. C. in the British Museum: B 134; J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, Pl. XVIII; Gardiner, p. 360, fig. 107; cf. these three events pictured on another amphora of similar date in Leyden: A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, Pl. IX; Gardiner, p. 361, fig. 108. A gymnasium scene (i. e., figures of a jumper, diskobolos, and apparently an akontistes) appears on a r.-f. vase-painting by Douris: see Pottier, Douris et les Peintres de Vases grecs, 1904 (engl. ed. 1909), fig. 6; Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 549, fig. 315.

1506 In addition to those cited we may add the vase in the British Museum, B 142 (= diskos-throwing and javelin-throwing); one in Munich, no. 656 (= javelin-throwing and jumping); two others in the British Museum, B 136 and 602 (= diskos-throwing); another there, B 605 (= javelin-throwing); etc.

1507 Inschr. v. Ol., 162, 163; I. G. B., 91; upper surface outlined in Furtw., Mp., p. 263, fig. 110; Mw., p. 472, fig. 80. For the discussion of Pythokles, see Mp., pp. 262 f.

1508 Furtwaengler believed in the first century B. C.; Dittenberger and Purgold, in the first century A. D.: cf. Inschr. v. Ol., p. 284.

1509 Gatti, B. Com. Rom., XIX, 1891, pp. 280 f., Pl. X, 1; cf. Petersen, R. M., VI, 1891, pp. 304 f.

1510 Statuette in the Braccio Nuovo of the Vatican: Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 32; Guide, 43; Amelung, Vat., I, no. 101 on p. 116, and Pls. XVI, XVII; Furtw., Mp., p. 264, fig. 111; Mw., p. 474, fig. 81; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 549, 2; Clarac, 861, 2184; a black marble statue found at Porto d’ Anzio in 1758, now in the Glyptothek: Furtwaengler-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.,2 no. 458; Clarac, 858, 2175; it is 1.54 meters high.

1511 Wiener Studien, XXIV, 1902, pp. 398 f.; he is, therefore, against the Pythokles ascription; see also Studniczka in Jh. oest. arch. Inst., 1906, p. 131.

1512 Cf. also Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, pp. 570 f.

1513 Hettner, Die Bildw. d. kgl. Antikensamml. zu Dresden, no. 90 (= a doryphoros); Furtw., Mp., Pl. XII (whence our plate) and fig. 112 (head from cast, two views), on p. 267; discussion, pp. 265 f; Mw., Pls. XXVI, XXVII (the head from a cast and the restored left forearm omitted) and text, pp. 475 f.; Clarac, 948, 2437. Furtwaengler mentions three other copies of the statue and three of the head.

1514 On a fourth-century B. C. Panathenaic prize vase we see an athlete in a similar pose holding a diskos in his left hand: Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. XLVIII, g, 10 (quoted by Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 266, n. 6).

1515 Formerly in the Coll. Pourtalès, and then in the Coll. Gréau: W. Froehner, Cat. des bronzes antiques de la Collection Gréau, 1885, Pl. XXXII, p. 204, no. 964; de Ridder, Les Bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1913, Pl. 19, no. 184, and p. 34; Mahler, Polyklet und seine Schule, pp. 57 f. and fig. 13; Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 278, Mw., p. 490; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 546, 3. It is 0.218 meter high. Froehner had interpreted the statuette as that of an oil-pourer, though the position of the hands is against it.

1516 P., VI, 14.13; Hyde, 139 and pp. 54–55; Foerster, 451, 456; Inschr. v. Ol., 176.

1517 Od., VIII, 103 and 128. On jumping, see Krause, I, pp. 383 f.; Gardiner, Ch. XIV, pp. 295 f.; etc.

1518 IV, 465 f.

1519 Cf. Stesichoros, apud Athenaeum, IV, 72 (pp. 172 f.).

1520 De Incessu animalium, Ch. 3 (p. 705 a).

1521 As, e. g., on the statues at Olympia of the Elean pentathlete Anauchidas (P., V, 27.12) and Hysmon (P., VI, 3.10). See supra, p. 164.

1522 Juethner, Antike Turngeraete, pp. 3–13; Gardiner, Ch. XIV, pp. 295 f. and J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, pp. 179 f., (especially pp. 181 f.). The following section is taken chiefly from these two sources. Cf. also Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 180–1; Pinder, A. A., 1864, pp. 230 f.

1523 National Museum, no. 9075; Arch. Eph., 1883, fig. on p. 190; Juethner, fig. 1; Gardiner, p. 298, fig. 60. The inscription = C. I. A., IV, 422^4. This weight is 4.5 inches long with concave sides and weighs 4 lbs. 2 oz.

1524 E. g., one of lead, in the British Museum: J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, p. 182; Gardiner, p. 299, fig. 61 c. It weighs 2 lbs. 5 oz.

1525 V, 26.3; the group dates from the second half of the fifth century B. C.: see Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 267–9.

1526 Arch. Eph., 1883, fig. on p. 104; Juethner, fig. 8; Gardiner, p. 300, fig. 62; Schreiber, Bilderatlas, Pl. XXII, fig. 10. It is 10 inches long. (The illustrations show one weight seen from three sides.)

1527 Bronz. v. Ol., p. 180, fig. 1101; Juethner, fig. 9; Gardiner, p. 299, fig. 61a (from cast in the British Museum). It is probably of diorite and is 11.5 inches long, and weighs over 10 pounds.

1528 Ch. 55; cf. Lucian, Anach., 27 (καὶ μολυβδίνας χειροπληθεῖς ἐν ταῖν χεροῖν ἔχοντες, i. e., cylindrical); Etym. magn., p. 71, 20.

1529 Such is the limestone halter from Kameiros, Rhodes, in the British Museum; B. M. Guide to Gk. and Rom. Life, 1908, fig. 41; Gardiner, p. 299, fig. 61 b. It is 7.5 inches long.

1530 Juethner, fig. 11.

1531 Duetschke, II, 22.

1532 Mon. d. I., VI, VII, 1857–63, Pl. LXXXII; Annali, XXXV, 1863, pp. 397 f.; Gardiner, p. 177, fig. 22.

1533 See Caelius Aurelianus, de Morb. acut. et chron., V, 2.38 (= of the early ? fifth century A. D.). The imperial physicians recommended them: see Galen and Antyllos, apud Oribasium, Coll. Medicin., ed. Bussemaker et Daremberg, 1851, VI, 14 and 34, respectively; see Krause, I, pp. 395 f., and Juethner, p. 16.

1534 Ch. 55.

1535 De Incessu anim., Ch. 3 (p. 705a).

1536 Made by E. O. Gourdin, in Cambridge, U. S. A., July 23, 1921.

1537 See J. H. S., II, 1881, p. 218, n. 1; the jump took place at Chester in 1854; here is also recorded a standing jump of 13 ft. 7 in. with 23-lb. weights, at Manchester in 1875.

1538 Mentioned by Pinder, Ueber d. Fuenfkampf d. Hellenen (quoted by Juethner, p. 16).

1539 So Fedde, p. 22. A record of 49 ft. 3 in. (hop, skip, and jump) was made at Harwich in 1861: J. H. S., II, p. 281, n. 1.

1540 A. Pl., 297; cf. schol. on Aristophanes, Acharn., 213, and other evidence gathered by Gardiner, in J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, pp. 70 f.

1541 Rutgers, p. 11.

1542 On the controversy about these jumps, see Gardiner, Fedde, ll. cc., and A. A., 1900, pp. 104–6 (Kueppers, Diels, and Stengel). On Greek jumping, see also Krause, I, pp. 383 f.; Pinder, pp. 108 f.; Fedde, pp. 14 f.; Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, pp. 303 f.; Girard, L’éducation athénienne, 1889, pp. 200 f.; etc.

1543 See Gardiner’s summary in J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, p. 189.

1544 E. g., on a r.-f. pelike in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, E 427; J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, p. 185, fig. 6; etc.

1545 E. g., on a r.-f. krater in Copenhagen (?): Annali, XVIII, 1846, Pl. M; Gardiner, p. 303, fig. 64; J. H. S., l. c., p. 185, fig. 7 (left-hand figure).

1546 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix in Bologna: J. H. S., l. c., p. 186, fig. 8; Gardiner, p. 304, fig. 65; Juethner, fig. 16; on interior of an early r.-f. vase, signed by Chelis, in the Louvre, G 15: Pottier, Vases antiques, Pl. 89; Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 366, fig. 211.

1547 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix from Orvieto, formerly in the Bourguignon Coll. in Naples, but now in Boston: A. Z., XLII, 1884, p. 243 (Meier), Pl. XVI, 2b; Reinach, Rép. vases peints, I, p. 454, 1, 5, 6; J. H. S., l. c., p. 183, fig. 3; Gardiner, p. 305, fig. 66 (interior showing diskobolos, ibid., p. 326, fig. 80 = J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, p. 20, fig. 9); Juethner, p. 15, fig. 14; Girard, L’éduc. athén., pp. 201, 207, figs. 22 and 27; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, p. 423, no. 44; Dar.-Sagl., III, 1, p. 5, fig. 3691, IV, 2, p. 1055, fig. 6083.

1548 E. g., on a b.-f. imitation Corinthian amphora in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, B 48; middle figure is given in J. H. S., l. c., p. 183, fig. 4; Gardiner, p. 306, fig. 67; Juethner, fig. 15 (three figures).

1549 Inghirami, Mus. Chius., Pl. CXXV (quoted by Gardiner).

1550 E. g., on a Panathenaic amphora in Leyden: J. H. S., XXVII, 1907 p. 260; on a later r.-f. kylix of Euphronios: Klein, Euphronios^2, 1887, p. 306; J. H. S., XXIV, 1904, p. 188, fig. 9; Gardiner, p. 307, fig. 68.

1551 B. M. Bronzes, 248, p. 26, fig. 10 (right); Gaz. arch., 1875, Pl. XXXV, p. 131; Schreiber, Bilderatlas, Pl. XXII, no. 15; Murray, Hbk. Gk. Archæology, 1892, p. 123, fig. 53. The diskos is 8.25 inches in diameter and is to be dated about 500 B. C. On the other side is represented a jumper, with measuring cord in his hands, measuring his leap. A similar figure appears on a metrological relief at Oxford: J. H. S., IV, 1883, Pl. XXXV, p. 335.

1552 Richter, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes, no. 81, fig. on p. 54 (three views); Burlington Fine Arts Club, Cat. Anc. Gk. Art, 1904, p. 46, no. 37; Reinach, Rép., IV, 345, 9.

1553 Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 543, 7 (quoted by Miss Richter).

1554 E. g., the jumper with halteres on the British Museum pelike already mentioned, E 427; see p. 216, n. 10; a still closer resemblance is found in a jumper without halteres on a r.-f. pelike discussed in J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, p. 272; Gardiner, p. 309, fig. 69.

1555 Krause, I, pp. 439 f. E. g., Apollo unintentionally slays Hyakinthos while contending with him in diskos-throwing: Euripides, Helena, 1469 f.; etc.

1556 Iliad, XXIII, 826 f. Later imitators of Homer use the word also: e. g., Apoll. Rhod., III, 1366.

1557 Inschr. v. Ol., 717; I. G. A., 370; Juethner, pp. 22–23. A larger block of volcanic rock weighing 480 kilograms has been found at Santorin with an inscription dating from about 500 B. C. stating that one Eumastas lifted it from the ground: I. G., XIII, no. 449. See J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, p. 2. Such a scene is depicted on the interior of a r.-f. kylix in the Louvre, G 96; J. H. S., l. c., fig. 1.

1558 Od., IV, 626 and VIII, 186 f. The diskos-throw was well known as a measure: e. g., Il., XXIII, 431. Scholiasts tried to show the difference between the solos and the diskos: see Juethner, pp. 19 f.

1559 Ol., X, 72; Isthm., I, 25.

1560 E. g., on a b.-f. amphora in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, B 271; J. H. S., XXVII, Pl. I; Gardiner, p. 314, fig. 71; cf. the Panathenaic amphora, B 134 (= Fig. 44); J. H. S., XXVII, Pl. XVIII.

1561 B. M. Bronzes, no. 3207; Gardiner, p. 317, fig. 73; Rev. arch., XVIII, 1891, Pl. XVIII, p. 45. It is 6.5 inches in diameter. The inscription is written retrograde.

1562 See list of fifteen in J. H. S., XXVII, p. 6; Gardiner, p. 316; eight of these are from Olympia.

1563 I, 35.5.

1564 Furtwaengler shows that there are numerous representations of Myron’s Diskobolos on gems: Die antiken Gemmen, e. g., Pls. XLIV, nos. 26, 27, and LXVI, 8; cf. also a gem in the British Museum: B. M. Gems, 742 and Pl. 11.

1565 J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, pp. 1 f., Pls. I-III, summary on p. 36; Greek Athl. Sports, Ch. XV, pp. 313 f. Cf. also E. Pernice, Jb., XXIII, 1908, Zum Diskoswurf, pp. 94 f., who corrects and augments the evidence furnished by Gardiner’s article in the J. H. S. On the diskos and mode of casting, see also Juethner, pp. 18–36; Krause, I, pp. 442 f.; Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, pp. 321 f.; Gaz. arch., 1888, pp. 291 f. (J. Six); Dar.-Sagl., II, 1, pp. 277 f.; Fedde, Der Fuenfkampf der Hellenen, pp. 37 f.; Girard, L’éduc. athén., pp. 201 f.; Kietz, Der Diskoswurf bei den Griechen, 1892, pp. 15 f.

1566 E. g., on a lekythos from Eretria: J. H. S., XXVII, p. 23, fig. 12.

1567 E. g., on a b.-f. Attic lekythos in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, B 576; J. H. S., l. c., Pl. II; Gardiner, p. 328, fig. 82; on a r.-f. kylix: J. H. S., p. 26, fig. 15; Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCXCIV, no. 6.

1568 E. g., on the reverse of a r.-f. kylix in the British Museum signed by Pheidippos: B. M. Vases, III, Pl. I, E 6; J. H. S., l. c., p. 13, fig. 3; Gardiner, p. 323, fig. 76; Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 368, fig. 214; on a b.-f. kelebe in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, E 361; Gardiner, p. 324, fig. 77; on an Attic b.-f. panel-amphora in the University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia: Museum Journal, VI, No. 4 (Dec., 1915), fig. 90, p. 170; A. J. A., XX, 1916, p. 440, fig. 4; (the obverse of this vase, representing a boxing scene, is given in our Fig. 56); on a b.-f. amphora pictured by Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLX., and Pernice, l. c., fig. on p. 98. The left foot is generally forward in this position: e. g., on a r.-f. kylix in Munich, no. 795; J. H. S., l. c., p. 26, fig. 14; the right is forward on two b.-f. vases: Gerhard, Pls. CCLIX, 2 (= our Pl. 36 B), and CCLX. On a r.-f. amphora in Naples (Pernice, fig. on p. 96), a youth is represented holding the diskos with the right hand on the shoulder, against which his face is silhouetted as in the famous archaic relief from the Dipylon gate discussed supra, Ch. III, p. 127.

1569 E. g., on the amphora pictured by Pernice, p. 99.

1570 The left is forward on a r.-f. krater of Amasis from Corneto: J. H. S., XXVII, p. 16, fig. 5; Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, p. 416, fig. 56a; Gardiner, p. 324, fig. 78; the right is forward on a r.-f. pelike in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, E 395; J. H. S., l. c., Pl. III; Gardiner, p. 325, fig. 79. The left is drawn back in a fifth-century B. C. bronze: J. H. S., l. c., p. 18, fig. 7; Burlington Fine Arts Club, Cat. Anc. Gk. Art, 1904, Pl. L. Another example is found on a r.-f. kylix in Paris: J. H. S., l. c., p. 27, fig. 17; Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, Pl. LXIII, 2; Gardiner, p. 331, fig. 85.

1571 For variations, see early fifth-century B. C. coins of Kos in the British Museum: J. H. S., l. c., p. 30, fig. 19; Gardiner, p. 332, fig. 86.

1572 E. g., on a Panathenaic amphora in Naples: J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, p. 32, fig. 20; Juethner, fig. 31; Gardiner, p. 333, fig. 87; on a b.-f. hydria in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, E 164; J. H. S., l. c., p. 32, fig. 21; Gardiner, p. 334, fig. 88.

1573 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix in Boulogne: J. H. S., l. c., p. 34, fig. 23; Gardiner, p. 335, fig. 89; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, I, p. 370, no. 11; cf. Beazley, Attic r.-f. Vases in Amer. Mus., 1918, no. 19 (= ascribed to Euergides).

1574 E. g., on the kylix just mentioned (the figure to the right).

1575 E. g., the archaic Pourtalès bronze: Panofka, Cabinet Pourtalès, Pl. XIII, 3; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 545, 3; cf. also another in the Antiquarium in Berlin: Inventar, no. 8570; A. A., 1904, p. 36, n. 7 and fig. on p. 35. The latter is 0.10 meter high.

1576 Mus. Bull., III, Feb., 1908, pp. 31–36; Richter, Greek, Roman, and Etruscan Bronzes, no. 78, p. 49 (three views); Cat. Class. Coll., pp. 89–90, figs. 52 and 53 (side views); Gardiner, p. 329, fig. 83. It is 9.25 inches tall.

1577 E. g., on a r.-f. krater in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, no. 561; on another in Munich: cf. J. D. Beazley, J. H. S., XXXI, 1911, Pl. VIII, 2; both quoted by Miss Richter, l. c.

1578 In the National Museum, no. 7412; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 321 and fig. on p. 270. It was found in the sanctuary of the Kabeiroi in Bœotia and is 0.19 meter high. Cf. a similar position on a r.-f. amphora in Munich painted by Euthymides: no. 374; published by Hoppin, Euthymides and his Fellows, 1917, Pl. II; Furtwaengler-Reichhold, Griech. Vasenmalerei, Pl. LXXXI.

1579 B. M. Bronzes, no. 675; J. H. S., XXVII, p. 22, fig. 11; Murray^2, 1, p. 274, fig. 59; Gardiner, p. 330, fig. 84; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 544, 10. It is 6.5 inches tall.

1580 Cf. also two very rude bronzes in the British Museum representing diskoboloi: B. M. Bronzes, nos. 502 (diskos held up in right hand), 504 (diskos in right hand), the first 3.37 inches tall, the other 4.87 inches; the latter has a fillet in the hair and so represents a victor.

1581 B. M. Bronzes, no. 559; J. H. S., l. c., p. 17, fig. 6. As the whole lebes is only 18.5 inches tall, this lid figure is very small.

1582 A. A., 1904, p. 36, fig. 8. Inventar, no. 8569. It is 0.115 meter high.

1583 Published by H. G. E. White in J. H. S., XXXVI, 1916, pp. 16 f., Pls. I, II and 3 figs, in text. Pl. I is the more archaic: Museum no. 6615; Arch. Eph., 1883, p. 86; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 267; de Ridder, pp. 281–2, no. 757, and fig. 265. Pl. II is the less archaic: Museum no. 6614; Arch. Eph., 1883, p. 46; J. H. S., X, 1889, pp. 268–9 (E. A. Gardiner); Staïs, op. cit., p. 267; de Ridder, pp. 275–7, no. 750, and fig. 257.

1584 Pliny, H. N., VII, 201, traces its origin to Aetolus, son of Mars. Phrastor won a victory in such a contest at Olympia: Pindar, Ol., X, 71. See Krause, pp. 465 f.; Juethner, pp. 36 f.; Gardiner, Ch. XVI, pp. 338 f.; id., J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, pp. 258 f.; Dar-Sagl., I, 1, pp. 226 f.; Pauly-Wissowa, I, pp. 1183 f. (Reisch); Girard, L’éduc. athén., pp. 203 f.; Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, pp. 327 f., and III, pp. 168 f.; etc. In the following account we are chiefly indebted to Juethner and Gardiner.

1585 See Stassoff apud Stephani, Comptes rendus de la comm. impér. archaéol., St. Petersburg, 1872, p. 302. Cf. Juethner, Ph., p. 64.

1586 Iliad, XXIII, 884 f.; cf. 637.

1587 The athletic style appears on many vases, especially on r.-f. ones; see infra, pp. 223–4 and notes.

1588 The javelin is held horizontally by the warrior on the interior of a b.-f. kylix in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, B 380; J. H. S., XXVII, p. 252, fig. 2; Gardiner, p. 342, fig. 93. It was commonly held slopingly over the shoulder level with the head in representations of the athletic style; e. g., the second athlete from the left in the sixth-century B. C. b.-f. Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum (Fig. 44): B. M. Vases, B 134; cf. also a similar figure on the sixth-century B. C. amphora in Leyden: A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, Pl. IX; Gardiner, p. 361, fig. 108.

1589 At Athens as early as the fifth century B. C. there were practical javelin contests from horseback with a target, and such contests kept up in Thessaly to the time of Hadrian: Gardiner, pp. 356–8. Throwing the javelin at a target from horseback is seen on a Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum: Gardiner, p. 357, fig. 106; J. H. S., XXVII, Pl. XX. Pindar mentions javelin-throwing three times, and in each case the throw was for distance: Nem., VII, 70–1; Isthm., II, 35; Pyth., I, 44. Lucian, in a passage referring to the pentathlon at Olympia, says that athletes competed for distance: Anacharsis, 27. On this question, see Juethner, pp. 54 f.

1590 Hesychios calls it ἀποτομάς, s. v.; see also Pollux, X, 64.

1591 A. Z., XLI, 1883, Pl. XIII, 2, and cf. p. 228 (Milchhoefer).

1592 See Juethner, figs. 34, 35, 36 on pp. 40–41 (representing akontistai holding the javelin in one hand and the amentum in the other). Fastening the thong is commonly depicted on vases: e. g., a youth seated on the ground attaching the amentum is pictured on a r.-f. hydria in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, E 164; J. H. S., XXVII, p. 32, fig. 25; Gardiner, p. 334, fig. 88; B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, p. 164, fig. 3; on a r.-f. kylix in Wuerzburg (no. 432), a youth is seen winding the amentum around the akontion, drawing one end of the thong tight by means of his left foot: Juethner, p. 42, fig. 37; Gardiner, p. 340, fig. 91; Dar.-Sagl., III, 1, p. 599, fig. 4116; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, I, p. 93, no. 7. On a r.-f. amphora from Vulci attributed to Euthymides, and now in the British Museum, we see an akontistes holding the spear pointed to the ground and drawing the amentum tight preparatory to the throw: B. M. Vases, E 256; J. H. S., XXVII, Pl. XIX; Gardiner, p. 348, fig. 99; Hoppin, Euthymides and his Fellows, p. 49, Pls. IX, XI; id., Hbk., I, pp. 442–3, no. 19. For the various methods of attaching the amentum, see collection of drawings from vases in Gardiner, p. 341, fig. 92 = J. H. S., XXVII, p. 250, fig. 1.

1593 See J. H. S., XXVII, pp. 262 f.; Gardiner, pp. 350 f.

1594 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix in Rome: J. H. S., XXVII, p. 266, fig. 14; Gardiner, p. 354, fig. 104; Juethner, p. 48, fig. 43.

1595 Downwards in the r.-f. amphora in the British Museum, mentioned above, E 256.

1596 No. 2667 (Jahn, no. 562 A); J. H. S., XXVII, 1907, p. 262, fig. 9; Gardiner, p. 349, fig. 100; Juethner, p. 47, fig. 41; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, p. 198, no. 8.

1597 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix in the Torlonia collection: J. H. S., XXVII, p. 264, fig. 11; Gardiner, p. 351, fig. 102; Juethner, p. 58, fig. 49.

1598 E. g., badly done on the Munich kylix mentioned, no. 2667; also on a r.-f. kylix of Panaitios from Vulci in Munich, no. 2637 (Jahn, no. 795): A. Z., XXXVI, 1878, p. 66, Pl. XI (= Reinach, Rép. vases peints, I, p. 422, 2); J. H. S., XXVII, p. 264, fig. 12; Gardiner, p. 105, fig. 17; Schreiber, Bilderatlas, Pl. XXI, 3; Baum., I, p. 613, fig. 672; Hoppin, Hbk., p. 426, no. 54; Dar.-Sagl., II, 2, p. 1452, fig. 3478; IV, 2, p. 1056, fig. 6086; on a r.-f. amphora in Munich (Jahn, no. 408): J. H. S., XXVII, p. 265, fig. 13; Gardiner, p. 353, fig. 103; Furtwaengler-Reichhold, Griech. Vasenmalerei, Pl. XLV.

1599 P. 48.

1600 See 23stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr.

1601 B. B., no. 273; Bulle, 47, and pp. 97–102 and fig. 18; von Mach, 113; Collignon, I, pp. 488 f. and Pl. XII; Rayet, I, Pl. 29; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. XXXIV; Springer-Michaelis, p. 276, fig. 496; F. W., 503.

1602 Polyklet u. s. Schule, 1902. For the Apollonios bust, see B. B., no. 336; F. W., 505. An almost identical bust—except for a wide fillet around the locks and shoulders—was found in the tablinum of the same villa (Invent., no. 6164). Many of these heads doubtless come from busts or statues which decorated gymnasia and palæstræ.

1603 Duetschke, III, no. 535 (0.81 meter high).

1604 F. W., 507; cf. Rayet, I, text to Pl. 29.

1605 No. 293; Amelung, Museums and Ruins of Rome, I, pp. 7 f.; id., Vat., I, no. 126 on p. 151 and Pl. 19; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 45; Guide, I, 58; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 545, 10. It is 2.11 meters high (Amelung). Cf. Loewy, Lysipp und Seine Stellung in der gr. Plastik, pp. 5–7 and 23–4; Hauser, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., XII, 1909, pp. 104–14. For other replicas, see Furtw., Mp., pp. 228 f.; Mw., pp. 421 f.

1606 Mahler, op. cit., p. 29.

1607 As we see from the careful copy on a Berlin gem: Helbig, Fuehrer, I, p. 31, fig. 3; Guide, I, p. 35, fig. 4; and on a funerary relief in Argos: A. M., III, 1878, pp. 287 f. and Pl. XIII (Furtwaengler); B. B., 279A; Collignon, I, p. 491, fig. 250; F. W., 504; cf. Annali, LI, 1879, p. 219 (Brunn); Mitchell, Hist. Anc. Sculpt., 1883, p. 386 and fig. 176.

1608 The uno crure insistere of Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 56. Here Pliny quotes Varro to the effect that Polykleitos’ statues were almost exactly after the same type (paene ad unum exemplum).

1609 See Mp., pp. 212 f. and figs. 90 and 91 (head, two views); Mw., pp. 403 f., and Pls. XXIV, XXV. For the statue, see also Furtw.-Wolters, Beschr. d. Glypt.2, no. 295 (= god or athlete); Kekulé, Jb., III, 1888, p. 37 and Pl. 1 (= Polykleitan and Zeus); B. B., 122.

1610 De instit. Orat., V, 12.21.

1611 H. N., XXXIV, 18.

1612 A. M., III, 1878, p. 292, n. 2.

1613 Mp., pp. 163 and 228; Mw., p. 420.

1614 E. g., that of Ktesilaos (= Kresilas; see below) in H. N., XXXIV, 76; of Polykleitos, ibid., 55, and of Aristodemos, ibid., 86.

1615 This torso is of Pentelic marble, like many of the later victor statues at Olympia, and is fleshier than the Naples and Vatican copies: Bildw. v. Ol., Textbd., p. 250 and fig. 284 (back view); Tafelbd., Pl. LXII, I; Furtw., Mp., p. 228, Mw., p. 420. It is in the Museum at Olympia.

1616 The Naples copy is 1.99 meters high; see Kalkmann, Die Proport. des Gesichts in d. gr. Kunst, 53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1893, p. 53; the Olympia torso is 1.10 meters high for the preserved part (Treu).

1617 Pro Imag., 11.

1618 E. g., the statue of Polydamas, P., VI, 5.1; the base of the statue of Kallias, Inschr. v. Ol., no. 146; of Eukles, ibid., no. 159; etc.

1619 Collignon, I, p. 490; he believed that the original statue by Polykleitos stood in a Gymnasion at Argos.

1620 Cf. infra, Ch. VIII, p. 342 and n. 2.

1621 Richter, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes, nos. 87 (pp. 56 f., and fig., showing front and back, on p. 57; cf. Cat. Class. Coll., p. 114, fig. 72; it is from Cyprus), and 88 (fig. on p. 58; Mus. Bull., Dec., 1913, p. 270, Richter). No. 87 is 6.25 inches tall; 88 is 5.56 inches.

1622 Mp., pp. 279 f. Furtwaengler wrongly ascribed the statue of Xenokles to the elder Polykleitos.

1623 See the fine drawings of these and other groups from tomb no. 17 (of Khety) in Champollion, Monuments de l’Égypte et de la Nubie, 1845, IV, Pls. CCCLXXII-CCCLXXVIII; Pl. CCCLXXIII, 3 = Perrot-Chipiez, I, p. 793, fig. 521; CCCLXXIV, 4 = ibid., p. 792, fig. 520. Another scene from the tomb of Nevothph is pictured in Champollion, Pl. CCCLXIV, I. See also Arch. Survey of Egypt, Beni Hasan, Pt. II, 1894, Pl. XV; cf. a poor reproduction of several scenes in Springer-Michaelis, p. 27, fig. 68.

1624 De Leg., VII, 796 A, B, C.

1625 Philostr., Imag., II, 32 (p. 857), ascribes its origin to Hermes’ daughter Palaistra; Apollodoros, II, 4.9, says that the same god’s son Autolykos was the teacher of Herakles. Pausanias, I, 39.3, says that the systematic instruction in the art began with Theseus. Eustathius, schol. on Il., XXIII, p. 1327, says that Kerkyon discovered it. In a scholion on Pindar, Nem., V, 49, Boeckh, p. 465, Pherekydes and Polemon are quoted as saying that Theseus’ charioteer Phorbas invented the art, and Istros is quoted as saying that Athena taught Theseus. At Olympia Herakles was a victor in wrestling: P., V, 8.4.

1626 Ajax (Telamon) and Odysseus contended in a wrestling bout which ended in a draw: Il., XXIII, 710–734; in line 701, and in Od., VIII, 126, it is called παλαισμοσύνη ἀλεγεινή; it appears among the Phaiakians in Od., VIII, 103, 246. It was pictured along with boxing on the shield of Herakles by Hesiod: Scut., 302 (= ἑλκηδόν).

1627 P., V, 8.7; Ph., 12.

1628 P., V, 8.9.

1629 On rules and representations of wrestling in literature and art, see especially E. N. Gardiner, J. H. S., XXV, 1905, pp. 14–31; pp. 263–293, and Pls. XI and XII; id., Greek Athl. Sports, Ch. XVIII, pp. 372–401; cf. Krause, I, pp. 400 f; Grasberger, Erziehung u. Unterricht, I, pp. 345 f. An excellent account of a wrestling match is found in the oldest Greek prose romance, the Aethiopica of Heliodoros, X, 31 f.; cf. also the fine account of a bout between Diomedes and Aias in Quintus Smyrnæus: IV, 215 f.; etc.

1630 Grenfell and Hunt, Oxy. Pap., III, 466; discussed by Juethner, with part of the text and translation, in his edition of the de Arte gymn. of Philostratos, p. 26. On the method of selecting antagonists at Olympia, the number engaged, byes, etc., see Gardiner, pp. 374–5.

1631 For coins in the British Museum, see Gardiner, p. 373, fig. 109, a, b, c (from Aspendos, of the fifth and fourth centuries B. C.), d (from Herakleia in Lucania, of the fourth), e, f (from Syracuse, of about 400 B. C.), g (from Alexandria of the time of Antoninus Pius); see also id., J. H. S., XXV, p. 271, fig. 9.

1632 See especially, Gardiner, ll. cc.

1633 Described by Lucian, Anach., 24.

1634 Described by Quintus Smyrnæus, IV, 215 f. and Nonnos, XXXVII, 553 f.; discussed in J. H. S., XXV, pp. 25 f.

1635 No. 2159; A. J. A., XI, 1896, p. 11, fig. 9; J. H. S., XXV, p. 270, fig. 8; Gardiner, p. 386, fig. 116; Furtwaengler-Reichhold, Die griech. Vasenmalerei, III, pp. 73 f., and Pl. CXXXIII; Gerhard, Trinkschalen und Gefaesse des k. Museums zu Berlin und anderer Sammlungen, 1848–50, Pls. XIX, XX; Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmythol., III, Apollon, p. 400, n. 1 and Pl. XXIV, 2; W. Klein, Die griech. Vasen mit Meistersignaturen^2, 1886, no. 4; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, I, p. 32, Pl. on p. 33.

1636 No. 2444; Trans. Univ. Penn. Mus., II, 1906–1907, Pl. XXXV, a, and pp. 140 f. (W. N. Bates); J. D. Beazley, Attic r.-f. Vases in Amer. Museums, 1918, p. 111 (Lysis, Laches, and Lykos group); Gardiner, p. 392, fig. 122.

1637 Invent., 5626–5627; B. B., 354; Comparetti e de Petra, La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni, 1883, Pl. XV, 2 and 3; Bulle, 91; Gardiner, p. 378, fig. 110 (= one statue); von Mach, 289; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 541 (= one statue); etc. They appear to be boys of about sixteen, and consequently may represent contestants in the πάλη παίδων. The statues are 1.18 meters high (Bulle). The advanced foot in no. 5626 is wrongly restored.

1638 Kalkmann, Jb., X, 1895, p. 64, n. 49 (dolichodromoi).

1639 Cf. Gardiner, p. 382.

1640 Jb., IV, 1889, pp. 116, n. 8; cf. Benndorf, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., IV, 1901, pp. 172–3 and n. 12. Mahler wrongly thought that the heads were different: Polyklet u. s. Schule, p. 18; he assigned one to the fifth century B. C., the other to the influence of Praxiteles. Benndorf believed the two figures to be copies of one statue, later used to make a group.

1641 Bulle, no, 90; in the Landesmuseum of Darmstadt: see Adamy, Archaeol. Samml. des grossherz. Hess. Museums, 1897, p. 21, no. 19. The figures are only 0.075 meter high.

1642 Bulle, p. 179, fig. 40; Reinach, Rép., IV, 318, 2; for other similar ones, cf. ibid., II, 2, 539, 2 (cover of a cista from Praeneste), 5 (in the Louvre), 6 (in Vienna = E. von Sacken, Die ant. Bronz. d. k. k. Muenz-und Ant.-Cabinetes in Wien, 1871, Pl. XLV, 7), and III, 155, 3 (in Forman Collection, London).

1643 Richter, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes, no. 124 and fig. on p. 79; it is 4.5 inches high.

1644 E. g., Walters, B. M. Bronzes, no. 639; Mon. d. I., X, 1877, Pl. XLV, 1 a.; Babelon et Blanchet, Cat. des bronzes antiques de la Bibl. Nationale, 1895, no. 935.

1645 Παναθήναια, II, Plates.

1646 Gardiner, p. 395, fig. 126; J. H. S., XXV, p. 286, fig. 23; Gardner, Hbk., p. 328, fig. 81.

1647 Gardiner, p. 396, fig. 127; Clarac, 802, 2014.

1648 J. Sieveking, Die Bronzen der Samml. Loeb, 1913, pp. 52–4 and Pl. XXI; it is 0.165 meter high. Others there listed include one in the British Museum: J. H. S., XXV, 1905, Pl. XI, b (front and back), and text on p. 288; Gardiner p. 398, fig. 129; another from Vienne in Bonn; two in Paris, in the de Clercq and Warrocqué collections respectively; and a fifth, whose location is unknown. All are of rough Roman workmanship, either of the second or first centuries B. C.

1649 See Petersen in R. M., XV, 1900, pp. 158 f.; Klein, III, pp. 309 f.; Sieveking, op. cit., p. 53, n. 1. The copies are in Florence (Galleria di Firenze, III, Pl. 123, 2; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 538, 5); in St. Petersburg (Comptes rendus de la comm. impér. archéol., St. Petersburg, 1867, Pl. I, pp. 5 f., text by Stephani; J. H. S., XXV, 1905, p. 290, fig. 25; Gardiner, p. 399, fig. 130; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 538, 1 and 3); in Constantinople, from Antioch (Jb., XIII, 1898, Pl. XI and pp. 177 f., Foerster; Rev. arch., XXXV, 1899, Pl. XVIII, pp. 207 f., Joubin; J. H. S., 1905, p. 291, fig. 26; Gardiner, p. 400, fig. 131); in the Louvre, from Egypt (no. 361; Jb., XVI, 1901, fig. on p. 51; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 234, 2); and in the British Museum (B. M. Bronzes, 853 and Pl. XXVII, middle one below). In the St. Petersburg copy the arms of the victor are changed around.

1650 Duetschke, III, 547; Bulle, 184; von Mach, 288; F. W., 1426; Reinach, Rép., I, 523, 1.

1651 Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1382 (= Attic); Jb., XXV, 1910, Pl. VII, and pp. 171 f. (Bieber = Euphranor); cf. R. M., VI, 1891, p. 304, n. 2 (Petersen = Skopaic); Furtw., Mw., p. 515, n. 4 (= Skopaic).

1652 H. N., XXXIV, 80.

1653 H. N., XXXV, 71; so Reisch, p. 45, n. 5. See supra, p. 206.

1654 H. N., XXXV, 130. It was probably votive in character.

1655 Ol. 141 ( = 216 B. C.): P., VI, 16.9; Hyde, 167; Foerster, 471; Inschr. v. Ol., 179.

1656 Inschr. v. Ol., 164; drawing of the base also in Furtw., Mp., p. 279, fig. 118; Mw., p. 491, fig. 85. The inscription dates from the end of the fifth or beginning of the fourth century B. C., which shows that the statue was the work of the younger Polykleitos. Xenokles won sometime between Ols. (?) 94 and 100 ( = 404 and 380 B. C.): P., VI,9.2; Hyde, 85 and p. 41; Foerster, 308.

1657 Pp. 45–6; he won in Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 9.3; Hyde, 88; Foerster, 285.

1658 Cf. Lucretius, V, 1282: arma antiqua manus ungues dentesque fuerunt; Hor., Sat., I, 3.101; etc.

1659 Between Epeios and Euryalos, Il., XXIII, 653 f.; Odysseus and Iros, Od., XVIII, 1 f.; cf. the match between Entellus and Dares in Virgil, Aen., V, 362 f.; Polydeukes and Amykos in Theokr., XXII, 80 f.; and in Apollon. Rhod., Argon., II, 67 f. For the Homeric and Virgilian matches, see Fencing, Boxing, and Wrestling, 1889 (Badminton Library), pp. 125 f.

1660 Il., XXIII, 653; he uses the same epithet of wrestling, ibid., 701, and Od., VIII, 126. Eustath. ad Il., XXIII, p. 1322, speaks of the πύκτης τλησίπονος.

1661 πυκτοσύνη ἀλγινόεσσα: frag. 19, l. 4 (= Philos. Fragm., ed. Didot, I, p. 104 = Athen., X, 6, p. 414a). Apollon. Rhod. calls it ἀπηνέα πυγμαχίην, II, 76–7. The parts injured were especially the nose, ears, cheeks, chin, and teeth; cf. Krause, p. 516 and n. 18.

1662 See Orsi, Museo Ital. di antich. class., II, Pl. V, p. 808; cf. Juethner, pp. 65–6, and Frothingham, A. J. A., IV, 1888, P. 444.

1663 See Krause, pp. 497 f. Ph., 9, says that it was an invention of the Spartans and was first used among the Bebrykes.

1664 P., V, 7.10; cf. Plut., Quaest. conviv., VIII, 4.4 (which speaks of victories of Apollo in boxing).

1665 P., V, 8.4.

1666 XXIII, 660.

1667 Plut., l. c.

1668 The schol. on Pindar, Nem., V, 89, Boeckh, p. 465, says that Theseus instituted the art of boxing.

1669 P., V, 8. 7; Afr., s. v. Onomastos; Ph., 12; Homeric Hymn to Apollo, 149; cf. Foerster, 28. The date is also given by Ph., l. c.

1670 P., V. 8. 9; Ph., 13.

1671 See K. T. Frost, J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, pp. 213f; Gardiner, Ch. XIX, pp. 402 f.; Krause, pp. 497 f.

1672 See Krause, I, pp. 502 f.; Juethner, pp. 65 f.; Gardiner, pp. 403 f.

1673 Mosso, The Palaces of Crete, 1907, p. 339, and fig. 160 on p. 341. Orsi, l. c., believes the object over the fists in the bronze shield fragment from Mount Ida to be part of a glove, though Juethner rejects this view, interpreting it merely as an ornament.

1674 Schol. on Plato, de Leg., VIII, 796 A; Clem. Alexandr., Strom., I, 16.76.

1675 ἱμάντας ἐϋτμήτους βοὸς ἀγραύλοιο: Il., XXIII, 684. In the Odyssey Iros and Odysseus fight with bare fists.

1676 E. g., P., VI, 23.4 and VIII, 40. 3; Apoll. Rhod., Argon., II, 52–53; cf. Plato, de Leg., VIII, 830 B.

1677 E. g., on a r.-f. kylix in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, E 63, and Pl. III; Juethner, p. 68, fig. 54; Gardiner, p. 403, fig. 132; it represents boxers with bundles of thongs in their hands standing before an official.

1678 B. M. Vases, E 39; J. H. S., XXVI, Pl. XII; Gardiner, p. 404, fig. 133; Juethner, p. 66, fig. 53; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, p. 237, Pl. On the interior of another a youth is seen, thongs in hand, standing before an altar: Murray, Designs from Gk. Vases in the British Museum, Pl. VI, 24.

1679 Museum no. 2444; Trans. Univ. Penn. Mus., II, 1906–1907, Pl. XXXV, b. and p. 142 (text by W. N. Bates).

1680 IX, 116. A similar game is mentioned by Plato, Theaet., XXVII ( = 181 A). On both games, see Krause, pp. 323 f.

1681 Juethner, pp. 69 f., rightly explains such objects as boxing thongs.

1682 Ch. 10; cf. P., VIII, 40.3.

1683 E. g., on the kylix just mentioned, E 39; on a r.-f. amphora in Munich (Jahn, no. 411B): Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, p. 410. fig. 55; on the interior of a r.-f. kylix in Munich, no. 1156: Juethner, p. 70, fig. 56; and on the interior of the r.-f. kylix in the British Museum to be discussed, E 78 (= Fig. 55): Murray, Designs from Gr. Vases in the B. M., Pl. XIV, 55; Juethner, p. 72, fig. 58; Gardiner, p. 406, fig. 134; on a r.-f. amphora in the Hofmuseum in Vienna by Epiktetos we see (figure at the left) a boxer who is just finishing tying the thongs on his left hand and wrist: Dar-Sagl., IV, 1, p. 755, fig. 5854; Schneider, Arch.-epigr. Mitt. aus Oesterr., V, 1881, pp. 139 f., and Pl. IV; Hoppin, Hbk. Attic r.-f. Vases, p. 334, no. 25, and Pl. on p. 335.

1684 Tafelbd., Pl. V, no. 4; Textbd., p. 35.

1685 P., VIII, 40.5; cf. II, 20. 1.

1686 VIII, 40.3. Cf. the statues of Damoxenos and Kreugas by Canova in the Gabinetto di Canova of the Vatican, to see in how exaggerated a way a modern sculptor has interpreted the boxing bout of these famous athletes: Helbig, Fuehrer, I, nos. 136, 137; Guide, 139, 140; Pistolesi, Il Vaticano Descritto, IV, 91.

1687 De Leg., VIII, 830 B; Plut., de Profectibus in virtute, IX (80 B); Pollux, III, 150; Bekker, Anecd. gr., 1814–1821, I, P. 62, l. 25.

1688 E. g., on an amphora in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, B 607; Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. XLVIII, e 2; Gardiner, p. 407, fig. 135; Juethner, p. 83, fig. 67; on the Ficoroni Cista in the Museo Kircheriano, Rome: Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1752; Guide, 437; Juethner, p. 82, fig. 66, a, c. On this cista, see F. Behn, Die ficoronische Cista, Arch. Studie, 1907; O. Jahn, Die ficoronische Cista, 1852; etc.

1689 Late writers generally use the terms σφαῖραι and ἱμάντες ὀξεῖς interchangeably.

1690 E. g., ἐπίσφαιρα in Plut., Praecept. ger. resp., 32 ( = 825 e).

1691 Juethner, p. 78, fig. 63; Gardiner, p. 409, fig. 137. For this and the delle Terme glove, see Huelsen, R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 175 f.

1692 Juethner, p. 79, fig. 54.; Antichi di Ercolano, Bronzi, II, pp. 411 f.

1693 In the Museo Civico there; mentioned by Juethner, p. 78.

1694 Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1145; Guide, 625; Baum., I, p. 524, fig. 566; Juethner, p. 85, fig. 68.

1695 The word μύρμηκες, A. G., XI, 78, may be merely a comic name for the gloves—certain protuberances (“metal studs” or “nails” = Liddell and Scott, s. v. looking like warts (μυρμηκίαι); cf. Pollux, III, 150.

1696 Aen., V, 404–5; 468–71.

1697 B. M. Vases, E 39; J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, Pl. XII.

1698 B. M. Vases, E 78; J. H. S., XXVI, Pl. XIII; Gardiner, p. 436, fig. 151.

1699 Mus. Journ., VI, no. 4 (Dec., 1915), p. 169, fig. 89; text by Dr. S. B. Luce, who believes this class of vases to be a prototype of the “Nolan” vases; another “Nolan” amphora is given, ibid., fig. 90 (also published in A. J. A., XX, 1916, p. 440, fig. 4), which shows a diskobolos, who is holding a diskos in a way similar to that on a r.-f. kelebe in the British Museum (B. M. Vases, B 361; Gardiner, p. 324, fig. 77). On the division of Attic b.-f. amphoræ into “panel-amphoræ” and “red-bodied amphoræ,” see H. B. Walters, Hist. Anc. Pottery, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman, 1905, I, pp. 160–62.

1700 Inschr. v. Ol., 149.

1701 Inschr. v. Ol., 155 (renewed); the date of the victory is given by P., VI, 7.8; Hyde, 65; Foerster, 263.

1702 Inschr. v. Ol., 147, 148. The statue stood equally on both feet, the left being slightly advanced. He won in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 10.9; Hyde, 102; Foerster, 237.

1703 Inschr. v. Ol., 165 (renewed); base drawn in outline in Furtw., Mp., p. 288, fig. 123; Mw., p. 503, fig. 90. He won in Ol. 82 ( = 452 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 13.6; Hyde, 115; Foerster, 376. Here the body weight rested upon the left foot, the right being flat on the ground and turned to one side, i. e., in the old scheme of Hagelaïdas and his school.

1704 Inschr. v. Ol., 159 (renewed); I. G. B., 86. This statue was in the same attitude as that of Aristion and was slightly over life-size. He won some time between Ols. (?) 90 and 93 ( = 420 and 408 B. C.): P., VI, 6.2; Hyde, 52; Foerster, 297.

1705 Michaelis, p. 446, no. 35; Clarac V, 946, 2436 A (wrongly = Antinous). See Furtw., Mp., pp. 288 f. (and fig. 124); Mw., pp. 503 f. (and fig. 91). Height 1.75 meters (Michaelis).

1706 Furtw., Mp., p. 246, fig. 99; Mw., p. 447, fig. 69; a headless copy in Lansdowne House: Michaelis, p. 438, 3; Clarac, V, 851, 2180 A. Here the present head is of different marble from the torso and does not belong to it; the body forms recall those of the Doryphoros. It is 1.49 meters high.

1707 Not. Scav., 1888, pp. 289 f. (Barracco); Atti dell’ Accad. di Napoli, 1889, pp. 35 f. (Sogliano); R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 179 f. (Huelsen); Kalkmann, Die Proport. d. Gesichts in d. gr. Kunst, 53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1893, Pl. III (profile and front views), and fig. on p. 68 (head); B. B., no. 614 (statue), 615 (head, two views); Juethner, p. 84; etc.

1708 Furtwaengler (Statuenkopien im Altertum) and Sogliano (l. c.) date the statue in the period of Augustus.

1709 B. B., no. 613; Kalkmann, Die Prop. des Gesichts, Pls. I (statue) and II (head, two views).

1710 B. B., nos. 132, 134–5; F. W., 462.

1711 Pl., H. N., XXXIV, 50 and 79. For this view, see text to B. B., no. 614. Furtwaengler had suggested Lykios as the sculptor of the Oil-pourer: Mp., p. 259.

1712 Though winning in Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.), his statue was set up later by his son: P., VI, 10.1–3; Hyde, 93 and p. 42; Foerster, 137. The word σκιαμαχεῖν (lit. “to fight in the shade,” and hence to practice in the gymnasium) is used synonymously with χειρονομεῖν in the sense “to spar:” Plato, de Leg., VIII, 830 C; P., VI, 10.3; Pollux, III, 150; etc. Cf. Paul’s phrase in I Corinthians, 9, 26. A derived meaning is “to fight with a shadow”: e. g., Plato, Apol., 18 D; etc. Dio Chrysostom, Or., XXXII (367 M), speaks of χειρονομοῦντες as gymnasium practisers. See Krause, pp. 510 f.

1713 The κώρυκος was such a bag used by athletes: cf. the proverb, πρὸς κώρυκον γυμνάζεσθαι, “to labor in vain”: Diog., 7, 54. The Ficoroni cista has been mentioned supra, p. 237, n. 4. The description and use of the bag are given by Ph., 57.

1714 Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 704; Guide, II, 207.

1715 Amelung, Vat., I, 372 B, pp. 554–5 and Pl. LVIII; Clarac, 883, 2256. It is 0.535 meter high.

1716 Beschr., no. 469; Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmyth., III, Apollon, pp. 218 f. and fig. 14 (restored), interpreted the torso as that of an Apollo; but the Phrygian coin there pictured (Muenztafel, IV, 31), of the time of Lucius Verus, may merely show that the motive later was transferred to the god.

1717 Bronzen v. Ol., Textbd., pp. 21–2; Tafelbd., Pl. VIII, no. 57. It is only 0.112 meter high.

1718 E. g., Bronzen v. Ol., Pl. VIII, nos. 51–54 (statuettes); Pl. VI, nos. 59 and 63 (arm and right lower leg respectively); cf. Reisch, p. 39.

1719 J. H. S., I, 1880, p. 199. See B. B., no. 51; F. W., 89; etc. Theagenes won in Ols. 75, 76 ( = 480, 476 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 11.2 f.; Hyde, 104; Foerster, 191, 196.

1720 Inschr. v. Ol., 168. He won some time between Ols. (?) 99 and 103 ( = 384 and 368 B. C.): P., VI, 4.1; Hyde, 36; Foerster, 419.

1721 Inschr. v. Ol., 158; I. G. B., 98; he won some time between Ols. (?) 95 and 100 ( = 400 and 380 B. C.): P., VI, 6.3; Hyde, 54; Foerster, 319.

1722 Inschr. v. Ol., 186; I. G. B., 176. He won two victories in boxing some time between Ols. (?) 144 and 147 ( = 204 and 192, B. C.): P., VI, 15.6; Hyde, 147; Foerster, 510, 512 (who dates the artist toward the middle of the second century B. C.; but I have followed the earlier dating of Hiller von Gaertringen, Woch. f. kl. Philol., X, 1893, p. 856, which date has been accepted by Dittenberger).

1723 Inschr. v. Ol., 174.

1724 VI., 8.5.

1725 See Hyde, de olymp. Stat., pp. 39–41. There Ol. 80 or 84 ( = 460 or 444 B. C.) has been suggested for the original victory.

1726 Philippos won some time between Ols. (?) 119 and 125 ( = 304 and 280 B. C.): Hyde, 79 a.

1727 Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 575, in discussing my solution of the difficulty, call it “sinnreich, aber doch ungemein kompliziert,” and the assumption that a victor would use an older statue of a fellow countryman to celebrate his own victory “sehr bedenklich.”

1728 Cf. Dittenberger, Inschr. v. Ol., p. 296.

1729 Op. cit., p. 41. See also supra, p. 188.

1730 Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pl. II (head, two views); Annali, XLVI, 1874, Pl. L and pp. 51 f. (Brizio); Photo. Giraudon, no. 1207.

1731 Furtwaengler sees in this statue a work by Pythagoras: Mp., p. 171 f.; Mw., pp. 345 f.; Brizio, l. c., ascribes it to Hagelaïdas.

1732 Supra, pp. 180–1.

1733 On the pankration, see Gardiner, Ch. XX, pp. 435 f.; id., J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, pp. 4 f. and Pls. III-V; Krause, I, pp. 534 f.; etc.

1734 For the etymology, see Plato, Euthydem., 271 C, D; definition, Pollux III, 150; Plut., Quaest. conviv., II, 4 (containing also fanciful etymologies of πάλη); cf. Philostr., Imag., II, 6 (containing a full account of the contest in the description of the death of Arrhachion); cf. schol. on Plato, de Rep., I, 338 C, D.

1735 Vita Demonactis, 49 (against biting).

1736 L. c. (against biting and gouging).

1737 Aves, 442–3; Pax, 898–9.

1738 E 78; another example is seen on a r.-f. kylix in Baltimore: Gardiner, p. 437, fig. 152; J. H. S., XXVI, p. 9, fig. 3; Hartwig, Die griech. Meisterschalen, Pl. LXIV; Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 629, fig. 350.

1739 Nem., II, III, V; Isthm., IV, V, VI, VII, VIII.

1740 Frag. 19, l. 5 (ap. Athenæum, X, 6 = 414 a).

1741 E. g., Mahaffy, in his Old Greek Life, 1886, p. 56; see Gardiner, pp. 435–7, in refutation of such an exaggerated view.

1742 De Leg., VIII, 832 E; 834 A.

1743 Older writers, e. g., Faber, Agonisticon (published in 1592), I, 9, p. 1828, thought that the glove was used, an opinion long ago refuted by Krause, I, p. 539, n. 2. Waldstein, J. H. S., I, 1880, p. 185, wrongly says that the pancratiast sometimes wore gloves. Pausanias does not mention them, nor do we see them on any of the vase-paintings.

1744 VI, 6.5.

1745 VI, 15.5. Cf. also V, 17.10, where, in describing the boxing match between Admetos and Mopsos represented on the chest of Kypselos, he says οἱ δὲ ἀποτετολμηκότες πυκτεύειν—a hint of the dangerous character of boxing.

1746 Oneir., 1, 62. This, at best, seems to be an exaggeration.

1747 Philostr., l. c.

1748 VIII, 40.3–5.

1749 To Theseus: schol. on Pindar, Nem., V, 89, Boeckh, p. 465; cf. schol. on Nem., III, 27, Boeckh, p. 442; to Herakles: P., V, 8.4.

1750 P., V, 8.8; Ph., 12; and Afr.

1751 P., V, 8.11; Ph., 13.

1752 E. g., at Nemea; Pindar composed Nem., V, in honor of the boy Pytheas of Aegina, who won in (?) 485 B. C.; it was introduced at Delphi in the 61st Pythiad: P., X, 7.8; at the Isthmus in mythical times: P., V, 2.4.

1753 Collected by Gardiner, op. cit.

1754 Described by Lucian, Anachar., I.

1755 This throw is depicted on the walls of the tombs of Beni-Hasan on the Nile and is practised to-day by the Japanese; it is described by Dio Cassius, LXXI, 7.

1756 Κλιμακισμός: described by Soph., Trachiniae, 520 f., and the schol.; see also Ovid, Met., IX, 51. Cf. J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, pp. 15–16.

1757 E. g., on four Græco-Roman gems in the British Museum pictured in J. H. S., XXVI, p. 10, fig. 4; Gardiner, p. 447, fig. 162.

1758 B. M. Vases, B 604; J. H. S., XXVI, Pl. III; Gardiner, p. 442, fig. 157.

1759 E 78.

1760 Mentioned by Plato, Alcibiades, I, 107 E; Ph., 50; Pollux, III, 150; Suidas, s. v. ἀκροχειρίζεσθαι and s. v. Σώστρατος; Lucian, Lexiphanes, 5; de Saltatione, 10; Reisch, ap. Pauly-Wissowa, I, p. 1197; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 548; Grasberger, Erziehung und Unterricht, I, pp. 349–50; Krause, I, pp. 421 f., 510 f.; J. H. S., XXVI, pp. 13–15, where Gardiner discusses the word in ancient writers and concludes that it had nothing to do with wrestling, but only with boxing (both the separate event and part of the pankration), and meant “to spar lightly with an opponent for practice.”

1761 He won three victories in Ols. (?) 104, (?) 105, and 106 ( = 364–356 B. C.): P., VI, 4.1; Hyde, 37; Foerster, 349, 353, 359. This explanation of Pausanias has been accepted by Krause and most modern authorities, but is found untenable by Gardiner, who bases his interpretation, not on Pausanias, but on the accurate definition of Suidas.

1762 B. C. H., VI, 1882, pp. 446 f.

1763 He won in Ols. 81 and 82 ( = 456 and 452 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 4.3; Hyde, 38; Foerster, 202, 203; cf. Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 59. He was probably merely represented in the preliminary tactics of getting a grip.

1764 See Reisch, p. 46; I. G. B., 120.

1765 Anz. d. Wiener Akad., 1887, pp. 86 f. (Benndorf); Reisch, l. c.

1766 A. de Ridder, Les bronzes antiques du Louvre, I, 1913, Pl. 63, no. 1067, and p. 131 (= pancratiast); Rev. arch., 1869, II, p. 292; Bulle, no. 96 (right); Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 543, 4. It is 0.275 meter high.

1767 See supra, p. 167.

1768 H. N., XXXIV, 55. Hauser, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., XII, 1909, pp. 116 f. His reasoning is accepted by Bulle.

1769 Ges. Stud. zur Kunstgesch., Festschr. fuer A. Springer, 1885, pp. 260.

1770 See S. Q., 1463–67.

1771 Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LV, 4–5; Textbd., pp. 212 f., and fig. 239; F. W., no. 336; cf. Immerwahr, Kulte und Mythen Arkadiens, I, 1891, p. 288.

1772 Archiv fuer lateinische Lexikographie u. Grammatik, IX, 1894, 1, pp. 109 f.

1773 Mp., p. 249, n. 2; Mw., pp. 451–2; he adduced two passages from Ovid’s Met., XIV, 402 (saevisque parant incessere telis), and XIII, 566–7 (telorum lapidumque incessere iactu coepit).

1774 This explanation has been followed by Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., l. c.; Sittl, Parerga zur alten Kunstgesch., p. 24; Klein, II, pp. 362 f.; Jex-Blake, p. 235; and others.

1775 Inschr. v. Ol., 146; I. G. B., 41. He won in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; P., VI, 6.1; Hyde, 50; Foerster, 208.

1776 Collection Somzée, 1897, Pls. 3–5; see Hyde, to no. 50, on p. 8. Its quiet and reserved pose recalls that of the Pelops of the East gable of the temple of Zeus at Olympia (Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. IX, 2; Textbd., pp. 46 f.). Because of its archaic grace, though it shows no trace of archaic stiffness, it might even be referred to the school of Kritios and Nesiotes.

1777 Inschr. v. Ol., 153; I. G. B., 29. He won the pankration in Ols. 87, 88, 89 ( = 432–424 B. C.); P., VI, 7.1; Hyde, 61; Foerster, 258, 260, 262.

1778 VI, 2.1; to be discussed infra, Ch. VI, pp. 293 f.

1779 B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 592 f. Agias was not only a victor at Delphi three times, at Nemea five times, and at the Isthmus five times, but was also an Olympic victor in the pankration, Ol. (?) 80 ( = 460 B. C.): see inscription, B. C. H., l. c., p. 593, and for the date of the Olympic victory, K. K. Smith, in Class. Philol., V, 1910, pp. 169 f.; cf. A. J. A., XIII, 1909, pp. 447 f.

1780 Duetschke, III, no. 547; Amelung, Fuehrer, 66; B. B., 431; Bulle, 184; von Mach, 288; F. W., 1426; Reinach, Rép., I, 523, I; Clarac, V, 858 A, 2176; M. W., I, XXXVI, 149; J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, p. 19; Gardiner, p. 449, fig. 163. The group is 0.98 meter high and 0.71 meter broad (Duetschke).

1781 Bulle dates it at the beginning of the third century B. C.; both he and Amelung believe it to be the work of a follower of Lysippos; see also B. Graef, Jb., IX, 1894, pp. 119 f., who believes that the original heads of the group are preserved, the one still on the under pancratiast, the other on the statue of a Niobid in the Uffizi (Duetschke, III, no. 253), the head now on the upper pancratiast being a modern copy of it. See Amelung’s reply in A. A., 1894, pp. 192 f.

1782 E. g., von Mach, Pls. 265 f.

1783 H. N., XXXVI, 24; see note ad loc. by Jex-Blake.

1784 Aeth., X, 31, 32; quoted in full by Krause, II, pp. 912 f.

1785 Duetschke, Wolters, von Mach, and Lucas (the latter in Jb., XIX, 1904, pp. 127 f. and figs.) thought that the wrestling groups on the Roman mosaic of the Imperial period found in Tusculum in 1862 were influenced by the Florence group: Mon. d. I., VI, VII, 1857–63, Pl. LXXXII; Annali, XXXV, 1863, pp. 397 f.; Schreiber, Bilderatlas, Pl. XXIII, 10; Gardiner, p. 177, fig. 22.

1786 J. H. S., XXV, 1905, p. 30.

1787 He won in Ol. 142 ( = 212 B. C.): P., VI, 15.10; cf. V., 21.10; Hyde, 150; Foerster, 474, 475.

1788 E. g., by Gardiner, p. 146.

1789 Bulle, no. 72; B. B., 285; von Mach, 236; Collignon, II, p. 427, fig. 222; Overbeck, II, p. 448, fig. 221; F. W., 1265; M. W., 1, Pl. XXXVIII, 152; Reinach, Rép., I, 465, 1, 2, 3; Clarac, V, 789, 1978; Gardiner, p. 147, fig. 21; etc. It is 3.17 meters high (Bulle).

1790 An excellent one is in the Uffizi: Amelung, Fuehrer, 40; Reinach, Rép., I, 474, 1; a colossal replica was found in the sea off Antikythera: Arch. Eph., 1902, Suppl., Pl. B, 7; one in the Pitti Gallery will be mentioned immediately.

1791 I. G. B., 345.

1792 Duetschke, II, no. 36; Amelung, Fuehrer, p. 134; B. B., 284; M. W., XXXVIII, 151; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 210, 5. For the inscription, see I. G. B., 506; it has been needlessly attacked as a forgery—an ancient one by Winckelmann, Mon. Inediti, pp. LXXVI f., and a modern one by Maffei, Ars critica, III, 1, p. 76 (both quoted by Duetschke), and more recently by Stephani, Der ausruhende Herakles, pp. 164 f. The inscription is at least as old as the sixteenth century, as it is mentioned by Flaminius Vacca (see Duetschke).

1793 Numism. Chron., Sér. 3, III, 1883, Pl. I, 5, p. 9.

1794 Mentioned by Strabo, VI, 3.1 (= C. 278), and described by the late writer Niketas, Chron. de signis Constant., 5 (who wrongly calls Lysippos Lysimachos).

1795 Gesch. d. bild. Kuenste, II^2, PP. 245 f.

1796 P. 234.

1797 Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. II, 2a and 2; Textbd., pp. 10–11; F. W., 323.

1798 De olymp. Stat., p. 56.

1799 On the “finsterer Blick” of this class of victor monuments, see Furtw., Mp., p. 173; Mw., p. 348; and Bronz. v. Ol., Text, pp. 10–11.

1800 Thus Furtwaengler assigns it to the statue of the Akarnanian pancratiast (Philandridas) mentioned by Pausanias, VI, 2.1; see Bronz. v. Ol., p. 11. I have assigned an earlier marble head to Philandridas, infra, pp. 293 f.

1801 So Overbeck, II, p. 168; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 534; F. W., l. c.; etc.

1802 Bronz. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. III, 3, 3a; Textbd., pp. 11–12; F. W., no. 324.

1803 De olymp. Stat., p. 56.

1804 Cf. P., VI, 20, 13: ἐπίδειξις ἐπιστήμης τε ἡνιόχων καὶ ἵππων ὠκύτητος; Pindar, Ol., III, 36 f.: θαητὸν ἀγῶνα ... ἀνδρῶν τ’ ἀρετᾶς πέρι καὶ ῥιμφαρμάτου διφρηλασίας.

1805 On the hippodrome and its events at Olympia and elsewhere, see A. Martin, in Dar.-Sagl., III, 1, 1900, pp. 193 f. (art. Hippodromos); on the chariot, Saglio, ibid., I, 2, pp. 1633 f. (art. Currus); K. Schneider, in Pauly-Wissowa, VIII, pp. 1735 f.; Julius, in Baum., I, pp. 692 f.; Pollack, Hippodromica, Diss. inaug., 1890; Gardiner, Ch. XXI, pp. 451 f.; Krause, I, pp. 557 f.; etc.

1806 See Isokrates, XVI (de Bigis), 33 (p. 353 c); Xenophon, de Re equestr., II, 1; Aristotle, Politics, VI, 3.2 ( = 1289 b 35), VIII, 7.1 ( = 1321 a 11); Plut., de Adul. et Amic., Chs. 7 and 16 (latter quoting Karneades). On the expense of horse-breeding (ἱπποτροφία), see also Xen., Ages., I, 23; id., Oecon., II, 6; Plut., Ages., XX, 1; Pindar, Isthm., II, 38; IV, 29; etc.

1807 The first, second, and fourth, according to Thukyd., VI, 16; the first, second and third, according to Eurip., fragm. 3 (= P. l. G., II, p. 266), and Isokr., de Bigis, 34 (p. 353 d). See Foerster, 275.

1808 See Oxy. Pap., II, p. 222.

1809 Besides 24 victories of both in various running races. The older part of the inscription (with a chariot-group in relief) was discovered by Leake: see Travels in the Morea, 1830, II, p. 521, and Pl. 71 (at the end of III); better reproduction by Dressler and Milchhoefer, A. M., II, 1877, pp. 318 f.; I. G. A., 79; Tod, Sparta Museum Cat., no. 440. The newer portion is discussed in B. S. A., XIII, 1906–07, pp. 174 f.

1810 See Hill, Coins of Sicily, pp. 43 f.

1811 VIII, 38.5; see Exped. scientif. en Morée, 1831–1838, II, p. 37, and Pls. XXXIII, XXXIV. It was 240 by 105 meters in extent, though the actual course was probably only a stade long.

1812 See list in Pauly-Wissowa, VIII, pp. 1743–4.

1813 Described by P., V, 15.5 f., and VI, 20.10 f. For its position, see Doerpfeld, Ergebn. v. Ol., I, p. 78; Curtius u. Adler, Olympia und Umgegend, 1882, p. 30; Boetticher, Olympia: Das Fest u. seine Staette^2, 1886, p. 119; G. Herrmann, de Hippodromo olympiaco, 1839 (= Opusc., VII, pp. 388). Five attempts at reconstruction are given by Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, pp. 643 f., and Pl. VI: those of Visconti (1796); A. Hirt (Gesch. d. Baukunst bei d. Alten, 1827, III, pp. 148 f., and Pl. XX, 8; reproduced in Baum., I, p. 693, fig. 750; Smith, Dict. Antiq.3, 1890, I, p. 963; Frazer, IV, p. 83, fig. 6); Lehndorff (Hippodromos, 1876); Pollack (op cit., p. 52); Wernicke (Jb., IX, 1894, p. 199). To these should be added those of A. Martin (op. cit., p. 198, fig. 3844); Weniger (Klio, IX, 1909, p. 303, the aphesis transcribed by Gardiner, p. 453, fig. 164). See also Guhl u. Koner, Das Leben d. Gr. u. Roem.6, 1893, pp. 233 f. and Fig. 271 (= restoration of Pollack), and cf. Krause, I, p. 150, n. 9.

1814 See Blass, in Hermes, XXIII, 1888, p. 222 (n. 1); R. Schoene, A. A., 1897, pp. 77–8; id., Jb., XII, 1897, pp. 150 f. (Neue Angaben ueber den Hippodrom zu Olympia); Gaspar, in article on Olympia in Dar.-Sagl., IV, 1, p. 177 and n. 5; Frazer, V, p. 617; etc.

1815 VI, 20.8.

1816 Il., XXIII, 262–650. The four-horse chariot-race fills more than one and one-half times as many verses as the seven other contests combined (vv. 651–897). Homer’s description was often imitated by later poets, especially by Sophokles, Electra, 698–763 (race at Delphi); Nonnos, Dionys., XXXVII, 103–484; Quintus Smyrnæus, IV, 500–595; Statius, Theb., VI, 274–527; etc. Hesiod describes a race as wrought on Herakles’ shield: Scut., 305 f.

1817 P., V, 10.6–7; VI, 21.6–7; VIII, 14.10–11; etc.; Pindar, Ol., I, 67 f.

1818 Diod., IV, 73.3.

1819 VIII, 4.5.

1820 E. g., Nestor won at the games of Amarynkeus, Iliad, XXIII, 630 f. On such myths, see Krause, I, pp. 558 f.

1821 E. g., the race between Pelops and Oinomaos was represented on the chest of Kypselos, P., V, 17.7, and in the sculptures on the East gable of the temple of Zeus at Olympia, P., V, 10.6–7. It appears also on many early vases: e. g., on the François vase in Florence and the Amphiaraos vase in Berlin. For the latter, see Mon. d. I., X, 1874–78, Pls. IV-V; Annali, XLVI, 1874, pp. 82 f. (Robert); Gardiner, p. 29, fig. 3.

1822 V, 8.7.

1823 See Plato, de Rep., III, 19 (= 412 B); Isokr., de Bigis, 33 (p. 353 c); Dio Cassius, LII, 30; Hdt., I, 167; Andok., 4, 26 (Contra Alcib.); Soph., Electra, 698; etc.

1824 VI, 2.2; he won in the hoplite-race and chariot-race in Ols. (?) 83, 84 ( = 448, 444 B. C.): Hyde, 12; Foerster, 211 A.

1825 Foerster thinks that the story arose from the small size of one of the horses in the monument of Lykidas.

1826 These and the following figures are given in the Constantinople MS. The length of the four-horse chariot-race there given agrees with passages in Pindar (Ol., II, 50; III, 33; VI, 75; cf. Pyth., V, 33, for Delphi) and the scholiasts (on Ol., III, 59, Boeckh, p. 102, and Pyth., V, 39, Boeckh, p. 380). See also Pollack, Hippodromica, pp. 103 f., and Gardiner, p. 457.

1827 P., V, 8.10.

1828 Length stated by the MS. and by a scholiast on Pindar, Pyth., V, 39, Boeckh, p. 380.

1829 Those of Troilos of Elis, who won in Ol. 103 ( = 368 B. C.): P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 6; Foerster, 345; Inschr. v. Ol., 166; and of Akestorides of Alexandria in the Troad, who won between Ols. 142 and 144 ( = 212 and 204 B. C.): P., VI, 13.7; Hyde, 119 and pp. 49–50; Foerster, 501; Inschr. v. Ol., 184.

1830 For the date, see P., V, 8.10; Xen., Hell., I, 2.1; for the event, Krause, I, pp. 567 f.

1831 Troilos, already mentioned, who won in Ol. 102 ( = 372 B. C.) and had a statue by Lysippos: P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 6; Foerster, 338.

1832 Euryleonis: P., III, 17.6; Foerster, 344.

1833 The συνωρίς was introduced at Delphi in 398 B. C., while the ἅρμα τέλειον was introduced there in 582 B. C.: see Dar.-Sagl., III, 1, p. 202, for these and other dates of equestrian events at the Pythian games.

1834 B. M. Vases, B 130.

1835 The date is given in the Armenian version of Afr.; cf. also P., V, 8.11.

1836 P., V, 8.8.

1837 P., V, 8.11.

1838 XV, 679–84; Hesiod, Scut., 285 f. On myths relating to it, see Krause, I, p. 582, n. 1. We read of equi desultorii at the games inaugurated by Cæsar in Rome: Sueton., Julius, 39. See supra, p. 3.

1839 VI, 13.9.

1840 P., V, 9.1. Polemon, frag. 21 (= F. H. G., III, p. 122), apud schol. on Pindar, Ol., V, Argum. (Boeckh, p. 117), says that the κάλπη ceased in Ol. 84 ( = 444 B. C.), if we accept Boeckh’s correction πδʹ for οδʹ. A scholiast on Pindar, Ol., V, lines 6 and 19 (Boeckh, pp. 119 and 122) says Ol. 85 ( = 440 B. C.); another on Ol., VI, Argum. (Boeckh, p. 129), says Ol. 85 or Ol. 86. But Ol. 85 may be reconciled with Pausanias’ and Polemon’s date by assuming that the proclamation of abolition fell in Ol. 84, but that the event was first omitted in Ol. 85; see Bentley, Diss. upon the Epistles of Phalaris, p. 200 (ed. W. Wagner).

1841 VI, 9.2; Hyde, 84.

1842 V, 9.1; he won Ol. 70 ( = 500 B. C.); Foerster, 157.

1843 Anaxilas of Rhegion, whose victory fell sometime between Ols. (?) 70 and 76 ( = 500 and 476 B. C.), and was celebrated by Simonides, frag. 7 (= P. l. G., III, p. 390); Agesias of Syracuse, whose victory fell Ol. (?) 77 ( = 472 B. C.), and was celebrated by Pindar, Ol., VI; and Psaumis of Kamarina, whose victory, falling Ol. (?) 81 ( = 456 B. C.), was sung by the pseudo-Pindar, Ol., V (= P. l. G., I, pp. 109 f.); he also won in the chariot-race in Ol. (?) 82 ( = 452 B. C.), a victory sung by Pindar in Ol., IV. See Foerster, nos. 173, 210, 234, and 238.

1844 Inschr. v. Ol., 220, 221; Foerster, 601.

1845 The corrupt text of Africanus is here corrected by Gelzer, S. Jul. Afr. und die byzant. Chronographie, 1880, I, pp. 168 f. Gardiner, p. 165, n. 3, wrongly gives the victory of Germanicus as Ol. 194, thus confusing it with that of Tiberius.

1846 Foerster, 642–647.

1847 Ol. 208 ( = 53 A. D.); Foerster, 634.

1848 Most of the gems representing such contests, however, refer to the Roman circus.

1849 For illustrations of the two, see Dar.-Sagl., I, 2, pp. 1636 f., figs. 2203 f., and cf. Gardiner, pp. 458 f.; an excellent illustration of a four-horse chariot and driver is seen on an Attic-Corinthian goblet (dinos) in the Louvre: Perrot-Chipiez, X, Pl. II, opp. p. 116; also several at rest and racing on the François Vase: Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 141, fig. 93, p. 154, fig. 101 (= Furtw.-Reichhold, Griech. Vasenmalerei, 1904–1912, Pls. III, 10, and XI-XII.).

1850 Von Mach, no. 5.

1851 See, e. g., P. Gardner, Sculptured Tombs of Hellas, 1896, figs. 18–20.

1852 C. Smith, B. S. A., III, 1896–7, pp. 183 f., dates these prize amphoræ from the middle of the sixth to the close of the fourth centuries B. C., as the last of the series is dated 313 B. C. In this article he publishes a mosaic found on Delos (Pl. XVI, a) and dating from the early second century B. C., which reproduces a Panathenaic amphora with an illustration of a chariot-race—the latest date at which either a prize-amphora (or picture of one) can be proved to have been used. He believes (p. 187) that it is the representation of an amphora won long before by the ancestor of the owner of the mosaic, carefully preserved in his family.

1853 B. M. Guide to Greek and Roman Life, 1908, p. 200.

1854 E. g., on a Panathenaic amphora in the British Museum, dating from the sixth century B. C.: B. M. Vases, B 132; Gardiner, p. 458, fig. 166; cf. also a silver tetradrachm from Rhegion in the British Museum, from the early fifth century B. C.: Gardiner, p. 460, fig. 168.

1855 Philip won κέλητι in Ol. 106 ( = 356 B. C.): Plut., Alex., 3 and 4; cf. Justin, XII, 16, 6; ἅρματι twice at unknown dates: Foerster, 360, 364, 370. As we have no record of a victory by him συνωρὶδι, the two-horse chariot appearing on his coins (e. g., a gold stater in the British Museum, Gardiner, p. 459, fig. 167, right) may refer to unrecorded victories, or else may be interpreted (with Gardiner) as a pun on his name.

1856 E. g., on a silver tetradrachm of Rhegion in the British Museum: Gardiner, p. 460, fig. 168. This and other coins commemorate the victory in this event of the Rhegion prince Anaxilas, already mentioned: Aristotle, frag. 228a, ap. Pollux, V, 73 (= F. H. G., II, p. 173); Foerster, 173.

1857 E. g., a decadrachm of Akragas (dating from the end of the fifth century B. C.) and another of Syracuse (from the beginning of the fourth century B. C.) in the British Museum; reproduced by Gardiner, p. 465, fig. 172.

1858 B. S. A., XIII, 1906–7, Pl. V; Gardner, p. 456, fig. 165.

1859 Gerhard, IV, Pls. CCXLIX and CCL; Dar.-Sagl., l. c., fig. 2219. It was formerly in Lucien Bonaparte’s collection.

1860 A. V., Pls. CCLI-CCLIV.

1861 B. B., 586–7 and figs. 1–14 (text by Furtwaengler); Richter, Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes in the Metropolitan Museum, 1915, pp. 17 f., no. 40, and figs.; P. Ducati, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., XII, 1909, pp. 74 f.; J. Offord, R. Arch., Sér. IV, III, 1904, pp. 305–7 and Pls. VII-IX, etc. Closely allied in style to its decorative designs are fragments of another chariot found at Perugia and now distributed among the Perugia, Munich, and British Museums: Petersen, A. M., X, 1894, pp. 253 f.; B. B., 588–589. Cf. also fragments of similar technique from Capua: Froehner, Cat. de la Collection Dutuit, 1897–1901, II, p. 199, no. 250, and Pls. 190–195.

1862 A. J. A., XII, 1908, pp. 312 f., with plates and figures.

1863 H. N., XXXVI, 31.

1864 Vitruv., de Arch., VII (Praef.), §§ 12–13.

1865 See B. M. Sculpt., II, nos. 1000–1005 and Pl. XVI; for discussion of the group, J. H. S., XXX, 1910, pp. 133–162 (J. B. K. Preedy).

1866 E. g., XXXIV, 71 (Calamis et alias quadrigas bigasque fecit se impari, equis sine aemulo expressis); XXXV, 99 (Aristides ... pinxit et currentes quadrigas); XXXIV, 78 (Euphranor); 64 (Lysippus ... fecit et quadrigas multorum generum); 66 (Euthykrates); 80 (Pyromachos); 88 (Menogenes); 86 (Aristodemos).

1867 P., VI, 12.1; to be mentioned infra, p. 279.

1868 P., VI, 9.4–5.

1869 P., V, 27.2.

1870 P., VI, 14.12.

1871 P., VI, 10.8 and 19.6, and cf. 10.8; Hdt., VI, 36; Hyde, 99a and p. 44; Foerster, 105. Pausanias here confuses this elder Miltiades with the son of Kimon, as does also the pseudo-Andok., IV, 33.

1872 P., VI, 10.8; cf. Hdt., VI, 103; Hyde, 99b and p. 44; Foerster, 77–79.

1873 Some time between Ols. (?) 68 and 70 ( = 508 and 500 B. C.): P., VI, 16.6; Hyde, 160 and pp. 58–9; Foerster, 797 (undated).

1874 Kalliteles won some time between Ols. (?) 66 and 68 ( = 516 and 508 B. C.): Inschr. v. Ol., 632; Hyde, 161; Foerster, 774 (undated).

1875 Pindar, Pyth., V, 34 f.; date given by schol. on Pyth., IV, Argum., Boeckh, p. 342. Pindar’s Pyth., IV and V celebrate this victory. The same scholiast also records a chariot-victory of Arkesilas at Olympia in Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.); Foerster, 229.

1876 P., V, 12.5; Inschr. v. Ol., 634; I. G. B., 100. Kyniska won two chariot-victories in Ols. (?) 96, 97 ( = 396, 392 B. C.), and for them also had an equestrian group set up in the Altis, the work of the Megarian artist Apellas, which we shall discuss later: P., VI, 1.6 f.; Hyde, 7; Foerster, 326, 333; see infra, p. 267.

1877 P., VI, 12.7; Hyde, 108; Foerster, 801 (undated).

1878 He won some time between Ols. (?) 128 and 137 ( = 268 and 232 B. C.): P., VI, 1.9; Hyde, 169; Foerster, 446; Inschr. v. Ol., 178.

1879 P., VI, 17.5; cf. 10.6–8. In the latter passage (§8) Pausanias says that Kleosthenes, who won in Ol. 66, was the first to dedicate his statue together with a chariot and horses and the statue of a charioteer. Foerster, 38, following Westermann, believes that Archidamas is the name which has fallen out of Phlegon, fragm. 4 (= F. H. G., III, p. 605), that of a victor from Dyspontion in Elis, and therefore wrongly gives the date of the victory as Ol. 27 ( = 672 B. C.); for a refutation of this view and an indeterminate date, see Hyde, 182 and p. 62.

1880 He won Ol. (?) 79 ( = 464 B. C.): P., VI, 1.7; Hyde, 8; Foerster, 233.

1881 He won in two events, the hoplite-race and charioteering, in Ols. (?) 83, 84 ( = 448, 444 B. C.): P., VI, 2.1–2; Hyde, 12; Foerster, 211A. Perhaps one of his two statues by Myron represented his charioteer (so Foerster), though more probably the two statues represented the victor for his two victories.

1882 He won some time between Ols. (?) 98 and 101 ( = 388 and 376 B. C.): P., VI, 2.8; Hyde, 17; Foerster, 310; his statue stood beside that of his son Aigyptos on horseback; the latter won κέλητι about the date of his father’s victory: P., VI, 2.8; Hyde 18; Foerster, 301. The two monuments were by the Sikyonian Daidalos.

1883 He won συνωρίδι καὶ τεθρίππῳ in Ols. 102, 103 ( = 372, 368 B. C.): P., VI, 1.4; Hyde, 6; Foerster, 338, 345.

1884 He won some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 130 ( = 320 and 260 B. C.): P., VI, 13.11; Hyde, 122; Foerster, 513: Inschr. v. Ol., 177.

1885 Polykles won in Ol. (?) 89 ( = 424 B. C.): P., VI, 1.7; Hyde, 9; Foerster, 796 (undated). For this athletic genre group, see Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 534. On children’s hoops (τρόχοι) see L. Becq de Fouquières, Les Jeux des Anciens^2, 1873, Ch. VIII, pp. 159 f.

1886 1, 96 (quoting Ephoros, fragm. 106 = F. H. G., 1, pp. 262–3). Periandros won a chariot victory at Olympia at the end of the seventh or beginning of the sixth century B. C.: Foerster, 80, who assumes that it was a statue of Zeus, and not of Periandros.

1887 Gelo won in Ol. 73 ( = 488 B. C.): P., VI, 9.4; Hyde, 90; Foerster, 180; Inschr. v. Ol., 143. This inscription on the recovered base and another from the base of the monument of Pantarkes, who won apparently in the chariot-race at the end of the sixth century B. C. (Inschr. v. Ol., 142; Foerster, 149), are the two oldest inscriptions known of chariot victors at Olympia.

1888 He won Ol. 66 ( = 516 B. C.): P., VI, 10.6–7; Hyde, 99; Foerster, 143.

1889 P., VI, 10.7.

1890 We have mentioned the inscribed relief supra, pp. 257 and 258, and n. 1 on p. 258.

1891 Line 15.

1892 Pindar, Pyth., V, 26. For the above examples, see also Gardiner, p. 463.

1893 P., VI, 2.8; he was represented on horseback.

1894 P., III, 8.1; cf. VI, 1.6.

1895 Inschr. v. Ol., 160; Loewy, I. G. B., 99; see A. G., XIII, 16.

1896 A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, p. 151.

1897 Noted in A. J. A., XV, 1911, p. 60.

1898 H. N., XXXIV, 86: et adornantes se feminas. For the five larger bronze figures, see Inv., 5604–5, 5619–21; for the smaller sixth figure, usually known as the Praying Child, see Inv., 5603. All six are pictured in E. R. Barker’s Buried Herculaneum, 1908, Figs. 18–19.

1899 P., VI, 12.1; cf. VIII, 42.9–10; Oxy. Pap.; Hyde, 105; Foerster, 199, 209, and 215. Pindar celebrates the victory of 476 B. C. in his first Olympian ode.

1900 P., V, 27.2. See supra, pp. 28, 62, and 163.

1901 P., VI, 14.12.

1902 H. N., XXXIV, 71. On the basis of this and other references, Reisch built up a theory that there was also a fourth-century B. C. Kalamis, the contemporary of the younger Praxiteles: Jh. oest. arch. Inst., IX, 1906, pp. 199 f. He was followed by Amelung (R. M., XXI, 1906, pp. 285 and 287) and Studniczka (Abh. d. k. saechs. Gesellsch. d. Wiss., philolog.-histor. Klasse, XXV, no. IV, 1907, pp. 5 f.). Furtwaengler has shown the weakness of such an argument and has rightly referred the monument mentioned by Pliny to the great Kalamis and his younger contemporary, the elder Praxiteles: Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1907, pp. 160 f.

1903 P., VI, 18.1. Kratisthenes won Ol. (?) 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Hyde, 185; Foerster, 193 A.

1904 P., VI, 12.6; Hyde, 105d. The same Timon is mentioned again: P., VI, 2.8; Hyde, 17. This monument may have been set up for a second victory or even for the victory mentioned by Pausanias, VI, 2.8; however, I have classed it as an honor dedication, assuming two monuments: Hyde, p. 45.

1905 Lampos won some time after Ol. (?) 105 ( = 360 B. C.): P., VI, 4.10; Hyde, 44; Foerster, 420. Philippi, the native city of Lampos, was founded in Ol. 105 by Philip, father of Alexander, on the site of an older town, Krenides.

1906 H. N., XXXIV, 89; it was by the statuary Piston.

1907 Reisch, p. 49, believes that she represented a Nike apteros; Rouse, p. 164, also believes that such figures were Victories.

1908 H. N., XXXV, 108.

1909 Ant. Denkm., I, 4, 1889, Pl. XLIV.

1910 B. M. Sculpt., I, 814; Museum Marbles, IX, Pl. XXXVIII, fig. 2. A. H. Smith (op. cit., no. 814; cf. Guide to Græco-Roman Sculpt., I, no. 176) also mentions another similar votive tablet in the British Museum. It is mounted on a pilaster and represents the visit of Dionysos to Ikarios. Such tablets seem to have been commonly dedicated by agonistic victors.

1911 Schoene, Griech. Reliefs, 1872, Pl. XVIII, fig. 80; F. W., 1142; von Sybel, Kat. d. Skulpt. zu Athen, 1881, no. 7014. Here only the arms and wings of Nike are left.

1912 E. Huebner, Die antiken Bildw. in Madrid, 1862, 241, 559; Annali, XXXIV, 1862, Pl. G., and p. 103; Reisch, p. 51.

1913 Arch. Eph., 1893, pp. 128 f. (Kabbadias) and Pl. IX; Rouse, p. 177.

1914 Cf. Reisch, pp. 49–50; Rouse, p. 176.

1915 Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1752; Guide, I, 437.

1916 P., V, 17.8.

1917 Frazer, III, p. 609, fig. 77; etc. See supra, p. 13 and n. 1.

1918 We have already discussed the style and date of this relief in Ch. III, pp. 128–9. For the relief, see Dickins, no. 1342 and illustration on p. 275; von Sybel, Kat. d. Skulpt. zu Athen, no. 5039; Baum., I, p. 342, fig. 359; Studniczka, Jb., XI, 1896, p. 265, fig. 7; Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 664, fig. 342; B. B., 21; von Mach, 56; Collignon, I, pp. 378 f. and fig. 194; Overbeck, I, p. 203 and fig. 47; Le Bas, Voyage archeol. (Reinach’s ed.), pp. 50–51 and Pl. I; F. W., 97; cast in British Museum, B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 155. A small piece of the adjacent slab to the right (found on the eastern slope of the Akropolis in 1859–1860), fitting the main block exactly, shows two horses’ tails and one hind leg and proves that the chariot was represented at rest.

1919 This fragment contains a head whose pointed beard and petasos have been thought to indicate the god: Dickins, no. 1343; Collignon, I, p. 378, fig. 195; von Mach, fig. 11, opp. p. 58; Conze, Nuove Memorie dell’ Instituto, II, pp. 408 f. and Pl. XIII A; F. W., 96.

1920 So O. Hauser, Jb., VII, 1892, pp. 54 f.; he is followed by Robinson, Cat. of Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, no. 33. J. Braun, Gesch. d. Kunst, 1858, II, pp. 188 and 549 (quoted by F. W.), Conze, op. cit., Michaelis, Der Parthenon, 1870, p. 123, Helbig, Das homerische Epos^2, 1887, p. 179 and n. 11, Springer-Michaelis, pp. 207–8 (and fig. 389), Dickins, and many others, also interpret the figure as male.

1921 This coiffure, however, appears on several female heads: e. g., on the Harpy monument, F. W., 127 f. Knapp (Nike in d. Vasenmalerei, p. 10), Brunn (Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1870, II, pp. 213 f.), W. Mueller (Quaestiones vestiariae, 1890, p. 44), Collignon, Overbeck, Friedrichs-Wolters, Reisch (p. 49), and many others call the figure of the charioteer female.

1922 E. g., the headless draped statue, resembling the Korai, in the Akropolis Museum: B. B., 551.

1923 A. M., XXX, 1905, pp. 305 f. (especially 321) and Pls. XI, XII (the rebuilding of the temple referred to the time of Peisistratos). He also (p. 320) favors the well-known view of Doerpfeld (A. M., XII, 1887, pp. 25–61, 190–211; XV, 1890, pp. 420–439) that the Hekatompedon or Old Temple of Athena, rebuilt by the Athenians shortly after the Persian wars, existed not only down to 406 B. C., when Xenophon says that it was burnt (Hell., I, 6), but down at least to the time of Pausanias. This view is held by J. Harrison, Mythology and Monuments of Ancient Athens, 1890, pp. 505 f., Dickins, l. c., and many archæologists. It has been rejected by many others, e. g., Petersen (A. M., XII, pp. 62–72), Wernicke (ibid., pp. 184–189), and in extenso Frazer (J. H. S., XIII, 1892–1893, pp. 153–187; reprinted in his edition of Pausanias, II, pp. 553–82). Murray, I, p. 143 and fig. 35, referred the relief to one of the metopes of the Old Temple of Athena.

1924 Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1906, II, pp. 147 f.; cf. also ibid., 1905, pp. 433 f.

1925 Springer-Michaelis (l. c.) think that it may represent a chariot victor; similarly Purgold (Arch. Eph., 1885, p. 251). Boetticher (Die Akropolis, 1888, pp. 85–6) believes that it represents a Panathenaic victor.

1926 In the British Museum: B. M. Sculpt., II, 951 and Pl. XIII; Sir Charles Fellows, An Account of Discoveries in Lycia, 1841, p. 166. The Chimæra may be introduced as a heraldic device of the owner of the tomb (Smith). Bellerophon appears on Pegasos on a relief from a rock tomb of Pinara: B. M. Sculpt., I, 760. We should also compare with these the reliefs found by Fellows at Xanthos and now in the British Museum. They show a two-horse chariot with a seated charioteer (F. W., 131; Murray, I, Pl. IV), a two-horse chariot with a charioteer and a seated man (F. W., 133; Murray, Pl. III), and a young rider (F. W., 134). See Fellows, pp. 172, 176; Murray, I, pp. 124 f.

1927 Michaelis, Der Parthenon, 1870, slabs XI-XXIII; B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 325. The charioteers on slabs XII and XIV have long, close-fitting tunics.

1928 Michaelis, op. cit., slabs XXIV-XXXIV; B. M. Sculpt., no. 327.

1929 Theophrastos, ap. Harpokr., s. v. ἀποβάτης), says that it was peculiar to Athens and Bœotia, but there is evidence of its existence elsewhere, e. g., at Aphrodisias in Karia (C. I. G., II, no. 2758, G. col. IV, line 3, p. 507, and C. col. IV, l. 3), Naples (ibid., no. 5807, l. 4), Rome (C. I. L., VI, 2, 10047, b, line 8 = pedibus ad quadrigam), etc. On the race at the Panathenaia, see Michaelis, op. cit., pp. 324 f.; Mommsen, Heortologie, 1864, pp. 153 f., and Die Feste d. Stadt Athen im Altertum, 1898, pp. 89 f.; and for the race in general, Pauly-Wissowa, I, pp. 2814 f.

1930 For a description of the race, see Bekker, Anecd. gr., I, pp. 425–6 and Dionys. Halikarn., VII, 73, 2–3; the former account says that the apobates mounted the chariot in full course by setting his foot on the wheel and dismounted again; the latter only that he dismounted in the last lap; the two are apparently describing different moments of the same race.

1931 National Museum, no. 1391; Svoronos, II, pp. 340–1, Tafelbd., Pl. LVI (right); noted in A. M., XII, 1887, p. 146, no. 1; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 237 and fig.; Arch. Eph., 1910, pp. 251 f.; Reisch, p. 51. Staïs gives the measurements as 0.60 meter high and 0.36 meter broad.

1932 A. M., III, 1878, pp. 410–14, no. 193 (Koerte); Mon. d. I., IV, 1844–48, Pl. 5; Annali, Pl. XVI, 1844, pp. 166 f. (F. J. Welcker), and Pl. E.

1933 A third relief from Oropos, showing the same subject, is in Berlin (no. 725): see Furtwaengler, Samml. Sabouroff, I, Pl. XXVI (and text, on the subject of the race).

1934 B. C. H., VII, 1883, Pl. XVII and pp. 458 f. (Collignon); Gardiner, p. 238, fig. 34; F. W., 1836.

1935 Its antiquity has been questioned by Kekulé, who is quoted by F. W.; see on no. 1838.

1936 B. M. Sculpt., II, 1037, Pl. XVIII; von Mach, 231; Ant. Denkm., II, 2, 1893–4, Pl. XVIII, 0; Collignon, II, p. 327, fig. 165; Newton, Travels and Discoveries in the Levant, 1865, II, p. 133, Pl. XVI; Gardner, Hbk., p. 430, fig. 111. It is 2 feet 1.5 inches high.

1937 For the sarcophagus, see the work of Hamdy Bey and Th. Reinach, Une nécropole royale à Sidon, 1892; Text, pp. 272 f., and Pls. XXIII-XXVIII, XXX-XXXI, XXXIV-XXXVII; also Studniczka, Jb., IX, 1894, pp. 211 f. (who assigned it to Lysippos’ pupil, Eutychides); Judeich, ibid., X, 1895, pp. 165 f. and figs. 1–6; J. H. S., XIX, 1899, pp. 273 f.; Gardner, Hbk., pp. 466 f. and fig. 124 (= Hamdy-Bey et Reinach, Pl. XXIX); von Mach, 379–83; Richardson, p. 242, fig. 116; Springer-Michaelis, p. 348, fig. 627; etc.

1938 We see it, e. g., on the cuirass of the statue of Augustus in the Vatican: von Mach, no. 418.

1939 Von Mach, no. 232; Robinson, Report of the Trustees of the Museum of Fine Arts, 1897, pp. 18–19; Klein, Praxitelische Studien (= Suppl. to his Praxiteles), 1899, p. 1; in n. 1 Klein says that the statue was found in the Tiber.

1940 Griech. Kunstmythol., III, Apollon, pp. 149 f.

1941 Noted by Klein, op. cit., figs. 5 and 7.

1942 E. g., on the vase in the British Museum, discussed in Guide to Greek and Roman Life, 1908, p. 200. Here the driver stands clothed in the regular chiton like that on the Charioteer from Delphi. (Fig. 66.) We see similarly clothed charioteers on various r.-f. vases: e. g., on those pictured by Gerhard, IV, Pls. CCLI-CCLIII; on those enumerated by Hauser, Jb., VII, 1892, p. 60 (including some r.-f. ones, e. g., the fifth-century B. C. one from Corneto by Euxithoos and Oltos = Baum., III, Pl. XCIII, 2 and p. 2141). Hauser also adds the draped charioteer in the Helios group from the Great Pergamene Altar relief (pictured in Baum., II, Pl. XXXIX, and pp. 1255–6). The general statement of W. Mueller (Quaestiones vestiariae, Goettingen, 1880, p. 44), nam aurigae semper fere longa tunica sola vestiti sunt, is, of course, correct.

1943 E. g., the statue in the Palazzo dei Conservatori to be mentioned infra, p. 276; also other examples in Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 536, 6 (in Rome: B. Com. Rom., I, 1888, Pl. XV) and 7 (in Athens: Jb., I, 1886, p. 173; Staïs, op. cit., p. 221). We see nude charioteers entering two four-horse chariots on a r.-f. lebes, formerly in the collection of Lucien Bonaparte, now in Munich: Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCLIV (below).

1944 Von Mach, no. 274; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 488, 7: A. Z., XVIII, 1860, pp. 1 f. (Friedrichs) and Pls. CXXXIII, CXXXIV; Bonner Jb., XXVI, Pl. IV. It is 4 ft. 7 in. tall and represents a boy of about 14.

1945 Friedrichs, though at first, because of the crown on the hair, interpreting it as a Bonus Eventus (A. Z., XVIII, 1860, pp. 1 f.), later (Beschr. d. Skulpt., no. 4, pp. 5–6) called it a charioteer.

1946 B. Com. Rom., XVI, 1888, Pls. XV, XVI, 1, 2 (pp. 335 f.); Joubin, pp. 134 f., and fig. 40; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 973 (restored on p. 557, fig. 29); Guide, 597 (restored on p. 442, fig. 28); Furtw., Mp., pp. 81–82; Mw., pp. 115–116; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 536, 6. Mentioned supra, p. 275, n. 7.

1947 Hamdy Bey and Th. Reinach, Une nécropole royale à Sidon, Pl. XXII, 2.

1948 Including the Hestia Giustiniani in the Museo Torlonia, Rome: B. B., 491; von Mach, 75; the so-called Aspasia head, with copies in Paris (Photo Giraudon, no. 1219) and Berlin (A. Z., XXXV, 1877, Pl. VIII, two views), and the Apollo-on-the-Omphalos in Athens (Pl. 7B); he assigns the later related Athena in the Villa Albani to Praxias, the pupil of Kalamis and contemporary of Pheidias: F. W., 524; Mp., p. 78, figs. 29 and 30 (head); Mw., pp. 112–113, figs. 19 and 20 (head). However, as Richardson points out, pp. 137 and 207, the Hestia bears a strong resemblance to the East gable figures at Olympia, especially to those of Sterope and Hippodameia, and to several female statues in Copenhagen: Arndt, La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, Pls. VII (= Joubin, p. 161, fig. 53), XXXVIII, and fig. 3 on p. 13.

1949 C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1896, pp. 178, 186, 362, 388, and Pls. I, II; A. A., 1896, pp. 173 f. (with fig.); Homolle, in Mon. Piot, IV, 1897, Pls. XV, XVI, pp. 169 f.; id., B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 579, 581–3; Fouilles de Delphes, IV, 1904, Pls. XLIX, L (4 views); Bulle, 199 and fig. 134 on p. 460; von Mach, 60; H. B. Walters, Art of the Anc. Greeks, 1906, Pl. XXVIII; Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 49 f. and Pls. VIII, IX; G. F. Hill, One Hundred Masterpieces of Sculpture, 1909, pp. 7–8 and Pl. V; Springer-Michaelis, p. 225, fig. 482; Robinson, Cat. Mus. Fine Arts in Boston, Suppl., pp. 1 f., no. 85; cast in British Museum, B. M. Sculpt., III, 2688; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 536, 1. It is 5 feet 10.75 inches high (A. H. Smith) or 1.80 meters (Bulle).

1950 See Svoronos, p. 131, n. 3.

1951 O. M. Washburn, Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., XXV, 1905, cols. 1358 f.; A. J. A., X, 1906, pp. 151–3; XII, 1908, pp. 198–208.

1952 P., X, 15.6.

1953 L. c., and Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., 1905, col. 1549.

1954 Lechat, Rev. Arch., XI, 1908, pp. 126 f., Furtw., Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1907, II, pp. 157 f., Studniczka, Jb., XXII, 1907, pp. 133 f., and others, support Washburn’s view.

1955 P., X, 9.7–8; cf. VI, 3.5, where Amphion is called the pupil of Ptolichos, the pupil of Kritios.

1956 So von Duhn, A. M., XXXI, 1906, pp. 421 f.; a conclusion also reached independently by E. A. Gardner, Sculpt., p. 51.

1957 So von Duhn, Gardner, and Mahler; the latter in Jh. oest. arch. Inst., III, 1900, pp. 142 f. Furtwaengler, l. c., found von Duhn’s view that the Charioteer is an original work of Pythagoras untenable. He also combated his interpretation of πολύζαλος as a proper name, preferring the suggestion of Washburn that it might be an adjective. However, in a former article (Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1897, pp. 129 f.) he had emphasized the similarity between the statue and a bronze statuette in London (B. M. Bronzes, 515 and Pl. XVI; Sitzb., l. c., Pl. V, two views) which he believed was almost certainly a product of Magna Græcia. He found the style of the Charioteer Ionic-Attic without Peloponnesian affiliations, and referred it to Amphion or to some unknown artist of the circle of Kritios and Nesiotes. For a similar view, see Homolle, Mon. Piot, IV, 1897, p. 207. Pottier (ap. Homolle, l. c.) assigned it to Kalamis. Cf. also Lechat, Pythagoras de Rhegion, 1905, p. 100.

1958 A. D. Keramopoullos, A. M., XXXIV, 1909, pp. 33 f. Homolle, op. cit., pp. 176 f., and O. Schroeder, A. A., 1902, pp. 12 f., had also referred it to Gelo’s dedication.

1959 P. 152.

1960 See G. F. Hill, l. c.

1961 Besides the Olympic victories already recorded, Hiero also won the chariot-race at Delphi in Pythiad 29 ( = 470 B. C.), and the horse-race there twice in Pythiads 26 and 27 ( = 482 and 478 B. C.); he also won a chariot-race probably at the Theban Iolaia in (?) 475 B. C.; Pindar celebrates the four victories in Pyth., I-III; Bergk, P. l. G.,5 I, pp. 175 f.

1962 P., VI, 14.4; he won either before Ol. 67 ( = 512 B. C.) or in Ols. 69 or 70 ( = 504 or 500 B. C.): Hyde, 126 and p. 52; Foerster, 778 (undated).

1963 He won κέλητι in Ols. 66 or 67 ( = 516 or 512 B. C.): P., VI, 13.9; Hyde, 120; Foerster, 129, 149a (two victories).

1964 They won in Ol. 68 ( = 508 B. C.): P., VI, 13.10; Hyde, 121; Foerster, 152.

1965 So Hyde, pp. 50–1.

1966 So Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 598.

1967 P., VI, 12.1.

1968 P., VI, 2.8.

1969 Xenombrotos won in Ol. (?) 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Hyde, 133 (following Robert, O. S., pp. 180–181); Foerster, 327; Xenodikos in Ol. (?) 84 ( = 444 B. C.): Hyde, 134; Foerster, 332.

1970 Inschr. v. Ol., 154; I. G. A., 552a; Robert, O. S., pp. 179–81. However, Kirchhoff referred this base to the statue of a runner: A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, p. 84; and Dittenberger to the victor D[amasi]ppos, who won in some running race at an unknown date: Foerster, 812. Robert read the mutilated inscription ἐλάσιππος (“horse-driving”) instead of the proper name Δαμάσιππος.

1971 H. N., XXXIV, 75 and 78 (celetizontes pueri).

1972 Pliny, XXXIV, 71.

1973 B. M. Vases, B 133; Gardiner, p. 461, fig. 169; see also a Panathenaic amphora pictured in Perrot-Chipiez, X, p. 129, fig. 92 (left).

1974 Gardiner, p. 459, fig. 167 (left). He won κέλητι in Ol. 106 ( = 356 B. C.): Plut., Alex., 3; Foerster, 360. Cf. a similar jockey on horseback on a coin of Tarentum: Head, Guide to the Principal Gold and Silver Coins ... in the British Museum, Pl. XXIV, 7.

1975 B. M. Vases, B 144; Gerhard, IV, Pl. CCXLVII (lower half); Gardiner, p. 243, fig. 37.

1976 See supra, p. 13 and n. 1.

1977 Mentioned in J. H. S., XIV, 1894, p. 66 (H. Stuart Jones).

1978 III, i, p. 200, fig. 3846 (from Dubois-Maisonneuve, Introd. à l’Étude des vases, Pl. XLIII); others are there mentioned, e. g., Mon. d. I., I, 1829–33, Pl. XXII, 3b and II, 1834–38, Pl. XXXII (bottom).

1979 B. C. H., V, 1881, pp. 436 f., with figure (Collignon). This and the following three reliefs are mentioned by Rouse, p. 176.

1980 F. W., 1206, formerly interpreted as Alexander and Boukephalos.

1981 Von Sybel, Kat. d. Skulpt. zu Athen, 1881, no. 307.

1982 Von Duhn, in A. Z., XXXV, 1877, pp. 167, no. 89 (cf. no. 88).

1983 On the North frieze, Michaelis, Der Parthenon, 1870, Tafelbd., slabs XXIV-XLII; B. M. Sculpt., I, 325, pp. 175 f.; West frieze, Michaelis, slabs II, IV, VI-VII, IX-XI; B. M. Sculpt., 326, pp. 179–80; South frieze, Michaelis, slabs I, III, X-XVI, XXII-XXIII; B. M. Sculpt., 327, pp. 181–85.

1984 C. I. A., IV, 2, 373, line 99; cf. Studniczka, Arch. Eph., 1887, p. 146.

1985 Vit. X Orat., 42 (p. 839b); he says that it stood in the ball-court of the maidens known as arrephoroi. Pausanias, I, 18.8, also mentions a statuette of Isokrates on a column near the Olympieion.

1986 Carapanos, Dodone et ses ruines, 1877, p. 183 and Pl. XIII, 1; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 527, 1.

1987 Arndt-Amelung, Einzelaufnahmen, no. 242.

1988 Dickins, nos. 700, found in 1887 (height 1.12 meters, length of fragment 0.76 meter) and 697 (height 1.13 meters); Winter, Archaische Reiterbilder von der Akropolis, Jb., VIII, 1893, pp. 135–156, figs. 13a and b, 14a and b; Collignon, I, pp. 358–9, figs. 180 and 181; Schrader, Arch. Marmor-Skulpt. im Akropolis-Museum zu Athen, 1909, p. 81, figs. 72–3 (assuming a Chian sculptor for no. 700); B. B., 459; no. 700 = Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 639, fig. 327; 697 = ibid., p. 637, fig. 326. Winter, in the article cited, gives fourteen cuts of such archaic horse monuments.

1989 See preliminary account by Th. Reinach in C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1919, (Jan.-Feb.), pp. 56–59 and fig. on p. 58. It is 49 centimeters high.

1990 J. Sieveking, Die Bronz. d. Samml. Loeb, 1913, p. 70, Pl. 29; it is 0.12 meter high. An exact copy is in the Cabinet des Médailles in Paris; Babelon et Blanchet, Cat. des bronzes ant. de la Bibliothèque Nationale, 1893, no. 893. For further examples of horsemen in bronze and marble, see Reinach, Rép., II, 2, pp. 527–533.

1991 The race is described by P., V, 9.2; cf. Plutarch, Quaest. conviv., V, 2 (675 C.) For possible examples in sculpture, see Reinach, Rép., II, 2, pp. 532–3.

1992 E. g., on a silver stater of the early third century B. C. from Tarentum in the British Museum: Gardiner, p. 462, fig. 170 (right).

1993 Les ἱππεῖς athéniens, 1902 (Extrait des Mémoires de l’Acad. des Inscr. et Belles-Lettres, Vol. XXXVII). Cf. Gardiner, pp. 71–2.

1994 Heralds (κήρυκες), trumpeters (σαλπισταί), flutists (αὐληταί), cithara-players (κιθαρισταί), and those who sang with them (κιθαρῳδοί), are mentioned as victors in many inscriptions: e. g., at Oropos, C. I. G. G. S., I, nos. 419–20; at Tanagra, ibid., 540; at Plataiai, ibid., 1667; at Thespiai, ibid., 1760 and 1773; on Mt. Helikon, ibid., 1776; at Akraiphia, ibid., 2727; at Koroneia, ibid., 2871; etc. Cf. Frazer, III, p. 628. Also on Samos: see inscription discussed in J. H. S., VII, 1886, p. 150.

1995 Afr.; Foerster, nos. 302 (Timaios) and 303 (Krates); they are not mentioned by Pausanias in his account of the introduction of various contests at Olympia, V, 8.6 f. Lucian mentions the contests of heralds at Olympia: de morte Peregrini, 32.

1996 V, 22.1.

1997 Nestor (F. H. G., II, p. 485*, quoted by Athenæus, X, 7, p. 415a) says that he was periodonikes ten times, while Pollux (IV, 89) says seven times. For the dates of the victories, which fell some time between Ols. (?) 113 and 122 ( = 328 and 292 B. C.), see Foerster, nos. 395, 399, 402, 404, 406, 411, 415, 422, 425, and 428.

1998 Athen., X, 7 (p. 414e).

1999 Amarantos of Alexandria, apud Athen., l. c., says that he was 3.5 ells in height; Pollux, l. c., four ells. Athenæus relates examples of his voracity.

2000 For the inscribed basis of his statue at Olympia, see Inschr. v. Ol., 232; cf. Foerster, 815–19 (undated). The inscription appears to belong to the first century A. D.

2001 B. S. A., XIII, 1906–7, pp. 146–7 (Dickins) and fig. 3; cf. A. J. A., XIII, 1909, p. 83 and fig. 6. It is 0.131 meter high.

2002 B. M. Bronzes, 223 (quoted by Dickins, l. c.).

2003 See P., X, 9.2.

2004 Fragm. 65 (= F. H. G., I, 207, quoted by Strabo, VI, 1.9, C. 260). For the story about his victory, see Timaios, Strabo, l. c., Clemens Alexandr., Protrept., I, p. 2, and poetically in A. G., VI, 54 (Paulus Silentiarius), and IX, 584.

2005 Cf. Reisch, p. 52.

2006 IX, 30. 2 f.

2007 In another passage, X, 7. 2, Pausanias says that Thamyris won a prize for singing at the Pythian games; he also mentions a painting of him by Polygnotos: X, 30. 8. On Thamyris, cf. also P., IV, 33. 3 and 7.

2008 For the story of the poet Arion and the dolphin, see P. III, 25. 7.

2009 In X, 7. 4, Pausanias says that Sakadas won in flute-playing at Delphi three times, the first in the third year of Ol. 48 ( = 585 B. C.). In another passage, II, 22.8, he says that Sakadas was the first to play the “Pythian tune” on the flute. For a description of this tune, see Pollux, IV, 84, and Strabo, IX, 3.10 (C. 421).

2010 XIV, 24 (p. 629a).

2011 C. I. A., I, 357.

2012 Froehner, Notice, no. 16; Clarac, 122, 342; M. W., I, Pl. 13, 46; etc.

2013 A. M., XII, 1887, pp. 378 f. (Wolters) and Pl. XII.

2014 V, 7.10; cf. Plutarch, de Musica, 26. Athenæus, IV, 39 (p. 154a), quotes from the first book of the catalogue of Olympic victors by Eratosthenes to the effect that the Etruscans used to box to the music of the flute.

2015 P., V, 17. 10.

2016 Ph., 55.

2017 Plut., l. c.

2018 See Pinder, Ueber den Fuenfkampf d. Hellenen, 1867, pp. 97 f.

2019 He won sometime between Ols. (?) 58 and 62 ( = 548 and 532 B. C.): P., VI, 14.9–10; Hyde, 128b and p. 52. He also won six victories at Delphi and fluted at the pentathlon: cf. P., l. c. and Ph., 55.

2020 So Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 604. An example, on the other hand, of a very small man erecting a large statue is that of the poet Lucius Accius, whose statue was set up in the temple of the Camenae in Rome: Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 19; cf. Bernouilli, Roem. Ikonogr., I, p. 289.

2021 E. g., to Aristotle of Stagira: P., VI, 4.8; Hyde, 41b; to Gorgias of Leontini: P., VI, 17.7; Hyde, 184a; Inschr. v. Ol., 293; etc.

2022 The first part of the present chapter appeared under the caption, Lysippus as a Worker in Marble, in A. J. A., 2d Series, XI, 1907, pp. 396–416, and figs. 1–6; the second part, entitled, The Head of a Youthful Heracles from Sparta, appeared ibid., XVIII, 1914, pp. 462–478, and fig. 1. Both parts have been rewritten. The author is indebted to the former editor-in-chief, Dr. James M. Paton, for permission to use the original papers in writing the present chapter.

2023 First noted by Homolle, Gaz. B.-A., XII, 1894, III Sér., pp. 452 f.; id., B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 592 f.; id., ibid., XXIII, 1899, pp. 421 f.; id., Rev. Arch., 1900, p. 383; P. Gardner, J. H. S., XXV, 1905, pp. 234 f. (The Apoxyomenos of Lysippos). For a good summary and a new identification of the figures of the group (without discussing the style), see Miss E. M. Gardner and K. K. Smith, A. J. A., XIII, 1909, pp. 447 f. (Pl. XIV and 21 text-cuts).

2024 The group was composed of nine statues: three of athletes, those of the brothers Agias, a pancratiast, Telemachos, a wrestler, and Agelaos, a boy runner; four statesmen, and the son of the dedicator, and one unknown: B. C. H., XXI, pp. 592 f.; Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1913, III, no. 4, pp. 45–46.

2025 Gaz. B.-A., XII, 1894, p. 452: “un des meilleures exemples de la manière de Lysippe.”

2026 B. C. H., XXI, 1897, p. 598.

2027 B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, pp. 470–1: “L’auteur de la statue d’Agias ... ne peut être cherché que dans l’école de Lysippe ou dans sa dépendance immédiate....” On p. 472 he says that in the Agias we have a statue “qui approche aussi près que possible d’un original de Lysippe.”

2028 Ein delphisches Weihgeschenck, 1900; for the inscription referring to the statue of Agias, see B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 592–593. Preuner’s ingenious theory was based on a combination of the inscriptions on the bases of the group.

2029 Fouilles de Delphes, IV, 1904, Pls. LXIII (full length), LXIV (head); statue of Sisyphos I, Pl. LXV; Sisyphos II, LXVIII (= B. C. H., XXIII, Pl. IX); Agelaos (= B. C. H., XXIII, Pl. IX). For the Agias, see also B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, Pls. X (head, two views) and XI (statue); von Mach, 234; Springer-Michaelis, p. 336, fig. 596; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 549, 11 (before the discovery of the lower legs). The name is to be spelled either Agias or Hagias; the former has now become usual.

2030 Baron Otto Magnus von Stackelberg (1760–1836) visited Pharsalos in September 1811.

2031 In the Braccio Nuovo: Amelung, Vat., I, p. 86, no. 67 and Pl. XI; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, no. 23; Guide, I, no. 31; B. B., 281 (head = 487); Bulle, 62 (head = 213); and reconstruction in a bronzed cast on a high pedestal in the Museum of the University of Erlangen, ibid., pp. 117–18, fig. 22, a, b, c (cf. Muenchner Jb. f. bild. Kunst., 1906, p. 36); von Mach, 235; Baum., II, p. 843, fig. 925; Mon. d. I., V, 1849–53, Pl. XIII; Rayet, II, Pl. 47 (text by Collignon); Overbeck, II, p. 157, fig. 182; Collignon, II, p. 415, fig. 218; Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., Pl. XXXIV and pp. 107–10; Springer-Michaelis, p. 337, fig. 603; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 546, 2; Clarac, V, 848B, 2168A; F. W., 1264; etc.

2032 Cf. F. W., p. 449, paragraph 2 of the notes. E. Braun (Annali, L, 1850, pp. 223 f.) first identified the statue with Lysippos’ Apoxyomenos; cf. also Brunn (Bulletino d. Inst., 1851, p. 91).

2033 Cf. Becker, Gallus,3 III, p. 108; and especially J. Kueppers, Der Apoxyomenos des Lysippos, in Progr. des Bonner Gymnas., 1869.

2034 H. N., XXXIV, 62.

2035 Ibid., XXXIV, 65.

2036 Especially its surface modeling was supposed to confirm Pliny’s criticism of the master: op. cit., XXXIV, 65.

2037 One Hundred Masterpieces of Sculpture, 1909, p. 39.

2038 Unless we except the Athenian torso to be mentioned infra, p. 290, n. 4.

2039 Cf. Tarbell, Congress of Arts and Sciences, St. Louis, 1904, III, p. 614.

2040 De Alex. Magn. fort. aut virt., Orat. II, 2 (p. 335, b, c); S. Q., no. 1479.

2041 J. H. S., XXIII, p. 130, n. 28; it is also quoted by Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 220–1.

2042 See Ada Maviglia, L’attività artistica di Lisippo ricostruita su nuova base, 1914. For the Uffizi statue, see supra, pp. 136–137.

2043 In his discussion of the Athenian torso, which he believed was another copy of the original of the Vatican statue: A. M., II, 1877, pp. 57–8, Pl. IV; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 819, 1. This torso had the left leg free, while the Vatican one had the right one free; it is also dry and hard in its technique.

2044 That of Emil Braun, in Annali, L, 1850, p. 249.

2045 E. g., Loewy, R. M., XVI, 1901, p. 392. Furtwaengler, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1904, II, p. 379, n. 1, says that the Agias “dem Lysipp gaenzlich ferne steht,” and assigns it to an Athenian artist.

2046 Especially the Gardner brothers: P. Gardner, J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, pp. 130–131 (where he identifies the Apoxyomenos with the Perixyomenos of Daïppos, the son or pupil of Lysippos, a work mentioned by Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 87); ibid., XXV, 1905, pp. 234 f., especially p. 236 (on pp. 255 f. he dates the Apoxyomenos just after 300 B. C., though ultimately deriving it from the school of Lysippos); id., Class. Rev., 1913, p. 56; E. A. Gardner, Sculpt., p. 222; Hbk., p. 443. T. L. Shear, A. J. A., XX, 1916, p. 292, makes the Agias the centre of his treatment of Lysippos. Still others who think that the two statues can not be by the same sculptor are cited by Wolters, Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1913, III, no. 4, p. 44, n. 3. See also F. Paulson, Delphi, 1920, pp. 288–289.

2047 E. g., Collignon, Lysippe, p. 31; Amelung, R. M., XX, 1905, pp. 144 f.; id., Vat., I, p. 87 (where he says that the Agias offers the closest analogies in style to the Apoxyomenos); Michaelis, Die archaeol. Entdeckungen des 19ten Jahrh., 1906, p. 276; A Century of Archæological Discoveries (transl. of preceding, by Bettina Kahnweiler, 1908), p. 323; id., Springer-Michaelis, p. 335; for others, cf. Wolters, l. c., n. 2.

2048 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 61 (= S. Q. no. 1444), quotes Douris as saying that Lysippos was the pupil of no artist. He tells how the painter Eupompos advised the sculptor as a boy naturam ipsam imitandam, esse non artificem. Such a judgment, of course, can not be literally true, as every artist is to a large extent a child of his age and circumstances. Cf. Jex-Blake, pp. xlviii f., for the anecdotal character of Pliny’s statement. That the statement comes, perhaps, from Eupompos is the view of Kalkmann, Quellen der Kunstgeschichte des Plinius, 1898, p. 165.

2049 B. C. H., XXI, 1897, p. 598; id., XXIII, 1899, p. 471; cf. T. L. Shear, A. J. A., l. c. On the relation of Skopas to Lysippos, see P. Gardner, J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, pp. 126 f., and E. A. Gardner, Sculpt., p. 198. The influence of Skopas is especially observable in Lysippos’ treatment of forehead and eyes and in the consequent intensity of expression.

2050 Jb., XXV, 1910, pp. 172–3.

2051 See Wolters, l. c., pp. 45 f. Most scholars have followed the contention of Preuner that the statue at Pharsalos was the older: e. g., Kern, I. G., IX, 2, 249.

2052 Cf. Hill, op. cit., p. 39.

2053 Mp., p. 364 and n. 2; Mw., p. 597 and n. 3; for the Berlin athlete, see Beschr. d. ant. Skulpt., no. 471; for a copy of the Berlin head in the Museo delle Terme, Rome, see Helbig, Fuehrer, II, 1380 bis; Jb., XXVI, 1911, p. 278, n. 1; and cf. R. M., XX, 1905, pp. 147 f., figs. 5–7; for the Dresden statues, see Hettner, Bildw. d. kgl. Antiken-samml., nos. 245–6; one of these has a beardless head, which is analogous to a more beautiful head in Copenhagen: La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, no. 1072. Of this head, which is earlier than that of the Apoxyomenos, Furtwaengler says that it is “one of the finest and most purely Lysippan works in existence.” In Mp., p. 338, he mentions a bronze statuette of Hermes from Athens now in Berlin (Invent. 6305) “in the swinging posture of the Apoxyomenos,” and says that it is of the purest Lysippan style.

2054 J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, pp. 239–40 and Pl. XVI; Duetschke, IV, 151.

2055 La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, no. 240; Mahler ascribes this work to Lysippos: Polykl. u. s. Sch., 1902, p. 153, n. 1.

2056 B. M. Sculpt., 1747, p. 102; Mp., p. 298 and fig. 126; Mw., pp. 515 and 517 and fig. 93; cf. Mrs. Strong, in Strena Helbigiana, 1900, p. 297. It is 6 ft. 8 in. high without the plinth (Smith).

2057 A better copy is the torso in the Louvre, Photo Giraudon, no. 1289; a head is in the Lateran, no. 891.

2058 De olymp. Stat., Halle, 1902, and enlarged, 1903, pp. 27 f.

2059 Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LIV, 3–4, and Textbd., p. 209, fig. 237; Ausgr. v. Ol., V, 1881, Pl. XX.

2060 VI, 2.1.

2061 The head is still exhibited at Olympia in the same room as the Hermes.

2062 A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, p. 114; cf., Ausgr. v. Ol., V, pp. 13–14.

2063 Olympia^2, 1886, pp. 343 f. and Pl. XVI (right).

2064 Restauration d’Olympie, 1889, p. 137.

2065 In Roscher, Lex., I, 2, s. v. Herakles, p. 2166.

2066 E. g., Graef, R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 189–226, especially p. 217; von Sybel, in Luetzow’s Zeitschr. fuer bild. Kunst, N. F., II, pp. 253 f.

2067 Bildw. v. Ol., pp. 209 and n. 1.

2068 B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, pp. 456–7.

2069 Polyklet u. seine Schule, p. 149.

2070 Preuner (op. cit., p. 12) dates the dedication 339–331 B. C.; Homolle (B. C. H., XVIII, 1899, p. 440) more closely, 338–334 B. C. Preuner dates Agias’ victory about 450 B. C.

2071 Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., p. 208, gives these measurements: height with neck, 0.270 meter; height of head alone, 0.215 meter; breadth of face, 0.127 meter; height of face, 0.155 meter.

2072 H. N., XXXIV, 65.

2073 The hair, however, of the Apoxyomenos is an exception, for, even if worked out with some care, it is devoid of expression.

2074 The use of the drill is seen in the Praxitelian Hermes, but is not seen in the Tegea heads, nor is it common in the first half of the fourth century B. C.: cf. Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 309.

2075 So Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., p. 208 (though formerly in A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, p. 114, he called it a pancratiast with Herakles features); Reisch, p. 43, n. 1; Flasch, in Baum., p. 1104 00; Furtwaengler, in Roscher’s Lex., s. v. Herakles, I, 2, p. 2166; etc.

2076 See pp. 75 and 94.

2077 E. g., Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., pp. 208 f.

2078 Supra, pp. 167 f.

2079 Michaelis, pp. 451 f., no. 61; Specimens, I, Pl. XL; Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 297, fig. 125, Mw., p. 516, fig. 92; Graef, R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 189 f., and Pls. VIII-IX; Springer-Michaelis, p. 336, fig. 600; Clarac, V, 788, 1973; etc. It was found in 1790 in the ruins of Hadrian’s villa at Tivoli.

2080 VI, 1.4.

2081 VI, 2.1.

2082 VI, 5.1.

2083 VI, 4.6.

2084 VI, 17.3.

2085 East of the temple of Zeus; see infra, Ch. VIII, p. 342, n. 4.

2086 See list in Hyde, pp. 3 f. Here nos. 91 and 136 refer to the same victor.

2087 VI, 1.3.

2088 Bildw. v. Ol., p. 209. See Plans A and B.

2089 P., VI, 1.4.

2090 P., VI, 1.6.

2091 P., VI, 3.2.

2092 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 166 (Troilos), 160 (Kyniska), 172 (Sophios). See Plans A and B.

2093 This fact, together with its place of finding not far from the Great Gymnasion, led Treu to believe that the statue once adorned the interior of the exercise-place of the athletes: Bildw. v. Ol., p. 209.

2094 The Praxitelian Hermes similarly shows an unfinished treatment of the back hair; in fact the entire back of the statue is carelessly done (Bildw. v. Ol., p. 203, fig. 233), though chisel-rasps show a subsequent attempt to better it. This condition led Treu at first (Ausgrab. v. Ol., V, p. 10; followed by Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 308, n. 7; Mw., p. 531, n. 3) to believe that the statue was made at Olympia with regard to its position in the Heraion. Later (Bildw. v. Ol., pp. 204–5) Treu believed that this merely indicated that the statue was intended to stand against a wall; and since the present base is not the original one (see Bulle, apud Purgold, Ergebnisse v. Ol., II, pp. 157 f.), that the statue was not originally meant for the temple, but was moved thither, perhaps in Nero’s day; cf. also Wernicke, Jb., IX, 1894, pp. 108 f. For the Hermes, mentioned by P., V, 17.3, and found in the cella of the Heraion on May 8, 1877, see Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pls. XLIX-LIII; Textbd., pp. 194 f. and figs. 225–234.

2095 However, Lysippos made the statue of Polydamas of Skotoussa, who won the pankration in Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C.), many years after the victory: see P., VI, 5.1; Hyde, 47; Foerster, 279; H. L. von Urlichs, Ueber Griech. Kunstschriftsteller, Diss. inaug., 1887, p. 26.

2096 P. 27.

2097 Inschr. v. Ol., 166; cf. P., VI, 1. 4 (both victories wrongly in Ol. 102); Hyde, 6; Foerster, 338 and 345.

2098 Date given by P., VI, 4.2. See Hyde, 37; Foerster, 349, 353, 359.

2099 For the earlier dating of Lysippos, see Winter, Jb., VII, 1892, p. 169 (who begins the artist’s activity with the seventies), Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., p. 211, and Milchhoefer, Arch. Stud. fuer H. Brunn, p. 66, n. 2; see also Hyde, pp. 26–7, (who gives the sculptor’s artistic activity as Ols. 103–115 = 368–320 B. C.); E. A. Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 216–217, who dates his activity 366–316 B. C.; P. Gardner, infra, next note.

2100 J. H. S., XXV, 1905, pp. 243–249; on p. 245 he says: “There is some evidence for work by Lysippos at a later date than B. C. 320. And if he were born, as seems probable, about B. C. 390, he may well have accepted commissions, to be executed mainly by his pupils, for several years after 320.”

2101 P., VI, 4, 6–7; Hyde, 41; Foerster, 384 and 392, who, on the basis of I. G. B., p. 75, to no. 93b, dates the victories Ols. (?) 112 and 113 ( = 332 and 328 B. C.).

2102 L. c., p. 246.

2103 P., VI, 17, 3; Hyde, 175; Foerster, 390 and 397 (= Ols. ? 113 and 114, = 328 and 324 B. C. on the basis of I. G. B., p. 75).

2104 E. g., Furtwaengler, who gives 350–300 B. C. as the period of his artistic activity: Mw., p. 523, n. 3.

2105 B. C. H., XXI, 1897, p. 598 (and copied in XXIII, 1899, p. 422). The Agias is but slightly later than the Hermes, if we accept Furtwaengler’s dating for the latter, about 343 B. C.: Mp., pp. 307–308; Mw., pp. 529–531. Brunn had regarded the Hermes as a youthful work of Praxiteles: Deutsche Rundschau, VIII, 1882, pp. 188 f. Purgold, Aufsaetze E. Curtius gewidmet, pp. 233 f., and S. Reinach, Gaz. Arch., 1887, p. 282, n. 9, had assigned it to the year 363 B. C.

2106 H. N., XXXIV, 37.

2107 Ibid., 61 f.

2108 The two are contrasted in XXXV, 156: [Varro] laudat et Pasitelen qui plasticen matrem caela turae et statuariae scalpturaeque (= sculpturae) dixit, etc. Cf. infra, Ch. VII, p. 324, n. 4. They are also contrasted in XXXVI, 15. Sculptura is the modern title of Bk. XXXVI.

2109 II, p. 150. See also Bulle, p. 137. Amongst recent writers who oppose this view are Koepp, Ueber d. Bildnisse Alex. d. Gr., p. 29, and Preuner, op. cit., pp. 46–7.

2110 Thus the Sikyonian Kanachos worked in marble, bronze, gold and ivory, and cedar-wood: Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 50 and 75; XXXVI, 41; P., II, 10.5; IX, 10.2; etc.

2111 F. Spiro, Woch. f. kl. Philologie, XXI, 1904, col. 792 (in his review of my de olymp. Stat. a Paus. commem.).

2112 See Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. LV, 1–3; Textbd., pp. 209 f.

2113 This is substantially Preuner’s view: op. cit., pp. 39–40 and 46–47; the later view of P. Wolters that the Delphi group was older than the statue at Pharsalos has already been mentioned supra, p. 292; see Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1913, III, no. 4, pp. 44–45.

2114 In A. J. A., XI, 1907, pp. 414–16, I argued that the statue of Agias was an original and not a copy; in the present work this view is somewhat modified.

2115 So Homolle, B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, pp. 445 and 459; S. Reinach, C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1900, pp. 8 f.; H. Lechat, Rev. des Études anciennes, II, 1900, pp. 195 f.; Gardner, Hbk., p. 441; P. Gardner, J. H. S., XXIII, p. 127; cf. Preuner, op. cit., p. 38; etc. Homolle, l. c., p. 471, says that if the Agias is a copy, “c’est celui d’une copie authentique immédiate, contemporaine du modèle.” The view that the Delphi group was not original is well expressed by P. Wolters, l. c., p. 50, who says that “niemand die delphischen Statuen fuer Originale des Lysippos erklaeren wird.”

2116 Hbk., p. 441, n. 2; only two small marble props, reaching to the calves, support the ankles.

2117 This treatment gives the impression of texture and profusion; see Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 309.

2118 Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 69–71 (list of bronze works).

2119 Mechanically exact copies were unknown in the fourth century B. C. Furtwaengler has shown that such copies began to be made in the second century B. C., or possibly at the end of the third, and became common only in the first: Ueber Statuencopien im Altertum, 1896.

2120 It is mentioned by Pausanias, IX, 35.3, and the Surname “Oulios” by Strabo, XIV, 1.6 (C. 635); it is described by Plutarch, de Musica, 14 ( = 1136 A), and Macrobius, Sat., I, 1713.

2121 Schol. on Pindar, Ol., XIV, 16, Boeckh, p. 293.

2122 Bekker, Anecd. gr., p. 299, 8–9; cf. Athen., X, 24 (p. 424 f.). It appears on Athenian coins also: see Frazer, V, p. 174, figs. 8–9.

2123 P., VIII, 46.3; Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 75. Cf. Brunn, I, pp. 74 f.

2124 P., IX, 10.2.

2125 Op. cit. The transference to the minor arts—reliefs, coins, gems and vase-paintings—was, of course, especially common at all times. See also F. Hauser, Die neu-attischen Reliefs, 1889, and Flasch, A. Z., XXXVI, 1878, p. 119.

2126 P., VI, 8.5 and VII, 27.5. He won the pankration in Ol. 94 ( = 404 B. C.): Hyde, 81; Foerster, 286.

2127 B. C. H., XXI, 1897, pp. 616–20 (Homolle).

2128 See Amelung, R. M., IX, 1894, pp. 162 f. and Pl. VII. Cf., Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., pp. 190–191, and fig. 222 B, on pp. 188–189.

2129 J. H. S., XXIX, 1909, pp. 151–2, fig. 1 a and b (F. H. Marshall).

2130 XIII, 1909, pp. 151–7, with Pl. IV and figs. 1–3 (A head of Heracles in the style of Scopas.)

2131 Ibid., pp. 156 and 157.

2132 Museum of Fine Arts Bulletin, VIII, no. 46 (Aug., 1910), p. 26.

2133 II, 10.1.

2134 F. Imhoof-Blumer and P. Gardner, p. 30 (reprinted from articles which appeared in the J. H. S., VI-VIII, 1885–1887).

2135 Discussed by Graef, R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 189–226. For the coin, see ibid., pp. 212–14.

2136 For the two heads of heroes, see Kabbadias, pp. 154 f., nos. 179, 180; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 33; B. B., no. 44; Collignon, II, pp. 239, figs. 118 and 119; Ant. Denkm., I, 3, 1888, Pl. XXXV, 2–3, 4–5 (from casts); Milchhoefer, A. M., IV, 1879, pp. 133–4, nos. 24–25; G. Treu, A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, pp. 98 f.; Luetzow, Zeitschr. f. bild. Kunst, XVII, 1882, pp. 322 f.; Baum., III, pp. 1667 f. and figs. 1733 and 1734; von Sybel, Weltgesch. d. Kunst, pp. 255 f.; Springer-Michaelis, p. 306, figs. 544, a, b; Gardner, Hbk., p. 412, fig. 105; von Mach, 469.

2137 VIII, 45.6–7; see Mendel, B. C. H., XXV, 1901, pp. 257 f., and Pls. IV, V (= head of Atalanta?), VI (= torso of Atalanta?), VII, VIII (= heads of Herakles); Gardner, Hbk., p. 416, fig. 106, has reconstructed the Atalanta from Pls. IV and VI just mentioned.

2138 L. c., p. 259. The head has been restored by a German sculptor, and the chin appears to have been made too retreating: see Encyl. Brit., 11th ed., vol. XII, s. v. “Greek Art,” Pl. III, fig. 63.

2139 From his Atalanta of Tegea, in J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, pp. 172–3, quoted in part by Dr. Bates, l. c., pp. 155–6.

2140 It was chiefly the preponderance of the lower part of the face over the upper, in consequence of the large chin and strongly marked cheek-bones, that led Treu to predicate Peloponnesian rather than Attic influence in the Tegea heads: A. M., VI, 1881, p. 408. He found them Polykleitan in character, as did also Graef, l. c., p. 210, Furtwaengler, Mp., p. 523, and Collignon, II, p. 238. L. R. Farnell, however, long ago combated the theory of Peloponnesian influence, and found analogies in fifth-century Attic works of the time of Pheidias, as well as in works from the beginning of the fourth century B. C.: see J. H. S., VII, 1886, pp. 114 f.

2141 Descriptiones stat., B (in Philostrati opera, ed. Kayser, p. 891). He also says (ibid.) that Skopas ὥσπερ ἔκ τινος ἐπιπνοίας κινηθεὶς εἰς τὴν τοῦ ἀγάλματος δημιουργίαν τὴν θεοφορίαν ἐφῆκε. The words with which Diodoros (Fragm. 1, Bk. XXVI) characterized Praxiteles, as ὁ καταμίξας ἄκρως τοῖς λιθίνοις ἔργοις τὰ τῆς ψυχῆς πάθη, apply much better to Skopas, for Praxiteles’ “emotions of the soul” are mood and temperament rather than emotion and passion.

2142 B. C. H., XXV, 1901, Pls. IV-V.

2143 The same overhanging masses of flesh, which we see in the male heads, are, however, visible in several other female heads attributed to Skopas: e. g., in the colossal one called Artemisia from the Eastern pediment of the Mausoleion: Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LIX; in the head of an Aphrodite found in the sea off Laurion: J. H. S., XV, 1895, pp. 194f. and fig. (Aphrodite ?); in the head of a goddess found south of the Akropolis (and in the copy of it in Berlin): Gardner, Hbk., p. 457, fig. 119; and in the Dresden statuette of a Mænad: Treu, Mélanges Perrot, Pl. V; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LII; etc.; they are also plainly visible in the Demeter of Knidos: Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LIII; etc. These heads are discussed by Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 190f., and are ascribed by him to Skopas.

2144 J. H. S., XXVI, 1906, p. 174. Gardner (ibid.) does not explain this contrast in expression between the Atalanta and the surrounding heroes on the analogy of the contrast in the calmness of Apollo among the struggling Lapiths from the Olympia pediment, since the action in the torso of Atalanta shows that she was no mere spectator. He finds the explanation rather in the sex and youth of the heroine; for this reason he thinks that the sculptor did not represent her as sharing equally with the others the passion of the combat. He finds a truer analogy in the contrast between calm and passion in the Lapiths and Centaurs of the Parthenon metopes, where the human and bestial are thus distinguished; just so the heroine-goddess is here distinguished from her human companions. He also supposes that Skopas was not ready thus early in his career (just after 395 B. C., when the temple of Athena Alea was destroyed by fire) to apply his new extreme of expression to female heads. However, it must not be overlooked that these male heads—because of their marked individuality—presuppose a more mature genius, and so can just as well be assigned to the period of the Arkadian revival of 370 B. C. It has recently been seriously disputed whether the Atalanta should be assigned at all to the Eastern pediment, where the French excavators placed it; thus Cultrera has looked upon it as an akroterion figure, while Thiersch and Neugebauer have identified it with a single figure representing Nike. See Cultrera, Atti dell’ Accad. dei Lincei, 1910, pp. 22f.; H. Thiersch, Zum Problem des Tegeatempels, Jb., XXVIII, 1913, p. 270; Neugebauer, Studien ueber Skopas, Leipsic, 1913; the latter has argued that the head and torso do not belong together, while Dugas has maintained the older view, that the turn and position of the neck fit the torso: Rev. de l’art anc. et mod., 1911, pp. 9f.

2145 The effect in the Tegea heads is heightened by the abrupt transition from the brow to the socket—the outer end of the upper lid being almost hidden.

2146 Kabbadias, I, p. 416, no. 869; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 168 f. and fig.; Conze, Griech. Grabreliefs, IX, 1897, no. 1055 and Pl. CCXI; B. B., 469; Bulle, 267; von Mach, 369; P. Gardner, Sculptured Tombs of Hellas, 1896, Pl. XIV and p. 152; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LXV and p. 208; Graef, R. M., IV, 1889, pp. 199 f.; von Sybel, Weltgesch. d. Kunst, fig. 204; id., Zeitschr. f. bild. Kunst, N. F., II, p. 293; cf. Wolters, A. M., XVIII, 1893, p. 6. It is 1.68 meters in height and 1.07 in breadth (Staïs). The likeness of the head of the athlete in this relief to that of the Agias is striking.

2147 It was formerly in the Sala di Meleagro, but was later removed to the Sala degli animali; Helbig, Fuehrer, I, 128, and Nachtrag; Guide, I, p. 78, no. 133; Amelung, Vat., II, p. 33, no. 10, and Pls. II and XII; B. B., 386; von Mach, 216; id., Greek Sculpture, Its Spirit and Principles, 1903, pp. 279 f.; Bulle, p. 484, fig. 145; Ant. Denkm., I, 4, 1889, Pl. XL, 1a, 1b (head); Graef, R. M., IV, pp. 218 f.; Reinach, Rép., 1, 479, 2; Clarac, 805, 2021. It is 2.10 meters high (Amelung).

2148 De olymp. Stat., p. 28.

2149 Mp., 296 f.; cf. Homolle, B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, p. 450, n. 2. Furtwaengler thought that the head was Attic and believed that it was the direct successor of the Munich Oil-pourer (Pl. 11), the Standing Diskobolos of the Vatican (Pl. 6), the Florence Apoxyomenos (Pl. 12), and analogous to the Ilissos relief (Fig. 74), two bronze heads from Herculaneum (a = F. W., 1302, and Comparetti e de Petra, La Villa Ercol., Pl. VII, 3; b = ibid., Pl. X, 2), and other works; Graef, op. cit., p. 199, and Gardner, Sculpt., pp. 198–9, regard it as Skopasian; Kalkmann, Die Proport. d. Gesichts in d. gr. Kunst, 53stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 60, n. 3, believes that it shows Polykleitan influence.

2150 Ancient Marbles in Great Britain, p. 451.

2151 P. Gardner, J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, p. 128 (cf. XXV, 1895, p. 240), has called it “definitely a Lysippic work”; similarly Cultrera, Una Statua di Ercole, Mem. della R. Accad. dei Lincei, p. 188; recently, T. L. Shear, A. J. A., XX, 1916, pp. 297–298.

2152 Op. cit., pp. 219 f.

2153 Von Mach, 214; Reinach, Rép., I, 484, 1; another in Copenhagen: Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., Pl. XXXII (opp. p. 98); a head is also in the Ny-Carlsberg collection there: La Glypt. Ny-Carlsberg, no. 362 and Pl. 100.

2154 Ant. Denkm., I, 4, 1889, Pl. XL, 2a, 2b, p. 29 (Petersen); Collignon, II, p. 250, fig. 127; Bulle, 212 and fig. 144, on p. 481; Furtw., Mp., Pl. XV. For the Apollo torso, see M. D., I, no. 215.

2155 Mentioned in Not. Scav., 1895, p. 196, and figs. 1–2, and in R. M., X, p. 92 (Petersen); briefly described by R. Norton, Harvard Graduates’ Magazine, VIII, 1900 (June), pp. 485 f.; von Mach, 215; Reinach, Rép., II, 2, 555, 6. Cf. A. J. A., IV, 1900, p. 275 and V, 1901, pp. 29 f. (latter = abstract of paper by von Mach). The Cambridge copy was found about 300 feet from the spot where the Berlin copy was discovered.

2156 H. N., XXXIV, 66; in the text, et Alexandrum Thespiis venatorem, it is best to understand venatorem as an appositive, therefore indicating a statue of Alexander as hunter. As the boar (in the bronze original no support was necessary) is a Roman accessory like the chlamys, it is best to call the work under discussion not Meleager, but merely hunter and dog (so Furtw.-Urlichs, Denkm., l. c.). It was probably dedicated by a successful hunter to Artemis, or else it was a grave-monument, as such figures are common on sarcophagi: see Robert, Ant. Sarcoph. Reliefs, IV, Pls. XLVII, 154, and XLIX, 155, pp. 188 f.; and also on Attic grave-reliefs: e. g., on the Ilissos relief mentioned above (Fig. 74).

2157 Furtw., Mp., pp. 304–5; Furtw.-Urlichs, Amelung, Helbig, von Mach, Arndt, E. Sellers-Strong (see introduction to Furtw., Mp., p. XIII), etc.

2158 J. H. S., XXIII, 1903, pp. 128–129.

2159 Sculpt., p. 219.

2160 Cf. P. Gardner, Types of Greek Coins, 1883, Pl. XII, 16.

2161 Pl. LXIX in Six Greek Sculptors. E. A. Gardner (p. 226) is doubtless right in believing that this form of brow was a personal peculiarity of Alexander, as it recurs so often in his portraits. It is seen in the head of Alexander on the sarcophagus from Sidon (either by a pupil of Lysippos or by some sculptor under his influence), the reliefs from which portray the same subject as the bronze group by Lysippos in Delphi mentioned by Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 64, dedicated by Krateros on the occasion narrated by Plutarch, Vita Alex. Magni, 40, who states that the group was executed conjointly with Leochares: see Hamdy Bey et Th. Reinach, Une nécropole royale à Sidon, 1892, Pl. XXXIII, no. 6 (reproduced by Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. LXXI). So far as I know, it occurs in Lysippan work to a prominent degree only in likenesses of Alexander. We know that Lysippos created the Alexander-type of head, as he alone could reproduce his manly and leonine air (cf. Plut., de Alex. M. fortuna aut virtute, oratio II, 2, = p. 335). It is, to a less extent, present in the Azara head in the Louvre, which, owing to its likeness to the head of the Apoxyomenos, used to be taken as the nearest copy of the original by Lysippos.

2162 It should be observed that the axis of the right eye in the head from Sparta droops slightly, which causes the eyeball to turn in. This seems to me to be merely the result of imperfect skill in modeling. It has a tendency to give to the face a look of greater intensity.

2163 See supra, pp. 295–6.

2164 B. C. H. XXIII, 1899, p. 455. Furtwaengler, Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 10 f., has shown that it was a favorite device to represent boxers and pancratiasts with a sombre look (“der finstere Blick”).

2165 1102:κοὐδεὶς τροπαῖ’ ἔστησε τῶν ἐμῶν χερῶν.

2166 In the passage already cited from de Alex. Magn. fort. aut virtute, Orat. II, 2, (= p. 385c); ... καὶ τῶν ὀμμάτων τὴν διάχυσιν καὶ ὑγρότητα, κ. τ. λ.; cf. also his Vita Alex. Magni, IV (= p. 666), ... τὴν ὑγρότητα τῶν ὀμμάτων.

2167 The hair of the head from Sparta, like that of the Agias and the Philandridas, has not the expression displayed in some Lysippan heads (notably in portraits of Alexander), nor the detail which we should expect from Pliny’s statement that Lysippos excelled in his treatment of hair (H. N., XXXIV, 65; see next note). But the Agias and the Philandridas represent pancratiasts, and here we should not expect such expression. In the Agias, the hair, even if lacking in detail, is treated carefully and with variety.

2168 H. N., XXXIV, 65: propriae huius videntur esse argutiae operum custoditae in minimis quoque rebus. Here the word argutiae means “subtlety,” rather than “animation,” as given in Harper’s Latin Dictionary.

2169 I need hardly add that such an idealizing tendency should be carefully distinguished from the deification of mortals which came into prominence after the time of Alexander, but existed in Greece from the early fifth century B. C., at least. The case of heroizing the Thasian Theagenes, who won at Olympia in boxing and the pankration in Ols. 75 and 76 ( = 480 and 475 B. C.), has been discussed with similar ones in Ch. I, p. 35. But the fact that a victor wanted his statue to be more or less assimilated to the ideal type of the hero, whom he regarded as his athletic prototype and ideal, does not mean that he had any idea of looking upon himself as a god.

2170 This would explain the simple, even sketchy, treatment of the closely cropped hair, just as in the Agias and the Philandridas. The similarly parted lips of the Sparta head are certainly more appropriate to an athlete represented as weary with his toil than to a youthful Herakles. The slightly fierce expression of the face, augmented by the already noted imperfection in the modeling of the right eyeball, recalls the γοργόν look characteristic of boxers and pancratiasts; cf. supra, p. 317, n. 2. On the threatening eyes of contestants in general, see Xenophon, Mem., III, 10, 6–8, and supra, p. 59.

The head appears to me to be that of a boy of about sixteen years; its style is too early for a victor in the boys’ pankration, as this event was not introduced at Olympia until the 145th Olympiad ( = 200 B. C.): see Paus., V, 8.11 and Ph., 13. The wrestling match for boys was introduced in 01. 37 ( = 632 B. C.): see Paus., V, 8.9, and Afr. Boys were first allowed to box in Ol. 41 ( = 616 B. C.): see Paus., ibid. (though Philostratos, 13, gives two traditions, Ols. 41 and 60).

2171 We have record of only one statue of a victor set up in Sparta, that of the wrestler Hetoimokles, who won at the beginning of the sixth century B. C.: see Paus., III, 13.9, and cf. infra, Ch. VIII, p. 362, no. 4.

2172 In the present chapter I have partly rewritten two articles which have appeared in the A. J. A.; the first, entitled, Were Olympic Victor Statues Exclusively of Bronze?, in vol. XIX, 2d Ser., 1915, pp. 57–62; the second, The Oldest Dated Victor Statue, in vol. XVIII, 2d Ser., 1914, pp. 156–164 and Fig. I. I am indebted to Dr. J. M. Paton, former editor-in-chief, for permission to use them in the present work.

2173 On p. 16 he says: id unum dubitari non potest quin Olympionicarum statuae posteriorum temporum omnes ad unam aeneae fuerint; on p. 17 he again says: fieri non potest quin existimemus illas statuas omnes ex aere factas fuisse.

2174 Inschr. v. Ol., p. 235.

2175 II, 2, p. 530 (note on P., VI, 1.1).

2176 F. W., under no. 213, p. 101.

2177 Denkm.3, p. 101; Engl. ed., p. 117.

2178 VI, 1.1–18.7.

2179 Pauly-Wissowa, VII, pp. 2189 f.; and cf. Brunn, I, p. 72. See supra, Ch. III, School of Argos, pp. 109–110.

2180 Brunn, I, p. 34; etc.

2181 The inscription gives a fragmentary enumeration of various victories: Inschr. v. Ol., 234, p. 346; see infra, Ch. VIII, p. 360 and n. 3.

2182 Inschr. v. Ol., 235, pp. 346–347; see infra, Ch. VIII, p. 360 and n. 4.

2183 Ch. IV, pp. 254–5; Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 10–11; Tafelbd., Pl. II, 2, 2a; F. W., 322; etc.

2184 Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 11–12; Tafelbd., Pl. III, 3, 3a; F. W., 324. See supra, p. 255.

2185 Bronz. v. Ol., p. 12; Tafelbd., Pl. IV, 5, 5a. Furtwaengler assigned it to a statue “freien Stiles.” Cf. F. W., 325.

2186 Bronz. v. Ol., p. 22; Tafelbd., Pl. VI, no. 63. Even the veins are here indicated.

2187 Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 12–13; Tafelbd., Pl. IV, nos. 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, etc., and see text on p. 16. In this connection we have omitted bronze fragments in modern museums known to have once stood in the Altis, e. g., the head from Beneventum (Fig. 3) in the Louvre: B. B., 324; von Mach, 481. These have been already discussed in Ch. II, pp. 62 f.

2188 E. Curtius, Peloponnesos, 1851–2, I, p. 85; II, pp. 16 and 96, n. 14; F. Dahn, Die Germanen in Griechenland, in A. Z., XL, 1882, pp. 128 f. Of course, long before the barbarians entered Greece many of the best of these statues had been removed to Italy by Roman generals and emperors, especially Nero, and others were destroyed in various ways.

2189 He won in Ol. 59 ( = 544 B. C.): P., VI, 18.7; Hyde, 187; Foerster, 113.

2190 He won in Ol. 61 ( = 536 B. C.): P., l. c.; Hyde, 188; Foerster, 120.

2191 That of Rhexibios was of fig-wood and that of Praxidamas of cypress, and consequently less decayed than the other. We know that cypress-wood was largely used for the early ξόανα because of its hardness and durability: e. g., the gilded statue in Ephesos, mentioned by Xenophon, Anab., V, 3.12. Theophrastos speaks of the durability of this wood: de Plant. hist., V, 4.2 (χρονιώτατα δοκεῖ τὰ κυπαρίττινα εἶναι). Cf. Hehn, Kulturpflanzen und Haustiere^6, 1894, pp. 276 f.; H. Bluemner, Technologie und Terminologie d. Gewerbe und Kuenste bei Griechen und Roemern, 1879, II, pp. 257 f.; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 625.

2192 VII, 27.5. Scherer also, p. 18, n. 4, adduces a passage from the work of the second-century A. D. rhetorician Aristeides, κατὰ τῶν ἐξορχ., II, p. 544 (ed. Dindorf), which he thinks points to the exclusive use of metal for victor statues: τοὺς ἐπὶ στεφανιτῶν ἀγώνων σκεψώμεθα, οἷον τὸν Δωριέα ... καὶ πάντας, ὦν εἰκόνες χαλκαί; he also refers to a passage in Dio Chrysost., Orat., XXVIII, A, p. 531 R (289 M).

2193 F. W., no. 213, p. 101; Scherer, p. 18, n. 3; Vischer, Aesthetik, III, §607, p. 377; and cf. S. Reinach, R. Ét. Gr., XX, p. 413.

2194 See Koehler, Gesam. Schriften (ed. Stephani), VI, p. 345.

2195 VI, 1.2.

2196 See Hyde, op. cit., Catalogue, pp. 3–24. There 188 victors are listed, Philon of Corcyra appearing twice, nos. 91 and 136.

2197 H. N., XXXIV, 16.

2198 P., VI, 1.1, says that not all victors set up statues. This has been discussed in Ch. I, p. 27.

2199 Pliny differentiates carefully between ars sculptura (i. e., sculpture in stone) and ars statuaria (i. e., in bronze): thus Bk. XXXIV of the H. N. is concerned with the latter, Bk. XXXVI with the former. In XXXVI, 15, he says that sculptura is the older, and that both bronze statuary and painting began with Pheidias in Ol. 83 ( = 448–445 B. C.), a statement which is inconsistent with XXXIV, 83, where he speaks of Theodoros (of the middle or second half of the sixth century B. C.) as casting a likeness of himself in bronze. But it is well known that Pliny in his long work quotes from a variety of sources, without any attempt to reconcile them.

2200 Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, p. 414, says, less correctly, one-sixth. Forty inscribed bases may be referred to victor statues mentioned by Pausanias, while 63 others have been referred to victor statues not mentioned by him: see infra, Ch. VIII, pp. 340 f., 353 f.

2201 Taken from Treu’s account in Bildw. v. Ol., pp. 29–34 and 216–218.

2202 Chapter III, supra, pp. 162–3; a = Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. VI, 1–4 (with fragments, ibid., 5–6, 7–8, and figs. 30–32 in the text); b = ibid., Pl. VI, 9–10.

2203 Textbd., p. 216, fig. 241; Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 2. Furtwaengler, despite the size and material of this torso, ascribed it to the statue of a boy victor: 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., 1890, pp. 147–148; similarly Treu, l. c.; both refer it to the fifth century B. C. and to a Peloponnesian sculptor.

2204 Tafelbd., Pl. LVI, 3; F. W., 330.

2205 Tafelbd., Pl. LVI. 4.

2206 P. 216, n. 4 and fig. 242; a = buttocks; b = right upper leg; c = bent upper leg with knee; d = upper arm bent at elbow.

2207 V, 17.3; here he enumerates images of ivory and gold, the marble Hermes of Praxiteles, an Aphrodite in bronze. Similarly, in II, 17.6, he mentions dedications, of different materials, in the Heraion of Argos; in I, 26.3, he mentions a bronze statue of Olympiodoros at Delphi dedicated by the Phokians, but says nothing of the material of two statues at Athens, where most of the offerings were marble; in I, 28.1, he speaks of a bronze statue of Kylon on the Akropolis; etc.

2208 P., VIII, 40.1; to be discussed in the second part of the present chapter, pp. 326 f.

2209 R. Ét. Anc., X, 1908, pp. 161 f.

2210 Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pls. XLVI-XLVIII; Textbd., pp. 182 f. and Figs. 210 f.; and Ergebnisse, II (Baudenkmaeler), Pl. XCIII (basis) and pp. 153–5; cf. P., V, 26.1.

2211 P., V, 17.3 (already mentioned on p. 325, n. 3).

2212 See Treu, Bildw. v. Ol., p. 216. To-day marble is far commoner than bronze for artistic work; the reverse was true in antiquity. Many varieties of bronze—a combination of copper and tin in varying proportions—were named from places where it was manufactured: e. g., Corinthian, Delian (the favorite with Myron), Aeginetan (the favorite with Polykleitos), etc.

2213 Cf. Furtwaengler, Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 21–2; 50stes Berl. Winckelmannsprogr., p. 147; Reisch, p. 39. Good examples are the Tuebingen bronze hoplitodrome discussed in Ch. IV, pp. 206 f. (Fig. 42) and the παῖς κέλης from Dodona (Carapanos, Dodone et ses Ruines, Pl. XIII. 1). For diskoboloi, see E. von Sacken, Die ant. Bronzen des k. k. Muenz- und Antiken-Cabinetes in Wien, 1871, Pls, XXXV, 1, XXXVII, 4.

2214 VIII, 40.1: Φιγαλεῦσι δὲ ἀνδριάς ἐστιν ἐπὶ τῆς ἀγορᾶς Ἀρ<ρα> χίωνος τοῦ παγκρατιαστοῦ, τά τε ἄλλα ἀρχαῖος καὶ οὐχ ἥκιστα ἐπὶ τῷ σχήματι· οὐ διεστᾶσι μὲν πολὺ οἱ πόδες, καθεῖνται δὲ παρὰ πλευρὰν αἱ χεῖρες ἄχρι τῶν γλουτῶν. πεποίηται μὲν δὴ ἡ εἰκὼν λίθου, λέγουσι δὲ καὶ ἐπίγραμμα ἐπ’ αὐτὴν γραφῆναι. καὶ τοῦτο μὲν ἠφάνιστο ὑπὸ τοῦ χρόνου, κ.τ.λ.

On the various spellings of the name, Arrhachion, Arrhachon, Arrhichion, etc., see critical note in Rutgers, p. 19, and Foerster, no. 103.

2215 Both Africanus (see Rutgers, l. c.), and Pausanias (l. c.) date the third victory. Pausanias and Philostratos, 21, place the other two victories in the Ols. just preceding. Cf. Rutgers, p. 20, n. 1, and Foerster, nos. 98, 101, 103. The story how Arrhachion expired at the moment of victory, throttled by his adversary, whose toe he succeeded in putting out of joint, is told by Africanus, Pausanias (VIII, 40.2), and Philostratos (Imag., II, 6 = p. 411); Pausanias also mentions that the body was crowned.

2216 Frazer, IV, pp. 391–2; III, pp. 40–1. The statue has otherwise not been published. In all probability it is the same one listed by Waldemar Deonna, in his Les Apollons archaïques, Geneva, 1909, p. 187, no. 79. This was seen at Phigalia in 1891 by M. Chamonard and notices of it are to be found in the following works: B. C. H., XV, 1891, pp. 440 and 448; Chroniques d’Orient, II, p. 36; R. Ét. gr., 1892, p. 127; Mueller, Nacktheit und Entbloessung in d. altoriental. und aelteren griech. Kunst, Diss. inaug., 1906, p. 100; Rouse, p. 307.

Pausanias’ description of Arrhachion’s statue is discussed by the following: Scherer, pp. 16 and 23; Iwan v. Mueller, Handbuch, VI, p. 530: Dumont, Mélanges d’ Arch., p. 53; Lange, Darstellung des Menschen in der aelteren griech. Kunst, 1899; Brunn, Griech. Kunstgesch., II, p. 73; Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmythol., III, Apollon, p. 12, no. 9; Klein, p. 146; Reisch, p. 40; Collignon, I, p. 117, n. 1, and B. C. H., V, 1881, p. 321; cf. Deonna, op. cit., p. 13, n. 4.

2217 See Lange, op. cit., pp. XI f., who states the formula, which we have already given supra, Ch. IV, p. 175, cf. Loewy, Die Naturwiedergabe in der aelteren griech. Kunst, 1900, pp. 25, 27; id., Lysipp und seine Stellung in der griech. Kunst, pp. 17–18. On the pose, cf. S. Reinach, Manuel de Philologie classique (ed. 2), 1907, II, p. 91 n. 2.

2218 Deonna, op. cit., p. 85, says that the size of the αἰδοῖα is an indication of archaism, as the earlier artists exaggerated them in order to show the sex better. Figs. 7 (example from the Kerameikos) and 72 (example from Delphi), on pp. 132 and 179 respectively of his work, resemble our statue in this feature.

2219 I, pp. 21 f.; cf. Rhein. Mus., N. F., X, 1856, pp. 153 f.

2220 See bibliography in Collignon, I, pp. 117–18; cf. G. Kieseritzky, Jb., VII, 1892, pp. 182 f.

2221 A. Z., XL, 1882, pp. 55 f.

2222 Mw., p. 712.

2223 I, pp. 117–19; more fully in Gaz. Arch., 1886, pp. 235 f.; cf. also his later treatment in Mon. Piot, XX, 1913, pp. 5 f.; he assumes less influence in the corresponding archaic draped female type. Cf. also, for a similar view, F. W., p. 11 (to no. 14); von Sybel, Weltgesch. d. Kunst, p. 114; Kieseritzky, l. c.; Loewy, Jh. oest. arch. Inst., XII, 1909, pp. 243 f.; cf. id., ibid., XIV, 1911, pp. 1 f,; id., Griech. Plastik, 1911, p. 5. While Loewy believes Egyptian influence reached Greece via Crete, Poulson believes that it came via Phœnicia: see the latter’s Der Orient u. d. fruehgriech. Kunst, 1912, and cf. his article in Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., XXXIV, 1914, cols. 61 f.; Richardson, p. 39; E. Kroker, Jb., I, 1886, pp. 114 f.; etc.

2224 Gaz. B.-A., XXI, 1899, pp. 177 f.; 313 f.; for a similar view, see also Overbeck, I, pp. 37 f.

2225 Les Apollons archaïques, pp. 21 f.; id., L’Archéologie, sa valeur, ses methodes, II, pp. 193 f.; id., L’influence égyptienne sur l’attitude du type statuaire debout dans l’archaïsme grec, in Festgabe H. Bluemner ueberreicht, 1914, pp. 102–142.

2226 Greek Sculpture, Its Spirit and Principles, 1903, p. 84. On p. 324, however, he admits Oriental influence on the Greek minor arts, especially that of Assyria on early vases.

2227 So Pottier, B. C. H., XVIII, 1894, pp. 408 f.; cf. Gardner, Hbk., pp. 47 f.; Sculpt., pp. 17 f.; etc.

2228 Schliemann, Orchomenos, Pl. I (restored); Perrot-Chipiez, VIII, p. 543, fig. 220 (fragment), (restored on p. 544, fig. 221, from Schliemann); Springer-Michaelis, p. 115, fig. 246; etc.

2229 E. g., I, 42.5; II, 19.3; VII, 5.5; cf. IV, 32.1.

2230 I, 98.

2231 Bulle dates the Old Kingdom from the 30th to the 25th centuries B. C. But early Egyptian dates are too unsettled to be discussed here. For a tabular view of the chronology of the Egyptian dynasties as given by different scholars—Sethe, Meyer, Petrie, Breasted, Maspero, etc., see Encycl. Brit., eleventh ed., vol. IX, p. 79 (in the article on Egypt, Chronology and History, by R. S. Poole and F. Ll. Griffith). Breasted, A History of Egypt^2, 1916, chart on p. 21, dates dynasties I-VI, 3400–2475 B. C.; XI-XVII, 2160–1580 B. C.; XVIII-(part of) XX, 1580–1150 B. C.

2232 Both are given by Bulle, Pl. 5; cf. id., Pl. 37 (“Apollos” of Tenea and Volomandra); Ra-nefer, in Maspero, Art in Egypt, 1912, p. 82, fig. 148; Perrot-Chipiez, I, 1882, p. 655, fig. 436; Tepemankh, in Maspero, p. 84, fig. 155, and in Perrot-Chipiez, p. 678, fig. 461. The statue of Ra-nefer is 1.73 meters tall, that of Tepemankh 1.66 meters.

2233 Ka-aper in Bulle, Pls. 6 and 7 (two views of the head); von Bissing, Denkm. aegypt. Skulpt., I, 1914, Pl. XI; Perrot-Chipiez, I, p. 11, fig. 7; Maspero, op. cit., p. 83, figs. 151, 152; id., Manual of Egyptian Archæology, 1895, p. 218, fig. 188, and p. 221, fig. 191. The “wife,” in Bulle, Pl. 9 (two views); Maspero, p. 83, fig. 154; id., Manual, p. 222, fig. 192.

2234 Breasted, A History of Egypt^2, l. c., dates dynasties XI-XII, 2160–1788 B. C.; the Hyksos, dynasties XIII-XVII, 1788–1580 B. C.

2235 Bulle. Pls. 11 (two views) and 12 (head); von Bissing, op. cit., I, Pl. XL, A (left); Maspero, Art in Egypt, p. 110, figs. 203–204.

2236 We should add to the New Empire the Deltaic dynasties, from the twenty-first on. Breasted, l. c., assigns to the New Empire dynasties XVIII-XIX and part of XX, 1580–1150 B. C.

2237 Bulle, Pl. 17 (left); Maspero, Hist. anc. des peuples de l’Orient classique, II, p. 531; id., Art in Egypt, p. 201, fig. 390 (= the Lady Naï); Mon. Piot, II, 1895, Pls. II-IV.

2238 Bulle, Pl. 17 (right); von Bissing, II, Pl. LXIV; Maspero, Hist., III, pp. 503–504 and Pl. II; id., Art in Egypt, p. 238, fig. 455; Perrot-Chipiez, I, p. 714, fig. 481 (profile). Though the face is lifeless, the bust and lower trunk are delicately modeled.

2239 We see the Egyptian treatment of the hair especially marked in the upper part of a stone “Apollo” discovered at Eleutherna in Crete, which is now in the Candia Museum: Rendiconti della R. Accad. dei Lincei, 1891, p. 599 (Loewy); Rev. Arch., 1893, Pls. III-IV (Joubin); Gardner, Hbk., p. 147, fig. 21; Perrot-Chipiez, p. 431, fig. 208; etc.

2240 E. g., in the statue of Ra-nefer.

2241 E. g., in the statue of the Sheik-el-Beled.

2242 High-placed ears are common to many archaic Greek works other than the “Apollos.” They persist even in some of the figures on the Parthenon frieze.

2243 On these common characteristics, see Richardson, p. 39; cf. H. N. Fowler, History of Sculpture, 1916, pp. 59–60; etc.

2244 Pottier, op. cit., p. 414, assumes a religious reason for the left foot being advanced in both types. For another, natural explanation, see Homolle, de antiquiss. Dianae Simul., p. 95, quoted by Collignon, I, p. 118, n. 3.

2245 The Greeks first copied the type in statuettes: e. g., alabaster figurines from Naukratis: W. Flinders Petrie, Naukratis^2, 1888, I, Pls. 1, 3, 4; G. Kieseritzky, Jb., VII, 1892, Pl. VI (with head, three views); ibid. p. 189 (figure in Boston). Pottier, op. cit., p. 409, cites two alabaster examples from Egypt (probably from Naukratis) which are nude, and on Pl. XVII, he reproduces four terra-cotta draped figurines in the Louvre, of Phœnician manufacture, similar to Egyptian works. The nudity of the “Apollos” marks the distinction between Greek and barbarian art.

2246 Brunn, in his Kunst bei Homer, 1868, quoted by Gardner, Hbk., p. 47, showed by a very true analogy the way in which the Greek artist became an imitator. The Greeks borrowed their alphabet from Phœnicia, but wrote Greek and not Phœnician with it; just so the Greek artist borrowed the alphabet of art from Egypt, but with it wrote his own language of art.

2247 Gesch. des Materialismus,3 I, p. 127 (quoted by F. W., on p. 12).

2248 This is the view of K. Kouroniotis, who carefully examined them. I quote his words incorporated in Dr. Svoronos’ letter to me of Dec. 29, 1911: τὰ γράμματα ἐπὶ τοῦ κορμοῦ, νομίζω ὅτι δὲ ἔχουσι καμμίαν σημασίαν, ἴσως δὲ μάλιστα εἶνε τὰ χαράγματα νέου τινός.

The inscriptions on the great majority of victor monuments found at Olympia were engraved upon the horizontal upper face of the base in front of the feet—at least down to the fourth century B. C.: see Inschr. v. Ol., p. 235. Dittenberger and Purgold have referred two inscribed convex bronze fragments found in the Altis to the flanks of victor statues set up in imperial times: ibid., nos. 234–5.

2249 Only one other victor from Phigalia is known, Narykidas, who won πάλῃ some time in the first half of the fourth century B. C., as the mutilated epigram and artist’s name found upon fragments of the pedestal of his statue at Olympia attest, a date out of the question for our statue: see Inschr. v. Ol., no. 161: cf. P., VI, 6, 1; Foerster, no. 324.

2250 P., VI, 15.8; Hyde, 148; Foerster, 61, 62.

2251 P., I, 28.1; cf. for the date, Foerster, no. 55. See infra, p. 362.

2252 P., III, 13.9; Foerster, nos. 86–90. See infra, p. 362.

2253 P., VI, 3.8; Hyde, 29; Foerster, 6.

2254 P., VI, 13.2; it was accordingly set up about Ols. 77–8 ( = 472–468 B. C.): see Hyde, no. 111, and cf. p. 48; Foerster, 39, 41–46. See infra, p. 362.

2255 The god was so described in the Homeric Hymn to the Delian Apollo, v. 134, and that to the Pythian Apollo, v. 272. On the grounds of long hair and nudity G. Koerte identified the example from Orchomenos: see his article, Die Antiken Skulpturen aus Boeotien, A. M., III, 1878, pp. 305 f.

2256 So Vitet, Gaz. B.-A., XII, 1862, p. 29.

2257 See list in Deonna, Les Apollons archaïques, p. 13, n. 1.

2258 E. g., on an amphora from Vienne: see Annali, XXI, 1849, Pl. D., and pp. 159 f.; on another from Nola, now in the British Museum: B. M. Vases, III, p. 230, E 336; cf. also ibid., E 313; on a wall-painting from Pompeii: A. Z., XL, 1882, p. 58; on a marble bas-relief in the Palazzo Corsini in Florence: Duetschke, II, p. 114, no. 283. These examples represent the god only.

2259 I, 98. Cf. Brunn, Griech. Kunstgesch., II, p. 76, and Griech. Kuenstler, I, pp. 36–37, no. 11; Mueller, Nacktheit und Entbloessung in d. altorient. und aelteren griech. Kunst, Diss. inaug., 1906, pp. 112 and 122; Roscher, Lex., I, s. v. Apollon, p. 450; Overbeck, I, pp. 38 and 78.

2260 P., VIII, 53. 7–8.

2261 P., II, 32. 5; cf. IX, 35. 3; described by Plut., de Musica, 14 (p. 1136); cf. Annali, XXXVI, 1864, p. 254; etc. Discussed infra, p. 335 and n. 7.

2262 See list in B. M. Sculpt., I, pp. 81 f. (from which we have taken some of the following examples).

2263 Petrie, Naukratis, I, Pl. 1, fig. 4.

2264 A. Z., XL, 1882, p. 323.

2265 Deonna, op. cit., nos. 1, 2; cf. Gaz. Arch., 1886, p. 235.

2266 See Deonna, nos. 28 f.; B. C. H., X, 1886, pp. 66 f.; B. B., 12; etc.

2267 B. M. Sculpt., no. 210.

2268 B. M. Sculpt., nos. 202 (torso = Petrie, Naukratis, I, Pl. I, fig. 9) and 204 (torso = Naukratis, I, Pl. I, fig. 3).

2269 Ibid., no. 203 (= Naukratis, II, Pl. XIV, fig. 13).

2270 See A. M., IV, 1879, p. 304.

2271 See Rapporto d’un viaggio nella Grecia nel 1860, in Annali, XXXIII, 1861, p. 80.

2272 J. H. S., I, 1880, pp. 168 f., already quoted. For the monument of Dermys and Kitylos, see Gaz. Arch., 1878, Pl. 29; A. M., III, 1878, Pl. XIV; F. W., 44.

2273 On the subject of hair on “Apollo” statues, see Overbeck, Griech. Kunstmythol., III, Apollon, p. 14 (cf. note f); and cf. Milchhoefer, A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, p. 54, who discards this feature as a criterion.

2274 For examples, see Deonna, Les Apollons archaïques, p. 12, n. 4 and n. 5.

2275 Cf. the colossal bearded statue of Dionysos found in the quarries on Naxos (Komiaki), described by Deonna, p. 221. In a preceding note (p. 334, n. 4) we have already listed examples of the type of Apollo appearing on vases, etc.; see B. M. Sculpt., I, p. 82.

2276 The date of these sculptors is fixed by that of their pupil, the Aeginetan Kallon, who lived at the beginning of the fifth century B. C.; cf. Akropolis inscription, I. G. B., no. 27. This statue is mentioned by P., IX, 35. 3, as holding the Graces in one hand. Plutarch, who cites Antikles and Istros as his authorities, gives a better description of it in de Musica, 14; he says that it held the bow in the right hand and the Graces playing on musical instruments in the left. A scholion on Pindar, Ol., XIV, 16, Boeckh, p. 293, mentions such an image of Apollo in Delphi, manifestly a copy of the Delian one. Both the scholiast and Macrobius, Saturnalia, 1, 17. 13, place the bow in the left hand and the Graces in the right, an arrangement confirmed by Athenian coins which are copied from the replica of the statue in Athens (Bekker, Anecdota gr., I, p. 299, ll. 8–9). Frazer, V, p. 174, figs. 8–9, reproduces two of these coins.

2277 This image, known as the Philesian Apollo, already discussed on pp. 118f., is described by Pliny, H. H., XXXIV, 75. It was made between 494 and 479 B. C.: see Frazer, IV, pp. 429–30. It is copied on Milesian coins, which represent the god nude, holding a stag in the right hand and a bow in the left: see Overbeck, Griech. Mythol., III, Apollon, Muenztafel I, 22 f. P., IX, 10.2, mentions a cedar replica of the statue in Thebes. In the British Museum is a bronze, the so-called Payne Knight statuette, a copy of the one on the coins; it is reproduced by Frazer, l. c., p. 430, fig. 45 (= B. M. Bronzes, no. 209); Frazer mentions as other copies a statuette in Berlin, described in A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, pp. 84–91, and one from the Ptoian sanctuary, described in B. C. H., X, 1886, pp. 190–6, and Pl. IX. On Milesian reliefs, see one published by Kekulé von Stradonitz, Ueber d. Apoll. des Kanachos, Sitzb. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss., 1904, I, fig. on p. 787, and p. 797, and another by Th. Wiegand, Siebenter vorlaeufiger Bericht ueber Ausgrabungen in Milet und Didyma (Abh. Berl. Akad. d. Wiss., Philosoph.-histor. Cl., 1911), p. 21.

2278 Mentioned by P., X, 24. 5, and Philochoros, in F. H. G., I, fragm. 22 on p. 387. Imperial Delphic coins from the time of Hadrian on represent the god nude with outstretched arms; such coin-types may be copies of this statue; cf. Frazer, V, p. 352.

2279 See B. C. H., XII, 1888, p. 468.

2280 In the Ottoman Museum, Invent. no. 374; Reinach, Rép., II, 1, 78, 2. It is described by Mendel, in B. C. H., XXVI, 1902, pp. 467 f.; cf. Deonna, Les Apollons archaïques, p. 226, no. 127.

2281 See Deonna, pp. 191 f., no. 81 and figs. 84–90; cf. Annali, XXXVI, 1864, p. 253 (Michaelis).

2282 Ibid., pp. 185 f., no. 77 and fig. 82.

2283 E. g., the two colossal statues from Cape Sounion discovered by Staïs in 1906 in front of the ruins of the temple of Poseidon, and now in Athens, possibly meant for the Dioskouroi: see Deonna, pp. 135–8, nos. 7–8 and figs. 14–17; for one, see A. M., XXXI, 1906, pp. 363–4; Deonna, no. 7, pp. 135 and 347; Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, no. 2720, pp. 6–7 and fig.; Gardner, Hbk., p. 197, fig. 40; it is 3.05 meters high (Staïs); two from Delphi, called either Kleobis and Biton, or the Dioskouroi by Homolle, B. C. H., XXIV, 1900, pp. 445 = B) and 446 (= A), and 450 f.; Homolle here has the letters changed; his B = Fouilles de Delphes, IV, 1 (= our A, = Pl. 8B); see Deonna, pp. 176–8, nos. 65–6, figs. 66–9; see list of statues from sanctuaries of Apollo and other gods, ibid., pp. 18–19.

2284 See Milchhoefer, A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, pp. 54–55.

2285 See Loeschke, A. M., IV, 1879, p. 304; cf. Furtwaengler, A. Z., XL, 1882, p. 57; Hiller von Gaertringen, Thera, III, 1904, p. 285; Ross, Reisen auf d. griech. Inseln des Aegaeischen Meeres, I, 1840, p. 8.

2286 See Deonna, Les Apollons archaïques, pp. 238–9, no. 141; B. M. Sculpt., 207 (= torso).

2287 Deonna, p. 247, no. 155. This is one of the most recent of the series and belongs to the end of the sixth or beginning of the fifth century B. C.: Orsi, Monumenti antichi, I, pp. 789 f.

2288 Bulle, 37 (left).

2289 Vit. Apoll. Tyan., IV, 28; see supra, pp. 106–7. Scherer, op. cit., pp. 23 ff., thought that this statue conformed with the type of the Apollo of Kanachos already mentioned. Reisch, p. 40, rightly believes that it had “noch geschlossene Beine, aber geloeste Arme,” i. e., like the Apollo of Tektaios and Angelion already discussed.

2290 Arndt, La Glyptothèque Ny-Carlsberg, pp. 1–2 and Pls. I-II; Deonna, pp. 143–4, no. 21. It has been ascribed to different artists of the last quarter of the sixth century B. C.: Lechat, Au Musée de l’Acropole, pp. 359–60; Klein, I, p. 246 f.; we have already discussed it on pp. 127–8. E. A. Gardner, J. H. S., VIII, 1887, p. 190, refers some of the statues found at the Ptoian sanctuary to athletes, but Holleaux believes that these statues represent Apollo: B. C. H., X, 1886, p. 68; cf. also Staïs, Marbres et Bronzes, p. 8. W. Vischer, Kleine Schriften, II, 1878, p. 307, admits that some of the “Apollos” can be athletes, as Conze and Michaelis had done: Annali, XXXIII, 861, p. 80.

2291 See Deonna, p. 253.

2292 Thus Scherer, p. 22, n. 3, and Reisch, p. 40, leave the question unsettled; Gardner, Hbk., p. 98, n. 1, thinks that the material for a decision as to a given statue, whether of this god or that, or of a worshiper or athlete, hardly exists; Collignon, Mythol. figurée de la Grèce, p. 84, recognizes that these statues stood for both gods and athletes; Hitz.-Bluemn., III, 1, p. 262, think that the type passes equally well for gods and sepulchral statues; Overbeck, I, pp. 114–115, and F. W., p. 11, believe that it represents a general scheme for athletes, sepulchral statues, and Apollos.

2293 The first part of this chapter appeared, under the title The Positions of Victor Statues at Olympia, in A. J. A., XVI, 2d Ser., 1912, pp. 203–229, with Plan; the second part, entitled, Greek Literary Notices of Olympic Victor Monuments outside Olympia, appeared in Trans. Amer. Philol. Assn., XLII, 1912, pp. 53–67. I am indebted to Dr. J. M. Paton, former editor-in-chief of the A. J. A., for permission to use the former, and to Prof. Clarence Bill, the present secretary of the American Philological Association, for permission to use the latter. Only slight changes have been made in the original articles for the present work. The summary of the last section, Statistics of Olympic Victor Statuaries, is revised from my note published in Proceedings of the American Philological Association, XLIV, 1913, pp. xxx-xxxi. I am also indebted to Professor Bill for permission to use it in the present work.

2294ἵππων ἀγωνιστῶν ... καὶ ἀνδρῶν ἀθλητῶν τε καὶ ἰδιωτῶν ὁμοίως (VI, 1.1).

2295 VI, Chs. 1–16. 169 in my de olympionicarum Statuis: Philon of Kerkyra, who had two statues, is there named twice, under nos. 91 and 136.

2296 VI, Chs. 17–18.

2297 See Ergebn. v. Ol., Karten u. Plaene, 1899, III, IV (Doerpfeld); cf. also H. Luckenbach, Olympia und Delphi, 1904, p. 11, fig. 5 (= A. J. A., XVI, 1912, p. 204, fig. 1).

2298 A. Z., XL, 1882, pp. 119 f. (and Sketch-plan).

2299 Pp. 45 f.

2300 In Baum., II, pp. 1094 f.

2301 Olympia, Ergebnisse, Textbd., I (Topographie und Geschichte), pp. 87 f.; cf. A. M., XIII, 1888, pp. 335 f.

2302 De olymp. Stat., Ch. III, pp. 63 f. The outline therein forms the basis of the present treatment. The numbers of the victors from the catalogue of that work, showing the order of presentation by Pausanias, are here retained in parentheses: e. g., Telemachos (122). A letter after the number indicates either that an adjacent “honor” statue, e. g., Philonides (154a), stood next to a victor statue, e. g., Menalkeas (154), or that no statue is mentioned.

2303 E. g., Kalkmann, Pausanias der Perieget, 1886, p. 88.

2304 E. g., nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 were Eleans; 7–9 and 11–14 were Spartans; 17–18 and 23–26 were Eleans; 45 and 48–49, 51, 54, 57 were Arkadians; 6–9 and 11–14 were victors in chariot-races; 30, 34, 37, 40 were pancratiasts; 25–28 had statues by Sikyonian artists; 39–40 had statues by Athenian artists; 59–63 formed a family group; etc.

2305 Ueber Pausanias, 1890, p. 393.

2306 The lack of continuity in describing the altars led R. Heberdey, Eranos Vindobonensis, 1893, pp. 39 f., (Die Olympische Altarperiegese des Pausanias), to conclude wrongly that Pausanias took over bodily from an earlier work his enumeration of the altars, only here and there interposing a remark of his own, as e. g., V, 15. 2, where he parenthetically describes the Leonidaion.

2307 E. g., the statue of the Akarnanian boxer (10) stood among those of Spartan victors (7–14); Eukles (52), a grandson of Diagoras, had his statue away from his family group (59–63); the two statues of Timon (17 and 105 d) stood in different parts of the Altis.

2308 VI, 1.3.

2309 So Furtwaengler, A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, p. 146; Treu, ibid., p. 207; Flasch, Hirschfeld, and Scherer, in the works already cited.

2310 So Doerpfeld, l. c., p. 88; Michaelis, A. Z., XXXIV, 1876, p. 164; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 531; etc.

2311 Hyde, p. 64. I here append three such passages: in V, 24.3, in speaking of the statue of the Zeus of the Lacedæmonians, he says that it τοῦ ναοῦ δέ ἐστιν ἐν δεξιᾷ τοῦ μεγάλου Ζεὺς πρὸς ἀνατολὰς ἡλίου, i. e., at the southeast corner of the temple near where the pedestal was found (cf. Inschr. v. Ol., 252, and Olympia, Ergebn., Textbd., I, p. 86); in V, 26.2, in speaking of the offerings of Mikythos, he says that they stood παρὰ δὲ τοῦ ναοῦ τοῦ μεγάλου τὴν ἐν ἀριστερᾷ πλεύραν, i. e., on the northern side of the temple of Zeus, where most authorities find their foundations (cf. Inschr. v. Ol., 267–269, and Flasch, op. cit., p. 1093); in VIII, 38.2, he says that Mount Lykaion is ἐν ἀριστερᾷ δὲ τοῦ ἱεροῦ τῆς Δεσποίνης, i. e., to the north of that temple. Cf. also V, 21.2. Professor Bluemner, reviewing my monograph de olymp. Stat., in the Berl. Philol. Wochenschr., XXIV, 1904, col. 1382, objects to my interpretation of ἐν δεξιᾷ, and admits not one but three possibilities: (a) of the temple pro persona, i. e., its south side; (b) of a spectator facing the chief, i. e., east front, the northern half of the space before it; (c) of a spectator with his back to this front, i. e., the southern half of this space. But if Pausanias had meant either of the two latter, he would have said πρὸ τοῦ ναοῦ, as in VIII, 37.2, κατὰ τὸν ναόν, cf. V, 15.3, or ἀντικρὺ τοῦ ναοῦ, cf. V, 27.1.

2312 For locations of bases, see Insch. v. Ol., nos. 166 (Troilos), 160 (Kyniska), 172 (Sophios). Because of the finds in the Prytaneion both Hirschfeld and Scherer started this ἔφοδος west of the Heraion.

2313 From the unfinished condition of the back of the Lysippan marble head from the statue of Philandridas (10), as well as its excellent surface preservation (Frontispiece and Fig. 69), we have already argued that some of these early statues may have stood along the southern steps of the temple against the columns of the peristyle: supra, p. 300.

2314 See Inschr. v. Ol., no. 248; cf. P., V, 27.9.

2315 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 161 (Narykdas); 146 (Kallias); 159 (Eukles); 144 (Euthymos); 156 (Charmides); 155 (Hellanikos). Other bases of statues which must have stood in this vicinity have also been found, far from their original positions: i. e., those of Athenaios (36), 56 meters west of the Leonidaion; of Polydamas (47), fragments 26 meters southeast of the Echo Hall; of Diagoras (59), five fragments near the Metroon; of Damagetos (62), in the Leonidaion; of Dorieus (61), near the Victory of Paionios; of Kyniskos (45), inside the Byzantine church; of Damoxenidas (54), near the Heraion. See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 168 (Athenaios), 151 (Diagoras), 152 (Damagetos), 153 (Dorieus), 149 (Kyniskos), 158 (Damoxenidas); for the sculptured base of Polydamas (47), see Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., PI. LV, 1–3; Textbd., pp. 209 f.

2316 Argum., Boeckh, pp. 157–8. Pausanias names them in the order: Diagoras, Akousilaos, Dorieus, Damagetos, Peisirhodos. The scholiast names them in the order: Diagoras, Damagetos, Dorieus, Akousilaos, Eukles, Peisirhodos.

2317 See for Aristotle, F. H. G., II, p. 183, fragm. 264. Apollas Ponticus is little known: cf. F. H. G., IV, p. 307, fragm. 7; he probably copied from Aristotle’s work.

2318 This is Dittenberger’s explanation, Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 151 and 159; and also that of Robert, O. S., p. 195, Scherer, p. 49, and Gurlitt, op. cit., p. 411; Purgold, however, Inschr. v. Ol., p. 262, has tried to reconcile the two accounts on the theory of no change.

2319 However, Kalkmann, Pausanias der Perieget, p. 90, thinks that the two groups of Diagoras and Alkainetos stood apart.

2320 The base of the statue of Pythokles was found between the Heraion and the Pelopion: see Inschr. v. Ol., 162–163.

2321 Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, p. 412, assumed the possibility of the existence of two different statues of Lysandros, one 35 a, and the other somewhere after Charmides (58) in the family group of Diagoras; Kalkmann, op. cit., p. 105 and note 4, explains the discrepancy between the scholiast and Pausanias on the theory that the latter borrowed from older lists; Purgold, Aufsaetze E. Curtius gewidmet, pp. 238 f., assumed but one statue of Lysandros.

2322 Scherer, p. 51 (cf. Plan opposite p. 56), and Flasch, l. c., p. 1095, note 1, proposed a route south from the Heraion to the west of the so-called Great Altar site, while Hirschfeld, l. c., p. 119, made it run to the east of it. Doerpfeld, op. cit., p. 88, starting east of the Heraion, made the route run first to the west along the south side of the temple, and thence around the western side of the Pelopion, and so across to the Eretrian Bull; Michaelis, l. c., p. 164, with the same starting-point, had it bear first to the east parallel with the Treasury Terrace, and thence south. See Plans A and B.

2323 See Inschr. v. Ol., no. 259, and Ol., Ergebn., Textbd., II, pp. 153–155, etc.; cf. P., V, 26.1.

2324 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 157 (So[si]krates; for the restoration of the name, see Hyde, p. 37); 167 (Kritodamos); 164 (Xenokles). The plate from the pedestal of the statue of the unknown Arkadian victor (79) was found far away from this point, in the Palaistra. We have shown (supra, pp. 244–5,) that the statue of Philippos (79a), mentioned by Pausanias as the work of Myron (cf. VI, 8.5), was probably only that of this older unknown Arkadian, later used for Philippos, who won some time between Ols. (?) 119 and 125 ( = 304 and 280 B. C.); see Inschr. v. Ol., no. 174; cf. Hyde, op. cit., pp. 39–41.

2325 On the name, see Hyde, p. 42.

2326 See Ol., Ergebn., Textbd., I, p. 86, and cf. II, p. 78. A slit in the lower step of the base of the Zeus may have contained the tablet mentioned by P., V, 23.4. Three of the four inscribed blocks of Gelo’s chariot base were found in the Palaistra: Inschr. v. Ol., under no. 143.

For Doerpfeld’s identification of the Council-house (Bouleuterion) with the tripartite building south of the temple of Zeus just outside the South Altis wall, see Ausgrab. zu Ol., IV, 1878–1879, pp. 40–46, and Olympia, Ergebn., Textbd., II, pp. 76–79. Others, on the basis of a passage in Xenophon’s Hell., VII, 4.31, wrongly place it near the Prytaneion in the northwestern part of the Altis. Cf. Frazer, III, pp. 636 f., and Doerpfeld, l. c., pp. 78 f. See Plans A and B.

2327 See Inschr. v. Ol., no. 177. It stands on the south edge of the South Terrace wall between its gateway and the later East Byzantine wall of the Altis.

2328 Hyde, pp. 49 f., where I assume that the passage VI, 13.8 is a digression, and that the name of a victor has dropped out at the end of 13.7. There I have inserted, from a recovered inscription, the name of Akestorides of Alexandria Troas, placing his statue next to that of Agemachos (118) of similar date, the only other Asiatic in this part of the Altis. Foerster, 501, dates Akestorides wrongly in the second century B. C. (on the basis of Furtwaengler, A. M., V, 1880, p. 30, n. 2, end), although the inscription from the base is referred by Dittenberger to the end of the third; Agemachos won in Ol. 147 ( = 192 B. C.); I have therefore dated Akestorides tentatively between Ol. (?) 142 and Ol. (?) 144 ( = 212 and 204 B. C.).

2329 See Inschr. v. Ol., 147, 148 (Tellon, inscription renewed in the first century B. C.); 165 (Aristion); 184 (Akestorides).

Roehl (I. G. A., no. 355 and Add., p. 182) referred an inscription on two marble fragments found in 1879 (cf. A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, p. 161, no. 312), one found near the Heraion, the other east of the temple of Zeus, to the victor Agiadas (103); Dittenberger (cf. Inschr. v. Ol., no. 150) and others have rightly rejected this ascription. Similarly the inscribed base of the statue of Areus (105 b), son of Akrotatos, King of Sparta, found in the Heraion (see Inschr. v. Ol., no. 308), belongs rather to the second statue of Areus (148 a) dedicated by Ptolemy Philadelphus; cf. Hyde, pp. 44–45. I have also referred the second inscription of the artist Pythagoras (Inschr. v. Ol., no. 145) found in the Leonidaion, to the statue of Astylos (110), because of its similarity to that on the base of the statue of Euthymos (56) likewise by Pythagoras: ibid., pp. 47–48.

2330 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 169 (Aristophon), 154 (Xenombrotos and Xenodikos), following Robert’s ascription, O. S., 1900, pp. 179 f.; a second epigram referring to Xenombrotos alone (Inschr. v. Olymp., no. 170) must belong to a second monument not mentioned by Pausanias; cf. Hyde, p. 53.

2331 E. g., Furtwaengler, A. Z., XXXVII, 1879, p. 140 (quoted by Dittenberger); Frazer, IV, p. 43.

2332 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 176 (Aischines; see Foerster, no. 451), 173 (Archippos), 186 (Epitherses), 304 (Antigonos); [a fragment of the base of the statue of Demetrios (147 e) was also found, the exact location not being recorded, no. 305]; 276 (Philonides; a second mutilated copy of this inscription was found nearby built into a late wall north of the Byzantine church; see no. 277); Pausanias (VI, 15.10) mentions two statues of Kapros. For the bronze foot (Fig. 62) of one of them, see supra, p. 255 and n. 3.

2333 VI, 18.7. He gives this honor to Praxidamas and Rhexibios (187–188), who won in Ols. 59 and 61 ( = 544 and 536 B. C.) respectively. We have already pointed out that the statue of Oibotas (29), who won in Ol. 6 ( = 756 B. C.), was set up in Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.) by the Achæans (VI, 3.8).

2334 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 294 (Leonidas; cf. A. M., XIII, 1888, p. 322, note 1, Treu); 183 (Seleadas; this is my own ascription; see Hyde, p. 58; Dittenberger wrongly restored the name as Σέλευκος); 632 (Polypeithes and Kalliteles); 171 (Deinosthenes); 178 (Glaukon; his monument was a little bronze chariot, not a statue, thus imitating earlier sixth-century victor dedications, like that of Kyniska (7); no. 296 is another inscription from a statue of Glaukon dedicated by Ptolemy Euergetes.)

The pedestal of the statue of Paianios (167) was found behind the south side of the Echo Colonnade and therefore far removed (Inschr. v. Ol., no. 179); Pausanias again mentions Paianios in VI, 15.10. Another pedestal (no. 632), found south of the west end of the Byzantine church, has been referred by Purgold to the statue of Lysippos (162): cf. A. Z., XXXIX, 1881, pp. 85 f., no. 387. Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 615, and others have rejected the ascription.

2335 Διέστηκε δὲ ἀγυιὰν ἀπὸ τῆς ἐσόδου τῆς πομπικῆς, τοὺς γὰρ δὴ ὑπὸ Ἀθηναίων καλουμένους στενωποὺς ἀγυιὰς ὀνομάζουσιν οἱ Ἠλεῖοι.

2336 See A. M., XIII, 1888, pp. 327–336 and Pl. VII (Die Altis Mauer in Olympia). On the west of the Altis are the ruins of two parallel walls, the inner Greek, the outer Roman; the original South wall of the Altis ran along the line of the South Terrace wall, the later Roman wall (dating from Nero’s time) to the south of it. Thus in Pausanias’ day, the ἔσοδος πομπική was opposite the Leonidaion. In two other passages, however, it appears to be at the southeast corner of the Altis (V, 15.7; VI, 20.7). R. Heberdey (in Eranos Vindobonensis, 1893, pp. 34–47) explains this discrepancy by saying that Pausanias, in mentioning the southwestern entrance, is writing from his own observation after the Roman extension, and in the other passages is copying from other writers who wrote before that extension. Doerpfeld’s explanation, however, is better: in the Roman extension a gate was built at the southwest corner of the new West wall superseding the older southeast entrance. Processions still passed along the same way, but were now inside the Altis, the great gateway of Nero at the southeast corner being given up after his death. Cf. Frazer, III, pp. 570–572; Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, pp. 375–6.

2337 P., VI, 17.1.

2338 A. M., XIII, 1888, pp. 317–326 (Die Bauinschrift des Leonidaions zu Olympia); and cf. Inschr. v. Ol., no. 651, and Olympia, Ergebn., Textbd., II, Die Baudenkmaeler, pp. 83–93, and Tafelbd., Pls. LXII-LXVI (R. Borrmann).

2339 E. g., K. Lange, Haus und Halle, 1885, pp. 331 f; Hirschfeld, A. Z., XL, 1882, p. 121; Flasch, in Baum., II, pp. 1095 and 1104 K. Others placed it elsewhere: e. g., Curtius-Adler, Olympia und Umgegend, 1882, pp. 23 f.; Scherer, op. cit., pp. 55 f. (and Plan), identified it with the “South-east Building,” where he had this second ἔφοδος begin.

2340 V, 13.9. For full account of the altar, see V, 13.8–11.

2341 Thus Curtius, Altaere v. Ol., Abhandl. d. k. Preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1882, p. 4 (= Gesammelte Abhandlungen, 1894, II, pp. 42 f.); Adler, A. A., 1894, p. 85; ibid., 1895, pp. 108 f. (cf. his reconstruction in Olympia, Ergebn., Tafelbd., II, Pl. CXXXII and Textbd., II, pp. 210 f.); Curtius-Adler, Olympia u. Umgegend, p. 35; Flasch, op. cit., p. 1067 (cf. Funde v. Ol., pp. 238–239); Boetticher, Olympia^2, 1886, pp. 190 f. (and Plan); Furtwaengler, Bronzen v. Olympia, p. 4; Hirschfeld, op. cit., p. 119 (= Plan); Scherer, op. cit., p. 56 (with Plan); Trendelenburg, Der grosse Altar des Zeus in Olympia, 1902, pp. 17 f.; Doerpfeld, Olympia, Ergebn., Textbd., II (Baudenkmaeler) p. 162, (cf. I, p. 82, where he admits the possibility that it may have stood further northwest, nearer the Heraion); Frazer, III, p. 556; etc.

2342 See A. M., XXXIII, 1908, pp. 185–192 (Olympia in praehistorischer Zeit); cf. Year’s Work in Classical Studies, III, 1908, p. 12.

2343 For Puchstein’s location and form of the altar of Zeus, see A. A., 1893, p. 22; ibid., 1895, p. 107; Jb., XI, 1896, pp. 53 f. (with “oblong” reconstruction by Koldewey, pp. 76–77); for Wernicke’s view, see Jb., IX, 1894, pp. 93 f. This view was already refuted by Adler, A. A., 1895, p. 108, and Doerpfeld, Ergebn. v. Ol., Textbd., II, pp. 162 f. Doerpfeld later referred these remains also to prehistoric houses (cf. preceding note)

2344 V, 13.8. The exact site of the Pelopion is given in V, 13.1 (see Plans A and B). Wernicke, (l. c., pp. 94 f.) placed the older altar of Zeus (who was at first worshiped in common with Hera) between the Heraion and Pelopion (as Puchstein also did). He believed that later, however, after the building of the temple of Zeus and the Pelopion, the altar was moved east of both and stood somewhere northwest of the elliptical depression, where Pausanias saw it. He explained the lack of remains on the theory that the Christians would completely destroy this, the chief pagan altar. But it is difficult to see why the few Christian settlers in this out of the way place should have shown any such anger. Doerpfeld (Ergebn. v. Ol., Textbd., II, Baudenkmaeler, p. 163) suggested that it may have stood south of the Exedra of Herodes Attikos, where its site must certainly be sought.

2345 Hitz.-Bluemn., II, i, p. 359, rightly say that the words of Pausanias point to a place in the Altis where there are neither foundations nor ashes. Since it is incredible that the Christians should have destroyed it so completely, they assume that Pausanias made a mistake in his directions. Their conclusion that the elliptical depression best fits the conditions is untenable now.

2346 Op. cit., p. 164.

2347 See A. M., XIII, 1888, pp. 335–336, and Ergebn., Textbd., I, p. 88. In the latter he says: “Zu unserer Verwunderung sehen wir, dass der zweite Teil die ununterbrochene Fortsetzung des ersten Teiles ist, also in Wirklichkeit nur eine Ephodos, nur ein einziger Rundgang.”

2348 This pillar stood between the Great Altar and the temple of Zeus: P., V, 20. 6.

2349 Ἀνδριάντας δὲ ἀναμεμιγμένους οὐκ ἐπιφα <νέ> σιν ἄγαν ἀναθήμασιν, κ. τ. λ., (VI, 17.7); again in VI, 18.2 he says that he discovered the statue of Anaximenes “by searching” (ἀνευρών).

2350 Similarly, on arriving at the statue of Telemachos, he moved first to the east and then returned (passing the chariot of Kleosthenes) before proceeding west, without mentioning it: see supra, p. 345.

2351 On analogy with V, 15.1. See Hyde, p. 68.

2352 The Terrace wall can still be traced before the western front of the temple and also to the northeast of it; cf. Treu, A. Z., XXXVI, 1878, p. 36: “So umgab denn vermutlich einst den ganzen Tempel eine statuenbekroente Terrasse.” Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, p. 619, suppose such a road to the west and north of the temple, but would interpret it as being ἐν ἀριστερᾷ.

2353 Cf. Hyde, p. 70. Hitz.-Bluemn. (see preceding note) rejected this textual change of mine as unnecessary, and followed Hirschfeld and Doerpfeld in having Pausanias return along the south side of the temple of Zeus. I proposed this change by analogy with the text of V, 24.1, V, 21.2, and other passages.

2354 The bronze tablet of Demokrates (170), found south of the southwest corner of the temple of Zeus, did not belong to his victor statue, but to a base which stood probably inside the temple: Inschr. v. Ol. no. 39. Also the archaic marble helmeted head and arm with the remains of a shield attached (see Bildw. v. Ol., Tafelbd., Pl. VI, 1–4, and 5–6), the head being found west of the temple and the arm before the gate of the Pelopion, wrongly ascribed by Treu (A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, pp. 48 f., and Bildw. v. Ol., III, pp. 33–34) and Overbeck (I, pp. 198 f., and p. 178) to Eperastos (183), I have referred to an older hoplite, Phrikias of Pelinna (Foerster, nos. 151, 155): see Hyde, p. 43, and supra, Ch. III, pp. 162–3 and Fig. 30a, b.

2355 See Inschr. v. Ol., no. 293.

2356 See Inschr. v. Ol., nos. 267–269. The supposed foundation was found thirty feet north of the temple; cf. Frazer, III, pp. 646 f.; etc.

2357 V, 20.6 f. A large foundation, between the pedestal of Dropion, King of the Paionians, Inschr. v. Ol., no. 303, (see Plans A and B), and the pedestal of the Eretrian Bull, may have formed part of the house of Oinomaos (cf. Curtius-Adler, op. cit., p. 40; Flasch, l. c., p. 1074). Wernicke, (Jb., IX, 1894, p. 95), however, refers it to the oval depression called the Great Altar site. Doerpfeld (Ergebn. v. Ol., Textbd., I, p. 82) is opposed to this view and places it further north, near the Metroon.

2358 This is Kalkmann’s theory (op. cit., p. 89), who calls this section (VI, 18.7) the “letzter Trumpf,” an addition having no connection with the second ἔφοδος. He compares it with V, 24.9, where Pausanias, after ending the periegesis of the altars, adds one more, that of “Zeus Horkios,” which stood in the Council House, though he had already passed this point twice without mentioning the fact. Kalkmann also compares it with V, 27.12 (the transition to the account of the victor statues). Gurlitt (op. cit., p. 392) explains this last section, i. e., V, 27.12, as due to a later revision of Pausanias’ work.

2359 VI, 19.1.

2360 See the Catalogue in my de olymp. Stat., (pp. 3 f.) for dates; and cf. ibid., Ch. IV, pp. 72 f., for results. The summaries are made only on the basis of the 153 monuments which can be exactly or approximately dated.

2361 Eutelidas (148), Praxidamas (18), Rhexibios (188), Polypeithes and Kalliteles (160–161).

2362 On the date of the temple of Zeus (?468–456 B. C.), cf. Doerpfeld, Ol., Ergebn., Textbd., II, pp. 19. f.

2363 Enation (176) is simply called an Arkadian by P., VI, 17.3.

2364 VI, 1.2, and cf. his words in VI, 17.1.

2365 The last dated victor statue at Olympia, known from inscriptions, is that of Valerios Eklektos of Sinope, four times victor as herald, winning in Ols. 256, 258, 259, 260 ( = 245, 253–261 A. D.): Foerster, 741–744. Philoumenos of Philadelphia in Lydia, victor in wrestling (?) in Ol. (?) 288 ( = 373 A. D.), Foerster, 750, had a statue, as we learn from the conclusion of an epigram preserved by Panodoros in Cramer’s Anecd. gr. Parisiensia, 1839–41, II, p. 155, 17 f.; cf. Inscr. Graecae metricae, ed. Preger, 1891, no. 133. It may have been in Olympia.

2366 On his use of older lists of victors and especially of the Elean register, see P. Hirt, de Fontibus Pausaniae in Eliacis (Greifswald, 1878), pp. 12 f.; Mie, Quaestiones agonisticae (Rostock, 1888), pp. 17 f.; Kalkmann, Pausanias der Perieget, pp. 72 f. and 103 f.; Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, p. 426, note 43; Robert, Hermes, XXIII, 1888, pp. 444 f.; Hirschfeld, A. Z., XL, 1882, pp. 105 and 111; J. Juethner, Philostratos ueber Gymnastik, pp. 60–74 (Elean register), and 109 f.; Gardiner, p. 50. Pausanias frequently mentions such sources himself, especially the Elean register: e. g., III, 21.1; V, 2.19; VI, 2.3. Hirschfeld (l. c., pp. 105 and 113) and others have unreasonably doubted whether Pausanias ever visited Olympia at all.

2367 Hyde, 146; Foerster, 472, 476; P., VI, 15.3 f.

2368 Hyde, 150; Foerster, 474, 475; P., VI, 15.10 (two statues).

2369 Hyde, 119 and pp. 49–50; Foerster, 501; P., VI, 13.7, and Inschr. v. Ol., 184.

2370 Hyde, 42; Foerster, 800; P., VI, 4.9.

2371 Hyde, 40; Foerster, 494; P., VI, 4.5.

2372 Hyde, 152; Foerster, 391; P., VI, 16.2.

2373 Hyde, 162; Foerster, 515; P., VI, 6.7.

2374 Hyde, 125a; Foerster, 651; P., VI, 14.2.

2375 Hyde, 111b; Foerster, 648–650; P., VI, 13.3.

2376 Hyde, 111a; Foerster, 654–6, 659, 660, 662–664; P., VI, 13.3.

2377 H. N., XXXIV, 16. See supra, pp. 27 and 54.

2378 Cf. Inschr. v. Ol., p. 235. P., VI, 1.1, distinctly states that not all victors had statues, adding that some of the most distinguished had none.

2379 Thus the epigram on the base of a monument of Xenombrotos (133; cf. P., VI, 14.12) states that it was a portrait of the victor: Inschr. v. Ol., 170. We have, however, aside from this inscription, no record that he was a victor more than once. See supra, pp. 54–5. On the basis of three or more victories, several victors should have had portrait statues: e. g., Foerster, 60, 86, 144, 351, 358, 495, 603, 741, 815.

2380 Discussed supra, Ch. II, p. 58.

2381 For dates, places of finding, and contests, references are constantly made by number to Dittenberger, Inschr. v. Ol.; the number of each victor is given also from Foerster’s lists, which, though incomplete, are the best that have yet appeared. Where the exact dates are known they are cited from Foerster; otherwise, the probable dating of the inscription as given by Dittenberger is followed. See Plans A and B.

2382 See Inschr. v. Ol., 142 (Pantares, son of Menekrates of Gela); Foerster, 149, = Ol. (?) 67 ( = 572 B. C.); Gelo won in Ol. 73 ( = 488 B. C.): Foerster, 180.

2383 Phrikias won twice, in Ols. 68 and 69 ( = 508 and 504 B. C.): Foerster, 151 and 155. Phanas was three times victor on the same day (τριαστής), in the στάδιον, δίαυλος and as ὁπλίτης, in Ol. 67 ( = 512 B. C.): Foerster, 144–146. For the ascriptions, see supra, pp. 162–3.

2384 Inschr. v. Ol., 150. Roehl (I. G. A., 355 and Add., p. 182) wrongly ascribed it to Agiadas (103), boy boxer of Elis, whose statue was by the Aeginetan Serambos (P., VI, 10.9). His victory should fall between Ols. 72 and 74 inclusive ( = 492 and 484 B. C.): Hyde, p. 44. Foerster, 519, following Roehl and Gurlitt (op. cit., pp. 369 and 419), who placed Serambos in the second century B. C., referred the victory of Agiadas to Ol. (?) 161 ( = 136 B. C.). Robert, O. S., p. 181, identifies the inscription with Epitimiadas mentioned in the Oxy. Pap. as victor in παγκράτιον in Ol. 78 ( = 468 B. C.). Dittenberger and Loewy (latter in I. G. B., 416) refer the inscription to the first half or middle of the fifth century B. C.

2385 Inschr. v. Ol., 170; cf. Hyde, p. 53.

2386 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 175; Foerster, 375. Foerster’s proposed dating of this victor, Ol. 110 ( = 340 B. C.), is wrong.

2387 Ibid., no. 180.

2388 Ibid., no. 181.

2389 Ibid., no. 182.

2390 Ibid., no. 185.

2391 Ibid., no. 187.

2392 Ibid., no. 188.

2393 Ibid., no. 189.

2394 This Greek building dates from the first half of the fifth century B. C. Cf. F. Adler, Ol., Ergebn., Textbd., II (Die Baudenkmaeler), pp. 93–105 (especially 98 f.), and Flasch, in Baum., pp. 1070–1 and 1104 M f., both of whom identify it with the workshop of Pheidias (P., V, 15.1); Curtius, Die Altaere v. Ol., Abhandl. d. k. Preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. zu Berlin, 1882, p. 20 (= Gesamm. Abhandl., 1894, II, pp. 57 f.), refers it to the Theekoleon, generally identified with the easternmost of the two buildings further north. See Plans A and B.

2395 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 190.

2396 Ibid., no. 192.

2397 Ibid., no. 193.

2398 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 194; Foerster, 484.

2399 Ibid., no. 195.

2400 Ibid., no. 196.

2401 Ibid., no. 197; Foerster, 808 (undated).

2402 Ibid., no. 191; Foerster, 807 (undated).

2403 Ibid., nos. 198–204; see Foerster, 542–547; one of the group, Telemachos, son of Leon, had another statue at Olympia: Inschr. v. Ol., 406.

2404 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 205; Foerster, 822 (undated).

2405 Ibid., no. 206; Foerster, 828 (undated).

2406 Ibid., no. 207.

2407 Ibid., no. 208.

2408 Ibid., no. 209; Foerster, 482.

2409 Ibid., no. 210.

2410 Ibid., no. 211.

2411 Ibid., no. 212.

2412 Ibid., no. 213; Foerster, 614, 619.

2413 Ibid., nos. 214, 215.

2414 Ibid., nos. 216, 217; Foerster, 550.

2415 Ibid., no. 218; Foerster, 535 (= Ol. ? 171 = 96 B. C.).

2416 Ibid., no. 219; Foerster, 593; he won in Ol. 190 ( = 20 B. C.).

2417 Ibid., no. 220; Foerster, 601, who dates the victory in Ol. (?) 194 ( = 4 B. C.).

2418 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 221; Foerster, 612. He won τεθρίππῳ in Ol. 199 ( = 17 A. D.); his statue was set up by M. Antonios Peisanos.

2419 Ibid., no. 222; Foerster, 585, 587. He won two victories (perhaps after 17 A. D.) in an unknown contest; Foerster dates them Ols. (?) 184 and 185 ( = 44 and 40 B. C.).

2420 Ibid., no. 223; Foerster, 568; his statue was erected by his mother, Klaudia Kleodike.

2421 Ibid., no. 224; Foerster, 823 (undated); his statue was set up by his native state.

2422 Ibid., no. 225; Foerster,632. The base contained two epigrams by T. Klaudios Thessalos, of Kos: E. Cougny, Epigramm. Anth. Pal., III, 1890 (Appendix nova), p. 26, no. 169.

2423 Ibid., 226; Foerster, 634. His statue was erected by L. Betilenos Phloros, of Elis.

2424 Ibid., no. 227; Foerster, 666; he won Ol. 217 ( = 89 A. D.). His brother Diodoros set up the statue. The victor was an ἔφεδρος; see A. E. J. Holwerda, A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, pp. 171 f.

2425 Ibid., 228; Foerster, 671.

2426 Ibid., nos. 229, 230 (newer inscription); I. G. B., 125; Foerster, 624–625. He was a περιοδονίκης and won in Ols. (?) 205 and 207 ( = 41 and 49 A. D.).

2427 Inschr. v. Ol., no. 231; Foerster, 595 and 597. Foerster dates his two Olympic victories in Ols. (?) 191 and 192 ( = 16 and 12 B. C.). Hermas was περιοδονίκης twice, and also gained victories besides at the Nemean and other games.

2428 Ibid., no. 232; Foerster, 815–819 (undated). He was twice περιοδονίκης and won besides at the Isthmus, Nemea, and at other games—eighty victories in all.

2429 Ibid., no. 234 and p. 346; he won in either πάλη or παγκράτιον.

2430 Ibid., no. 235 and pp. 346–347. These bronze fragments have been noted in our list of surviving fragments of victor statues, Ch. VII, p. 322.

2431 Ibid., no. 233 (name restored from no. 440, line 4). On her father, see Foerster, under no. 634.

2432 Ibid., 236; Foerster, 686. Both Gurlitt, op. cit., p. 421, and Foerster think that this monument is mentioned by P., V, 20.8 (that of a Roman senator). Dittenberger is against this view, and the place of finding also is against it. On the victor’s full name and that of his father, see Foerster, l. c.

2433 Ibid., no. 237; Foerster, 692. He won at Olympia in Ol. 229 ( = 137 A. D.), and the inscription names many other victories elsewhere.

2434 Ibid., no. 238; Foerster, 679 and 681, who dates the victories in Ols. (?) 224 and 225 ( = 117 and 121 A. D.), while Dittenberger dates them in the next century. He was twice περιοδονίκης: see Foerster, l. c.

2435 Ibid., no. 239; Foerster, 746 (date = end of second or third centuries B. C.). For the epigram, see also Cougny, Epigramm. Anth. Pal., III (Appendix nova), p. 46, n. 284.

2436 Ibid., nos. 242–243; Foerster, 741–744. He was a τρισπερίοδος, i. e., three times περιοδονίκης. For his other victories outside Olympia, see Foerster, l. c.

2437 Ibid., nos. 240–241; Foerster, 739. Asklepiades won the πένταθλον in Ol. 255 ( = 241 A. D.).

2438 Philinos, son of Hegepolis of Kos (173), won 24 victories, 5 at Olympia, 4 at Delphi, 4 at Nemea, 11 at the Isthmus, mostly in the στάδιον, he was, therefore, four times περιοδονίκης. He won in Ols. 129 and 130 ( = 264 and 260 B. C.): cf. P., VI, 17.2 and Foerster, 441 and 442; Leonidas of Rhodes (111c) was τριαστής in the four different Ols. 154–157 ( = 164–152 B. C.), winning 12 races: cf. P., VI, 13.4, and Foerster, 495–497, 498–500, 502–504, 507–509.

2439 Omitting the votive bronze diskos of the victor P. Asklepiades of Corinth mentioned above.

2440 Foerster, pp. 26–30, records the names of 634 Olympic victors who are known to us from all available sources.

2441 Sepulchral monuments are either entirely excluded or mentioned only incidentally. The tombs of nine Olympic victors are known from various sources.

2442 The dating of victories in the present section will necessitate certain repetitions of dates already given elsewhere in this work. While heretofore dates have been referred usually to the compilations of Foerster and Hyde, the original authorities for them will be cited in this section.

2443 Chionis, (= Charmis in Afr.), according to P., III, 14.3, won seven victories at Olympia: four in the στάδιον, in Ols. 28 to 31 ( = 668 to 656 B. C.); 1–4 = Afr.; 1 = P., IV, 23.4; 2 = IV, 23.10; 3 = VIII, 39.3; three in the δίαυλος, probably in Ols. (?) 29–31: see Rutgers, p. 11, n. 4, and pp. 10–11; Hyde, 111 and p. 48; Foerster, 39, 41–46.

2444 Kylon won the δίαυλος in Ol. 35 ( = 640 B. C.): Afr.; cf. Rutgers p. 13; Foerster, 55.

2445 Hdt., V, 71; Thukyd., I, 126; Plut., Solon, 12.

2446 A. M., V, 1880, p. 27 and n. 1. Kuhnert, Jahrb. f. classische Philol., Supplbd., XIV, 1885, pp. 278 f., and n. 2, agrees with Furtwaengler, and thinks that it was set up long after the death of Kylon, and that it is possible that the name of the conspirator became mixed with that of an Athenian victor of the same name, but of later date.

2447 A. Z., XXIV, 1866, pp. 183 f.; he is followed by Frazer, II, p. 348.

2448 Thukyd., I, 134.

2449 Loeschke, A. M., IV, 1879, p. 295, n. 1.

2450 See also Hitz.-Bluemn., I, 1, pp. 299–300.

2451 His six victories in πάλη are mentioned by P., III, 13.9; he won πάλη παίδων in Ol. 37 ( = 632 B. C.): P., V, 8.9; Afr.; πάλη ἀνδρῶν in Ols. 39–43 ( = 624–608 B. C.): Afr.; Foerster, 60, 64, 66, 68, 71, 73. He is mentioned by Ph., I.

2452 See Wide, Lakonische Kulte, 1893, pp. 38 f.; Hitz.-Bluemn., I, 2, pp. 792–3.

2453 Pausanias, III, 13.9, mentions his five victories in πάλη. He must have won after his father’s victories, and so at the beginning of the sixth century B. C. Rutgers, pp. 109 f., conjectures that the first victory was πάλη παίδων; Foerster, 86–90.

2454 Arrhachion (on various spellings of the name, cf. Rutgers, p. 19) won thrice in the παγκράτιον in Ols. 52–54 ( = 572–564 B. C.). The third victory is recorded by Afr. and P., VIII, 40.1; the first two by P., l. c. Cf. also Ph., 21. Foerster, 98, 101, 103. See supra, pp. 326 f.

2455 He had the nickname Koalemos: Plut., Cimon, 4. He won two victories τεθρίππῳ in Ols. 62 and 64 ( = 532 and 524 B. C.); his horses, under the name of Peisistratos, won in the same event in Ol. 63 ( = 528 B. C.): Hdt., VI, 103; they were buried in front of the city beyond the so-called “Hollow Way,” opposite the tomb of Kimon; Hdt., l. c.; Plutarch, Cato Major, 5. Cf. Aelian, de Animal., XII, 40, where he says that the mares of Miltiades—meaning Kimon—were buried in the Kerameikos. See Foerster, 124, 128 and 132.

2456 Var. Hist., IX, 32.

2457 Hdt., VI, 103.

2458 IV, 33.

2459 On Nubes, 64.

2460 Foerster, 85.

2461 He won in an unknown contest. He accompanied Dorieus, the younger brother of Kleomenes I of Sparta, on his futile expedition to Sicily, and died there: Hdt., V, 47. Kleomenes began to reign in 519 B. C., and the Sicilian expedition occurred about 510 B. C.; Foerster, 138, therefore dates the victory of Philippos about Ol. 65 ( = 520 B. C.).

2462 Hdt., V, 47; Eustath., on Iliad, Bk. III (p. 383, 43).

2463 Astylos (on variations of the name, see Rutgers, pp. 32 f.) won victories in στάδιον and δίαυλος in three successive Ols.: P., VI, 13.1: στάδιον in Ols. 73–75 ( = 488–480 B. C.): 1 = Afr., and Dionys. Hal., VIII, 1; 2 = Afr., and Dionys., VIII, 77; 3 = Afr., Dionys., IX, 1, and Diod. Sic., XI, 1. So the victories in δίαυλος, 1, 2, 3, must have been in the same Ols. The Oxy. Pap. also names Astylos a victor twice as ὁπλίτης, in Ols. 75 and 76 ( = 480 and 476 B. C.). So Grenfell and Hunt thought that P. had mixed the victories in δίαυλος and as ὁπλίτης; Robert, O. S., pp. 163 f., however, supports P., and thinks that Astylos won eight victories, the victories in δίαυλος and στάδιον all preceding Ol. 76, as other names appear here in the Oxy. Pap. Astylos, therefore, won three victories in Ol. 75, one in Ol. 76, and the other four in Ols. 73–74. Cf. Rutgers, pp. 32, 34–35; Foerster, 176–177, 181–182, 187–188; Hyde, 110.

2464 Rutgers, p. 34, n. 1 (cf. Robert, O. S., p. 164) has shown that the tyrant named Hiero by Pausanias should be Gelo; cf. Hertzberg, Gesch. v. Hellas u. Rom, I, 1879, p. 181; Foerster, 181–2.

2465 I, pp. 409–410; Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 59, calls the statue of Astylos that of a stadiodromos.

2466 Euthymos won πύξ three times in Ols. 74, 76, and 77 ( = 484, 476, and 472 B. C.): 1 = P., VI, 6.5; 2 and 3 = P., VI, 6.6 and Oxy. Pap. Cf. Rutgers, pp. 34, 38, 41; Foerster, 185, 195, 207; Robert, O. S., pp. 167, 184 f.; Hyde, 56.

2467 Inscribed base found: see Inschr. v. Ol., 144; I. G. B., 23; I. G. A., 1882, 388.

2468 See Kallimachos, apud Plin., H. N., VII, 152.

2469 Strabo, VI, 1.5 (= C. 255); Aelian, Var. Hist., VIII, 18; Suidas, s. v. Εὔθυμος; P., VI, 6. 7–11. Cf. also E. Curtius on the Olympia base, A. Z., XXXVI, 1878, p. 83, no. 127. On the legend of the statue, see Eusebios, Praep. evang., V, 34.7.

2470 Theagenes won πύξ in Ol. 75 ( = 480 B. C.): P., VI, 6.5; Oxy.Pap.; and παγκράτιον in Ol. 76 ( = 476 B. C.): P., VI, 11.4; Oxy. Pap.; he was twice περιοδονίκης and won many victories elsewhere, carrying off 1400 crowns, according to P., VI, 11.5, and 1200, according to Plut., Praec. reipub. ger., 15, p. 811 D. Cf. Rutgers, pp. 36, 38; Foerster, 191, 196; Hyde, 104. Dio Chrys., Orat., XXXI, p. 339 M, wrongly mentions three Olympic victories.

2471 Op. cit., p. 340 M.

2472 Praep. evang., V, 34.7.

2473 Deor. Conc., 12; cf. P., VI, 11.9.

2474 Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1900, p. 332, n. 2.

2475 Ladas won δόλιχος in Ol. (?) 76 ( = 476 B. C.): Robert, O. S., p. 165, because of an older dating for Myron, 480–444 B. C., necessitated by the Oxy. Pap. (see also ibid., p. 184). Foerster, 249, has given Ol. (?) 85 ( = 440 B. C.) as the date of the victory, on the basis of the earlier dating of Myron, 460–420 B. C.; cf., e. g., Brunn, 1, p. 142; Bergk, P. l. G., III, p. 473, no 125 and note, and Rutgers p. 107.

2476 A. Pl., nos. 53, 54; see supra, Ch. IV, pp. 196–197.

2477 Foerster assumed that the statue by Myron stood in Olympia. Against this view, see Furtwaengler (Mw., p. 379, n. 5), Kalkmann (Jb., X, 1895, p. 56, and XI, 1896, p. 197), Studniczka (article cited in note on Theagenes preceding), Brunn (Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1880, pp. 474 f.). Benndorf (de anthol. Gr. Epigram., 1862, 15, n. 1) thought it more probable that the statue stood formerly at Olympia, but in the time of Pausanias was in Rome. Thus it is best to assume two statues, the one in Argos not by Myron. Brunn (p. 475) showed that Ladas was a Spartan because of P., III, 21. I and VIII, 12.5; Benndorf (op. cit., p. 13) thought that he was an Argive. Kuhnert (Jahrbuecher f. cl. Philol., Supplbd., XIV, p. 269 n. 13) argued that the Argive statue was set up by the Argive state, an improbable assumption if Ladas were a Spartan. A different Ladas is the stade runner from Aigion, mentioned by P., III, 21.1, and X, 23.14.

2478 Kallias won παγκράτιον in Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.): P. V, 9.3. He was περιοδονίκης: C. I. A., I, 419. Cf. Foerster, 208; Hyde, 50. Three other Athenian victors at Olympia named Kallias are known: Kallias, son of Pheinippos, won κέλητι in Ol. 54 ( = 564 B. C.): Foerster, 104; Rutgers, p. 21; Kallias, son of Hipponikos, grandson of preceding, won τεθρίππῳ thrice in Ol. (?) 74, and Ols. 83, 84 ( = 484, 448, 444 B. C.): Foerster, 186 a, 242, 247; Rutgers, p. 142; Kallias, mentioned by Polyb., XXVIII, 16, won παγκράτιον in the second century B. C.: cf. Foerster, under no. 208.

2479 Inscribed base found: Inschr. v. Ol., 146; I. G. B., 41.

2480 C. I. A., I, 419. The painter Mikon, mentioned by Pliny, H. N., XXXV, 59, is also named by him as a sculptor of athlete statues: op. cit., XXXIV, 88; he is also known from an inscription found on the Akropolis at Athens: C. I. A., I, 418; I. G. B., 42.

2481 Diagoras won πύξ in Ol. 79 ( = 464 B. C.): schol. on Pindar, Ol., VII, Argum., Boeckh, p. 157, and Oxy. Pap. He was περιοδονίκης, and his other victories are mentioned by Pindar and the scholiast on the ode cited. On Diagoras, see H. van Gelder, Geschichte der alten Rhodier, 1900, p. 435; on Kallikles, see Robert, O. S., pp. 194 f. Cf. Rutgers, p. 43; Foerster, 220; Hyde, 59.

2482 Boeckh, p. 157 and cf. p. 159; F. H. G., IV, p. 410 (= Gorgon, fragm. 3).

2483 Agias was περιοδονίκης. The date of his victory in the παγκράτιον at Olympia can not be determined exactly. Although the dedication of Daochos occurred in the latter half of the fourth century B. C., the time of Lysippos (Preuner = between 339 and 331 B. C.: see Ein delphisches Weihgeschenk, 1900, p. 12; Homolle dates it more closely between 338 and 334 B. C.; B. C. H., XXIII, 1899, 440), the victory of Agias fell over a century earlier. Homolle proposed 428 B. C. as the floruit of Agias, but gave no date for his victory at Olympia; Preuner (p. 17) sets the victory before the middle of the fifth century B. C.; K. K. Smith (Class. Phil., 1910, pp. 169–174) has proposed Ol. 80 ( = 460 B. C.), the only lacuna for παγκράτιον in the Oxy. Pap.; however, Robert (O. S., p. 183) has placed Timodemos of Acharnai in that place. Foerster, 214, dates Timodemos Ol. (?) 78 ( = 468 B. C.).

2484 Pharsalos, p. 28. See supra, pp. 286–287.

2485 Cheimon won πάλη in Ol. 83 ( = 448 B. C.): Oxy. Pap.; cf. Robert, O. S., pp. 171 and 191; Hyde, no. 88. Foerster, 285, had proposed Ol. (?) 94 ( = 404 B. C.), on the basis of the older dating of Naukydes = 423–390 B. C. (see Robert, Arch. Maerchen, 1886, p. 107). Kalkmann, Pausanias der Perieget, 1886, p. 192, n. 1, thought that the statue at Olympia and the one at Rome were identical; Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, 1890, pp. 374 and 423, n. 38 a, has shown that the assumption is unfounded.

2486 The temple of Peace was built by Vespasian (between A. D. 70 and 75) east of the Forum Augusti. Pliny (H. N., XXXIV, 84, and XXXV, 102) mentions works of art in it; Josephus (de Bell. Judaico, VII, 5.7) also describes it.

2487 Leon, according to Eustathius, on Iliad, II, 851 (= p. 361, 10), won τεθρίππῳ in Ol. 85 ( = 440 B. C.). This date is followed by Schubart, Pausanias und seine Anklaeger, Jb. f. cl. Philol., XXX, 1884, p. 99, and Preger, Inscript. Gr. metricae ex scriptoribus praeter anthologiam collectae, (Lipsiae, 1891), on no. 128. He won in Ol. 89 ( = 424 B. C.), according to Polemon (fragm. 22), the date followed by Foerster, 264 and 264 N. Foerster places Arkesilaos of Sparta ( = 250) as victor τεθρίππῳ in Ol. (?) 85; Hyde (13) places Arkesilaos either in Ol. 86 or Ol. 87, leaving Ol. 85 free for Leon. Polemon (fragm. 22) calls Leon the “father of Antikleidas”; Preger, op. cit., p. 49, proposes the “son of Antikleidas,” thus having Leon win with his father’s chariot. Bergk, P. l. G., III, p. 40, note, changed the name to Antalkidas.

2488 Fragm., 22 (= schol. on Euripides, Hippolytus, 230); see F. H. G., III, p. 122; cf. P. l. G., l. c.

2489 Eubotas (on the name, cf. Hitz.-Bluemn., II, 2, pp. 573–574) won στάδιον in Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C.): Afr.; Xen., Hell., I, 2.10; Diodoros, XIII, 68.1; and τεθρίππῳ in Ol. 104 ( = 304 B. C.): P., VI, 8.3 and cf. VI, 4.2; Foerster, 277, 350; Hyde, 75. Pausanias (VI, 8.3) says that his Olympia statue was made before his victory. Ol. 104 was a non-Olympiad; see on no. 28 infra (Xenodamos), p. 369 and notes.

2490 Aelian, Var. Hist., X, 2.

2491 Promachos won παγκράτιον in Ol. 94 ( = 404 B. C.): see Rutgers, p. 56, n. 4, who gives this date on the basis of P., VII, 27.6, and Ph., 22. Cf. Foerster, 286; Hyde, 81.

2492 He won in an unknown contest, either in the fifth or the fourth century B. C.: Preger, op. cit., no. 144, on the basis of the epigram. Cf. Foerster, 293a; Foerster, in another place, under no. 159, wrongly refers this same epigram (which he there ascribes to Simonides) to another unknown victor of Argos who won in some gymnic contest, some time between Ols. 65 and 76 ( = 527 and 476 B. C.), the dates of Simonides’ sojourn in Greece (cf. K. Sittl, Gesch. d. griech. Litt., 1884–1887, III, pp. 59 f.). It can, however, refer to but one victor.

2493 I, 7, p. 1365a and I, 9, p. 1367b.

2494 Ap. Eustath., on Od., XIV, 350 (= p. 1761, 25).

2495 See G. Kaibel, Quaestiones Simonideae, Rhein. Mus., XXVIII, 1873, pp. 452–3. Cf. P. l. G., III, p. 503; fragm. 163 (Simonides).

2496 Kyniska won τεθρίππῳ twice in Ols. (?) 96 and 97 ( = 396 and 392 B. C.): see Hyde, 7, on the basis of Robert, O. S., p. 195; Foerster, 326 and 333, proposed Ols. (?) 100 and 101 ( = 380 and 376 B. C.) on the basis of the inscription found at Olympia (Inschr. v. Ol., 160; I. G. B., no. 99 and p. XXI). Cf. Rutgers, pp. 143–144.

2497 She won συνωρίδι some time near the middle of the fourth century B. C.; Foerster, 344, dates the victory Ol. (?) 103 ( = 368 B. C.).

2498 Curtius, Peloponnesos, II, 1852, p. 313, n. 29; for King Pausanias, see Thukyd., I, 134.

2499 Archias won as κῆρυξ in three successive Olympiads: Pollux, IV, 92; the epigram says (ὃς τρὶς ἐκάρυξεν). Foerster, 351, 356, 361; he proposes (see under no. 351) Ols. (?) 104–106 ( = 364–356 B. C.).

2500 A. Pl., 372; also in Pollux, IV, 92.

2501 [Phil]okrates won συνωρίδι about the middle of the fourth century B. C. (see Koehler on the inscription cited in the following note). Foerster, 365, proposes Ol. (?) 107 ( = 352 B. C.)

2502 C. I. A., II, 3, 1303; see L. Ross, Die Demen von Attika, 1846, pp. 80 and 111.

2503 C. I. A., II, 3, 1319; Le Bas, Voyage archéologique, I, Attique, no. 595. The inscription appears to belong to the fourth century B. C.

2504 Phorystas won as κῆρυξ some time toward the end of the fourth century B. C., i. e., in the time of the artist Kaphisias: see Loewy, on the inscription cited in the following note. Foerster, 405, proposes Ol. (?) 117 ( = 312 B. C.).

2505 C. I. G., I, 1582; Kaibel, Epigr. Gr. ex lapid. conlecta, 1878, no. 938; Loewy, I. G. B., 119; Collitz and Bechtel, Samml. d. gr. Dialekt-Inschr., 1883–90, no. 945.

2506 I. G. B., 120. See Foerster, under no. 405.

2507 Aristophon won παγκράτιον some time between Ols. (?) 115 and 130 ( = 320 and 260 B. C.), as we infer from the date of the inscription from the base of his statue at Olympia: see Inschr. v. Ol., no. 169. Cf. Hyde, 123 and p. 51. Foerster, 758 (following Rutgers, p. 122) had left the victory undated.

2508 C. I. A., II, 3, 1475. See Ross, Die Demen von Attika, no. 70; Le Bas, Attique, no. 115.

2509 Strabo, XII, 4.2 (= C. 624).

2510 Attalos won ἅρματι πώλων some time during the reign of his older brother Philetairos, founder of the Attalid dynasty, i. e., between Ols. 124 and 129 ( = 284 and 264 B. C.): see Foerster, 436. An epigram of the philosopher Arkesilaos of Pitane (mentioned by Foerster), celebrating the chariot-race of this Attalos, is preserved by Diog. Laert., IV, 6.30; cf. Fraenkel on the inscription, no. 10 (see next note).

2511 Inschr v. Pergamon (ed. Fraenkel), 1890, I, nos. 10–12; cf. I. G. B., no. 157.

2512 He won παγκράτιον ἀνδρῶν in Ol. 211 ( = 67 A. D.): P., X, 36.9.

2513 A. Z., XL, 1882, p. 110.

2514 P., VI, 22.2.

2515 Ibid.

2516 P., VI, 22.3; 4.2; cf. 8.3 (where Eubotas won τεθρίππῳ, no. 17 supra).

2517 V, pp. 454–455; cf. Hitz.-Bluemn., III, 2, p. 829.

2518 Vit. Apoll. Tyan., V, 7.

2519 Suetonius, Nero, 24; Dio Cassius, LXIII, 14. Foerster, 642–647.

2520 Cf. also Schubart, Pausanias u. seine Anklaeger, Jb. f. cl. Philologie, XXIX, 1883, pp. 472 f.; Brunn, ibid., XXX, 1884, p. 24; and Foerster, 641 and under no. 638.

2521 T. Phlabios Artemidoros won παγκράτιον twice. He was also περιοδονίκης. The Magna Capitolia, in which he was also victor, were instituted by Domitian in 86 A. D.; Foerster, 657, 661, proposes Ols. (?) 215 and 216 ( = 81 and 85 A. D.) for the two victories.

2522 C. I. G., III, 5806; Kaibel, Inscript. Gr. Sicil. et Ital., 1890, no. 746.

2523 T. Phlabios Metrobios won δόλιχος, first of his countrymen, in Ol. 217 ( = 89 A. D.): cf. Boeckh on the inscription (see next note) and Rutgers, p. 91, n. 2; Foerster, 665. He was also περιοδονίκης and won δόλιχος at the Capitolia in Rome, as “first of all men.”

2524 C. I. G., II, 2682.

2525 Sarapion won πὺξ παίδων in Ol. 217 ( = 89 A. D.): P., VI, 23.6. Cf. Foerster, 667; Rutgers, p. 91, n. 3, who doubts whether Sarapion was an Olympic victor, though Pausanias says that he was.

2526 I. e., Sarapion, from Alexandria, who won στάδιον in Ol. 204 ( = 37 A. D.): Afr.; Foerster, 620; Rutgers, p. 86; another Sarapion, from Alexandria, who, Pausanias (V. 21.18) says, came to Olympia in Ol. 201 ( = 25 A. D.) to enter the παγκράτιον, but ran away the day before the contest and was fined for cowardice; Sarapion of Magnesia ad Sipylum, victor in an unknown contest and at an unknown date, known from an inscription from Tralles: C. I. G., II, 2933; Foerster, 824; Rutgers, p. 156.

2527 M. Aurelios Demetrios won παγκράτιον some time before his son’s victory in the same contest in Ol. 240 ( = 181 A. D.), as we learn from the inscription mentioned in the next note; cf. Rutgers, p. 96; Foerster, 719. Foerster, 682, therefore proposes Ol. (?) 225 ( = 121 A. D.) for the father’s victory; cf. Rutgers, p. 122. Both father and son were περιοδονῖκαι. The father was called ὁ παράδοξος.

2528 C. I. G., III, 5912, 5913, and 5914; Kaibel, Inscript. Gr. Sicil. et Ital., 1102–1104.

2529 This victor won πάλη ἀνδρῶν, first of his countrymen, in Ol. 229 ( = 137 A. D.); date from the inscription (see next note); Foerster, 691.

2530 B. C. H., XI, 1887, pp. 80 f. (P. Foucart).

2531 Kranaos won στάδιον in Ol. 231 ( = 145 A. D.): Afr.; and πένταθλον twice, δίαυλος once, and as ὁπλίτης once, according to Pausanias (II, 11.8), but in unknown Olympiads: Foerster, 697, 702–703, 707–708. He dates the four last victories in Ols. (?) 232 and 233 ( = 149 and 153 A. D.).

Most writers have identified the Granianos of Pausanias with Kranaos of Africanus, as both are from Sikyon; cf. Rutgers, p. 94 and n. 1. Kalkmann, Pausanias der Perieget, p. 74, note 6, however, is doubtful of the identification.

2532 T. Ailios Aurelios Apollonios won as κῆρυξ during the reign of Antoninus Pius ( = 138–161 A. D.): cf. Dittenberger on the inscription (see next note). Foerster, 700, proposes Ol. (?) 231 ( = 145 A. D.). He was περιοδονίκης.

2533 C. I. A., III, 120 (Dittenberger).

2534 Mnasiboulos won στάδιον in Ol. 235 ( = 161 A. D.): Afr., and P., X, 34.5; and as ὁπλίτης in Ol. 235: P., ibid. He was περιοδονίκης in both events: Foerster, nos. 712–713. His son of the same name had a statue in the temple of Athena Kranaia at Elateia, whose marble inscribed plate has been recovered: see B. C. H., XI, 1887, p. 342, no. 13 (P. Paris).

2535 Aurelios Toalios won (?) παγκράτιον twice in the time of Alexander Severus ( = 222–235 A. D.): see Holleaux and Paris on the inscription (see next note). Foerster, 735–736, proposes Ols. (?) 251 and 252 ( = 225 and 229 A. D.).

2536 B. C. H., X, 1886, pp. 233 f., no. 13.

2537 Aurelios Metrodorus won παγκράτιον about the time of Alexander Severus (see Boeckh, on the inscription mentioned in the next note). Foerster, 737, proposes Ol. (?) 253 ( = 233 A. D.).

2538 C. I. G., III, 3676.

2539 Valerios Eklektos won as κῆρυξ four times in Ols. 256, 258, 259, and 260 ( = 245, 253, 257, and 261 A. D.): see inscription mentioned in the next note; Foerster, 741–744. He was περιοδονίκης thrice (= τρισπερίοδος), and won 80 crowns in various games.

2540 Inschr. v. Ol., 242–243; A. Z., XXXVIII, 1880, pp. 164 f., no. 369.

2541 C. I. A., III, 129 (Dittenberger).

2542 Klaudios Rhouphos won (?) πάλη or (?) πύξ or (?) παγκράτιον near the beginning of the fourth century A. D. (see Kaibel and the inscription mentioned in the next note); Foerster, 748–749, and Rutgers, p. 154. He was twice περιοδονίκης.

2543 C. I. G., III, 5910; Kaibel, Inscript. Gr. Sicil. et Ital., no. 1107, p. 299.

2544 Philoumenos won (?) πάλη, according to Rutgers, p. 98, n. 3, either in Ol. 288 ( = 373 A. D.) or certe non multo prius (on the basis of the passage in Panodoros cited in the following note). He is also mentioned in a Roman inscription given by Rutgers, ibid. Foerster, 750.

2545 Ap. Cramer, Anecd. gr. Parisiensia, 1839–41, II, p. 155, 17 (quoted by Foerster); Preger, Inscr. Gr. metricae, no. 133.

2546 Ainetos was victor in πένταθλον. Cf. Rutgers, p. 112; Foerster, 754, who wrongly gives the contest as πύξ.

2547 Nikokles, according to Pausanias, l. c., won five prizes in running δρόμος in two Olympiads. Foerster, under nos. 788–792, explains these words by arranging victories in δίαυλος, δόλιχος, and as ὁπλίτης in one Olympiad, and two of these contests in the next; none of them could have been in στάδιον, since his name does not appear in Africanus. Cf. Rutgers, pp. 105–106, 107, and 126. Le Bas long ago (R. arch., II, 1845, p. 220) connected a restored inscription with this victor.

2548 Aigistratos won πάλη παίδων: Foerster, 806.

2549 C. I. G., II, 2527.

2550 He won in an unknown contest and was three times περιοδονίκης, gaining 35 crowns at various games. Cf. Foerster, 825–827.

2551 C. I. G., I, 1715.

2552 Ross, Arch. Aufsaetze, 1855–1861, I, pp. 163 f; C. I. A., I, 376; I. G. B., 39; E. S. Roberts, An Introduction to Greek Epigraphy, I, 1887, 68a.

2553 Rhein. Mus., XVI, 1861, p. 224.

2554 Hermes, XII, 1877, p. 345 and n. 29.

2555 E. g., by R. Schoell, Hermes, XIII, 1878, p. 437; cf. Gurlitt, Ueber Pausanias, pp. 158 f., Loewy on the inscription, and Hitz.-Bluemn., I, 1, p. 261.

2556 IX, 105.

2557 C. I. A., I, 402; I. G. B., 46; Ross, Arch. Aufsaetze, I, pp 168 f. This is possibly to be connected with the statue of the Volneratus deficiens mentioned by Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 74. See supra, p. 199. However, the lettering is not later than 444 B. C., while Diitrephes is known to have been living as late as 411: Thukyd., VIII, 64.

2558 Th. Bergk, Zeitschr. f. d. Altertumswissensch., III, 1845, pp. 961 f.; Wilamowitz, Hermes, XII, 1877, p. 346; Furtwaengler, A. M., V, 1880, p. 28 and n. 2; cf., however, Gurlitt, op. cit., pp. 159 f.; Robert, Die Marathonschlacht in der Poikile und Weiteres ueber Polygnot, 18stes Hallisches Winckelmannsprogr., 1895, p. 22; Hitz.-Bluemn., I, i, pp. 255 f. and 262 f.

2559 II, p. 289; cf. ibid., pp. 275 f.

2560 Jb., VII, 1892, pp. 185 f. Cf. the remarks of Gercke, ibid., VIII, 1893, pp. 113 f.

2561 III, 75; IV, 119 and 129.

2562 Mw., pp. 278 f.

2563 Vit. X Orat., IV (Isokrates), 42, (p. 839 c.) It was in the ball-court of the Arrephoroi. The same author, IV, 41, (839b), also mentions a bronze statue (with inscription) of Isokrates set up by the orator’s adopted son Aphareus. See supra, pp. 24 and 281. I assume that these two passages refer to one and the same monument.

2564 Three victors, Ladas (no. 11), Agias (no. 14), and Sarapion (no. 30), had two statues each. Theagenes (no. 10) had several, according to Pausanias, who, however, mentions only one definitely. We have omitted from our total the statue set up by T. Phlabios Artemidoros (28a) to his father.

2565 We have here included the tablet of Chionis at Sparta (no. 1), a victor of the seventh century B. C., whose monument, however, was erected in the fifth century B. C.

2566 Including the two Lysippan statues of Agias, a victor of the fifth century, B. C.

2567 Of the 192 monuments referred to 187 victors mentioned by Pausanias in his victor periegesis at Olympia, only 153, belonging to 148 victors, can be exactly or approximately dated. Of these, 33 monuments (referred to 32 victors) belong to the epoch prior to the approximate date of the founding of the temple of Zeus, i. e., prior to Ol. 77 ( = 472 B. C.); 51 monuments (referred to 50 victors) from this date on, to the approximate date of the battle of Aigospotamoi (B. C. 404), i. e., down to Ol. 93 ( = 408 B. C.); 36 monuments (referred to 34 victors) from then on, to about the time of the birth of Alexander the Great, i. e., to Ol. 106 ( = 356 B. C.); and 33 monuments (referred to 32 victors) from that date, to the close of the description of the athlete periegesis, i. e., from Ols. 107 to 149 ( = 352 to 184 B. C.). See Hyde, op. cit., Ch. IV, pp. 72 sq., and supra, pp. 352–3. (In my victor lists, op. cit., pp. 3–24, I have enumerated 188 victors; however, Philon of Kerkyra is listed twice, nos. 91 and 136, for two different statues.) Of these 153 monuments, nearly one-half (i. e., 74) belong properly to the fifth century (Ols. 70 to 94 = 500 to 404 B. C.).

2568 Pausanias mentions 192 (referred to 187 victors, as above); we have found in the present chapter that 63 others (referred to 61 victors) are known from inscribed base fragments found at Olympia; and that 47 (referred to 44 victors) are known from literary sources as having stood elsewhere. If we deduct 10 victors who had monuments both at Olympia and elsewhere, we have a grand total of 282 victors, in whose honor these 302 monuments of various kinds were erected.

2569 See Hyde, pp. v-vi, for an alphabetic list of sculptors mentioned by Pausanias, or known from the recovered bases of statues at Olympia. See supra, p. 339, n. 1, end.

2570 Lysippos made two statues honoris causa for Pythes, son of Andromachos, of Abdera: P., VI, 14.12; Hyde, 134a. Mikon made two statues for King Hiero of Syracuse, one represented on foot and the other on horseback, which I have classed as “honor” statues: P., VI, 12.2; Hyde, 105a. All the “honor” statues at Olympia named by Pausanias are listed in the work cited, on p. v.

2571 H. N., Bk. XXXIV, passim. One other sculptor, Kratinos, named by Pausanias, is noted by Pliny as a painter only: ibid., XXXV, 140 and 147.

INDEX.

Aberdeen head, 87.

Academy, festival in honor of Athenian soldiers at the, 11.

Achæans, games among, 20;

- in Homer, 1, 7;

- origin of sports among, 1.

Achaia, erects victor statue at Olympia, 30;

- Pausanias’ account of, 323.

Achilleae, definition of, 92, note 6;

- statues, 87, 226.

Achilles, casts solos at games of Patroklos, 218;

- fights with Telephos, on Tegea pediment, 306, 307;

- shield of, 5;

- yields prize to Agamemnon, 8.

Acrobats, among Athenians, 5;

- in Crete, 2, 3;
- in Homer, 5;
- in modern Italy, 5;
- in Thessaly, 5;
- at Tiryns, 2, 3;
- on Vapheio cups, 5.

Actors, statues of victorious, at Olympia, 285.

Adlocutio, gesture of, 132.

Admetos, boxing match with Mopsos, on chest of Kypselos, 285.

Adonis(?), statue of, 74.

Adorantes se feminae, statues by Apellas, 131.

Adoration and prayer, as athletic motives, 130f.

Aegean civilization, 1f.;

- unathletic character of, 7.

Aegina, games on, 20;

- date of gable statues from temple of Aphaia, 125;

- gable statues from temple of Aphaia, 123f.;

- influence of sculptors on “Apollo” statues, 102;

- kneeling Herakles, from East gable, 195;
- movement in gable statues, 176;
- observation of nature in, 244;
- runners, from West gable, 195;
- sculptors from, 122f.;
- sculptors in favor at Olympia, 264;
- temple of Aphaia on, 123f.

Aeginetans, at battle of Salamis, 125.

Aelian, on bronze horses of Kimon, 363.

Aesthetic judgments of classical writers, 58.

Africanus, list of stade victors in, 191;

- on omission of 211th Olympiad, 369.

Agamemnon, prize of, 8;

- the Agamemnon of Aischylos, 75.

Agasias, sculptor, 208.

Agathinos, statue at Olympia, 345.

Age, classification of Greek athletes by, 189;

- in Plato’s Republic, 189.

Ageladas; see Hagelaïdas, 190.

Agenor, statue at Olympia, 30, 118.

Agesarchos, statue at Olympia, 129.

Agiadas, statue at Olympia, 123.

Agias, statue at Delphi, 46, 365, 366;

- statue at Pharsalos, 366;
- careless finish of Delphian statue, 304;
- compared with Apoxyomenos of Vatican, 289;
- compared with Farnese Herakles, 253;
- epigram on base of statue, 328;
- as example of assimilation, 94;
- fillet on, 150;
- as statue “double,” 304;
- as statue of a pancratiast, 292;

- supplants Apoxyomenos as norm of Lysippos, 290, 291f.;

- swollen ear of, 168;

- why considered copy, 303f., 316.

Agids, tomb in Sparta, 362.

Agilochos, statue at Olympia, 357.

Agon (Contest), figure in group of Mikythos, 164, 215.

Agorakritos, sculptor, 182.

Agrippa, M., removes the Apoxyomenos to Rome, 289.

Aiakos, games in honor of, 20.

Aigion, boy from, chosen as priest for his beauty, 57.

Aigistratos, Olympic victor statue at Lindos, 372.

Aigospotamoi, battle of, 352;

- memorial at Delphi, 278.

Aigyptos, equestrian monument at Olympia, 120, 267, 279.

Ainetos, statue at Amyklai, 371.

Aischines, statue at Olympia, 29, 214, 346.

Aischylos, on ἀγώνιοι θεοί, 75;

- Agamemnon of, 75.

Aischylos, victor relief, in honor of the Dioskouroi, 96, 97.

Ajax, acrobatic feat of, 3;

- combat with Diomedes, 8;

- on r.-f. Etruscan stamnos, 132.

Akarnania, 318.

Akastos, games of, depicted on chest of Kypselos and on throne of Apollo at Amyklai, 12.

Akestorides, statue at Olympia, 345, 354.

Akontistai; see Javelin-throwers.

Akousilaos, statue at Olympia, 130, 165.

Akragas, bronze statue dedicated at Olympia by people of, 130;

- decadrachm of, 48.

Akropolis at Athens, Aeginetan bronze head from, 123;

- Argive bronze head from, 114, 115;
- athlete statue from, 115, 127;
- chariot-race relief from, 128;
- ephebe head, yellow-haired, from, 116;
- excavations of, 126;
- Hermes relief from, 270;
- Korai from, 115, 126;
- la petite boudeuse from, 115;
- pre-Persian sculptures from, 126f.;
- Old Temple of Athena on, 128, 271.

Akroteria, winged figures as, 177.

Aktion, “Apollos” from, 103, 334.

Alabastron, on statue of Milo at Olympia, 107.

Alexander the Great, bust of, from Alexandria, 316;

- coin of, showing Herakles, 253;

- funeral games in honor of, 11;

- head of, in Copenhagen, from sarcophagus, 95;

- institutes funeral games for Hephaistion, 11;

- portraits of, 56;
- portraits of, by Lysippos, 290, 311, 316;
- pensiveness in portraits of, 318;
- statue of, by Lysippos, 73.

Alexander Sarcophagus, so-called, in Constantinople, 275.

Alexinikos, statue at Olympia, 122.

Alkainetos, statue at Olympia, 343, 352.

Alkamenes, and Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo type, 89;

- Enkrinomenos of, 134;
- and Olympia gable statues, 113;
- and Standing Diskobolos, 76.

Alkandridas, P. Ailios, statue at Olympia, 360.

Alketos, statue at Olympia, 120, 344.

Alki, temple of Apollo at, 336.

Alkibiades, victor at Olympia, 257;

- so-called Alkibiades of the Vatican, 199.

Alkibios, base of statue of, from Akropolis, 284.

Alkinoos, King of Scheria, 210.

Alkmena, 10.

Alpheios, river at Olympia, 49, 258.

Altars, at Olympia: of Aphrodite, 351;

- near Stadion, 283;
- of Nymphs, 351;
- of Seasons, 351;
- scattered positions of, 341;
- of Zeus; see Great Altar of Zeus.

Altis at Olympia, East Byzantine wall of, 345, 357;

- erection of statues in, 27, 99;
- excavation of, 24;
- honor statues in, 339;
- location of earliest statues in, 299;
- North Byzantine wall of, 359;
- periegesis of Pausanias in, 151, 298;
- positions of victor statues in, 339f.;
- processional entrance of, 347;
- processional way of, 348;
- Roman enlargement of, 348;
- routes (ἔφοδοι) of Pausanias in, 339f.;
- South Terrace wall of, 346;

- South wall of, 339, 341, 345, 347, 352, 357;

- Southwest gate of, 360;
- statues “within,” 347;
- topography of, 339;
- West Byzantine wall of, 358;
- West wall of, 347, 355f.

Alypos, sculptor, 120.

Amaltheia, ivory horn of, at Olympia, 264, 265.

Amastris, coin of, showing figure of Hermes, 78.

Amazon, of Polykleitos, 159;

- torso of Atalanta from Tegea pediment, draped as, 306.

Ambrakia, 105.

Amelung, W., on supposed absence of libation-pouring in athletic art, 140;

- on head in Turin, 93;

- on statuette in Vatican, 212, 244.

Amenartas; see Amenerdis.

Amenerdis, Egyptian queen, statue of, 331.

Amenemhat III, co-regent of Horfuabra, 330.

Amentum; see Thong.

Amertas, statue of, at Olympia, 117.

Amphiaraos vase, in Berlin, 13, 269, 280;

- Amphiaraos, on chest of Kypselos, 269;

- reliefs in honor of, 273.

Amphiareion, at Oropos, 272, 273.

Amphidamas, games of, 19.

Amphiktyonic League, 17.

Amphion, sculptor, 277.

Amphipolis, games at, 11.

Amyklai, temple of Apollo at, 19.

Amykos, boxing match of, with Polydeukes, 269;

- invention of boxing-gloves ascribed to, 236.

Amyntas, statue at Olympia, 129, 354.

Analogy, in Greek art, 66.

Anatomy, knowledge of, in Greek sculpture, 56;

- in Aeginetan gable statues, 124;
- in Ligourió bronze, 111;
- studied in Alexandria, 289.

Anauchidas, statue at Olympia, 341.

Anaxandros, statue at Olympia, 130, 266.

Anaxilas, as dedicator of Delphi Charioteer, 278.

Ancestors, worship of, in Greece, 14.

Ancient writings of the Eleans, 15.

Andokides, vase-painter, 229, 230.

Andreas, sculptor, 118.

Angelion, sculptor, 122, 304, 334.

- See also Tektaios.

Aniconic statues, 58.

Anochos, statue at Olympia, 110, 111.

Anointing, as athletic motive, 133f.

Antaios, bout with Herakles, on proto-Attic amphora, 13.

Antenor, sculptor, 174, 175.

Anthologies, Greek, 43, 239, 368.

Anthropometry in Greek sculpture, 68.

Antidotos, painter, 29, 233.

Antigenes, statue at Olympia, 357.

Antignotos, sculptor, 136.

Antigonos, statue at Olympia, 346.

Antikythera, bronze statue of youth from sea near, 80f.;

- statuette from sea near, 78, 79.

Antioch, date of founding of, 121.

Antipatros, statue at Olympia, 118;

- father of, bribed by Syracuse, 33.

Antoninus Pius, coins of, showing pine, 21.

Apellas, sculptor, 131, 267, 367.

Aphaia, temple of, on Aegina, 123f.

Aphrodeisios, Tiberios Klaudios, statue at Olympia, 359;

- victor in horse-race, 262.

Aphrodite, altar at Olympia, 351;

- statue in Heraion at Olympia, 326;

- temple at Naukratis, 334.

Apobates, chariot-race, 272f.;

- armor worn in, 272, 273;

- known at Athens and in Bœotia, 273;

- preserves tradition of Homeric warfare, 272;

- on reliefs, 272;

- apobates, horse-race, at Olympia, 282f.

Apollas, lost work of, on Olympic victors, 45, 130, 343.

Apollo, as athlete, 88;

- beaten in running, 76;
- beats Ares in boxing, 88, 235, 285;
- beats Hermes in running, 88, 285;
- as charioteer, 129, 270;
- combat with Herakles, 88, 89;
- cult statue of, represented on vases, 335;
- as god of boxing at Delphi, 235;
- as god of boxing in Homer, 235;
- as god of contests, 75;
- as god of youth, 88;
- hymn to, 25;
- on coins of Athens, 90;
- on relief in Capitoline, 89;

- on relief with Artemis and Leto, in Louvre, 284;

- tripods in worship of, 19.
- Statues: Apollo Alexikakos, by Kalamis, 90;
- from temple of Apollo at Alki, 336;
- from Delos, 334, 335;
- colossal, from Delos, 336;
- from Mausoleion, 311;
- colossal, from Olympia, 91;

- Philesian Apollo, by elder Kanachos, 107, 118, 336;

- from Porto d’Anzio, 144;
- Praxitelian, in Medici Gardens, Rome, 313;
- from West gable, Olympia, 114–116.

- Statuettes: bronze from Naxos, in Berlin, 74, 119;

- Payne Knight bronze, British Museum, 108, 119;

- bronze, from Piombino, Louvre, 118;
- Sciarra bronze, Rome, 119.
- Temples: of Apollo Lykios, 364;
- at Bassai, 327;
- at Naukratis, 334.

“Apollo,” type of, in sculpture, 100f.;

- Aeginetan influence on, 102;
- Choiseul-Gouffier, 89f., 91, 148;
- funerary in character, 336, 337;
- “grinning” and “stolid” groups, 100;
- name “Apollo,” 337;

- name rightly applied to statues found in sanctuaries of Apollo, 334–336;

- nudity of, 48;
- represents early victor statues, 334f.;
- on-the-Omphalos, 89f., 168.

- Statues of: from Aktion, 103, 334;

- from Cyprus, 337;
- from Delphi, 148;
- colossal, from Megara, 336;
- from Melos, 100f.;
- from Mount Ptoion, 100–103, 120, 123, 334;
- from Naukratis, 334;
- from Naxos, 328, 334;
- from Orchomenos, 100, 101, 103, 328, 334;
- from Pompeii, 111;
- from Tenea, 100f., 127, 148, 327, 328, 336;
- from Thera, 100f., 327, 337;
- from Volomandra, 100, 104, 337.

Apollonia, head from, 157.

Apollonios, sculptor, 168, 224;

- quoted by Philostratos, 107.

Apollonios, T. Ailios Aurelios, Olympic victor, statue at Athens, 370.

Apollonios, victor at Olympia, fined by the umpires, 34.

Apoxyomenos, the, after Lysippos, 74;

- statue in Vatican, 136, 288f.;

- pose of, 81, 99;

- regarded formerly as center of stylistic treatment of Lysippos, 288;

- so regarded by some scholars now, 291;
- present doubts of, 290;
- display of anatomical knowledge in, 289;
- compared with the Agias, 289f.;
- as work of Lysippos’ school, 292;
- of third century B. C., 292;
- Apoxyomenos of Polykleitos, 136;
- statue in Uffizi as, 136, 137, 168.

Apples, prizes at Delphi, 21, 107, 182.

Aratos, statesman, honor statue at Olympia, 42.

Aratos, victor, painting of, 29.

Archaism, break with, in the statue of the ephebe from the Akropolis, 115.

Archedamos, statue at Olympia, 120.

Archemoros, 10.

Archery, in Homer, 8.

Archiadas, statue at Olympia, 358.

Archias, victor statue at Delphi, 368.

Archidamas, chariot victor, statue at Olympia, 265.

Archidamas III, King of Sparta, statues at Olympia, 42.

Archippos, statue at Olympia, 346.

Ares, beaten by Apollo in boxing, 235, 285;

- Doryphoros of Polykleitos converted into Ares, 74;

- head of, in Munich, 170;
- helmeted head of, in Louvre, 170;
- Ludovisi statue of, 170;
- swollen ears on heads of, 170.

Argeiadas, sculptor, 110.

Argive “Apollos” from Delphi, 104, 106;

- Argive and Sikyonian canons, 68.

Argos, canon of early sculptors of, 68;

- characteristics of sculptors of, 116;
- Nemean games held at, 17;
- prizes at, 20;

- public chariot of, victorious at Olympia, 31, 257;

- public horse of, victorious at Olympia, 31, 257;

- school of sculptors from, 58, 109f., 105;

- schools of Argos and Sikyon, 109f.;

- square shoulders of canon of sculptors from, 112.

Arion, victor statue on Helikon, 284.

Aristarchos, statue at Olympia, 358.

Aristeides, the Elder, painter, 29.

Aristeus, statue, at Olympia, 344.

Aristion, statue at Olympia, 46, 88, 117, 159 and note 3, 240, 345.

Aristion, stele of, 124, 127.

- See Aristokles.

Aristodamos, statue at Olympia, 356.

Aristodemos, statue at Olympia, 120.

Aristogeiton, statue of, 173f.

- See also Harmodios and Tyrannicides.

Aristokles, Cretan sculptor of Sikyon, 118, 120.

Aristokles, sculptor of Aristion stele, 127.

Ariston, of Rhegion, kitharoidos, 284.

Ariston, P. Kornelios, statue at Olympia, 359.

Aristonikos of Egypt, beaten at Olympia, 147.

Aristonikos of Karystos, ball-player, 84.

Aristophanes, 36, 246;

- scholia on, 110, 363.

Aristophanes, of Byzantion, 367.

Aristophon, statue at Olympia, 31, 345, 368;

- at Athens, 368.

Aristotimos, 42.

Aristotle, honor statue at Olympia, 42;

- lost work of, on Olympic victors, 45, 130, 343;

- on inscribed base of statue of unknown Olympic victor, 367;

- on jumping, 214;
- on jumping-weights, 216;
- in praise of “mimetic” arts, 58.

Arkadia, funeral games in, 9, 20;

- Pausanias’ description of, 326;

- statue of unnamed boxer from, at Olympia, 245.

Arkas, father of Azan, 9.

Arkesilaos, of Sparta, statue at Olympia, 29.

Arkesilas IV, of Kyrene, chariot victor at Olympia 257;

- chariot model at Delphi, 24, 265, 267;

- as dedicator of the Delphi Charioteer, 277.

Arm, right, of boy victor, from Olympia, 46;

- bronze right arm from statue of Olympic victor, 322.

Armed contest, in early Greek art, 8–9.

Armor, race in; see Hoplite-race.

Arndt, P., on so-called Jason, of Louvre, 87;

- on the Perinthos and allied heads, 180.

Arolsen, statuette of diskobolos in, 187.

Arrhachion, crowned after death, 247;

- statue at Phigalia, 100, 325, 326f., 328, 335, 337, 363;

- inscription on, 333;
- one of oldest victor statues, 327, 333;
- three victories of 327;
- throttled by adversary, 247.

Ars statuaria, defined by Pliny, 302.

Artemas, P. Ailios, statue at Olympia, 360.

Artemidoros, Olympic victor, 354.

Artemidoros, T. Phlabios, statue in Naples, 369.

Artemis, on Sparta relief, 284.

Artemisia, chariot-group of, 264.

Artists, statues of, at Olympia, 285.

Arvanitopoullos, A. S., on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 81, 84.

Aryballos, 74, 119, 137, 138, 212;

- on vase-paintings, 133;

- wrongly as wrestler attribute, 165.

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, head of Diadoumenos in, 154.

Asiatics, wear loin-cloth, 48.

Asios, fragment of, 52.

Asklepiades, M. Aurelios, dedicates statue in Rome to father, 370.

Asklepiades, P., dedicates bronze diskos at Olympia, 22, 360.

Asklepieion, the, at Athens, statues in, 130.

Asklepios, temple at Sikyon, 370.

Assimilation of statues of men to god and hero types, 71f.;

- of Olympic victor statues, 71f.;
- to types of Apollo, 88f.;
- of the Dioskouroi, 96f.;
- of Herakles, 93f., 319;
- of Hermes, 75f.

Assurbanipal, reliefs from palace of, at Nineveh, 330.

Assyro-Babylonian art, reliefs of, represented in motion, 177;

- influence on early Greek art, 329.

Astragalos, base in form of, at Olympia, 240.

Astylos, bribed by Hiero of Syracuse, 33;

- statue at Kroton, 33, 363;

- at Olympia, 179, 363.

Asymmetry, example of, 70.

Atalanta, soul of, chooses body of athlete, in Plato’s myth of Er, 36;

- statue of, from Tegea, 306, 310, 316.

Athena, Alea, temple at Tegea, 306;

- Chalkioikos, hieron of, in Sparta, 283;
- helmeted heads of, 53;
- Lemnia, 53;
- Old Temple of, on Akropolis, 128, 271;
- on relief from Tarentum, 96.

Athenæus, 57, 284.

Athenaia; see Panathenaia.

Athenaios, statue at Olympia, 244, 343, 353.

Athens, athletes at, divided into two classes according to age, 189;

- coins of, showing Apollo, 90;
- statues of victors in, 26–27;
- Gymnasion of Ptolemy at, 166.

Athletes: barefoot and bareheaded, 48;

- head of, in Capitoline called Juba II, 166;

- head of, in Metropolitan Museum, showing swollen ears, 168;

- statue of, in Copenhagen resembling the Agias, 293;

- statue found at Ephesos, 137, 138;

- two statues in lunging attitude, in Dresden, 292;

- statue from Palazzo Farnese, now in London, 293;

- statue of late style in Lansdowne House, London, 180;

- statues of, adorn palæstræ and gymnasia, 297;

- statues of, assimilated to types of Apollo, 88f.;

- of the Dioskouroi, 96–97;
- of Herakles, 93f.;
- of Hermes, 75f.;
- bronze statuette in Louvre, 213, 214; etc.

Athletics, origin and early history of Greek, 1f.;

- in Crete, 1f.;
- at Delphi, 25;
- in Homer, 7f.;
- athletics and Greek religion, 14;
- influence on sculpture, 64;

- athletic funeral scene on a Cypriote silver vase from Etruria, 13;

- Argive-Sikyonian school of athletic sculptors, 1, 109f.

Attalos, base of victor statue of Attalos, father of Attalos I, at Pergamon, 368;

- Portico of, in Athens, 368.

Attic sculptors, 126f.;

- characteristics of, 128;
- examples of pre-Persian sculptures, 281;
- influence on Polykleitos, 152, 153;
- old Attic canon of proportions, 68.

Attributes of victor statues, 147f.;

- primary, 148f.;

- secondary 161f.

Augustus, coins of, showing celery, 21;

- enlarges privileges of athletes in Rome, 33;

- statue from Primaporta, 82.

Aura, victorious mare of Pheidolas, 279.

Aurelius, M. Antoninus, 43.

Authors; see Poets, Prose-writers.

Autolykos, statue in Athens, 27.

Autun, statuette of pancratiast from, in Louvre, 167, 250.

Aves, the, of Aristophanes, quoted, 206.

Azan, games of, in Arkadia, 9, 259.

Bacchiadas, flutist, statue on Helikon, 284.

Bacchylides, 10, 36.

Ball-playing (σφαιρίζειν), in antiquity, 83, 84;

- game known as φανίνδα, 84;

- Spartan origin of, 84.

Barbarians, invade Greece in Middle Ages, 322;

- destroy victor statues at Olympia, 43.

Barberini Palace, Rome, statue in, 142;

- estate of the Barberini, 50.

Barracco Collection, Rome, athlete statue in, 156.

Bases; see Victor statue bases.

Bassai, temple of Apollo Epikourios at, 327.

Bates, W. N., on interpretation of head of boy statue from Sparta, 305.

Bathykles, sculptor, 12.

Battos of Kyrene, group of, dedicated at Delphi, 277.

Baukis, statue at Olympia, 117.

Beauty, contest of, among women, in Arkadia, 57;

- in Elis, 57;
- on Lesbos, 57;
- at Panathenaic games, Athens, 57;
- on Tenedos, 57;
- games in honor of, 57;
- Greek worship of, 57;
- youth chosen for, at Tanagra, 57.

Bellerophon, on Chimæra tomb, Xanthos, 271.

Belvedere Hermes, statue in Vatican, 72.

Beneventum, head from, in Louvre, 63.

Beni-Hasan, Egypt, wall-paintings at, 1, 228.

Benndorf, on Boboli athlete in Florence, 180;

- on epigram relative to Ladas, 197;

- on Pliny’s nudus talo incessens of Polykleitos, 250.

Bieber, Fräulein, on various artistic tendencies in the Daochos group, 291.

Bigae and quadrigae, mentioned by Pliny, 264.

Biting, prohibited in pankration, 246.

Biton (?), statue of, from Delphi, 105.

Bloch, on the Uffizi Apoxyomenos, 137.

Boboli athlete in Florence, 180;

- Hermes, 85.

Boeckh, on division of athletes according to age at Athens, 189.

Boëdromion, month of, 18.

Bœotian games in Thebes, statues erected for, 26.

Boetticher, on Praxitelian origin of head from Olympia, 294.

Bologna, r.-f. krater in, 90.

Bonus Eventus (?), statue found in Rhine, 276.

Boreas, winged, on relief in Metropolitan Museum, 194.

Borghese Warrior (Gladiator), statue by Agasias, 169, 208, 209, 290.

Borsdorf, bronze bowl from, 231.

Bosanquet, R. C., on bronze statuette found in sea off Antikythera, 79.

Boudeuse, la petite, statue from Akropolis, 115.

Bouleuterion; see Council-house.

Bouprasion, Nestor contends at, 9.

Bow, attribute of Philesian Apollo, 119.

Boxer Vase, from Hagia Triada, 6, 7, 235.

Boxers, bases of statues of, at Olympia, 240, 241;

- bearded, on University of Pennsylvania Panathenaic amphora, 239;

- between groups of warriors and dancers on an eighth century B. C. vase, 13;

- boxer known as “man with crushed ear,” 167;

- on Boxer Vase, 6, 7;

- bronze head of boxer or pancratiast, from Olympia, 146, 254, 255, 322;

- on bronze shield from Mount Ida, 235;
- caps of, 165f.;
- head in Munich, with swollen ears, 63, 168;
- positions of, on vases, 239;
- pyctae (?), by Myron, 188;
- on pyxis, from Knossos, 7;
- on r.-f. kylix in the British Museum, 239;
- on r.-f. kylix of Douris, 239;
- Seated Boxer, of Museo delle Terme, 145f.;
- statues of, represented in motion, 243;
- statue of, with Diadoumenos motive, 155;
- statue in Kassel, 242;
- statue in Lansdowne House, London, 155;
- statue in Palazzo Albani, Rome, 165;
- statue from Sorrento, 242;
- statuette of, from Olympia, 28, 244;
- swollen ear of, 240, 241.

Boxing, 234f.;

- antiquity of, 235;
- in Crete, 3, 5, 6, 7, 235;
- in Homer, 8, 234;
- invented by Theseus, 235;
- more dangerous than pankration, 246;
- most popular sport at Olympia, 235;
- one of oldest sports, 234;
- when introduced at Olympia, 235;

- boys’ contest, when introduced at Olympia, 235;

- painful character of, 234f.;
- two periods of, 235;
- at Sparta, 167;
- on vases, 239.

Boxing-gloves, 235f.;

- on Boxer Vase, 7, 235;
- in Crete, 235;
- in Homer, 235;

- described by Pausanias and Philostratos, 236;

- forms of, 236;
- heavy (σφαῖραι or ἱμάντες ὀξεῖς), 235f.;
- soft (ἱμάντες λεπτοί or μειλίχαι)  235f.;
- method of putting on, 236;
- not used in pankration, 246;

- soft, on bronze arm found in sea off Antikythera, 236;

- on fist from Verona, 238;

- on forearms of Seated Boxer of the Museo delle Terme, 237, 238;

- on statue from Herculaneum, 238;

- on statue from Sorrento, 238.

Boy Binding on a Fillet (ἀναδούμενος), by Pheidias, 150.

Boy Crowning Himself, copies of statue of, identified with statue of Kyniskos at Olympia, 156;

- on funerary relief, 155.

Boy victors, statues of, at Olympia, 31;

- fragments of, 324, 325;

- less than life-size, 46;

- boy victor (?) from Sparta, head from statue of, 305f.;

- as case of assimilation, 319f.;
- as an eclectic work, 37, 38;
- chiefly Lysippan, 311, 318;
- compared with head of Philandridas, 316;
- surface modeling of, 318.

Branchidai, 304, 336.

Brasidas, games in honor of, 11.

Bribery, of Olympic victors, 33;

- at Epidauros, the Isthmus, etc., 34.

Brimias, statue at Olympia, 346.

Bronze, used for victor statues, 321f.;

- more expensive than marble, 323, 326;

- bronze and stone monuments together, 323.

Brunn, on Aeginetan art, 124;

- on archaic Attic art, 124;
- on Daidalian ξόανα, 328;
- on the Oil-pourer in Munich, 134;
- on Olympia pediment groups, 114;
- on Standing Diskobolos, 76;
- on symmetry and rhythm, 66;
- on Tux bronze, 207;

- on the Vaison and Farnese types of the Diadoumenos, 154.

Brutus, the, of Cicero, 60.

Brygos, r.-f. kylix in style of, 204.

Bull, in Crete, 1f.;

- zone of the, at Olympia, 355.

Bulle, on boxer head from Olympia, 255;

- on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 82;

- on the Polykleitan Diadoumenos, 151;
- on Doryphoros, 227;
- on dying hoplite relief, 209;

- on Egyptian influence on early Greek sculpture, 330;

- on ephebe statue from Akropolis, 115;
- on Farnese Herakles, 253;
- on hair technique of Greek sculptors, 53;
- on the Idolino, 141, 142;
- on the Oil-pourer, 134;
- on Tux bronze, 207;

- on statues of two wrestlers, from Herculaneum, 231.

Bull-grappling, in Crete, 2f.;

- in Tiryns, 2, 3;
- on Vapheio cups, 355;
- in Thessaly, 5;
- in Viterbo, 5.

Bull-ring, ivory model of, from Knossos, 3.

Burgon vase, 260.

Bybon, inscribed solos of, from Olympia, 22, 218.

Bykelos, statue at Olympia, 120.

Byzantine church, the, at Olympia, 347, 356f.

Byzantine walls, at Olympia, 345, 357, 358, 359.

Caere (Cerveteri), Amphiaraos vase from, 13 and note 1;

- hydrias from, 52.

Candia, Museum at, 2, 3.

Canina, discovers the Apoxyomenos of the Vatican, 288.

Canon, of Polykleitos, 69.

Canons of proportions, 65f.

Cap, of boxers and pancratiasts, 165f.;

- on athlete head called Juba II, 166;
- on relief in Rome, 166;
- on Munich kylix, 166–167;
- on statuette from Autun, 167.

Capua, bronze statuette from, 207.

Caracalla, baths of, 252.

Caricature, Theban law against, 57.

Casa Buonarroti, Florence, arm of Diskobolos from, 186.

Caskey, L. D., on Sparta head of boy athlete, 305, 306, 310, 319.

Castel Porziano, copy of Diskobolos from, 184.

Castellani copy of Spinario, 202.

Catania, coins of, showing Nike, 182.

Cauldron, as early prize, from Cumae, 20.

Celery, fresh, used for wreaths at Nemea, 20, 21;

- wild, used for wreaths at the Isthmus, 21.

Celetizontes pueri, of Kanachos, 120.

Cerveteri; see Caere.

Cestus, described by Virgil, 239;

- metal, invented by Romans, 238, 239;
- not mentioned by late Greek writers, 239;
- not used in Greek contests, 235.

Chabrias, general, statue of, 173.

Chæroneia, battle of, 301.

Chalkis, 19.

Champion, the, of East gable of temple on Aegina, 207;

- of West gable, 126.

Chamyne; see Demeter.

Chancery, hold in pankration, 247, 248.

Chaplet, as victor attribute, 148.

Chariots, Athenian type on vases, 262;

- on Cretan relief, 262;
- war-chariot in Crete and at Mycenæ, 262;
- on Mycenæan tombstones, 262;
- dedication of, 22;
- descendant of Homeric war-chariot, 260;
- four-horse, 262;
- four-horse, on vases, 263;
- four-horse, on marble relief, 268, 269;
- miniature models of, at Olympia, 23;

- war-chariot from Monteleone, in Metropolitan Museum, 263;

- two-horse, on vases, 263;
- two types of Greek racing-chariot, 262;
- on eighth century B. C. vase, 263;
- zone of, at Olympia, 345, 346, 352.

Charioteers, statues of, 274f.;

- close-fitting chiton of, 275;
- long chiton of, 48, 263, 273, 274;
- nude, 48, 275, 276;
- statue of, in Boston, 275;
- statue of, at Delphi, 48, 81, 90, 276f.;
- inscription on, 277;
- part of a group, 277;
- copies of, 277;
- deficiencies of, 278;
- Gelo as dedicator of, 278;
- as Aeginetan, 278;
- as Attic work, 278;
- assigned to Pythagoras, 278;
- statue of, from Esquiline, 276;

- statue of (?) found in Rhine near Xanten, 276;

- relief of, mounting chariot, from Akropolis, 128, 269.

Chariot-groups, at Olympia, 264f;

- remains of, 269.

Chariot-race, antiquity at Olympia, 259;

- common in Greece, 257f.;

- most brilliant event at Olympia and elsewhere, 257;

- one of earliest events at Olympia, 259;

- with two colts συνωρὶς πώλων, at Olympia, 260;

- harnessing of two horses, on b.-f. hydria, 263;

- groups, remains at Olympia, 269;

- with four colts πώλων ἅρμα, at Olympia, when introduced, 260;

- with four horses τέθριππον or ἵππων τελείων δρόμος, when introduced at Olympia, 259, 260;

- four-horse τέθριππον, on Panathenaic vase from Sparta, 263;

- length of race with four colts at Olympia, 260;

- length of race with four full-grown horses at Olympia, 260;

- with mules ἀπήνη, when introduced at Olympia, 261;

- at oldest funeral games, in Arkadia, 259;
- oldest monument of, at Olympia, 264, 265;
- origin of in mythical times, 259;
- originally with two horses, 260;
- when stopped at Olympia, 261;
- sport of wealthy, 257;
- representations, common on vases, 262f.;
- trotting-race with mares κάλπη, 261, 282.
- See Apobates, chariot-race.

Chariot victors, dedicate chariot-groups at Olympia, 264f.;

- dedicate models of chariots at Olympia, 265;

- dedicate statues at Olympia, 265;

- act as own charioteers, 266–267.

Charmides, statue at Olympia, 342.

Charops, statue at Olympia, 358.

Chase, G. H., on bronze tripods in Loeb collection, 194, note 7;

- on Monteleone chariot, 264.

Cheilon, ephor of Sparta, died of joy at Olympia, 36.

Cheilon, date of second victory of, 301;

- fights at Lamia, 301;

- statue at Olympia, 32, 121, 298.

Cheimon, statue at Argos, 366;

- at Olympia, 117, 234, 344, 366.

Cheirisophos, sculptor, 334.

Chewsurs, of the Caucasus, funeral games among, 11.

Chimæra tomb, so-called, at Xanthos, 271.

Chinnery Hermes, head, 181.

Chionis, statue at Olympia, 32, 333, 352, 362;

- tablet of, at Sparta, 362;

- record jump of, at Olympia, 216.

Chios, early sculpture of, 177; games on, 189.

Chisel, used in hair of the Agias and Philandridas, 297.

Chiton, conventional dress of charioteers, 275.

Chiusi, wall-painting from, 217.

Chlamys, on statues of Meleager, 313.

Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo, statue known as, 89f.;

- replica of head in British Museum, 91;
- replica of head, from Kyrene 334;
- thongs on tree-trunk nearby, 165.

Chorus, of boys and girls, in honor of victors, 34.

Christodoros, description of statue of Hermes by, 87.

Chrysippos, quoted by Galen, 70.

Chrysothemis, sculptor, 105, 116.

Cicero, as art critic, 60.

Cincinnatus, 87.

Circassians, funeral games among, 11.

Circus, Roman, hair-fashion of athletes at, 52;

- finally supersedes equestrian contests of Olympia, 261.

Cloak, prize at Pellene, 20.

Club, on Cretan grave-relief, 199;

- on statuette from Palermo, 199.

Cockerell, on dedication from Delphi, 372.

Coins: of Antoninus Pius, showing pine, 21;

- of Alexander the Great, showing Herakles, 253;

- of Athens, showing Apollo, 90;
- of Augustus, showing celery, 21;
- of Catania, showing Nike, 182;
- of Commodus as Hercules, 74;
- of Delphi, showing Apollo, 92, 336;

- of Euagoras I, King of Salamis in Cyprus, showing swollen ears, 169;

- of Geta, 306;
- of Lucius Verus, 21;
- of Markianopolis, 87;
- of Messana, showing mule-car, 263;
- of Messene, 111;
- of Miletos, 74, 118, 119, 336;
- of Nero, 21;

- of Philip II, King of Macedon, showing victorious jockey with palm-branch, 280;

- of Philippopolis, 78;
- of Rhegion, showing mule-car, 263;
- of Selinos, showing celery wreath, 21;

- of Sicily, showing racing chariots, 262, 263;

- of Syracuse, showing Nike with tablet, 182;

- of Tarentum, showing apobates horse-race, 282;

- showing poses of Olympic victor statues, 44;

- showing scenes of wrestling, 228.

Collignon, M., on statue of Astylos, at Kroton, 364;

- on so-called Borghese Warrior, 209;

- on the Doryphoros of Polykleitos, 227;

- on Egyptian influence on early Greek sculpture, 329;

- on identification of the statue of Kyniskos, 159;

- on the Olympia gable sculptures, 114;

- on Tux bronze, 207.

Color, on early Attic sculpture, 126.

Commodus, statue in Mantua, 72;

- coins of, showing him as Hercules, 74.

Concentration (αύτάρκεια), in Greek statues, 82;

- in Myron’s statues, 183;

- in the Diskobolos, 137, 201.

Concord, temple of, Rome, 234.

Constantinople, sack of, by Franks, 253.

Contest (Agon), figure of, in Mikythos group at Olympia, 164, 215.

Conversion of athlete statues into those of gods, 74.

Conze, A., on “Apollo” type as representing victors, 335;

- on Choiseul-Gouffier statue type, 90;

- on statue of Commodus at Mantua, 72.

Copenhagen, heads in Ny-Carlsberg collection at, with swollen ears, 168.

Corfu, bronze from, 96.

Corinth, clay tablets from, 52, 182;

- festival at Isthmus of, 1;
- meeting-place of East and West, 17;
- near Isthmian games, 25;
- end of tyranny at, 17.

Corn-grinding slave woman, Egyptian statuette of, 177.

Council-house (Bouleuterion), at Olympia, 227, 344, 346, 349, 350, 355, 357, 358.

Cow, sacrificed to Hera at the Heraia, Olympia, 49.

Cowardice, case of, at Olympia, 34.

Crete, acrobats of, 2;

- center of Aegean civilization, 1;

- costumes of men and women acrobats, 2, 4;

- Cretan youths dedicate offerings to Eros, 57;

- Cretan youths sacrifice to Apollo, the runner, 88;

- famed in the long race, 191;
- motion figures from, 3;
- origin of sports in, 1;
- physical development in, 6;
- sports in, 1f.

Crœsus, fall of empire of, 126.

Cross-buttocks, throw in wrestling, 229;

- shown in small bronze group in the Loeb Collection, 232, 233.

Crown of wild olive, as temporary reward for victor, 37, 155f.

Cuirass (?), prize at Argos, 20.

Cumae, inscribed cauldron from, as prize, 20.

Cures, effected by victor statues, 35.

Curtius, E., on the Σκήνωμα in Sparta, 367.

Cypriote silver vase in repoussé from Etruria, in Florence, 13.

Daidalian ξόανα, 328.

Daidalos, of Crete, mythical sculptor, 118.

Daidalos, of Sikyon, sculptor, 109, 120, 138, 266, 279;

- Daidalos and canon of Polykleitos, 69;
- statues of destringentes se by, 136;
- leg position of statues of, 159.

Daïkles, victor, 20.

Daïppos, sculptor, statues at Olympia, 121;

- perixyomenoi by, 136.

Daitondas, sculptor, 121.

Dalecampius, on Myron’s pristae, 188.

Damagetos, statue at Olympia, 36, 46, 355.

Damaithidas, statue at Olympia, 358.

Damaretos, statue at Olympia, 105, 116, 117, 161, 203.

Dameas, sculptor, 116.

Damokritos, sculptor, 120.

Damonon, hippodrome victories of, in and near Lakonia, 257;

- acts as own charioteer, 266.

Damoxenidas, statue at Olympia, 44.

Damoxenos, slays Kreugas in pankration at Nemea, 237, 247.

Danaë and Perseus, in a chest, 188.

Dancers, bronze, from Herculaneum, identified with statue of Kyniska, 267;

- ceremonial of, at Knossos, 3;

- on shield of Achilles, 5.

Daochos, dedicates statuary group at Pharsalos and Delphi, 286f.

Dead, cult of, as origin of Greek games, 9f.

Dedication, of athletic prizes, 21f.;

- formulæ at Olympia, 37.

Deida, M., statue at Olympia, 359.

Deinolochos, statue at Olympia, 120.

Deinosthenes, statue at Olympia, 347.

Delian Apollo, of Angelion and Tektaios, 304;

- “doubles” of, in Athens and Delphi, 304.

Delos, Apollo from, 334;

- colossal Apollo from, 336;
- copy of Diadoumenos from, 92f., 152, 153;
- Ionian festival on, 15;

- contests of Theseus in honor of Apollo on, 160;

- tripods in temple of Apollo on, 9.

Delphi, “Apollos” from, 104;

- athletes divided into three classes according to age, 189;

- coins of, showing Apollo, 92, 336;
- coins of, showing laurel wreath, 21;
- contests at, 25;
- athletic, 25;
- dramatic, 25;
- equestrian, 25;
- flute solo, 25;
- lyre-playing, 25;
- music, as chief contest at, 25;
- painting, 25;
- poetry, 25;
- singing, 25;
- decrees of, to athletes, 26;

- Delphians sacrifice to Apollo the boxer, 88;

- festival at, 9;

- inscribed bases of victor monuments from, 26;

- mentioned by Homer, 9;
- oracle at, 18, 30, 34;
- religious interest of Pausanias in, 24;
- statue of pancratiast at, 26;
- statuette of victor from, 28;
- temple of Apollo at, 336;
- tripods in temple of Apollo at, 19;
- victor monuments at, 26;
- victor grave-relief from, 138.

Demeter, the Eleusinia in honor of, 18;

- Chamyne, priestess of, admitted to Olympia, 16;

- of Knidos, statue of, 311.

Demetrios, M. Aurelios, Olympic victor statue in Rome, 370.

Demetrios of Phaleron, honor statues in Athens, 41.

Demetrios, sculptor, 56.

Demokrates, statue at Olympia, 358.

Deonna, W., against Egyptian influence on early Greek sculpture, 329.

Dermys and Kitylos, grave-figures of, from Tanagra, 335.

Destringentes se, statues mentioned by Pliny, 136.

Diadoumenoi, or fillet-binders, 150f.

Diadoumenos, of Pheidias, 150f.;

- older than that of Polykleitos, 151;
- motive of, 151;
- Farnese copy, 151;
- of Polykleitos, 152f.;
- as example of rest statue, 99;
- as example of “ethical grace,” 63;
- leg position of, 159;
- copy of, from Delos, 92f., 152, 153;
- other copies of, 152f.;
- head-style of, 152;
- British Museum head of, 153, 154;
- Dresden head of, 153;
- Kassel head of, 153;
- statuette from Smyrna, 154;
- on throne of Zeus at Olympia, 150;
- pose of Vaison and Farnese copies, 155.

Diagoras, most famous Greek boxer, 365;

- statue at Olympia, 130, 365;
- size of, 45;
- family group of, 342, 343, 352.

Diaulodromos, or double sprinter, 193;

- on Athens inscribed vase, 194.

Dickins, G., on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 90;

- on statuette of trumpeter from Sparta, 283.

Didymaion, near Miletos, 108;

- statues at, 26.

Diitrephes, statue on Akropolis, 199 and note 5, 373.

Dikon, three statues at Olympia, 29, 55;

- bribed by Syracuse, 33.

Dio Chrysostom, on art, 61;

- on confusing athlete and hero statues, 71;

- on difference between victor and honor statues, 41;

- on Theagenes’ statue at Thasos, 364.

Diodoros, on Egyptian influence on early Greek sculpture, 330;

- on proportion in Egyptian statuary, 67, note 4;

- on family of the artist Rhoikos of Samos, 330;

- on Pythian Apollo by Telekles and Theodoros, 334.

Diogenes, five times victor in trumpeting, at Olympia, 283;

- base of statue at Olympia, 360.

Diogenes Laertios, on gold statue vowed by Periandros, 266;

- on Pythagoras, 67, 179.

Diomedes, as boxer, 169;

- Delphic tripod ascribed to, 21;
- single combat of, with Ajax, 8;
- statue known as, in Munich, 157, 169;

- statue known as, in Palazzo Valentini, Rome, 163, 207.

Dionysia, games at the, in Kyrene, 50;

- at Sparta, 50;

- statue of victor at, in Athens, 27.

Dionysios, sculptor, 268.

Dionysios, tyrant of Syracuse, 33.

Dionysos, bearded type of, 335;

- short hair of, on Parthenon frieze, 53;

- statue of, in group, 144;

- statue of (?), found in Rhine near Xanten, 276;

- tripods in honor of, at Athens and Rhodes, 19.

Diophanes, statue at the Isthmus, 27.

Diophon, pentathlete, epigram on, 210.

Dioskouroi, athlete statues assimilated to, 96, 97;

- diskos dedicated to, by Exoïdas, 218;
- on grave-relief in Verona, 97;
- relief of, from Tarentum, 96;
- on votive relief in London, 97.

Dipoinos, sculptor, 118, 122, 334.

- See also Skyllis.

Dipylon geometric vase from Akropolis, in Copenhagen, showing funeral games, 13.

Diskoboloi, statuettes of, 28, 218f;

- bronze statuette in London, 221;

- bronze statuette in Metropolitan Museum, 116, 148, 220, 221;

- on cover of lebes in London, 221.

Diskobolos, the, of Myron, 184f.;

- cast of, from various copies, 186;
- concentration of (αυτάρκεια) 137, 183, 201;
- copies of 184f.;
- copy of, in Capitoline, 185;
- from Castel Porziano, 184;
- in Lancellotti Palace, Rome, 184;

- Græco-Roman copy from Tivoli, in London, 184, 185;

- in Vatican, from Tivoli, 184;
- on a gem, 187;
- as example of a diskos-thrower, 164;
- as example of rhythm, 66;
- Lucian’s description of, 186, 187;
- moment chosen by Myron in, 187;
- pose of, 219, 220;
- predecessors of, 222;
- Quintilian on, 187;
- relief of, from Dipylon, 127;
- represents trained athlete, 183, 184;

- right arm of, from Casa Buonarroti, Florence, 186;

- short hair of, 52;
- small bronze in Berlin, 221;
- statuettes in Munich and Arolsen, 187;
- compared with Tyrannicides, 183.
- See also Standing Diskobolos.

Diskoi, bronze, from the Altis, 22, 218;

- dedication of bronze, 22;

- kept in Sikyonian treasury at Olympia, for use of pentathletes, 22;

- on r.-f. vase in Munich, 164;

- diskos, as attribute of pentathlete statues, 164;

- bronze, from Sicily, 217;

- inscribed, of Asklepiades, 40;

- inscribed, of Exoïdas, from Kephallenia (?), 97, 218;

- known to Homer, 218;

- lighter for boys than for men, 218.

Diskos-throwing (δισκοβολία), goes back to mythology, 218;

- shown by statues, statuettes, reliefs, vase-paintings, etc., 164, 218;

- seven positions of, given by Gardiner, 218f.;

- record throw of Phaÿllos in, discussed, 216.

Dittenberger, W., on division of athletes at Athens, according to age, 189;

- on Pliny, 27;

- on votive character of inscriptions on victor statue-bases, at Olympia, 39;

- Dittenberger and Purgold, on exclusive use of bronze for Olympic victor statues, 321.

Diver (?), statuette of, from Perugia, 217.

Dodona, bronze statuette from, 143;

- bronze statuette of ephebe on horseback from, 28, 281;

- bronze statuette of warrior from, 126, 178;
- mentioned by Homer, 16;
- tripods in temple of Zeus at, 19.

Doerpfeld, W., on base of the Platæan Zeus at Olympia, 344;

- on bases of victors found in South wall of Altis, 347;

- on beginning of Pausanias’ first route in the Altis, 341;

- on excavations at site so-called of Great Altar of Zeus at Olympia, 349;

- on positions of victor statues in the Altis, 340;

- on second route of Pausanias in the Altis, 351;

- on statues, ἐν τῇ Ἄλτει, 350.

Dolichodromos, endurance runner, 193.

Domitian, stadion at Rome, 50.

Dorians, the, 1.

Dorieus, prisoner at Athens, 36;

- victor statue at Olympia, 355.

Dorykleidas, victor dedication to Herakles and Hermes by, 75, 76.

Doryphoroi, mentioned by Pliny, 226.

Doryphoros, of Kresilas, 145;

- of Polykleitos, 77, 224f.;
- as an Achilles, 92;
- converted into god-type, 74;
- converted into Hermes, 87, 88;
- compared with Diadoumenos, 152;
- copy at Olympia, 227;
- green basalt torso in Florence, 225;

- marble torso formerly in Pourtalès Collection, 225;

- from Pompeii, its measurements, 70;
- copy in Vatican, 225;
- etymology and use of word, 225, 226;
- head from Herculaneum, by Apollonios, 168;
- as highest ideal of manly beauty, 141;
- as example of javelin-thrower, 164;
- leg position of, 159;
- as master of Lysippos, 70, 301;
- as norm of proportions, 58, 68, 69, 70;
- original as pentathlete victor statue, 227;
- pose of, 225;
- style of head of, 152;
- as victor statue, 226, 227.

Double foot-race (δίαυλος), 190;

- date of introduction at Olympia, 191.

“Doubles” of statues, 304, 305.

Douris, on Lysippos, 69.

Douris, vase-painter, r.-f. kylix by, 239.

Dramatic contests, at Delphi, 25.

Dresden Boy, the, statue in Dresden, 213.

Dromeus, statue at Olympia, 179, 343;

- identified with mala ferens nudus, of Pliny, 182.

Drunkenness, statue of, 144.

Duerer, Albrecht, on proportions, 68.

Duetschke, on the Mantuan Commodus, 72.

Dumont, on division of athletes at Athens by age, 189.

Dying hoplite runner, relief of, in Athens, 194, 209.

Dying Gaul statues, 255.

Dyneiketos, victor, represented on r.-f. Panathenaic vase, 280.

Ear, swollen, as attribute of victor statues, 167f.;

- as professional characteristic of athlete and god statues, 168;

- on various heads, 168;

- on heads of gods and heroes, 169f.

Ear-lappets (ἀμφωτίδες, ἐπωτίδες), on marble head, 167;

- worn by boys in the palæstra, 167.

Echembrotos, musician, dedicates a tripod to Herakles 22.

Echo Colonnade, at Olympia, 343, 345, 352, 358, 360.

Egesta, Sicily, 35;

- honors Philippos, victor, with a heroön, 57.

Egypt, division of, into Old and Middle Kingdoms, and New Empire, 330–331.

Egyptian art, proportions in, 67 and note 4;

- adopted by Greeks, 330;

- becomes fixed, 331;

- influence of, on early Greek art, 328f., 332;

- Egyptian statues, characteristics of, 332;

- compared with Greek, 332.

Eklektos, Valerios, statue at Athens, 371;

- at Olympia, 359, 360, 371.

Elean register, 31;

- school of sculpture, 114;

- umpires, 94.

Eleans, led by Oxylos from Aitolia, 15.

Electra, of Sophokles, quoted, 267.

Eleusinia, the, 18;

- prizes at, 20;

- statue of victor in Athens, 27.

Eleusis, copy of statue of Kyniskos (?) from, 74, 156.

Eleutheria, games at Platæa, 11, 203.

Emerson, A., on statue of Kyniska, 267.

Energy, as characteristic of Myron’s statues, 152.

Enkrinomenos, statue by Alkamenes, 77, 134.

Enymakratidas, hippodrome victories of, in Lakonia, 257.

Epainetos, inscribed jumping-weight of, from Eleusis, 215.

Epeios, boxing-match with Euryalos, 7, 88.

Epeirote singer, pummelled by order of Nero, 34.

Eperastos, victor at Olympia, 163.

Ephebe, head of, with yellow hair, from Akropolis, 116;

- statue from Akropolis, 115, 175;

- statue from Hadrian’s villa, assimilated to Hermes, 80;

- victorious ephebes leading horses, on Athenian relief, 281;

- ephebes (ἀγένειοι), 189.

Ephodoi (ἔφοδοι), or routes of Pausanias, in the Altis, 339, 341f., 348f.

Epicharinos, statue on Akropolis, 27, 176, 179, 206, 372.

Epidauros, inscription from, 34.

Epigonos, erects monument to Attalos, 368.

Epigrams, on Olympic victor statue bases, 43.

Epikradios, statue at Olympia, 122, 352.

Epitaphia, festival at Athens, 18.

Epitherses, statue at Olympia, 31, 244, 346.

Eponymus victor, at Olympia, 191.

Equestrian contests, at Delphi, 25;

- at Olympia, replaced by amusements of Roman circus, 261;

- revived at Olympia under Empire, 261.

- See also Chariot-race, Horse-race.

Er, myth of, in Plato’s Republic, 36.

Erasistratos, physician at Alexandria, 290.

Eretrian Bull, the, at Olympia, 342, 352, 357, 358, 359;

- zone of, at Olympia, 343.

Eriphyle, on archaic vase, 13.

Eros, offerings to, 57;

- bronze statue from Tunis, 156, 158.

Erotidia, division of athletes at the Bœotian, according to age, 189.

Etruria, funeral games of, borrowed by Romans, 11;

- athletic scenes from tombs of, 11.

Etruscan Orator, statue in Florence, 82.

Euagoras I, King of Salamis, in Cyprus, coins of, showing swollen ears, 169.

Euagoras of Sparta, chariot-group of, at Olympia, 23, 37, 265.

Eubotas, statue at Kyrene, 366;

- at Olympia, 31, 352, 366.

Eudelos, of Rhodes, adversary of Straton, at Olympia, 34.

Eukles, statue at Olympia, 45, 117, 241, 342, 343.

Eumastas, inscribed stone of, from Thera, 218, note 3.

Eunomos, kitharoidos, statue in honor of Pythian victory, 284.

Euphorbos, on painted terra-cotta plate, 178.

Euphranor, sculptor, 23, 36, 69;

- books of, on symmetry, 69;
- canon of, 69;
- head of athlete statue from circle of, 233.

Euphronios, r.-f. kylix by, 204.

Eupolemos, statue at Olympia, 120, 342.c

Eupolos, bribes three adversaries at Olympia and all four are fined, 33.

Eupompos, painter, 29, 69, 160.

Euripides, protests against professionalism in athletics, 36.

Euryalos, 8, 88.

Eurybates, pentathlete, 59.

Euryleonis, victress, statue at Sparta, 367.

Eurytos, 8.

Eusebios, on statue of Theagenes, 364.

Eutelidas, sculptor, 105, 116.

Eutelidas, victor statue at Olympia, 106, 333, 337, 346.

Euthykrates, sculptor, 314.

Euthymenes, statue at Olympia, 120, 344, 352.

Euthymos, boxing match with Theagenes, 247;

- son of river god Kaikinos, 35;

- statue at Lokroi Epizephyrioi, 364;

- statue at Olympia, 55, 62, 90, 179, 183, 342, 352;

- inscribed base from, 38;

- statue at Olympia identified by Waldstein with Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo type, 179.

Eutychides, sculptor and painter, 121, 324.

Evans, A., on ivory statuettes from Knossos, 3;

- on stucco reliefs from Knossos, 4.

Exainetos, victor, drawn into native city by fellow-citizens, 35.

Exhortation to the Arts, work by Galen cited, 37.

Exoïdas, bronze diskos of, 97, 218.

Eye, almond-shaped, in archaic art, 127;

- in the Agias, 315;
- in Skopaic heads, 308, 311f.;
- treatment of, by Lysippos, 311f.

Fabius Maximus, carries off colossal Herakles from Tarentum to Rome, 253.

Fagan head, the, in British Museum, 87.

Farnese Diadoumenos, statue in British Museum, 151f., 154;

- compared with Diadoumenos from Vaison, 154.

Farnese Herakles, statue in Naples, 252, 253;

- of Lysippan origin, 253;

- as realistic work, 289.

Farnese Hermes, statue in British Museum, 72.

Farnsworth Museum, Wellesley, Mass., statue of athlete in, 139.

Fawn, as attribute of Philesian Apollo, 119.

Fellows, C., discovers Chimæra tomb at Xanthos, 271.

Fevers, cured by victor statues, 364.

Ficoroni cista, in Rome, 243, 269.

Fierce expression (γοργόν), of Philandridas head from Olympia, 294, 297;

- threatening look of athletes mentioned by Sokrates, 59.

File, use of, on Philandridas head, 295.

Fillet, victor, 168f.;

- on victor statues, 149f.;
- on statue from Piræus, 150;
- in hand of victor, 150;
- on heads, 96;
- as symposium attribute, 149;
- rolled, on heads of Herakles, 170.
- See Tainia.

Fillet-binders, or diadoumenoi, 150f.

Fine, paid by Theagenes, 247.

Finger, as common measure in proportions, 68.

Flasch, A. F., on bronze head of a boxer from Olympia, 255;

- on the Olympia gable sculptures, 114;

- on positions of victor statues in Altis, 340.

Flaxman, John, sculptor, on proportions, 68.

Flute-playing, at Delphi, 25;

- accompanies pentathlon, at Olympia, 284;

- on vases, 285.

Flutists, statues of victorious, 284;

- honor statue of, 42;

- on chest of Kypselos, 285.

Flying mare, throw in pankration, 247;

- throw in wrestling, 229.

Foal-race, at Olympia, 260.

Foerster, H., on location of statue of Ladas, 197;

- on statue of Leon, 366.

Foerster, R., on head of hoplitodrome, from Olympia, 163.

Foot, as common measure in proportions, 68;

- bronze, from victor statue at Olympia, 255, 322;

- left, forward in Egyptian and early Greek statues, 332.

Footmarks, on bases of victor statues, at Olympia, 43.

Foot-race, the, at games of Patroklos, 8;

- at the Heraia, at Olympia, 49.

- See Stade-race.

Forearm, fragment of, with horn, in relief, 4.

Fragments, bronze, of victor statues, from Olympia, 322;

- marble, from Olympia, 324;

- bronze, of boy victor statues from Olympia, 322;

- marble, of boy victor statues from Olympia, 324, 325.

Frascati, statuette from, in Boston, 138.

Frazer, J. G., on Arrhachion’s statue, 327;

- on funeral games, 11;

- on omission of Olympiad 211 from Elean register, 369;

- on statue of Diitrephes, Athens, 373.

“Free” leg, motive in sculpture, 109, 226.

Friedrichs, K., on identifying Doryphoros from Pompeii, 224.

Friedrichs-Wolters, on Olympia gable sculptures, 114.

Fritsch, G., on body proportions in Greek sculpture, 67.

Froehner, W., on the Jason of the Louvre, 87.

“Frontality,” law of, formulated, 175, 328.

Frost, K. T., on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 82;

- on differences between the Agias and Apoxyomenos, 290;

- on Ligourió bronze, 111.

Funeral games, on archaic vases, 13;

- attested by early Greek art, 12;

- on Dipylon vase, in Copenhagen, 13;

- in honor of Azan, 9; in honor of eminent men, 11;

- in honor of Patroklos, 8, 9;
- origin of, 14;
- periodic, 13, 14;
- on sarcophagus from Klazomenai, 13;

- funeral customs survive in later ritual, 11.

Funerary reliefs, Attic, 66.

Furtwaengler, A., on Akropolis chariot relief, 271;
on the Alkibiades of Vatican, 199, 200;
on the Apoxyomenos of Uffizi, 137;
on the Apoxyomenos of Vatican, 136;
on Aristion’s statue, 88, 241;
on athlete head in Copenhagen, 95;
on athlete statue in British Museum, 293;
on bronze head of a boxer in Glyptothek, 63;
on bronze head of a boxer from Olympia, 255;
on bronze foot from Olympia, 255;
on bronze head from Akropolis, 115;
on bronze statuette in Louvre, 139;
on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo type, 90;
on statue of Diitrephes, on Akropolis, 373;
on so-called Diomedes, of Palazzo Valentini, Rome, 207;
on doryphoroi of Pliny, 226;
on term doryphoros, 226;
on Dresden athlete statues, 292;
on Dresden Boy, 213;
on Egyptian influence on “Apollo” type, 329;
on ephebe statue from Akropolis, 115;
on erecting statues of victors at Olympia, 38;
on Esquiline charioteer, 276;
on Eupompos’ painting of Olympic victor, 160;
on excavations at Aegina, 124;
on Hagelaïdas, 110;
on Idolino, 141, 142;
on influence of athletics on Greek art, 64;
on Kassel boxer, 155;
on Kassel head of Polykleitos’ Diadoumenos, 153;
on kneeling figures from West gable at Olympia, 195;
on Kresilæan athlete head, 145;
on statue of Kylon, on Akropolis, 362;
on statue of Kyniska, at Olympia, 131;
on Kyniska’s victor group at Olympia, 267;
on Kyniskos’ statue, 74;
on Lansdowne Herakles, 313;
on libation-pouring, 139;
on Ligourió bronze, 111;
on marble head in Turin, 93;
on Monteleone chariot in Metropolitan Museum, 264;
on motive of Pheidias’ Diadoumenos, 151;
on Munich Oil-pourer, 134;
on Munich King, (?), 226;
on Myron’s pristae, 188;
on nudus talo incessens of Polykleitos, 250, 251;
on Olympia gable sculptures, 114;
on Petworth ephebe, 133;
on Pheidias’ hair treatment in goddess heads, 53;
on Philandridas head, 294;
on Pythagoras, 179, 180;
on Pythokles’ statue, 212;
on Rayet head, 128;
on Riccardi bust in Florence, 180;
on right arm of boy victor, from Olympia, 46;
on rolled fillet, 96;
on short and long hair of god heads, 52;
on Somzée athlete, 251;
on sparring motive in Berlin torso, 244;
on Standing Diskobolos, 76;
on statue from Carinthia, 131;
on statue “doubles,” 304;
on statue of youth in Berlin, 292;
on tin-foil wheels, from Olympia, 23;
on two heads of hoplitodromes from Olympia, 163;
on use of marble in Olympic victor statues, 324;
on “Vatican athlete at rest,” 140;

Furtwaengler and Urlichs, on use of bronze for Olympic victor statues, 321.

Galen, on ball-playing, 84;

- on the Doryphoros, 70;

- protests against professionalism in athletics, 36, 37.

Games, early Greek, 1f.;

- origin of, in cult of dead, 9f.;
- origin of four national, 9;
- early history of, 14f.;
- local, 17f.

Ganymedes, identified with statue of youth from Subiaco, 195.

Gardiner, E. N., on apobates horse-race, 282;

- on colossal Farnese Herakles, 252;
- on diskos-throwing, 218f.;
- on earliest event at Olympia, 37;
- on Irish fairs, 12;

- on origin of four-horse chariot-race at Olympia, 259;

- on positions in javelin-throwing, 223;
- on rules of pankration, 246;
- on shapes of jumping-weights, 214;
- on Uffizi pancratiast group, 252.

Gardner, E. A., on the Agias, 303;

- on artist school at Olympia, 58;

- on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 81;

- on contrast between the Atalanta and other Tegea heads, 310, note 3;

- on epigram from statue of Ladas, 197;

- on eye treatment in the Agias, 315;

- on eye treatment in the Atalanta from Tegea, 310;

- on honors paid to victors, 36;

- on helmeted head from Tegea, 308.

Gardner, P., on date of Lysippos 300, 301;

- on Greek portraiture, 55;

- on head of Diadoumenos of Polykleitos, in Oxford, 154, 155;

- on the Meleager and Lansdowne Herakles as Lysippan, 315;

- quotes K. T. Frost on the Agias and the Apoxyomenos, 290;

- on symmetry, 66.

Gelados; see Hagelaïdas.

Gelo, chariot-group at Olympia, 23, 122, 257, 264, 266, 344, 355;

- as dedicator of Delphi Charioteer, 278.

Gem, showing Apoxyomenos of Polykleitos, 136;

- showing Diskobolos, 187;

- showing Perseus and Gorgon’s head, 83;

- showing poses of Olympic victor statues, 214.

Genzano, bust of Herakles from, 169, 170.

Geraistos, Euboea, 373.

Gerhard, E., on vases showing four-horse chariots, 263.

Germanicus, statue so-called, 85.

Germanicus Caesar, victor in chariot race at Olympia, 257, 261, 357, 358, 359.

Germans, excavations of Olympia by, 43.

Gestures, “transitory” and “stationary,” 83.

Geta, coin of, 306.

Girl runner, statue in Vatican, 49, 50;

- statuette from Dodona, 28.

Gladiatorial shows, borrowed from Etruria by Romans, 11.

Glaukias, sculptor, 32, 122, 125, 176, 243, 244, 264, 266, 278.

Glaukon, chariot-group at Olympia, 23, 265, 347.

Glaukos, statue at Olympia, 32, 122, 125, 176, 243.

Glykon, sculptor, 252, 253.

Gods, statues of, dedicated to other gods and goddesses, 335;

- worship of, supersedes that of heroes, 14.

Goldsmiths, in Crete, 4.

Gorgias, honor statue at Olympia, 42, 351.

Gorgon, on Pindar’s VIIth Olympic ode, 365.

Gorgos, statue at Olympia, 55, 59.

Gouging, prohibited in pankration, 246;

- shown on r.-f. kylix, 246.

Graef, B., on Antenor’s female statue from Akropolis 174;

- on copies of original of Lansdowne Herakles, 313;

- Skopaic group of, 315.

Grain, as prize at the Eleusinia, 20.

Grained-hair technique, 53.

Granianos; see Kranaos.

Grave-relief, fragment from Dipylon, 127.

Great Altar; see Zeus, Great Altar of.

Greaves, early attribute of hoplitodromoi, 161;

- later discarded, 203.

Greece, dependent on outside peoples in early art, 329;

- debt to Orient, 330;

- Roman conquest of, 261.

Greek anthologies, see Anthologies, Greek.

Greek and Egyptian statues compared, 332.

“Grinning” group, of so-called “Apollo” statues, 100.

Guillaume, E., on measurements of Doryphoros, 70.

Gurlitt, W., on Pausanias’ routes in Altis, 340.

Gymnasia, absent in Homer, 7;

- statues of athletes in, 297;

- statues of athletic gods in, 75, 94.

Gymnasiarch, Hermes as, 78.

Gymnasion, Great, at Olympia, 297, 299, 356.

Gymnasium, scene from, on r.-f. kylix, 164.

Gythion, statue of Herakles, at, 319.

Habich, G., on Standing Diskobolos, 78.

Hadrian, revives Nemean games at Argos, 17;

- villa of, at Tivoli, 80, 174.

Hagelaïdas. sculptor, 36;

- canon of, 68, 148, 159;

- chariot-group of Kleosthenes, at Olympia, by, 266;

- date of, 61, 321;
- teacher of Myron and Polykleitos, 61, 110;
- teacher of Pheidias, 110;

- called Gelados by scholiast on Aristophanes’ Ranae, 110.

Hair-fashion, athletic, 50f.;

- Bulle on hair, 53;
- ephebes dedicate hair to a god, 51;
- grained style, 53;
- on Hellenistic heads, 296.
- Long, at Athens, after Persian Wars, 51;

- long, on athletes, before Persian Wars, 335;

- braided, by boxers and pancratiasts, 51;
- discarded in wrestling, 51;
- in Homer, 50, 51;
- on monuments, 52;
- on old Attic vases, 52;
- as sign of effeminacy, 51;
- at Sparta, 51;
- at Thermopylæ, 51;
- worn by knights, 51;
- long and short, on god statues, 52;
- pearl-string style of, 53;
- pictorial treatment of, 53.
- Short hair, on “Apollo” statues, 335;

- short, on athletes, after Persian Wars, 51, 335;

- on children, at Sparta, 51;
- on early vases, 52;
- on monuments, 52;
- not characteristic of athletes, 50, 51;
- as sign of mourning, at Athens, 51;
- of slaves, 51;

- sketchy treatment, on Hermes of Praxiteles, 303;

- snail-volute style of, 53.

- See Krobylos.

Halikarnassos, funeral games at, 11;

- chariot-group from Mausoleion at, 244.

Halimous, grave-relief from Attic deme of, 249.

Halteres; see Jumping-weights.

Hamilton, Gavin, 76.

Harmodios, statue of, 148, 173f.

- See also Aristogeiton and Tyrannicides.

Hartwig. P., on bronze statuette from Capua, 207.

Hauser, F., on Autun statuette of pancratiast, 249–251;

- on armor worn in hoplite-race, 203;
- on bronze athlete statue from Ephesos, 138;
- on bronze wrestlers from Herculaneum, 231;
- on Delian Diadoumenos, 92;
- on Tux bronze, 207.

Head-dress, artificial, on charioteers, 275, 276.

“Healer,” epithet of the Delian Apollo, 304.

Heave, in wrestling, 229;

- bronze wrestler-group in Paris, showing, 232;

- on metope of Theseion, 232;

- on r.-f. kylix, 230.

Hegestratos, statue at Athens, 27.

Hegias, sculptor, 110, 126, 175, 279;

- compared with Kallon, 122;

- criticism of, by Lucian, 60.

Hekatompedon, the, on Akropolis, 128.

Hektor, 7.

Helbig, W., on Barracco athlete statue, 157, 159;

- on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo, 90;
- on Doryphoros of Polykleitos, 226;
- on funerary relief, from Dipylon, 156;
- on Greek knights, 282;
- on head of Standing Diskobolos, 77, 78;
- on Spinario, 201;
- on Vatican statuette, 212.

Helikon, Mount, statues of poets and musicians on, 284;

- tripod on, dedicated by Hesiod, 21, 22.

Heliodoros, description of wrestling-match by, 252.

Hellanikos, statue at Olympia, 240, 342, 343.

Hellanodikai, the, at Olympia, 27 and n. 20, 29, 45, 227, 259.

Hellenistic Prince, statue of a, 73;

- assimilated to type of Alexander, 73.

Helmets, on Boxer Vase from Crete, 7;

- as early attributes of hoplite runners, 161;

- of hoplite runners, 48.

Hemerodromoi, institution of, 190.

Hephaistion, funeral games in honor of, 11.

Hera, temple of Lakinian, near Kroton, 363;

- worship of, at Olympia, earlier than that of Zeus, 16.

- See Heraion.

Heraia, the, games at Argos, 20;

- games at Olympia, 49;
- girls at, divided into three classes, 189;
- reliefs vowed by girl runners at, 29;
- running race for girls at, 191.

Heraion, the, at Olympia, 16, 259, 299, 341, 342, 343, 349, 352, 353, 358;

- monuments inside of, 325.

Herakleia, the, at Marathon, 18, 20;

- at Thebes and elsewhere, 19, 27.

Herakleides Ponticus, on the krobylos hair-fashion, 52.

Herakleion, the, at Sparta, 319.

Herakles, as boxer, 169, 235;

- of Crete, 10;
- destroys statue of self at Elis, 178;
- as father of athlete Theagenes, 35;

- first to win pankration and wrestling on same day, 252;

- as founder of Olympic games, 10, 93;

- Herakles and Hermes, as protectors of contests, 75;

- as inventor of pankration, 247;
- at Marathon, 18;
- in Odyssey, 8;
- plants olive at Olympia, 20;
- son of Zeus and Alkmena, 10;
- in Sophokles’ Trachiniae, 318;
- tripods in honor of, 19, 22;
- as wrestler, 13, 93, 228.

Herakles, heads of: beardless, in British Museum, 96;

- of boy athlete from Sparta so interpreted, 305;

- boyish, in British Museum, 319;
- bust from Genzano, 95;
- bust from Herculaneum, 170;
- colossal filleted, in Vatican, 95;
- from Tegea pediment, 306–311;
- marble, in Munich, 170;
- Philandridas head so interpreted, 297;
- showing swollen ears, 169;
- with rolled fillets, 96.

- Statues of: Alexikakos, by Hagelaïdas, 110;

- colossal, by Lysippos, 253;
- colossal, by Onatas, 122;
- in group with Telephos, in Vatican, 70, 95;
- in gymnasia and palæstræ, 94, 297;
- kneeling, from East gable from Aegina, 195;

- as knee-runner, bronze in Metropolitan Museum, 195;

- Kyniskos, converted into type of, 74;
- in Lakonia, 319;
- in Palazzo Altemps, Rome, 243;
- by Skopas, 306;
- victor statues assimilated to, 354f.

Heralds, contests of, when introduced at Olympia, 283;

- statues of, at Olympia, 283.

Herculaneum, bronze head from, in Naples, 63, 140.

Hercules, guild of athletes of, in Rome, 371.

Hermaia, the, games at Pheneus, 76.

Hermann, G., on Perinthos head, 180.

Hermas, base of statue of, at Olympia, 359.

Hermes, altar of, ἐναγώνιος, at Olympia, 76;

- beaten by Apollo in running at Olympia, 285;

- founder of wrestling, 76;
- god of youth and sports, 75;
- gymnasion of, at Athens, 76;
- one of athletic gods, 75;
- “presider over contests,” 36;
- head, in Boston, 85;
- bearded herma, by Alkamenes, 77;
- bearded type, 335;
- compared with Philandridas head, 293, 294;
- hair-treatment of, 303;
- on relief fragment from Athens, 270.

- Statues: from Andros, 71f.;

- in gymnasia and palæstræ, 94;
- in Lansdowne House, 88, 241;
- Logios or Agoraios, 80, 82, 84, 131;
- Ludovisi, 84;
- by Onatas, at Olympia, 122;
- by Praxiteles, at Olympia, 72, 144;

- victor statues assimilated to type of, 181, 354;

- statuette of, in Boston, 108;

- bronze, in British Museum, 88.

Hermes-Diskobolos, statue by Naukydes, 78.

Hermes Kriophoros, festival at Tanagra, 57.

Hermesianax, statue at Olympia, 30.

Hermione, stadion at, 96.

Hermitage, copy of head of boy athlete in, 157.

Hermogenes, victor at Olympia, 354.

Hermokrates, statue at Athens, 27.

Hermolykos, statue on Akropolis, 27, 372, 373.

Herodoros, trumpeter at Olympia, 283.

Herodotos, historian, on Hermolykos, pancratiast, 373;

- style of, imitated by Pausanias, 61.

Herodotos, of Klazomenai, statue at Olympia, 30.

Herodotos, of Thebes, as his own charioteer, 266, 267.

Heroes, nine Greek, on curved base at Olympia, 122.

Heroizing, custom of, in sculpture, 71.

Herophilos, physician at Alexandria, 290.

Hertz, Miss, copy of head of Nike by Paionios in collection of, Rome, 304.

Hesiod, wins tripod at Chalkis, 19;

- dedicates tripod to muses on Helikon, 21, 22;

- victor statue of, on Helikon, 284.

Hetoimokles, statue at Sparta, 106, 333, 337, 362.

Hiero, chariot-group at Olympia, 23, 122, 257, 264, 267, 278, 279;

- Pythian victory of, 278;

- tyrant of Syracuse, 362.

Hierothesion, the, at Messene, 19.

Hill, G. F., on Apoxyomenos and Lysippos, 288, 289.

Hipparchos, tyrant of Athens, 173.

Hippodameia, 14, 259.

Hippodrome races, at Olympia, non-athletic, 257;

- programme of, 259f.;

- horses and colts distinguished in, 259.

- See Chariot-race and Horse-race.

Hippodromes, common in Greece, 257f.;

- at Constantinople, 253;

- at Olympia, 258.

Hippokleides, 5.

Hippos, statue at Olympia, 120.

Hipposthenes, victor, temple dedicated to, at Sparta, 362.

Hirschfeld, G., on locations of victor statues in Altis, 340;

- on omission of Olympiad 211 from Elean register, 369.

Hirt, A., on Pliny’s “iconic” (iconicus = εἰκονικός) statues, 54;

- on Tux bronze, 207.

Historia Naturalis, of Pliny, 60, 321, and passim.

Hitzig-Bluemner, on exclusive use of bronze in Olympic victor statues, 321;

- on statue of Milo, at Olympia, 107.

Holleaux, M., on “Apollo” torso from Mount Ptoion, 119, 120.

Home-coming of Olympic victors, 34, 35.

Homer, athletics in, 7f.;

- does not mention Olympia, 16;
- κελετίζειν in, 3, 261;
- makes men and gods shriek, 57;
- on painful character of boxing, 234;
- warrior in, 8.

Homolle, Th., on appellation “Apollo,” 336;

- on artistic influences in the Agias, 291, 301;

- assigns the Agias to Lysippos, 292, 311;
- on expression of face of the Agias, 317;
- on group of Daochos at Delphi, 286;

- on resemblance between Philandridas head and that of the Agias, 294;

- on small heads outside school of Lysippos, 294;

- on differentiating statues of Herakles and victors, 94;

- on swollen ears of athlete statues, 168.

Honor statues, at Olympia, 41, 42, 339f.

Honors, extraordinary, paid to victors, 32f., 71.

Hoplite-race (ὁπλίτης), 190f.;

- belongs to mixed athletics, 203;
- called ἀσπίς, 190, 204;
- date of introduction at Olympia, 191;
- as diaulos at Olympia and Athens, 203;
- finish of, on a r.-f. kylix, 204;

- in full armor at the Eleutheria, at Platæa, 203;

- last in gymnic contests at Olympia and elsewhere, 203;

- most complete representation of, on a r.-f. kylix in Berlin, 204;

- preparations for, on a r.-f. kylix by Euphronios, 204;

- racers in, turning central post, on r.-f. kylix in Berlin, 204;

- round shields and Attic helmets used in, 204;

- semi-comic character of, on vases, 205;
- start of, on a r.-f. kylix in Berlin, 204;
- weapons used in, 203.

Hoplitodromoi, attributes of, 161 f.;

- so-called dying hoplite runner on grave-relief from Athens, 149, 209;

- statues of, in motion, 203f.;
- two heads from statues of, 46, 162f., 324;
- paintings of, by Parrhasios, 206;
- Tux bronze of, 206f.

Horarios, inscribed votive relief of, 75.

Horfuabra, statue from Dahshur, Egypt, 330.

Horse, crowned by Nike, on votive relief from Athens, 269;

- imported into Crete from Libya, 1;

- models of miniature horses at Olympia, 23.

Horse-race (ἵππος κέλης): common in Greece, 257f.;

- horses and colts distinguished in, 259;
- length of course at Olympia, 261;
- monuments, illustrating, 280f.;
- sport of the rich, 257;
- when introduced at Olympia, 260;

- race known as the apobates, at Olympia, 282f.

Horse-racers: bronze statuette of, from Dodona, 281;

- bronze statuette of, in Loeb collection, 282;

- bronze statuette of, from Volubilis, Morocco, 281;

- dedications of, at Olympia, 23, 278f.;

- on funerary relief, from Sicily, 281;

- on galloping horse, on terra-cotta relief from Thera, 281;

- mounted, on Athens relief, 281;
- nude, on vases, 281;
- small figures of, from Olympia, 24;
- statue of, in Florence, 281;

- two fragments of statues of, from Akropolis, 281;

- victorious racer leading-horse, on Athenian relief, 281.

Human sacrifice, as origin of funerary games, 14.

Hunter, honor statue at Olympia, 42.

Hyblæans, the Zeus of the, at Olympia, 344.

Hydriæ, from Caere (Cerveteri), 52;

- bronze, as prize at the Panathenaia, 20.

Hylas, identified with statue of youth from Subiaco, 196.

Hyperboreans, home of wild olive among, 20.

Hysmon, statue at Olympia, 120, 164.

Iapygians, King of the, 125.

Iconic and aniconic statues, 54f.

Ida, Mount, grotto of Zeus in, 235.

Idealism, in Greek art, 56, 71;

- idealism and realism, 57.

Identification of athlete statues in Roman copies, 44.

Idolino, the, statue in Florence, 131, 139, 141f.;

- as highest ideal of boyish beauty, 141;

- interpretation of, 142f.

Ikkos, slain by Kleomedes, 35;

- as teacher of gymnastics, 59.

Ildefonso group, in Madrid, 158.

Iliad, games of Patroklos in, 9.

Ilissos, river in Attica, 20;

- relief from, 312.

Impressionism, in hair technique, by Greek artists, 53;

- by Lysippos, 69.

Ince Blundell head of athlete, 167, note 4, 168, 180, 181.

Indians, the, of North America, funeral games among, 12.

Information, sources of, in reconstruction of Olympic victor statues, 43.

Inscriptions, earliest, using pankration for dates, 191;

- on pillars, in honor of victors, 34;

- on victor statue bases at Olympia, 43.

Iolaos, hurls stone diskos, 218.

Ionia, passes Egyptian influence to Greek sculptors, 332;

- school of sculpture from, 114;

- women of, witness games, 49.

Ionians, short hair with, 52.

Ionism, in Greek art, 115f., 126, 129, 175;

- reaction against, 116, 126.

Iphitos, restores Olympic games, 15.

Ismenian Apollo, the, statue in Thebes, 304.

Ismenion, the, at Thebes, tripods in, 19.

Isokrates, statue on Akropolis, 24, 27, 281, 373.

Isthmian festival, athletes divided into three classes according to age at, 189;

- beast contests at, 25;
- excavations on site of, 25;
- famed in Roman days, 25;
- funerary origin of, 9;
- history and administration of, 17;
- inferior to Olympia, 25;
- later in honor of a god, 9;
- in honor of Melikertes, 10;
- most frequented, 25;
- statue of victor at, in Athens, 27;
- statues of victors at, on Isthmus, 26.

Italian Archæological Mission, 3.

Italy, funeral games, in ancient, 11.

Jahn, O., on symmetry, 66;

- on the Wounded Amazon of Capitoline, 157.

Jason, statue so-called, of Louvre, 86.

Javelin (ἀκόντιον), 164, 165;

- as athletic attribute, 108, 164;
- Greek names for, 223;
- size of, 223;
- on vase-paintings, 164, 223.

Javelin-throwers (ἀκοντισταί), 222f.;

- two bronze statuettes of, 227, 228;

- on Spartan relief, 223.

Javelin-throwing, 222f.;

- athletic type of, 223;
- for distance, 223;
- from horseback, on vase-paintings, 223;
- at games of Patroklos, 222;
- origin of, mythical, 222;
- positions in, 223f.;
- positions, given by E. N. Gardiner, 223;
- practical, in war and the chase, 223;
- in sculpture, 224;
- two types of, 222, 223.

Jockey, nude, on vase-paintings, 280;

- in short-sleeved chiton, on b.-f. Panathenaic vase, 280.

Jones, H. Stuart, on Pliny’s Perseus et pristae of Myron, 188.

Joubin, A., on Delphi Charioteer, 278;

- on Olympia gable sculptures, 114.

Juba II, King of Numidia, 166.

Juethner, J., on Greek origin of javelin-throwing, 222;

- on shapes of jumping-weights, 214f.;
- on Standing Diskobolos, 220;
- on statue of boxer from Sorrento, 243.

Jumping, 214f.;

- adapted to painter and not to sculptor, 217;

- ancient records in, 216;

- modern records in, with and without weights, 216;

- modern record in, front spring-board, 216;

- most difficult feature of pentathlon, 216;

- most representative feature of pentathlon, 214;

- in Odyssey, 9, 214;
- as part of pentathlon, 214;
- popularity of, 216;
- spring-board not used in Greece in, 216;

- various moments in, depicted on vases, 216, 217;

- with weights, 216, 217.

Jumping-weights (ἁλτῆρες), 214f.;

- as attribute of pentathletes, 164;
- on bronze statue in Berlin, 164;
- dedications of, 22;
- forms of, 214f.;
- club-like form, 215;
- semispherical, 215;
- forms of, divided by Philostratos, 215;
- shown on vases, 215;
- on mosaic in Lateran, 215;
- not in Homer, 214;
- on r.-f. kylix in Munich, 164;
- on relief from Sparta, 164;

- on Roman copies of Greek athlete statues, 215;

- on statue of Hysmon, at Olympia, 164;
- on statues in Dresden and Florence, 215;
- stone, from Corinth and Olympia, 215;
- on tree-trunk beside statue, 164;

- use of, according to Aristotle and Philostratos, 216;

- use of, in medical gymnastics, 21;

- use of, according to vase-paintings, 216.

Justin, on chariot-groups at Delphi, 26.

Ka-aper, wood statue of, in Cairo, 330;

- statue of “wife” of, so-called, in Cairo, 330.

Kabbadias, P., on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 81.

Kabeirion, statuette from, 28.

Kalamis, sculptor, 36, 324;

- Kalamis and Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo type, 89;

- characterized, 90, 279;
- chariot-groups by, 23;
- criticism of, by Cicero, 60;
- horse-groups by, 24, 279;
- horses by, characterized by Pliny, 62;
- jockeys on horseback by, 23;

- Kalamis and nude charioteer from Esquiline, 276;

- Kalamis and Onatas, 219, 264, 267, 268;
- Kalamis and Praxiteles, 268;
- as predecessor of Pheidias, 279;

- statues at Olympia by, set up by the Akragantines, 130;

- Kalamis as unrivalled sculptor of horses, 279.

Kalkmann, A., on Herakles Alexikakos of Hagelaïdas, 110;

- on kneeling figures from West gable of temple on Aegina, 195;

- on proportions of face in Greek sculpture, 67.

Kallias, statue at Athens, 27, 182, 183, 365;

- statue at Olympia, 45, 129, 251, 352, 365.

Kallikles, sculptor, 365.

Kallikrates, dates of victories of, at Olympia, 301;

- statue at Olympia, 121, 298.

Kallimachos, on statues of Euthymos being struck by lightning, 364.

Kallippos, bribes opponents and is fined, 34.

Kallistratos, characterizes Skopas, 309.

Kalliteles, statue at Olympia, 265, 347.

Kallon, sculptor, 122, 125.

Kallon, victor, statue at Olympia, 121.

Kalydonian boar hunt, represented in Tegea pediment group, 307.

Kanachos, the Elder, sculptor, 24, 118, 120, 279, 324, 336;

- celetizontes pueri, by, 120;
- compared with Kallon, 122;
- criticism of, by Cicero, 60.

Kanachos, the Younger, sculptor, 120.

Kantharos, sculptor, 122.

Kaphisias, sculptor, 368, 375.

Kapros, boxing-match with Kleitomachos, 247;

- bronze foot from statue of, 255, 346;

- first to win pankration and wrestling at Olympia on same day, 252;

- Kapros and bronze boxer head from Olympia, 254;

- two statues at Olympia, 29, 342, 354.

Karrhotos, charioteer, 267.

Kasia Mnasithea, statue base at Olympia, 360.

Kassel, statue of Apollo in, 360;

- statue of boxer in, 46, 155;

- head of Diadoumenos of Polykleitos in, 153, 154.

Kastor, victor in foot-race at Olympia, 96;

- as horse-racer, 96;

- hurls stone diskos, 218.

Kebriones, 5.

Kekulé, on the Idolino, 141, 142;

- on Olympia gable sculptures, 114;
- on the Spinario, 201;
- on the Standing Diskobolos, 76.

Kephisodotos, sculptor, 252.

Kerameikos, Athens, 11.

Keramopoullos, A. D., on the Delphi Charioteer, 278.

Kerykeion, symbol of Hermes, 71, 72, 78, 82, 88, etc.

Kettle, prize at early games, 20.

Kicking, allowed in pankration, 246, 247.

Kietz, on the Standing Diskobolos, 78.

Kimon, son of Miltiades, 18.

Kimon, son of Stesagoras, bronze mares of, at Athens, 27, 363.

Kirchhoff, A., on statue of Hermolykos on Akropolis, 373.

Kirghiz, the, of India, funeral games among, 12.

Kittos, boxing and wrestling scenes on Panathenaic amphora of, 248.

Kitylos and Dermys, grave-figures of, from Tanagra, 335.

Kladeos, the, river at Olympia, 299, 342, 357, 358.

Klazomenai, paintings from, 52;

- reliefs from, 264, 268.

Klein, W., on the Boston Charioteer (?), 275;

- on the Idolino, 141;
- on the Jason of Louvre, 86;
- on the Oil-pourer of Munich, 134.

Kleito; see Polykleitos.

Kleitomachos, statue at Olympia, 353;

- identified wrongly with the Seated Boxer of Museo delle Terme, Rome, 253;

- story of, from Polybios, 147, 247.

Kleitor, son of Azan, 9.

Kleitor, relief from, 132.

Kleobis (?), statue of, from Delphi, 105.

Kleoitas, sculptor, 27.

Kleomedes, heroized at death, 35.

Kleomenes, sculptor, 85.

Kleon, sculptor, 69, 120, 121, 164;

- leg position of statues by, 159.

Kleonai, 17.

Kleosthenes, King of Pisa, 15.

Kleosthenes, of Epidamnos, chariot-group of, at Olympia, 23, 266, 344, 345.

Knee-runners, on bronze tripod reliefs, 194;

- on small bronze relief in Metropolitan Museum, 194;

- on marble relief of dying hoplite runner, 194;

- on small bronzes, 195;
- on vases, 194;
- statue of kneeling youth from Subiaco, 195.

Knights, Helbig on Greek, 282;

- Homeric method of, fighting from chariot, 272, 282;

- on Parthenon frieze, 281.

Knossos, bull-grappling at, 1, 2;

- ivory statuettes from, 3;
- paved inclosure at, 3;
- reliefs from, 3, 4;
- seal from, showing huge horse, 1;
- theatral area at, 3;
- toreadors on wall-paintings from, 1, 3.

Koblanos, sculptor, 242.

Kodias (Κῳδίας), jumping-weight of, 40.

Koehler, U., on the Apoxyomenos of Vatican, 290.

Koerte, on name “Apollo” for early statues, 335.

Korai, statues of, on Akropolis, 53, 115.

Koroibos, victor in first recorded Olympiad, 15, 191.

Kostobokoi, barbarian invaders of Greece, 370, 371.

Kouroniotis, K., letter of, quoted 327.

Kranaos, or Granianos, statue near Sikyon, 370.

Krates, victor as herald at Olympia, 283.

Kratinos, statue at Olympia, 122;

- set up by trainer of, 31.

Kratisthenes, chariot-group of, at Olympia, 179, 268.

Kresilas, sculptor, 36, 93;

- the Alkibiades of Vatican ascribed to, by Furtwaengler, 199;

- Doryphoros by, 145;
- portrait of Perikles by, 56;
- statue of the Wounded Amazon by, 157.

Kresilæan athlete head, five copies of, 144, 145.

Kreugas, crowned after death, 247;

- killed in boxing match, 236, 247;

- statue at Argos, 236, 237.

Krison, statue ascribed to, by Furtwaengler, 200.

Kritios, sculptor, 115, 126, 173, 174;

- criticism of, by Lucian, 60;

- Kritios and Tux bronze 207.

Kritodamos, statue at Olympia, 120, 344, 352.

Krobylos, old Attic hair-fashion, 51, 52, 89, 128, 135, 270.

Krokon, dedicates small bronze horse at Olympia, 23, 279.

Kronos, altar of, at Olympia, 16;

- wrestling match of, with Zeus, 14.

Krotonians, famed as pentathletes, 60.

Ktesibios, philosopher, on ball-playing, 84.

Kylon, conspiracy of, in Athens, 362;

- statue on Akropolis, 106, 333, 337, 362.

Kylon, of Elis, honor statue at Olympia, 42.

Kyniska, bronze horses of, at Olympia, 265, 267;

- chariot-group of, at Olympia, 23, 131, 267, 299, 342, 367;

- first woman to enter and win chariot-race at Olympia, 267, 367;

- shrine in honor of, at Sparta, 367.

Kyniskos, statue at Olympia, 74, 117, 239;

- copies of (?), 156f., 159;
- foot position on base of statue of, 239;
- date of victory, 160.

Kynosarges, Attic amphora from Gymnasion of, 13.

Kypselos, chest of, at Olympia, 12, 13.

Kypselos, King of Arkadia, 57.

Kyrene, the Dionysia at, 50;

- head from, 89;

- personified as charioteer in Delphi group, 277, 278;

- statue found in baths of, 141.

Kyrnos, battle of, 373.

Ladas, of Sparta, fleetness of, 364;

- grave of, 365;
- stadion in honor of, 365;
- statue in Argos, 364;
- statue of, by Myron, 196f., 364;

- compared with that of girl runner of Vatican, 197;

- epigrams on statue of, 196, 197;
- pose of, 197;
- story of death of, 196.

Lakonia, statues of Herakles in, 319.

Laloux and Monceaux, on Philandridas head, 294.

Lamia, date of battle of, 301;

- relief from, 132.

Lampos, chariot-group at Olympia, 268.

Lancellotti (or Massimi) Diskobolos, 184 and note 2.

Lange, F. A., on Egyptian influence on early Greek culture, 332.

Lange, J., on law of “frontality,” 175, 328;

- on Olympia gable sculptures, 114.

Lansdowne Herakles, statue, 81, 82;

- ascribed to Myron, 181;

- head of, compared with that of Philandridas, 298;

- regarded as Lysippan, 298, 311;

- regarded as Skopaic, 313.

Laokoön, the, group, Pliny’s praise of, 61;

- as realistic work, 289;

- of Lessing, 54, 187.

Las, statue of Herakles near, 319.

Lasso, boy throwing, wrongly identified with statue of kneeling youth from Subiaco, 196.

Lateran, athlete mosaic in, 215;

- boxers on relief in, 238.

Laurel, as prize at Delphi, 20, 21.

Laurentum, now Castel Porziano, 184.

Leaf, W., on chariot-race in the Iliad, 8.

Leaping-weights; see Jumping-weights.

Lechat, on bronze statue found in sea off Antikythera, 84;

- on evolution of Greek sculpture, 329;

- on the housing of stone statues, 325.

Leg, right lower, fragment of victor statue, 322;

- leg holds in pankration, 247;

- “free” and “rest” legs, as motives in sculpture, 109, 226.

Lekythion, athletic attribute, 84.

Lekythos, 137, 138.

Lemnian Athena, the, statue in Dresden, 53.

Lemniskos, 155, 156.

Leon, statue of, 366.

Leonidaion, the, (Suedwestbau), at Olympia, 339, 340, 346, 347, 348, 350, 353, 355, 356.

Leonidas, at Thermopylæ, 51;

- funeral games in honor of, 11.

Leonidas, of Naxos, statue at Olympia, 346, 347.

Leontiskos, painter, 29.

Leontiskos, of Sicily, statue at Olympia, 62, 179, 183, 249.

Lessing, characterization of Diadoumenos and Doryphoros by, 152;

- on most fruitful moment to be chosen by artist, 178.

- See Laokoön.

Libation-pourer, statue of, 143, 144.

Libation-pouring, 138f.

Libya, figure in Delphi group, 277;

- oracle of, 31.

Lichas, statue at Olympia, 31, 342;

- scourged by umpires, 33, 149.

Life, athlete, happy, 36.

Lifelike statues, 59.

Life-size statues at Olympia, 46.

Ligourió, bronze statuette from, 105, 111, 114.

Limping Man, the, statue at Syracuse, 182.

Lindos, temple of Athena at, 345.

Loeb collection, Munich, bronze group of wrestlers in, 232, 233;

- bronze statuette in, 136;
- bronze statuette of boy-rider in, 282;
- three bronze tripods in, 194, 264.

Loeschke, G. L., on appellation “Apollo” for early statues, 335;

- on statue of Kylon on Akropolis, 362 and note 7.

Loewy, E., on Delian Diadoumenos, 92;

- on group of Kyniska, at Olympia, 267;

- on style of statue of Pythokles, at Olympia, 213.

Loin-cloth, of athletes, 47;

- absence of, on Cretan frescoes, 47;
- worn by Asiatics, 48;
- in Homer, 47;
- on early vases, 47, 48;
- dropped first by Orsippos of Megara, 47;
- Plato on, 48;
- used by boxers and wrestlers, 48.

Lokroi, Ozolian, colonization of the, 201.

Lokros, ancestor of the Ozolian Lokroi, 201.

Longpérier, H. A., on bronze statuette in Paris, 142.

Long race (δόλιχος), at Olympia, 190;

- boys admitted to, at Delphi, 190;

- men admitted to, at Olympia, 190.

Lucian, on apples as prizes at Delphi, 21, 107;

- on art criticism, 60;

- criticism of Hegias, Kritios, and Nesiotes, by, 175;

- description of Diskobolos by, 186, 187;
- ideal statue of, 60;
- on life-size victor statues, 45, 227;

- on prohibition against biting and gouging in pankration, 246;

- on statue of Pelichos, 56;

- on statue of Theagenes on Thasos, 364.

Lucius Verus, coins of, 21.

Luctator anhelans, painting of, by Naukeros, 233.

Lykaia, the, statues at the games of, 26.

Lykaios, Mount, in Arkadia, hippodrome on, 258.

Lykidas, of Sparta, enters colts as full-grown horses at Olympia, 259.

Lykinos, of Elis, statue at Olympia, 343.

Lykinos, of Heraia, statue at Olympia, 121.

Lykinos, of Sparta, two statues at Olympia, 24, 29, 265, 266.

Lykios, sculptor, 134, 243.

Lykomedes, bases of two statues at Olympia, 358.

Lykourgos, of Sparta, 15, 51.

Lykourgos, rhetorician, 27.

Lyre-playing, at Delphi, 25.

Lyres, in Parthenon, 23.

Lysandros, statue at Olympia, 343.

Lysippos, of Elis, victor statue of, by Andreas, 118, 354.

Lysippos, sculptor, 36, 375;

- as art reformer, 301;
- borrows from other sculptors, 291;
- canon of, 68, 69, 136, 288;
- characteristics of, 311;
- chariot-groups by, 23;
- circle of, 131, 255;
- as court sculptor of Alexander, 296, 318;
- criticism of, by Pliny, 61;
- date of, 300f.;

- dates of Lysippos, Skopas, and Praxiteles, 301;

- divergent style of, 253;
- follows Doryphoros and nature, 301;
- improvements in hair technique by, 53, 296;
- influence of, on realism, 56;
- influenced by Skopas, 291, 301;

- inscription on base of statue in Pharsalos by, 287;

- Lansdowne Herakles ascribed to, 313;
- Lysippos and Skopas compared, 311f.;
- Lysippos and type of weary Herakles, 253;
- makes 1500 statues, 302;
- Philandridas head at Olympia, by, 298;
- portraiture after time of, 54;
- poses of statues of, 44;

- regarded exclusively as bronze founder, 302;

- statue of Agias by, 286, 366;
- statues of destringentes se, by, 136;
- statues of, at Olympia, 121, 266;
- surpasses earlier artists in symmetry, 66;
- as worker in marble, 302f.

Lysistratos, sculptor, first to make plaster moulds from face, 56, 255, 304.

Macedon, coins of, showing racing chariots, 262;

- kings of, 73;

- princes of, as horse-racers, 357.

Mach, E. von, against oriental influence on Greek sculpture, 329;

- on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 84;

- on the Charioteer (?) in Boston, 275, 276;

- on original of Farnese Herakles, 253.

Madrid, copy of Diadoumenos in, 153;

- Ildefonso group in, 153.

Mæcenas, and victor privileges in Rome, 33.

Magna Græcia, cities of, honor victors, 35;

- fond of hippodrome contests, 258.

Magnesia ad Sipylum, victor statue base from, 370.

Mahler, A., on copies of Doryphoros, 224;

- on identifying statue of Ladas, 197;

- on the Idolino, 141;

- on resemblance between head of the Agias and Philandridas, 294.

Maiden, figure of, in chariot-groups, 268.

Maltho, gymnasium in Elis, 370.

Manetho, Egyptian dynasties of, 330.

Mantua, statue of Apollo in, 111.

Marathon, battle of, 18, 209;

- Herakleia, the, at, 18.

Marble, less expensive than bronze, 28;

- some victor statues made of, at Olympia, 324.

Markianopolis, coin of, 87.

Markios, Gnaios, base of statue at Olympia, 359.

Marsyas, the, statue by Myron, 134, 183, 184.

Masks, dedication of, 22.

Massimi Diskobolos; see Lancellotti Diskobolos.

Materials of Olympic victor statues, 321f.

Matz and von Duhn, on so-called Diomedes, in Palazzo Valentini, Rome, 207.

Mau, A., on the Praying Boy of Berlin, 132.

Mausoleion, Halikarnassos, chariot frieze from, 271, 289;

- chariot-group from, 264;

- small chariot frieze from, 274, 275.

Mausolos, games in honor of, 11.

Maviglia, Ada, on Diadoumenos of Delos, 93;

- rejects the Apoxyomenos and the Agias as evidence of style of Lysippos, 290.

Mayer, M., on athlete (?) statue from Olympieion, 143;

- on Myron’s pristae, 188.

Medes, the, 11.

Mediterranean culture, 1;

- gymnastic exercises in, 6;

- origin of Greek athletics in, 7.

Megakles, victor at Olympia, 363.

Megara, colossal torso of “Apollo” from, 336.

Megara Hyblaia, Sicily, necropolis in, 337;

- statue of Zeus of, at Olympia, 344.

Meleager, head of, on Praxitelian trunk in Medici Gardens, Rome, 313;

- statue of, in Fogg Museum, Boston, 314;
- statue of, in Vatican, 312;
- statue of Kyniskos converted into, 74.

Melikertes, 10.

Melite, deme of, 110.

Melos, “Apollo” from, 100, 101, 103, 104.

Memorials, miscellaneous, of victors, 40, 41.

Memphis, motion statuettes from, 177;

- art of, 330.

Mende, offering of people of, at Olympia, 164, 341.

Mendel, M., excavations of, at Tegea, 306;

- on head of Herakles, from Tegea, 306, 307.

Menedemos, bases of two statues at Olympia, 358.

Menelaos, sculptor, 113.

Mengs, Raphael, painter, cast from collection of, showing swollen ears, 169;

- on proportions, 68.

Messana, coins of, showing mule-car, 263.

Messene, coins of, 111;

- hierothesion at, 19.

Messenians, of Naupaktos, 110.

Metageitnion, month of, 18.

Metellus Macedonicus, base of statue at Olympia, 348.

Metrobios, T. Phlabios (Flavius), base of statue at Iasos, 369.

Metrodoros, Aurelios, base of statue at Kyzikos, 371.

Michaelis, A., on apobates chariot-race on Parthenon frieze, 272;

- on base of statue of Epicharinos, on Akropolis, 372;

- on use of ἐν δεξιᾷ and ἐν ἀριστερᾷ by Pausanias, 349;

- on Lansdowne Herakles, 298, 313;
- on Petworth ephebe statue, 133;
- on the Standing Diskobolos, 76;

- Michaelis, A., and Conze, A., on “Apollo” type as victor statues, 335.

Middle Kingdom, Egypt, dates of, 330 and note 6;

- sculptures of, 330.

Mikon, of Athens, sculptor, 61, 62, 129.

Mikon, of Syracuse, sculptor, 375.

Mikythos, or Smikythos, group dedicated at Olympia by, 215, 351.

Milchhoefer, A., on painting by Eupompos, 160.

Miletos, coins of, 74, 118, 119, 336.

Military runner (δρομοκῆρυξ), 209.

Milo, statue at Olympia, 31, 106f., 130, 165, 337.

Miltiades, games in honor of, on Thracian Chersonesos, 11.

Miltiades, son of Kypselos, votive offering at Olympia, 264, 265.

Minoans, the, of Crete, 1;

- influenced by Orient, 1;

- love of sports among, 6.

- See Crete.

Mnaseas, statue at Olympia, 161, 179, 181.

Mnesiboulos, statue in Elateia, 204, 371.

Monceaux; see Laloux and Monceaux.

Mopsos, boxing match with Admetos, 285.

Mosaic, athlete, in Lateran, Rome, 215.

Mosso, A., on Boxer Vase, 6;

- on origin of Greek boxing-glove, 235;

- on Vapheio cups, 4.

Motion statues, antiquity of, in Greece, 176f.;

- in Assyro-Babylonian art, 177;
- in Cretan art, 177;
- in Egyptian art, 176, 177;

- in Greece, not developed out of “Apollo” statue type, 177;

- on early vases, 177;
- victor statues in, 173f.;
- victor statues in various contests, 188f.

Motives, general, of statues in motion, 188f.;

- at rest, 130f.

Mounot, Étienne, sculptor, 185.

Mueller, K. O., on common features of victor statues, 44.

Mule-car, on Rhegian and Messanian coins, 263.

Mule-race (ἀπήνη); see Chariot-race with mules.

Munich King, statue so-called, 226.

Muscles, in Cretan art, 3, 4.

Muses, group of, by Hagelaïdas, Arostokles and Kanachos, 118.

Musical contests, dedications for, at Olympia and elsewhere, 283f.;

- at Delphi, 25;

- honor dedications for, at Olympia, 285;

- monuments for, victor or votive in character, 284;

- at Olympia, non-athletic, 283, 285, represented on imitation Panathenaic vases, 284;

- on reliefs, 284;

- victors in, at Delphi, 284;

- victor statues for musicians, on Helikon, 284.

Mussius, L., gravestone of, 72.

Mycenæ, 1, 7;

- lack of athletic scenes at, 8;

- no Egyptian influence on art of, 332.

Mykale, battle of, 373.

Myrina, terra-cotta statuettes from, 135.

Myron, sculptor, 183f., 324, 353, 375;

- αὐτάρκεια of, 183;
- criticism of, by Cicero, 60;
- by Pliny, 180, 184;
- dated by Pliny, 61;
- love of movement of, 183;
- Myron and Hermes Ludovisi, 85;

- Myron and Pythagoras, difficulty of separating works of, 181, 245;

- Myron and Standing Diskobolos, 76;

- Olympic victor statues by, 129, 187f., 245, 333;

- poses of victor statues by, 44;
- pupil of Hagelaïdas, 110;
- as realist, 188;
- statue of Ladas by, 196f.;

- surpasses Polykleitos in rhythm and symmetry, 66;

- versatility of, 188;

- victor statues at Delphi by, 26, 188.

Myron, tyrant of Sikyon, dedicates bronze chapel at Olympia, 41.

Mytilene, statue from, 92.

Narkissos, 158.

Narykidas, base of statue at Olympia, 342.

Natalis, L. Minikios (Minicius), equestrian monument at Olympia, 37.

Natural History, of Pliny; see Historia Naturalis.

Naturalism, in Greek Art, 44.

Naukratis, Egypt, 105, 329, 334.

Naukydes, sculptor, 76, 117, 120;

- leg position of statues by, 159;
- Naukydes and Standing Diskobolos, 76f.;
- Naukydes and canon of Polykleitos, 69;

- statue of Cheimon by, characterized by Pausanias, 62.

Naupaktos, 110.

Nausikaa, 83.

Naxos, “Apollo” from, 328, 334;

- bronze statuette from, 74, 119;

- statue of Nikandre from, 177.

Nelson, Philip, head in collection of, 157.

Nemea, athletes at, divided into three classes, by ages, 189;

- athletic contests at, 25;

- athletic interest of, secondary to that of Olympia, 25;

- boy contests at, 25;
- festival at, 1;
- founded by Adrastos, 17;
- held every two years, 17;
- in honor of Opheltes or Archermoros, 10;
- later in honor of a god, 9;
- origin of, 9;
- records of victors at, 21;
- relief from, 132;
- retired valley of, 25;
- revived by Hadrian, 17;
- statues of victors at, 26;
- statues of victors at, in Athens, 27;
- summarily treated by Pausanias, 24;
- transferred to Argos, 17;
- under Argive influence, 17;
- the Nemea of Thebes, 27.

Nemead, first dated, 17.

Nemesis, statue by Agorakritos at Rhamnous, 182.

Neolaïdas, statue at Olympia, 120.

Nepos, on first date of representing athlete statues in motion, 173.

Nero, coins of, 21;

- uses force to win at the Isthmia, 34;

- villa of, at Subiaco, 195;

- wins chariot-races at Olympia, 257, 262, 369.

Nesiotes, sculptor, criticism of, by Lucian, 60.

Nestor, 8;

- contests at Bouprasion, 9;

- statue at Olympia, by Onatas, 122.

Net, on Vapheio cup, 5.

New Empire, Egypt, dates of, 331 and note 2;

- sculptures of, 331.

Nida-Haddernheim, terra-cotta statuette from, 202.

Nikandre, statue of, 177.

Nikandros, statue at Olympia, 121.

Nikanor, fragment of base of statue at Olympia, 359.

Nikarchos, base of statue at Olympia, 356.

Nike, the, of Archermos, 177;

- bronze figurine from Akropolis, 177;
- as charioteer, 268;
- on Ficoroni cista, 269;

- on hand of statue of Olympian Zeus, at Olympia, 149;

- on Nike balustrade from Akropolis, 86;
- on relief in Madrid, 269;
- on relief from Phaleron, 269;
- on sarcophagus from Klazomenai, 268.
- See also Paionios, the Nike of.

Nikeratos, date of archonship of, 194.

Nikeus, casts stone diskos, 218.

Nikodamos, sculptor, 244.

Nikokles, victor monument at Akriai, 372.

Nikomachos, painter, 268;

- Victoria quadrigam in sublime rapiens by, 268.

Nineveh, reliefs from, 330.

Niobid, identified with statue of youth from Subiaco, 195.

Nordostgraben, the, at Olympia, 358.

Nordwestgraben, the, at Olympia, 356.

North Greek-Thracian school of sculpture, 114.

Noses, bloody, on vase-paintings, 167.

Novus Annus (?), nude statue found in Rhine identified as, 276.

Nudity, characteristic of archaic statues, 335;

- as essential difference between Greek and foreigner, 48;

- not observed by charioteers, 48;

- of victor statues, 47f.

Nudus talo incessens, statue by Polykleitos, 158, 249, 250;

- statuette from Autun showing the Polykleitan motive, 249, 250.

Numismatic commentary on Pausanias, 306.

Ny-Carlsberg Museum, Copenhagen, archaic head of youth in, 128;

- two heads in, 180, 181; etc.

Nymphs, altar at Olympia, 351.

Odysseus, 8.

Oibotas, statue at Olympia, 30, 32, 333, 343, 351.

Oil, used in wrestling, 165.

Oil-flask, on r.-f. kylix in Munich, 164.

Oil-pourer, bronze statuette of, from South Italy, 135;

- statue so-called, in Munich, 99, 133f., 137;

- as Attic work, 137;
- head in Boston, copy of original of, 134;
- pose of, 158;
- torso in Dresden as variant of, 134, 135.

Oil-pouring, on gems, reliefs and terra-cotta statuettes, 135.

Oil-scraping, as athletic motive, 135f.

Oinoanda, base of victor statue from, 371.

Oinomaos, chariot-race with Pelops, 14, 259;

- column at Olympia, 323, 350, 351.

Olaidas, honor statue at Olympia, 42.

Old Kingdom, Egypt, dates of, 330 and note 3;

- sculptures of, 330.

Olive, crown of, as prize at Olympia, 155f.;

- of “Fair Crown,” at Olympia, 20, 351;

- wild, 20.

Olympia, account of monuments at, by Pausanias, 24;

- age of boy victors at, 189;

- antiquity of, from excavations and religious history, 16;

- athletes at, divided into two classes, by ages, 189;

- boxer head from, 62;

- celebrated every four years, 15;

- controlled by Eleans alone after Persian wars, 15;

- early controlled by Pisa, 15;

- early overshadowed by Delphi and Delos, 14, 15;

- founded before Dorian invasion, 14;
- funeral origin of, 9;
- German excavations at, 43;
- history of, 14;
- held in honor of a god, 9;
- held in honor of Pelops, 10;

- importance of, from seventh century B. C., 15;

- later controlled by Pisa and Elis, 15;
- prehistoric buildings at, 16, 349;
- sacrifices at, to Pelops and Zeus, 11;

- as sanctuary prior to advent of Achæans, 14;

- style of head of athlete (Philandridas) from, 293f.;

- style of gable statues from, 113, 114;

- traditional history of, by Pausanias and Strabo, 15;

- two figures from West gable of temple of Zeus from, 195;

- victor statues in Altis at, 26; etc.

Olympia register, 15.

Olympiad, first dated, 15;

- traditional first, 8;

- the 8th, 34th, 104th, 211th, omitted from Elean register, 369.

Olympieion, statue from ruins of, 143.

Olympos, sculptor, 120.

Omphalos, from Athens, 89.

Onatas, sculptor, 122;

- group of Opis at Delphi by, 125;

- inscribed base from Akropolis, 24, 281;

- Onatas and East gable statues from temple on Aegina, 125;

- Onatas and Kalamis, 129, 264;

- works of, at Olympia, 122, 267.

Onomastos, games of, at Cumae, 20.

Onomastos, of Smyrna, institutes boxing rules at Olympia, 235.

Opheltes, 10.

Opis, group of, at Delphi, by Onatas, 125.

Opportunity (Καιρός), altar at Olympia, 76;

- statue by Lysippos, 250.

Orchomenos, “Apollo” from, 100, 101, 103, 328, 334;

- ceiling of treasury of, 329.

Orestes, as his own charioteer, 267.

Oriental influence on early Greek art, 328f.

Originals of victor statues at Olympia, 62f., 322.

Orpheus and Telete, victor group on Helikon, 284.

Orsippos, first athlete to drop the loin-cloth, 47.

Osthalle, the, at Olympia, 358.

Overbeck, J., on Farnese Herakles, 253;

- on head of hoplitodromos from Olympia, 163;

- on heads of Apollo, 275;

- on Lysippos as exclusively a bronze founder, 302;

- on Olympia sculptures, 114;
- on Piombino statuette, 119;
- Schriftquellen of, 61;
- on Standing Diskobolos, 76.

Oxylos, King of Dorian Eleans, 15.

Oxyrhynchus Papyri, the, 31;

- order of contestants at Olympia in, 189.

Paianios, statue at Olympia, 234.

Paidotribes, or trainer of athletes, 229, 236, 248.

Paint, used on sculptures, 326.

Painting, competition in, at Delphi, 25.

Paintings, as victor monuments, 28.

Paionios, sculptor, 113;

- the Nike of, at Olympia, 326, 343, 344, 352, 360;

- replica of, at Delphi, 304;

- replica of head of, in Rome, 304.

Palæstra, absent in Homer, 7;

- palæstra gymnast, statuette of, 108;
- origin of name, 228;
- statues of athletes in, 297;
- statues of athletic gods in, 75, 94.

Palaistra, the, at Olympia, 347, 355, 356, 359, 360, etc.;

- at Pompeii, 224.

Palatine, the, at Rome, 50;

- fragment of leg of statue from, 89.

Palladion, carried off by Diomedes, 169.

Palm, the, as common measure in proportions, 68.

Palm-branch, on so-called Apollo-on-the-Omphalos and Apollo Choiseul-Gouffier, 161;

- in hand of victorious jockey on coin of Philip II, 280;

- on statue from Formiae, 161;
- on statue of girl runner in Vatican, 161;
- on stele from Dipylon, 161;

- on unfinished statue of athlete in Athens, 160;

- on vases, 161;

- as victor attribute, 50, 160f.

Palm-wreath, common to many games, 21, 160.

Pammachos, statue at Thebes, 368.

Pamphilos, grave-relief of, in Vienna, 97.

Pan, Doryphoros converted into, 74.

Panathenaia, the; see Panathenaic games.

Panathenaic amphoræ, runners on, 106, 194;

- four-horse chariot on, from Sparta, 263;

- Dyneiketos, victor, on, 280; etc.

Panathenaic games, Great, Athens, acrobatic feats at, 20;

- contest of beauty at, 57;

- dedication of victor in chariot-race at, 129;

- held every fourth year, 18;
- hydria as prize at, 20;
- jars of oil as prizes at, 20;
- money as prizes at, 33;
- origin of, 17;
- paintings dedicated by victors at, 29;
- remodeled by Solon, 17;

- statue of boy victor at, in Athens, 27.[s/b ;]

- Little, annual Athenian festival, 18.

Pancratiasts, 246f.;

- bronze statuette of, from Autun, 249;

- cap of, 165f.;

- ear of, as no criterion of athlete statues, 95;

- group of, in Florence, 99, 233, 251f.;
- head of, from Olympia, 254, 255;
- in sculpture, 170, 248.

Pan-hellenic fame of victors at four national games, 33.

Panionia, the, festival at Mykale, 19.

Pankration(παγκράτιον), Artemidoros on, 247;

- biting and gouging allowed at Sparta in, 246;

- boys’ contest introduced at Olympia, 247;

- boys’ contests outside Olympia, 247;

- as combination of boxing and wrestling, 246;

- contrasted with wrestling, 246;
- as dangerous sport, 246;
- eight Pindaric odes in honor of, 246;
- etymology of word, 246;
- “fairest” of contests, 246;
- fight on ground, 248;
- grips and throws shown on vases, 247;
- introduced at Olympia, 247;
- invented by Theseus or Herakles, 247;
- not in Homer, 247;
- not so brutal as popularly believed, 246;
- often ended with preliminary sparring, 249;
- often resulted in death, 247;

- pankration and wrestling on same day, 93, 94;

- popularity of, at Olympia, 247;

- rules of, 246.

Panodoros, 371.

Pantares, statue at Olympia, 354.

Pantarkes, favorite of Pheidias, 150.

Pantarkes, victor statue at Olympia, 150, 151.

Pantheion, the, at Olympia, 21.

Pantias, sculptor, 268, 279.

Papyrus, containing wrestling instructions, 229.

Paris, statue by Euphranor, 83.

Parnon, Mount, statue of Herakles on, 319.

Paros, torso of ephebe from Akropolis, work of sculptor from, 127.

Parrhasios, painter, 29, 67, 206.

Parsley, not used as prize wreath at Nemea, 21.

Parthenon, frieze of the, 18, 53, 86, 151;

- Athenian knights on, 281;
- chariot scenes on, 271;
- representing apobates race, 272;
- youth crowning self on, 158;
- metopes of, 149.

Pasiteles, sculptor, 60, 112;

- Pasiteles and Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 89;

- Pasiteles and Spinario, 201, 202.

Patrokles, sculptor, 117, 120, 131, 138, 141.

Patroklos, contests at funeral games of, 8;

- funeral games of, in Iliad, 7f., 11, 51;

- tripods in honor of, 19.

Pausanias, King of Sparta, flees from ephors, 367;

- funeral games in honor of, at Sparta, 11.

Pausanias, the Periegete, on art, 61;

- description of Greece by, 43;

- description of victor statues in Altis by, 339;

- on girl runners at the Heraia at Olympia, 49, 50;

- on honor and victor statues, 39;

- mentions only part of victor statues in Altis, 324;

- on origin of Olympic games, 15;

- periegesis of Altis by, 190;

- on reason for Pythian air being played at pankration, 284, 285;

- routes (ἔφοδοι) of, in Altis, 339, 341f., 348f.;

- on similarity between Greek and Egyptian sculptures, 330;

- on statue of Euthymos, at Olympia, 183;

- use of words ἐν ἀριστερᾷ and ἐν δεξιᾷ by, 299;

- on victor statues of poets and musicians on Helikon, 284;

- on votive character of victor statues at Athens and Olympia, 38; etc.

Payne Knight bronze statuette, so-called, in British Museum, 108, 119.

Peace, temple of, in Rome, 366.

Pearl-string hair technique, 53.

Peisanos, M. Antonios Kallippos, statue at Olympia, 359.

Peisirhodos, victor at Olympia, 47, 49.

Peisistratidai, 128.

Peisistratos, tyrant, 363;

- head of, so-called, 181.

Peisthetairos, in Aves of Aristophanes, 206.

Pelias, funeral games of, 11;

- on chest of Kypselos, 12;

- tripods in honor of, 19.

Pelichos, statue of, 56.

Pelopion, the, at Olympia, 348, 349, 350, 357.

Peloponnesian sculptors, 109f., 114.

Pelops, chariot-race with Oinomaos, 14, 259;

- contestants at Olympia sacrifice to, 11;
- Olympian games in honor of, 10;
- Peloponnesian boys lashed at altar of, 11;

- statue of, in East gable, temple of Zeus at Olympia, 176;

- worship of, at Olympia, preceded that of Zeus, 16.

Pensive expression, in portraits of Alexander, 296.

Pentaëteris, or four-year festival, 17.

Pentathletes, attributes of, 164, 165;

- statues in motion, 210f.;
- statues at rest, 164;
- on vases, 164.

Pentathlon, the, accompanied by flute, 284;

- all-round development from, 59, 211;
- boys’, introduced at Olympia, 210;
- events in, on r.-f. vases, 210;
- five events of, 9, 210;
- diskos throwing, 218f.;
- javelin throwing, 222f.;
- jumping, 214f.;
- jumping most difficult part of, 216;
- jumping-weights used in, 214;
- men’s introduced at Olympia, 210;
- not in Homer, 9, 210;
- Pythian air played at, 285.

Pergamon, dying Gaul statues from, 255;

- frieze of Great Altar at, 252;

- small frieze from, 253.

Periandros, tyrant, gold statue vowed by, 266;

- refounds Isthmian games, 17.

Periboëtos, statue of satyr known as the, 144.

Perikles, 52, 362;

- portrait of, by Kresilas, 56, 199;

- statue of slave of, 143.

Perinthos, head from, 179, 180, 181;

- prototype of Riccardi and Ince Blundell heads, 181.

Peripatetics, criticism of Greek sculpture by the, 58.

Perixyomenoi, statues of, 136.

Perrot and Chipiez, on so-called dying hoplite relief, 209.

Perseus and head of Medusa, on engraved gem, 83;

- Perseus and Danaë, in a chest, 188.

Persian Wars, 51;

- sack of Akropolis during, 126.

Perugia, statuette of diver (?) from, 217.

Pesaro, the Idolino found at, 141.

Petasos, as attribute of Hermes, 108, 207, note 1, etc.

Peter cista, the, in Vatican, 243.

Petersen E., on Kyniskos’ statue, 159;

- on Pythokles’ statue base, 212.

Petrograd, head of athlete in, 180; etc.

Petworth House, Sussex, Kresilæan head of athlete in, 145;

- statue of ephebe in, 133.

Phaistos, theatral area at, 3.

Phanas, head ascribed to, 163;

- statue at Olympia, 106, 355.

Pharsalos, home of Daochos, 286;

- statue base of the Agias at, 303.

Phaÿllos, record diskos-throw of, 216;

- record jump of, 216;

- statue at Delphi, 26.

Pheidias, 36, 110;

- goddess types of, 53;
- ideal tendency of, 152;
- relation of, to Diadoumenos Farnese, 151;
- relation of, to Hermes Ludovisi, 85;

- statue of boy crowning himself at Olympia by, 150f.

Pheidippides, runner, 209.

Pheidolas, sons of, monument at Olympia, 23, 279.

Pheidon, king of Argos, 15.

Pheneus, games at, 76.

Pherenike, mother of Peisirhodos, 47, 49.

Phigalia, victor statue of Arrhachion in market-place of, 326.

Philandridas, date of victory of, 300;

- head from statue of, at Olympia, by Lysippos, identified, 293f.;

- head called youthful Herakles by some, 297;

- compared with head of boy athlete from Sparta, 316f.;

- crushed ear of, 168;
- location of, in Altis, 300;
- under life-size, 46.

Philesian Apollo, of elder Kanachos, 74, 107, 108, 118–120, 336 and note 1;

- “double” of, in Thebes, 304.

Philinos, statue at Olympia, 30, 55.

Philios, D., on dying hoplite relief, so-called, 209.

Philip II, king of Macedon, coin of, showing victorious jockey with palm-branch, 280;

- coins of, showing Athenian type of chariot, 263;

- equestrian victor at Olympia, 257, 263.

Philippeion, the, at Olympia, 353, 355, 356, 357, 358.

Philippopolis, coin of, 78.

Philippos, of Kroton, Olympic victor, heroön of, at Egesta, 35, 57, 363.

Philippos, of Pellene, inscribed bronze plate from victor statue base at Olympia, 244f.

Philistos, monument base at Olympia, 357.

Phillen, or Philys, statue at Olympia, 344.

Philon, statue at Olympia, 122.

Philonides, courier of Alexander, honor statue at Olympia, 42, 346, 356, 359.

Philonides, sculptor, 109, 266.

Philonikos, base of statue at Olympia, 358.

Philokrates, base of statue at Olympia, 368.

Philoktetes, in Sophokles’ drama, the Philoctetes, 59.

Philostratos, of Rhodes, adversary of Straton at Olympia, 34.

Philostratos, on athletes wearing coarse mantle, 47;

- on Eleans allowing strangling in pankration, 246;

- on jumping-weights, 215, 216;
- on method of putting on boxing thongs, 236;
- on omitted 211th Olympiad, 369;

- on pankration as “fairest of contests,” 246;

- on prohibition against biting and gouging in pankration, 246;

- on reason for nudity of Olympic athletes, 47;

- on Spartans allowing biting and gouging in pankration, 246;

- on statue of Milo, 106, 337;

- on style of long race, 194;

- on reason for Pythian air being played at pentathlon, 285.

Philotimos, sculptor, 123, 264, 268, 279.

Philoumenos, inscription from base of statue of, 371.

Philys; see Phillen.

Phlegon, on olive crown, 20.

Phœnicians, the, transmit Assyrian and Egyptian designs to Greece, 330.

Phokis, confederacy of, sets up statue at Olympia, 30.

Phormis, offering at Olympia, 28, 62, 163, 264.

Phorystas, base of statue from Tanagra, 368.

Phradmon, sculptor, 117.

Phrikias, head ascribed to, 162, 163, 353;

- statue at Olympia, 106.

Phrixos, on shield relief, 162.

Physical differences, in athletes, 59.

Piankhi, King of Aethiopia and invader of Egypt, 331.

Pictorial hair technique, 53.

Pinakotheke, the, at Athens, 29.

Pinax, of victresses at the Heraia, at Olympia, 49;

- votive on Attic vase, 29;

- πινάκιον, iconic, 182.

Pindar, on boxing and wrestling, 8;

- on connection of Pelops with Olympia, 10;

- on early value of bronze, 19;

- on non-existence of the pentathlon in heroic days, 210;

- ode on flutist Sakadas, 284;
- scholia on, 26, 130, 190;
- seventh Olympic ode of, 343;
- sings praises of victors, 36;
- sixth Pythian ode of, 267;

- writes eight odes in praise of pankration, 246.

Pine, the, at the Isthmus, 21;

- wreath of, at the Isthmus, 20;

- at Nemea, 21.

Piombino, bronze statuette from, 118.

Pison, sculptor, 278.

Plane-tree Grove, Sparta, 319, 367.

Plastic hair technique, 53.

Platæa, the Eleutheria at, 11.

Platæan Zeus, the, statue at Olympia, 344.

Plato, on boys’ stade-race, 191;

- divides athletes into three classes, 189;
- on Egyptian art, 60;
- on happy life of victors, 36;
- on length of stade-race for boys, 191;
- on length of stade-race for ephebes, 191;
- on loin-cloth, 48;
- mentions σφαῖραι, 237;
- on mythical origin of wrestling, 228;
- omits pankration in his ideal state, 246;

- protests against competition in athletics, 36;

- on swollen ear of athletes, 167.

Plectra, in Parthenon, 23.

Pliny, on Alkamenes’ Enkrinomenos, 77;

- on the Apoxyomenos of Lysippos, 289;

- on art, 60, 61;

- on custom of setting up statues of victors at Olympia, 27, 324, 354;

- on Euphranor’s canon, 69;

- on Eutychides, sculptor, 121;

- on Greek origin of equestrian monuments, 24;

- Historia Naturalis of, 43, 321;

- on iconic statues, 54, 55;

- on Kanachos’ statue of the Philesian Apollo, 118;

- on Kanachos’ celetizontes pueri, 120;
- on Kresilas’ portrait of Perikles, 56;
- on Lysippos’ proportions, 46;

- on Lysistratos making portraits from plaster moulds, 56;

- on monotony in the art of Polykleitos, 152, 226;

- on Myron, 184;

- on nudity of athletes, 47;

- on the nudus talo incessens of Polykleitos, 249, 250;

- on representing victors by paintings, 29;
- on the sculptor Apellas, 267;
- on the Splanchnoptes of Styphax, 143;

- on statue of pancratiast at Delphi by Pythagoras, 26;

- on statue represented in prayer, 130;

- on statue of victors by Myron at Delphi, 26;

- on symmetry, 66; etc.

Plutarch, on Apollo as boxer, 88;

- on art, 61;

- on portraits of Alexander by Lysippos, 290, 328.

Plutus, the, of Aristophanes, quoted, 36.

Poetic competitions at Delphi, 25.

Poets, statues on Helikon, 284;

- statues at Olympia, 285.

Polemon, on statue of Leon, 366;

- on statue of Epicharinos, 372.

Polites, victor at Olympia, 354.

Pollux, describes game of σκαπέρδη, 236.

Pollux; see Polydeukes.

Pollux, the statue in Louvre, so-called, 180, 181, 188, 245.

Polybios, on Kleitomachos, boxer of Thebes, 147.

Polychalchos, surname of Spartan victor Polykles, 266.

Polydamas, relief from base of statue of, 303;

- statue of, at Olympia, by Lysippos, 32, 45, 121, 298, 299;

- statue of, cures fevers, 364.

Polydeukes, boxing-match with Amykos on Ficoroni cista, 269;

- as famed boxer, 235;

- wins boxing match at Olympia, 96, 235.

Polykleitos, the Elder, sculptor, 117, 118;

- Apoxyomenos of, 136;

- called Kleito by Sokrates, in Xenophon’s Memorabilia, 59;

- canon of, 68, 111, 136, 148, 288;
- characteristics of, 152;
- date of, by Pliny, 61;
- destringentesse of, 136, 288;
- Diadoumenos of, 152, 154;
- Doryphoros of, 211, 224f.;
- as idealist, 188;
- influence of, on Lysippos, 291;
- influenced by Attic art, 152;
- innovation of, in statue poses, 226;
- monotony of, 152, 226;
- poses of victor statues of, 44;
- pupil of Hagelaïdas, 110;
- pupils of, 139;
- victor statues of, 36.

Polykleitos, the Younger, sculptor, statues of victors at Olympia by, 30, 117, 118.

Polykles, the Elder, sculptor, 129, 324.

Polykles, victor group at Olympia, 150, 266.

Polymedes, sculptor, 105.

Polypeithes, chariot-group at Olympia, 23, 265, 347.

Polyxenos, statue at Olympia, 359.

Polyzalos, brother of Gelo, 278.

Pomegranate, attribute of victor statues, 107, 165.

Pompeii, Doryphoros of Polykleitos found at, 70;

- Palaistra at, 87.

Poros sculptures, 53, 128.

Porto d’Anzio, statue from, 135, 144.

Portraiture, Greek, 54, 55f.;

- privilege of erecting portrait statues at Olympia, 57, 354;

- privilege rarely given, 57;

- realistic, 56, 57.

Poseidon, altar at Isthmus, 259;

- god of contests, 75;
- pine sacred to, 21;
- sanctuary at Isthmus, 21;
- statue from Melos, 73, 74;
- surnamed ἵππιος, at Sparta, 362.

Poses, of victor statues, found on various sculptured and painted works, 44;

- general, of victor statues at rest, 130f.;

- general, of victor statues in motion, 188f.

Poulsen, F., on the Agias, 291, note 2.

Prado, copy of Diadoumenos of Polykleitos in the, Madrid, 153.

Praisos, seal from, 3.

Praxidamas, wood statue at Olympia, 106, 322, 326, 333, 337, 351.

Praxiteles, sculptor, 36, 80;

- the Agias of Lysippos influenced by, 291;
- art of, rooted in fifth century B. C., 134;
- as bronze worker, 303;
- delicate male types of, 297;
- hair technique of, 53;
- head-type of, 77, 309;

- Praxiteles and boy athlete head from Sparta, 305, 311;

- Praxiteles and Kalamis, chariot-group by, 268;

- Praxiteles and Philandridas head from Olympia, 293;

- Praxiteles and Skopas differentiated, 311;

- statue of a ψελιουμένη by, 131.

Prayer, as motive in votive monuments, 130;

- position of hands in Greek, 132;

- statue of youth represented in, from Carinthia, 131;

- statue of youth represented in, Berlin, 131;

- statuette of youth represented in, Metropolitan Museum, 132, 133.

Praying Boy, the, statue so-called, in Berlin, 131, 132.

Preuner, E., on inscription from statue base in Pharsalos, 286, 317, 318, 363.

Pristae, by Myron, 188.

Prizes, on chest of Kypselos, 13;

- at contests of beauty, 57;
- early athlete, 18f.;
- at games of Azan, 9;
- at games of Patroklos, 19.

Processional entrance, the, of the Altis, 347.

Processional way, the, of the Altis, 348, 349, 350.

Professionalism in athletics, at Olympia, 361;

- protests against, 36, 37.

Profile, first example of Greek, 116.

Prokles, statue at Olympia, 345, 346.

Promachos, statues at Olympia and Pellene, 31, 304, 323, 325, 326, 367.

Proportio, in Greek art, 66.

Proportions, canons of, 65f.;

- in Egyptian art, 67;
- Fritsch on, of body, 67;
- Kalkmann on, of face, 67.

Prose writers, statues at Olympia, 285.

Protogenes, athlete painted by, 29.

Protolaos, statue at Olympia, 179, 352.

Prytaneion, the, in Athens, victors eat at public expense at, 32;

- the, in Olympia, 299, 342, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360.

Psammetichos, tyrant of Corinth, 17.

Pseudo-Andokides, 363.

Pseudo-Plutarch, on statue of Isokrates at Athens, 24 and note 11, 27 and note 4, 281, 373.

Ptoion, Mount, statues of “Apollo” from, 100, 101, 102, 103, 334;

- tripods in temple of Apollo on, 19.

Ptolemy, Gymnasion at Athens, 166.

Ptolichos, sculptor, 61, 122.

Puchstein, O., on location of Great Altar of Zeus at Olympia, 349.

Pummeling, allowed in pankration, 246.

Pyanepsion, month of, 18.

Pyrilampes, statue at Olympia, 343, 346, 353.

Pythagoras, sculptor, 138, 178f., 364, 375;

- dated by Pliny, 61;

- first to aim at rhythm and symmetry, 67, 179;

- first to express sinews and veins, 138;

- Pythagoras and Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 89;

- Pythagoras and Delphi Charioteer, 278;
- Pythagoras and Myron, 181, 245;
- Pythagoras and Tux bronze, 207;

- statue of Delphic pancratiast by, 26, 178, 182;

- statue of mala ferens nudus by, 107;

- style of, 179;

- victor statues at Olympia, by, 36, 62, 161, 178f., 268.

Pytheos, see Pythis.

Pythes, honor statue at Olympia, 42.

Pythia, the, festival at Delphi, 16, 17;

- as athletic meet, inferior to Nemea and Isthmia, 24, 25;

- as festival, second to Olympia, 24;

- in honor of the Python, 10;

- statue of victor at, in Athens, 27.

- See Delphi.

Pythian air, played at pentathlon, 88, 285.

Pythian Apollo, the, statue of, 330, 334.

Pythis, or Pytheos, architect, 264.

Python, the, at Delphi, 10, 25.

Pythokles, replicas of statues of, 212f.;

- statue of, at Olympia, 93, 117, 159 and note 3, 211, 212, 343.

Pythokritos, flutist, honor statue at Olympia, 42, 285, 352.

Pythokritos, sculptor, 244.

Pyxis, from Knossos, 7.

Quadrigae, mentioned by Pliny, 264.

- See Chariot-race.

Quatremère de Quincy, on Borghese Warrior, 208.

“Quiet grandeur” (stille Grosse) of Greek Art, 57.

Quintilian, on art, 61;

- on the Doryphoros of Polykleitos, 70, 226;

- on the Diskobolos of Myron, 187.

Quintus Smyrnæus, on jumping among the Trojans, 214.

Quiver, on Torlonia copy of the Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 89.

Quoit; see Diskos.

Ram-offerer, statue by Naukydes, 78.

Rampin head, of Louvre, 126, 128, 176;

- hair technique of, 53.

Ra-nefer, limestone statue in Cairo, 330.

Rayet, on Borghese Warrior, 208.

Rayet-Jacobsen head, so-called, in Copenhagen, 127, 128, 167, 337.

Realism in Greek art, 56, 57, 146f.;

- in Greek portraiture, 56, 57.

Reconstruction of Olympic victor statues, 43f.

Reinach, S., on bronze statue of youth from Antikythera, 83;

- on stone statues being placed under cover, 325.

Reinach, Th., on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 81.

Reisch, E., on javelin-throwers in sculpture, 224;

- on Pliny’s puer tenens tabellam and malaferens nudus, 181;

- on statue of Euthymos at Olympia, 183;

- on votive character of Olympic victor statues, 39.

Reliefs, of akontistai, from Sparta, 223;

- Amphiaraos, 273;
- apobates chariot race, 272;
- Apollo, Artemis, and Leto, in Louvre, 284;
- Aristion, 124, 127;
- Boreas, in Metropolitan Museum, 194;
- boxers, in Lateran, 238;
- boy crowning self, 155;

- boxer, on bronze shield, from Mount Ida, Crete, 235;

- cap, in Rome, 166;
- charioteer, from Akropolis, 128;
- charioteer mounting chariot, 269;
- chariots, from Crete, 262;
- Dermys and Kitylos, from Tanagra, 335;
- Dioskouroi, set up by Aischylos, 96, 97;
- Dioskouroi, in London, 97;
- from Dipylon, 156;
- diskobolos, from Dipylon, 127;
- dying hoplite, from Athens, 194, 209;
- four-horse chariot, 268, 269;
- funerary, from Tanagra, 72;
- funerary, from Athens, 66;
- from Halimous, 249;
- Hermes, fragment from Athens, 270;
- hoplite runners, from Tarentum, 96;
- horse crowned by Nike, from Athens, 269;
- horseman, from Athens, 281;
- horse-racer, from Sicily, 281;
- horse-racer from Thera, 281;

- horse-racer leading horse, from Athens, 281;

- jumping-weights, from Sparta, 164;
- from Klazomenai, 264, 268;
- from Kleitor, 132;
- from Knossos, 3, 4;
- from Lamia, 132;
- from Loeb collection, Munich, 194;
- from Nemea, 132;
- palæstra victor, from Delphi, 138;

- in honor of Pamphilos and Alexandros, in Verona, 97;

- showing poses of victor statues, 44;
- as victor monuments, 28;
- war-chariots, from Mycenæ, 262.

Religion and Greek athletics, 14.

Remnants of victor statues at Olympia, 43.

Renaissance, the, 4;

- bronze copies of Spinario from period of, 202.

“Repose” of Greek art, 57.

“Rest” leg, motive in sculpture, 109.

Resting after contest, athletic motive, 144.

Rewards, money, of victors at Athens, 32.

Rhamnous, the Nemesis of Agorakritos at, 182.

Rhegion, Anaxilas, tyrant of, 278;

- coins of, showing mule-car, 263.

Rhetoric, the, of Aristotle, 58;

- inscribed base of Olympic victor mentioned in, 367.

Rhexibios, wood statue at Olympia, 106, 332, 326, 337, 351;

- wrongly called oldest at Olympia by Pausanias, 333.

Rhodes, scene of fighting combatants, in art of, 178;

- tripods in honor of Dionysos at, 19;

- Zan at Olympia, set up by, 34.

Rhoikos, bronze founder, date of, 321;

- family of, 330.

- See also Telekles and Theodoros.

Rhouphos, Klaudios (Rufus, Claudius), statue in Rome, 371.

Rhythm, definition of, 66;

- in Greek Art, 66.

Riccardi head, 169, 180, 181, 183.

Richardson, R. B., on bronze head from Akropolis, 114;

- on Farnese Herakles, 253, 254.

Richter, G., on statuette of diskobolos in Metropolitan Museum, 220 and note 5.

Ridder, A. de, on Tux bronze, 207;

- on two statuettes of diskoboloi from Akropolis, 221, 222.

Robert, C., on Diadoumenos of Pheidias, 150f.;

- on date of victor Kyniskos, 160.

Robinson, D. M., 267.

Robinson, E., on Charioteer (?), in Boston, 275;

- on head of Hermes, in Boston, 85; etc.

Roehl, H., on inscription referred to statue of Milo, 38.

Roman copies of victor statues, on, 44;

- no copy proved to be of victor statue, 160;

- on Roman patrons of art, 44.

Ross, L., on inscribed base from statue of Epicharinos, 372.

Rothschild, E. de, bronze copy of Spinario, in Paris collection of, 202.

Rouse, W. D., on votive character of victor statues at Olympia, 39, 40.

Routes, of Pausanias in the Altis; see Ephodoi.

Runners, difference in style of various, shown by vase-paintings, 193, 194;

- on Panathenaic amphoræ, 106, 194;
- represented as running with bent knee, 194;
- statues of boy, 200f.;

- statues of, from Velletri, in Rome, 198, 199;

- statues of, without special attributes, 170.

Running race (δρόμος), various kinds of, 190f.;

- in mythology, 190;

- number of victors in, named by Pausanias, 193;

- origin of, at Eleusis, 190;

- part of all Greek games and exercises, 190.

- See Double foot-race, Hoplite-race, Long race, Stade-race.

Sabouroff collection, head from, 128.

Sacred war, the, 17.

Sakadas, flutist, statue of, 284.

Salamis, Aeginetans at battle of, 125;

- date of battle of, 125.

Salis, A. von, on statue from Olympieion, 143.

Salutation, attitude of, to a divinity, in statuette in Metropolitan Museum, 133.

Sandal-binder, statue of, so-called, with copies, 86, 87, 202, 203.

Sandal-binding, motive of, originates with Lysippos, 86.

Sandals, worn by charioteers, 48.

Santa Marinella, statue from, in Fogg Art Museum, Cambridge, Mass., 314.

Sarapion, flees adversary and is fined, 34;

- two statues in Elis, 370.

Satrap Sarcophagus, so-called, in Constantinople, 276.

Satyr, of Praxiteles, called Periboëtos, 144;

- statue of, in Dresden, 144.

Sawyers (?) (pristae), group by Myron, 188.

Scarab, chalcedony, in British Museum, 138.

Schaefer, A., on statue of Kylon on Akropolis, 362.

Scherer, Chr., on exclusive use of bronze in Olympic victor statues, 321;

- on “iconic” statues of Pliny, 54;

- on Milo’s statue at Olympia, 107;

- on positions of victor statues at Olympia, 340.

Scheria, games on, 210.

Schnaase, on Farnese Herakles, 253.

Schober, A., on Perinthos and allied heads, 181.

Schoell, R., on votive character of victor monuments, 39.

Scholiasts, statements of, on victor statues at Olympia, 43.

Schrader, H., on Attic relief from the Akropolis, 271.

Schreiber, T., on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 90.

Schwabe, L., on Tux bronze, 207.

Sciarra bronze, statuette so-called, in Rome, 119.

Scraper; see Strigil.

Sculptors, of Olympic victor statues, 36;

- statistics of, 375.

Sculptura, definition of, from Pliny, 302.

Sculpture, Greek, after Persian Wars, 278;

- ancient criticism of, 58f.;

- evolution of, on traditional lines, 67;

- knowledge of, necessary in reconstructing Olympic victor statues, 44.

Sea-monsters (?) (pristes), group by Myron, 188.

Seasons, altar at Olympia, 351.

Seated Boxer, statue of the, in Museo delle Terme, Rome, 145f., 168;

- realism of, 57, 254.

See-saw (?) (pristae?), group by Myron, 188.

Seleados, base of statue at Olympia, 346.

Seleukos I, date of founding Antioch by, 121.

Selinos, coins of, showing celery wreath, 21;

- temple E at, 114.

Sellers, Eugénie; see Strong, Mrs. Eugénie.

Selling out, examples at Olympia, 33.

Seraglio, Old, manuscript from the, 258.

Serambos, sculptor, 123.

Shadow-fighting; see Sparring.

Sheik-el-Beled, the; see Ka-aper, statue of.

Shield, as attribute of hoplitodromoi, 161;

- as prize at Argive Heraia, 21;

- 25 bronze ones kept in temple of Zeus for Olympic hoplite runners, 22.

Siamese, funeral games among, 12.

Sicily, cities of, honor victors, 35;

- coins of, showing racing chariots, 262, 263;

- Greeks of, fond of hippodrome contests, 258;

- princes of, as victors at Olympia, 357;

- school of sculpture of, 114.

Sidon, Alexander Sarcophagus from, in Constantinople, 275;

- Satrap Sarcophagus from, in Constantinople, 276.

Sikyon, athletic school of sculptors from, 58, 118f.

Sikyonians, treasury of, at Olympia, 41, 265.

Silanion, sculptor, 129.

Silver bowl, as prize at games of Patroklos, 19;

- silver cups, as prizes at Sikyonian Pythian games, 20.

Simon, sculptor, 264, 268.

Simonides, of Keos, 36, 47, 210.

Singing, competition in, at Delphi, 25.

Single-combat, between Ajax and Diomedes, in Iliad, 8.

Six, J., on Borghese Warrior, 208;

- on statue of Hermolykos on Akropolis, 373.

Size of victor statues, 45f.

Skenoma (Σκήνωμα), the, at Sparta, 367.

Skopas, sculptor, 36;

- characteristics of, 311;

- head in style of, in Capitoline Museum, Rome, 169;

- head-type of, 77;
- influence on the Agias, 291;
- intense expression of, 307;
- Kallistratos on, 309;
- knowledge of, recently augmented, 286;
- as master of expression of passion, 309;
- Philandridas head wrongly ascribed to, 293;

- Skopas and boy athlete head from Sparta, 305;

- Skopas and Lysippos compared, 311f., 315;

- style of, from Tegea heads, 306.

Skripou, convent of, 334.

Skyllis, sculptor, 122, 334.

- See also Dipoinos.

Skyros, 18.

Slings for diskoi, on r.-f. vase, 164.

Smikythos; see Mikythos.

Smile, in archaic sculpture, 100, 126.

Smith, A. H., on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 89, 90;

- on athlete statue from Palazzo Farnese, Rome, in British Museum, 293.

Snail-volute, hair technique, 53.

Snatcher, the, from East gable, temple of Aegina, 125.

Sodamas, statue at Olympia, 354.

Sogliano, A., on boxer statue from Sorrento, 243.

Sokrates, philosopher, condemns “mimetic” arts, 58;

- on physical development of runners and boxers, 59;

- visit of, to sculptor Kleito, 59.

Sokrates, victor; see Sosikrates.

Solon, assigns money prizes to Olympic and Isthmian victors, 25, 32.

Solos, throwing of, in Iliad, 8;

- as type of diskos, 218.

Somzée Collection, athlete from the, 176, 251.

Songs, in honor of victors, 34.

Sophios, statue at Olympia, 299, 342.

Sophokles, Trachiniae of, 318.

Sorrento, statue of boxer from, by Koblanos, 242.

Sosikrates (or Sokrates), victor statue of, at Olympia, 200, 344.

Sostratos, dates of Olympic victories of, 300;

- inscribed base from statue, at Delphi, 249;
- statue at Olympia, 55;
- surnamed ἀκροχερσίτης, 248, 249.

Sotades, Olympic victor, bribed and exiled, 33.

Southeast Building, the, at Olympia, 344.

Sparring, preliminary, called ἀκροχερισμός in boxing and pankration, 248 and note 4;

- depicted on Ficoroni cista in Rome, 243;
- depicted on Peter cista in Rome, 243;
- as motive of boxer statues, 243;

- as motive of statuette of boxer in Vatican, 243;

- as motive of marble torso in Berlin, 243;

- preliminary in pankration, 248;

- called σκιαμαχεῖν (to shadow-fight), in boxing, 122, 243 and note 4.

Sparta, Akropolis, of, 305;

- Dionysia at, 50;

- Δρόμος at, 309;

- funeral games at, in honor of Leonidas and Pausanias, 11;

- head of statue of boy from, 305f.;

- Σκήνωμα at, 367.

Spartans, allow biting and gouging in pankration, 246;

- ball-playing among, 84;
- as boxers, 167;
- boxing of, in Plato, 167;

- excluded from Olympia on certain Olympiads, 31;

- girls contest with boys, 49;
- physical exercise among, 1;
- sacrifice to Apollo the Runner, 88;

- youths dedicate offerings to Eros in contest of beauty, 57.

Spear, casting of, at games of Patroklos, 8.

Sphairians (σφαιρεῖς), title of Spartan youths, 84, 319.

Spinario, the, statue in Rome, 201f.;

- as example of asymmetry, 70;

- imitations of original of, 202.

Splanchnoptes, statue of, by Styphax, 143.

Sponges, shown on r.-f. kylix, 164.

Springboard, not used in Greek jumping, 216.

Stackelberg, O. von, traveling journal of, 286, 366.

Stade-race (δρόμος, στάδιον), 190f.;

- first event at Olympia and at the Panathenaia, 191;

- for boys, introduced at Olympia, 191;
- the oldest (?) event at Olympia, 191;
- victor in, eponymous at Olympia, 37;

- wrongly regarded as chief event at Olympia, 191.

Stadia, absent in Homer, 7.

Stadion, the, at Olympia, 258, 359, 360.

Staïs, V., on Hermes of Andros, 71;

- on two statuettes of diskoboloi from Akropolis, 221, 222.

Stamnos, r.-f., from Etruria, in Vienna, 132.

Standard of physical development uniform in fifth century B. C., 147f.

Standing Diskobolos, the statue in Vatican, 76f.;

- pose of, 219, 220;

- replica of, 77.

Standing Hermes, the, statue in Vatican, 72.

“Stand-motif,” Polykleitan, 82.

“Starters of the race,” epithets of Kastor and Polydeukes at Sparta, 96.

Stassoff, on supposed Oriental origin of javelin-throwing, 222.

Statuettes, of ivory acrobats, from Knossos, 3;

- akontistai, two bronze, 227, 228;

- Apollo, from Naxos, in Berlin, 74, 119;

- Apollo (Payne Knight), in British Museum, 108, 119;

- Apollo, from Piombino, in Louvre, 118;

- Apollo, from Palazzo Sciarra, Rome, 119;

- apoxyomenos, in Loeb collection, Munich, 136;

- athlete, archaic, from Delphi, 28;
- athlete, from Ligourió, 105, 111, 114;
- athlete, in Louvre, 213, 214;
- boxer, from Akropolis, 28;
- boxer, from Corfu, in British Museum, 96;
- boxer, from Olympia, 28, 244;
- boxer, in Vatican Museum, 243;

- diadoumenos, terra cotta from Smyrna, in London, 154;

- diadoumenos, from Akropolis, 155;

- diskoboloi, 28, 218f.;

- diskoboloi, two bronze, from Akropolis, 222;

- diskoboloi, group in Loeb collection, Munich 232, 233;

- diskobolos, in Berlin, 221;

- diskobolos, in British Museum, 221;

- diskobolos, from cover of lebes, in British Museum, 221;

- diskobolos, from the Kabeirion, 28;

- diskobolos, in Metropolitan Museum, 220, 221;

- girl runner, from Dodona, 28;

- girl extracting thorn, terra cotta from Nida-Haddernheim, 202;

- Herakles or victor, in Berlin, 96;

- Herakles, or victors, in British Museum, 96;

- Hermes Diskobolos, from sea off Antikythera, 78, 79;

- hoplitodrome, from Capua, in Vienna, 207;
- hoplitodrome, Tux bronze, in Tuebingen, 28;
- horse-racer, from Dodona, 28, 281;

- horse-racer, in Loeb collection, Munich, 282;

- horse-racer, from Volubilis, 281;

- horse-racers, from Olympia, 24;

- oil-pourer, from S. Italy, in British Museum, 135;

- oil-pourers, terra cottas from Myrina, 135;

- pancratiast, from Autun, in Louvre, 249f.;

- praying boys, two bronze, in Metropolitan Museum, 132, 133;

- sacrificer, from Dodona, 143;
- trumpeter, from Sparta, 283;
- warrior, from Dodona, 126;
- wrestlers, group from Akropolis, 28;

- wrestlers, group in Loeb Collection, Munich, 232;

- statuettes in motion, from Egyptian art, 177;

- in Paris and Rome, showing motive of statue of Xenokles, 138, 139.

Stelæ, in honor of victors, 40.

Stephanos, sculptor, statue by, 111f.

“Stolid” group of so-called “Apollo” statues, 100.

Stomach throw, in pankration, 247.

Stomios, famous pentathlete, 59;

- statue of, at Olympia, 42.

Stone, used in Olympic victor statues, 323f.

Strabo, on origin of Olympic games, 15.

Strangford Apollo, the, statue in British Museum, 102, 103, 123, 244.

Strangling, allowed in pankration, 246, 247.

Straton, Olympic victor, 34, 93.

Strigil, or scraper (στλεγγίς), used by athletes as a common palæstra attribute, 135, 138, 288.

Stroganoff, statuette formerly in Collection, 166.

Strong, Mrs. Eugénie (née Sellers), on Apollo head, in British Museum, 92;

- on Beneventum head, in Louvre, 63.

Studniczka, F., on the gable statues from Olympia, 114;

- on the Idolino, 141;

- on statues of Theagenes, 364.

Styphax (or Styppax), sculptor, 143.

Subiaco, statue of kneeling youth from, 195;

- date and interpretation of, 195, 196.

Succession, contests of, as explanation of funerary games, 14.

Suedwestbau; see Leonidaion.

Svoronos, J. N., on bronze arm found in sea off Antikythera, 236;

- on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 83;

- on bronze statuette found in sea off Antikythera, 79;

- on Delphi Charioteer, 277;
- on dying hoplite relief, from Athens, 209;
- on the Idolino, 142.

Swollen ear, as attribute of victor statues, 167f.;

- not a determining distinction between heads of athletes and Herakles, 297, 319, 320;

- on various heads of athletes, gods, and heroes, 168f.

Symmachos, statue at Olympia, 120, 342.

Symmetry, in Greek art, 65, 66;

- Pliny and Vitruvius on, 66.

Symplegma, group representing a, by Kephisodotos, 252.

Symposium, of Xenophon, 59.

Syracuse, coins of, representing Nike with tablet, 182;

- funeral games at, in honor of Timoleon, 11;

- Hiero and Gelo, kings of, 257.

Tainia, or fillet, as victor attribute, 148f.

Tanagra, ephebe chosen at, for his beauty, 57;

- grave-stele from, 72.

Tarentum (Taras), captured by Q. Fabius Maximus, 253;

- coins of, showing apobates horse-racers, 282.

Tarsos, athlete head from, 168.

Tegea, excavations at temple of Athena at, 306;

- heads from gable of temple at, 306;

- heads from, compared with small frieze from Mausoleion, 275;

- heads from, compared with boy athlete head from Sparta, 305;

- torso of the Amazon from, 306.

Teisikrates, chariot victor, at Delphi, 268.

Teisikrates, pancratiast, inscribed base of statue of, from Delphi, 249.

Teisikrates, Theban sculptor, 368.

Tektaios, sculptor, 122, 304, 334, 335.

- See also Angelion.

Telekles, sculptor, 330, 334.

- See also Rhoikos and Theodoros.

Telemachos, base of statue at Olympia, 346, 348, 355;

- statue at Olympia, 109, 266, 339, 345;

- zone of, at Olympia, 345, 346.

Telephos, battle with Achilles, in Tegea pediment, 306;

- in group, on small frieze from Pergamon, 253;

- in group, in Vatican, 95.

Telesikrates, hoplite victor, statue at Delphi, 26, 162.

Tellon, base of statue at Olympia, 240, 345;

- statue at Olympia, 31, 352.

Temessa, Black Spirit of, 35.

Tempe, vale of, as home of laurel, 21.

Temple, spoken of as pro persona, 299.

Tenea, “Apollo” of, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 127, 327, 336;

- “Apollo” of, as runner, 148;

- necropolis of, 337.

Tenerani, sculptor, 288.

Tepemankh, wood statue in Cairo, 330.

Terrace wall, South, at Olympia, 346, 348, 357, 358.

Tetradrachm, silver, in honor of Olympic victory of Philip II, 280.

Thaliarchos, base of statue of, 358;

- oldest prose inscription making an Olympic victor statue votive, 39.

Thamyris, victor statue on Helikon, 284.

Thargelia, the, statue of boy victor at, 27.

Thasos, statue of Theagenes on, 364;

- temple of Apollo at Alki on, 336.

Theagenes, Olympic victor, boxing match with Euthymos, 247;

- heroized after death, 35;
- statue at Olympia, 122, 244, 364;
- story of statue on Thasos, 364;

- too wearied by boxing to enter pankration, 247;

- wrestling match with Aethiopian, 252.

Theekoleon, the, at Olympia, 353, 355, 357.

Theochrestos, chariot dedicated at Olympia, 265.

Theodoros, bronze founder, 321, 330, 334.

- See also Rhoikos and Telekles.

Theodosius, Roman emperor, abolishes Olympic games, 15.

Theognetos, statue at Olympia, 61, 165, 352.

Theopompos, statue at Olympia, 161.

Theopropos, base of statue at Olympia, 360.

Theoros, painter, 29, 133.

Theotimos, statue at Olympia, 121.

Thera, “Apollo” of, 100, 101, 103, 104, 327, 337.

Thermæ, the, of M. Agrippa, Rome, 289.

Thermopylæ, battle of, 51.

Thersias, first victor in mule-race at Olympia, 261.

Thersilochos, statue at Olympia, 117.

Thersonides, base of statue from Olympia, 356.

Theseia, the, 18;

- boys at, divided into three classes, 189.

Theseus, 18;

- contest of, on Delos, in honor of Apollo, 160;

- as inventor of boxing, 235;
- as inventor of pankration, 247;
- statues of, in gymnasia and palæstræ, 94;

- Theseus and Kerkyon, on metope of Theseion, 232.

Thessalonika, funeral games at, 11.

Thessaly, bull-grappling sport in, 5.

Thong (ἀγκύλη, amentum), of javelin, 223.

Thorn-puller; see Spinario.

Thorwaldsen, sculptor, restores Aegina gable statues, 123.

Thracian Chersonesos, games on, 11.

Thrasyboulos, drives father’s car at Delphi, 267.

Thrasymachos (or Thrasymedes), base of statue at Olympia, 358.

Threatening look of victor statues, 59.

Thukydides, on Diitrephes, 373;

- on krobylos hair-fashion, 52;
- on loin-cloth of athletes, 48;
- on refuge of King Pausanias, 367;
- uses pancratiasts for dating, 191.

Tiberius, Roman emperor, base of statue at Olympia, 357, 358;

- chariot victor at Olympia, 261;

- enamored of the Apoxyomenos of Lysippos, 289.

Tilting, hold in pankration, 247.

Timainetos, painter, 29.

Timaios, first victor in trumpeting at Olympia, 283.

Timaios, historian, 284.

Timarchides, sculptor, 129, 324.

Timasitheos, statue at Olympia, 111, 355.

Timokles, sculptor, 129.

Timoleon, funeral games in honor of, at Syracuse, 11.

Timon, chariot victor, statue in equestrian group, 120, 266, 268, 279.

Timon, pentathlete, statue at Olympia, 109, 354.

Timoptolis, honor statue at Olympia, 42.

Timosthenes, statue at Olympia, 121, 342.

Tiryns, fresco from, 2, 3;

- lack of athletic scenes at, 8.

Titus, baths at Rome, 371.

Toalios, Aurelios, base of victor statue at Oinoanda, 371.

Torches, dedications of, 22.

Toreadors, paintings of, male and female, at Knossos, 1, 3.

Torlonia, Palazzo, Rome, copy of Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type in, 89;

- head of Ares in, 170.

Trachiniae, of Sophokles, 318.

Trainers at Olympia, nude, 49.

Treasuries, the, at Olympia, 351.

Treu, G., on colossal Apollo from Olympia, 92;

- on copy of Doryphoros of Polykleitos, at Olympia, 227;

- on gable statues from temple of Zeus, Olympia, 114;

- on head of hoplite runner from Olympia, 163;

- identifies Leonidaion, at Olympia, 348;

- on Philandridas head, 293, 294;

- on use of marble in Olympic victor statues, 324, 326.

Triopia, the, at Mykale, 19.

Triphylia, 15.

Tripods, as early prizes, 19;

- found at Olympia and elsewhere, 22;

- in honor of various gods and heroes, 19;

- reliefs on bronze, in Loeb collection, Munich, 194.

Tripping, in wrestling, 229;

- shown by five bronze groups, 233.

Triptolemos (?), statue of Kyniskos converted into, 74.

Troilos, dates of victories at Olympia, 300, 301;

- statue at Olympia, 29, 121, 266, 298;

- tablet from base of statue of, 299, 342.

Trotting-race with mares (κάλπη), introduced at Olympia, 261;

- why introduced, 282.

Trumpeters, on Attic vases, 284;

- bronze statuette of, from Sparta, 283;
- contests of, introduced at Olympia, 283;
- statues at Olympia, 283.

Tuebingen bronze; see Tux bronze.

Tui, wood statue of, in Louvre, 331.

Tumblers, among Athenians, 5;

- among Trojans, 5;

- on shield of Achilles, 5.

Turin, head of athlete in, 87;

- marble head of Apollo in, 93;

- Roman grave-stone from, 72.

Tux bronze, statuette of hoplitodromos (?), in University Museum, Tuebingen, 28, 123, 164, 206, 207.

Tyche, statue by Eutychides, at Antioch, 121.

Types, various, of Olympic victor statues, 44, 99f., 173f.; etc.

Tyrannicides, the, group by Kritios and Nesiotes, 60, 148, 173f.;

- break with law of “frontality,” 175;

- as first examples of honor statues, 41;

- group of, returned from Susa by Alexander, 173;

- reconstruction of, from reliefs, vase-paintings, etc., 174;

- represented on oinochoe in Boston, 175;
- sculptors of, 173f., 372;
- Tyrannicides and Diskobolos compared, 183.

Umpires, at Olympia, 149.

- See also Hellanodikai.

Uncritical judgments of ancient writers on art, 58.

Uniformity, standard of, in physical development in fifth century B. C., 147f.

Urlichs, H. L. von, on pristae of Myron, 188;

- on puer tenens tabellam of Pythagoras, 182.

Urlichs, L. von, on mala ferens nudus, mentioned by Pliny, 182;

- on puer tenens tabellam of Pythagoras, 182.

Vaison Diadoumenos of Polykleitos, 152.

Valerian, Roman emperor, 11.

Vapheio, cups from, 4.

Varro, opinions of, on art, 60.

Vase-paintings, showing poses of Olympic victor statues, 44.

“Vatican athlete standing at rest,” so-called, 140.

Veins, shown in Cretan art, 3, 4.

Venator, statue of, by Euthykrates, 314.

Ventnor head in British Museum, 89.

Verona, grave-relief in, 72.

Victor fillets, 52.

Victor statues, assimilated to types of gods and heroes, 71f.;

- bases of, from Altis, 43, 353f.;
- carried off to Italy, 43;
- dedication of, an old Greek custom, 99;
- dedication at Olympia and elsewhere, 24f.;

- distinguished from statues of gods and heroes, 71;

- general characteristics of, 43f.;
- groups of, in Altis, 300, 340;
- hair-fashion of, 50f.;
- life-size, examples of, 46;
- materials of, 321f.;
- in motion, 173f.;
- nudity of, 47f.;

- periegesis of, in the Altis, by Pausanias, 321;

- positions of, in Altis, 339f., 352;
- remnants of, 43, 62f.;
- at rest, 99f.;
- set up at Olympia, long after victory, 32;
- set up at Olympia, soon after victory, 31;

- set up at Olympia by relatives of victor, by native city of victor, by fellow-citizens of victor, 30;

- set up by trainers, 30;
- set up outside Olympia, 361f.;
- size of, 45f.;
- statuaries of, 375;
- two classes of, 99;
- zones of, at Olympia, 340.

Victor statuettes, set up at Olympia, 27, 28;

- on Akropolis, 28.

Victoria quadrigam in sublime rapiens, painting by Nikomachos, 268.

Victors, special privileges of, at Rome, 33;

- Victor certamine gymnico palmam tenens, painting of, by Eupompos, 160;

- victor, represented as crowned, on chest of Kypselos, 13;

- victor in wrestling and pankration on same day, called παράδοξος or παραδοξονίκης, 94;

- victors at four national games, called περιοδονῖκαι, 361.

Victory, of Paionios; see Paionios, Nike of;

- zone of, at Olympia, 344, 355.

Vincent, Edgar, head of athlete in Collection of, 156.

Vinci, Leonardo da, on body proportions, 68.

Visconti, on so-called Borghese Warrior, 209;

- on Pliny’s “iconic” statues, 54.

Viterbo, bull-grappling in province of, 5.

Vitruvius, on analogy, rhythm, and symmetry, in Greek art, 66.

Volneratus deficiens, the, statue by Kresilas, 199.

Volomandra, “Apollo” from, 100, 104, 337.

Volubilis, Morocco, French excavations at, 281.

Votive offerings (ἀναθήματα), mentioned by Pausanias, 339;

- victor monuments as, 37.

Wace, A. J. B., on Parian marble male head in Turin, of athlete or Apollo, 93;

- on Roman male head in Turin, resembling the Apoxyomenos of Lysippan school, 292.

Waldstein (Walston), C., on appellation “Apollo” for early athlete statues, 335;

- on bronze statue of youth found in sea off Antikythera, 81;

- on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 90, 179;

- on the Strangford Apollo, 244;

- on victor fillet, 149.

Walking motive in sculpture, not Polykleitan in origin, 226.

Walston, C.; see Waldstein, C.

Warrior, or hoplitodromos, bronze head from Akropolis, 123.

Washburn, O. M., on Delphi Charioteer, 277, 278.

Wernicke, K., on Great Altar of Zeus at Olympia, 349.

Westgraben, the, at Olympia, 358.

Westmacott Athlete, the, 156f., 158, 305.

Wheels, four-spoked, one dedicated at Argos, 97;

- tin-foil, dedicated at Olympia, 23.

White, H. G. E., on two statuettes of diskoboloi from Akropolis, 221, 222.

Wilamowitz, U. von (Wilamowitz-Moellendorf), on inscribed base of statue of Epicharinos on Akropolis, 372.

Winckelmann, J., on character of Greek Art, 57;

- on Jason of Louvre, 87.

Wine-pourers, statues of, 144.

Winged figures, represented in motion before sixth century B. C., 176f.

Winnefeld, H., on Westmacott Athlete statue type, 158.

Winter, F., on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 90;

- on the Seated Boxer of Museo delle Terme, 147.

Woelfflin, E., on nudus talo incessens of Polykleitos, 250, 251.

Wolters, P., on bronze foot from Olympia, 255;

- on Choiseul-Gouffier Apollo statue type, 90, 91;

- on head of hoplitodrome, from Olympia, 163;
- on inscribed base of the Agias, 292;
- on Spinario, 201;
- on Tux bronze, 207;

- on use of bronze in Olympic victor statues, 321.

Woman, statue of Muse type, from Andros, 71;

- head in Louvre, 128.

Women, admitted to chariot-race at Olympia, 49;

- excluded from Olympia, 49;
- victress statues of, draped, 48;
- admitted to the Heraia, Olympia, 49.

Worship of victors after death, 35.

Wounded Amazon, statue in Capitoline Museum, 151.

Wounded Man, the, statue of; see Volneratus deficiens.

Wreath of leaves, as prize at various games.

Wrestlers, attributes of statues of, 165;

- bronze group of, in Paris, 232;

- bronze statue in Naples, 99;

- five copies of bronze group of, showing tripping, 233;

- group of, on bronze bowl from Borsdorf, showing hand grip, 231, 232;

- groups of, on cista handles, 232;

- groups of, on Etruscan cista in Metropolitan Museum, 231;

- group of, at Olympia (?), 233f.;

- paintings of wrestlers by Naukeros, and by Antidotos, 233;

- part of group of, found in sea off Antikythera, 232;

- small bronze group of, in Loeb Collection, showing cross-buttocks, 232;

- statues of, at Olympia, 234;

- statues of, without special attributes, 170;

- two bronze statues of, from Herculaneum showing front hold, 230, 231;

- two groups of, on rim of bronze bowl, in Boston, 232.

Wrestling (πάλη), 228f.;

- bout between Theseus and Kerkyon, on metope of Theseion, 232;

- cap used in, 166;
- depicted on proto-Attic amphora, 13;
- for boys, introduced at Olympia, 228;
- at games of Patroklos, 8;
- ground wrestling, on gems and vases, 248;

- holds in, on vases (arm, body, front, neck, side, wrist), 229;

- introduced at Olympia, 228;
- oldest(?) of athletic sports, 228;
- one of most popular sports, 228;
- positions in, on various monuments, 229;
- on r.-f. kylix, in Philadelphia, 230;

- scenes in, on r.-f. vase, by Andokides, 230;

- throws in, on vases (buttocks, cross-buttocks, flying mare, heave, tripping), 229;

- two kinds of, upright (ὀρθὴ πάλη), ground (κύλισις), 228, 229;

- victors in wrestling and pankration on same day, 93, 94;

- on wall-paintings at Beni-Hasan, Egypt, 1, 228;

- wrestling and boxing on Panathenaic amphora of Kittos, 248;

- wrestling and boxing in pankration, 247;

- wrestling and pankration contrasted, 246.

Wunderer, C., on the Seated Boxer of Museo delle Terme, 147.

Xanten, bronze statue of boy found in Rhine near, 276.

Xanthos, Chimæra tomb at, 271.

Xenodamos, statue at Antikythera, 369.

Xenodikos, statue at Olympia, 279, 345.

Xenokles, base of statue at Olympia, 234, 344;

- copies of statue of, 228, 234;

- motive of statue of, 138, 139;

- statue at Olympia, by Polykleitos the Younger, 118.

Xenokrates, of Akragas, chariot victor at Delphi, 267.

Xenokrates, sculptor, 61.

Xenombrotos, base of statue at Olympia, 345;

- base of second statue at Olympia, 355;

- portrait statue of, at Olympia, 54;

- statue at Olympia, by Philotimos, 122, 264, 279;

- two monuments of, at Olympia, 29.

Xenophanes, philosopher, on dangerous character of pankration, 246;

- on painful character of boxing, 235;

- protest of, against reverencing victors, 36.

Xenophon, historian, on athletics, 58, 59;

- Symposium of, 59.

Xenophon, of Aigion, statue at Olympia, 120, 343.

Xerxes, carries off the Tyrannicides to Susa, 173;

- sacks Akropolis, 271.

Xoana (ξόανα), Daidalian, 328.

Youth, bronze head of, from Akropolis, 114;

- bronze head of, from Herculaneum, 95;

- bronze statue of, found in sea off Antikythera, 80f., 82f.;

- Polykleitan statue of, crowning himself, 155;

- youth with tablet, on Munich vase, 182.

Zanes, statues of Zeus, so-called, near entrance to Stadion, at Olympia, 33, 34.

Zenobios, 182.

Zeus, contestants at Olympia sacrifice to, 11;

- diadoumenos on throne of, at Olympia, 150, 151;

- father of Herakles, 10;

- games in honor of, at Argos, 285;

- Great Altar of, at Olympia, 339, 349, 350, 351, 355;

- Nemean games in honor of, 17;

- as one of the gods presiding over contests, 75;

- sculptures from pediments of temple of, at Olympia, 53, 113, 114;

- site of Great Altar of, at Olympia, 348f.;
- statues of Hyblæan, at Olympia, 344;
- of Megarian, at Olympia, 344;
- of Olympian, by Pheidias, 52;
- of Platæan, at Olympia, 344;
- of Zeus Ithomatas, 110, 111;
- of Zeus παῖς, at Aigion, 111;
- with short hair, 52;

- temple of, at Olympia, 342, 344, 346, 347, 350, 351, 352, 353, 355, 356, 358, 359, 360;

- throne of, at Olympia, described by Pausanias, 61;

- worship of, at Olympia, later than that of Hera, 16;

- wrestling match of, with Kronos, 14.

Zeuxis, painter, 29.

Zones, of victor statues at Olympia, 340;

- of the Chariots, 345, 346;
- of the (Eretrian) Bull, 343, 346;
- of Telemachos, 345, 346;
- of the Victory, 344, 346.

*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS AND GREEK ATHLETIC ART ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

back

back

Table of Contents

OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS AND GREEK ATHLETIC ART

PREFACE.

CONTENTS.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

THE MOST COMMON ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE NOTES.

CORRIGENDA.

CHAPTER I. EARLY GREEK GAMES AND PRIZES.

- SPORTS IN CRETE.

- ATHLETICS IN HOMER.

- ORIGIN OF GREEK GAMES IN THE CULT OF THE DEAD.

- EARLY HISTORY OF THE FOUR NATIONAL GAMES.

- EARLY PRIZES FOR ATHLETES.

- DEDICATION OF ATHLETE PRIZES.

- DEDICATION OF STATUES AT OLYMPIA AND ELSEWHERE.

- HONORS PAID TO VICTORS BY THEIR NATIVE CITIES.

- VOTIVE CHARACTER OF VICTOR DEDICATIONS.

- MISCELLANEOUS MEMORIALS TO VICTORS.

- HONORARY STATUES.

CHAPTER II. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF VICTOR STATUES AT OLYMPIA.

- SIZE OF VICTOR STATUES.

- NUDITY OF VICTOR STATUES.

- THE ATHLETIC HAIR-FASHION.

- ICONIC AND ANICONIC STATUES.

- Portrait Statues.

- Aniconic Statues.

- ÆSTHETIC JUDGMENTS OF CLASSICAL WRITERS.

- GREEK ORIGINALS OF VICTOR STATUES.

- CANONS OF PROPORTION.

- ASSIMILATION OF OLYMPIC VICTOR STATUES TO TYPES OF GODS AND HEROES.

- Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Hermes.

- Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Apollo.

- Athlete Statues Assimilated to Types of Herakles.

- Athletes Represented as the Dioskouroi.

CHAPTER III. VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED AT REST.

- THE APOLLO TYPE.

- THE AFFILIATED SCHOOLS OF ARGOS AND SIKYON.

- The School of Argos.

- The School of Sikyon.

- ÆGINETAN SCULPTORS.

- ATTIC SCULPTORS.

- GENERAL MOTIVES OF STATUES AT REST.

- Adoration and Prayer.

- Anointing.

- Oil-scraping.

- Libation-pouring.

- Resting After the Contest.

- ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES.

- PRIMARY ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES.

- The Victor Fillet.

- Fillet-binders.

- The Crown of Wild Olive.

- The Palm-branch.

- SECONDARY ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES.

- Hoplitodromoi.

- Pentathletes.

- Boxers.

- Wrestlers.

- Caps for Boxers, Pancratiasts, and Wrestlers.

- The Swollen Ear.

CHAPTER IV. VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED IN MOTION.

- THE TYRANNICIDES.

- ANTIQUITY OF MOTION STATUES IN GREECE.

- PYTHAGORAS AND MYRON.

- MOTION STATUES REPRESENTING VICTORS IN VARIOUS CONTESTS.

- Runners: Stadiodromoi, Diaulodromoi, Dolichodromoi.

- The Statue of the Runner Ladas.

- Statues of Boy Runners.

- Hoplitodromoi.

- Pentathletes.

- Jumpers.

- Diskoboloi.

- Akontistai.

- Wrestlers.

- Boxers.

- Pancratiasts.

CHAPTER V. MONUMENTS OF HIPPODROME AND MUSICAL VICTORS.

- PROGRAMME OF HIPPODROME EVENTS.

- REPRESENTATIONS OF THE CHARIOT-RACE.

- CHARIOT-GROUPS AT OLYMPIA.

- REMAINS OF CHARIOT-GROUPS.

- THE APOBATES CHARIOT-RACE.

- STATUES OF CHARIOTEERS.

- DEDICATIONS OF VICTORS IN THE HORSE-RACE AT OLYMPIA AND ELSEWHERE.

- MONUMENTS ILLUSTRATING THE HORSE-RACE.

- THE APOBATES HORSE-RACE.

- DEDICATIONS OF MUSICAL VICTORS AT OLYMPIA AND ELSEWHERE.

CHAPTER VI. TWO MARBLE HEADS FROM VICTOR STATUES.2022

- THE GROUP OF DAOCHOS AT DELPHI, AND LYSIPPOS.

- THE APOXYOMENOS OF THE VATICAN, AND LYSIPPOS.

- THE AGIAS AND THE APOXYOMENOS COMPARED, AND THE STYLE OF LYSIPPOS.

- THE HEAD FROM OLYMPIA.

- THE OLYMPIA HEAD AND THAT OF THE AGIAS.

- IDENTIFICATION OF THE OLYMPIA HEAD.

- THE DATES OF PHILANDRIDAS AND LYSIPPOS.

- LYSIPPOS AS A WORKER IN MARBLE, AND STATUE “DOUBLES.”

- HEAD OF A STATUE OF A BOY FROM SPARTA, AND THE ART OF SKOPAS.

- COMPARISON OF THE TEGEA HEADS AND THE HEAD FROM SPARTA.

- THE STYLES OF SKOPAS AND LYSIPPOS COMPARED.

- THE SPARTA HEAD COMPARED WITH THAT OF THE PHILANDRIDAS.

- THE SPARTA HEAD AN ECLECTIC WORK AND AN EXAMPLE OF ASSIMILATION.

CHAPTER VII. THE MATERIALS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS, AND THE OLDEST DATED VICTOR STATUE.2172

- THE CASE FOR BRONZE.

- THE CASE FOR STONE.

- THE STATUE OF ARRHACHION AT PHIGALIA.

- EGYPTIAN INFLUENCE ON EARLY GREEK SCULPTURE.

- EARLY VICTOR STATUES AND THE “APOLLO” TYPE.

CHAPTER VIII. POSITIONS OF VICTOR STATUES IN THE ALTIS; OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS ERECTED OUTSIDE OLYMPIA; STATISTICS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR STATUARIES.2293

- STATUES MENTIONED BY PAUSANIAS.

- The First Ephodos of Pausanias.

- The Second Ephodos of Pausanias.

- SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

- STATUES NOT MENTIONED BY PAUSANIAS, BUT KNOWN FROM RECOVERED BASES.

- OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS ERECTED OUTSIDE OLYMPIA.

- SUMMARY OF RESULTS.

- STATISTICS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR STATUARIES.

FOOTNOTES
INDEX.
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE