Chapter XXVII: Book V: , Pausanias says he is proceeding north from the Council-house (4)

[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_, 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._ _Op. cit._, 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.