Sculpture, 1896-1923 (Corinth)

C

O

IN

R RESULTS

H

T

OF EXCAVATIONS

CONDUCTED

BY

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

VOLUME

IX

SCULPTU 1896-1923 13BY

FRANKLIN P. JOHNSON

PUBLISHED FOR

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS 1931

COPYRIGHT, 1931 BY THE TRUSTEES OF CLASSICAL

OF THE AMERICAN STUDIES

SCHOOL

AT ATHENS

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED AT THE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS CAMBRIDGE, MASS., U.S. A.

THIS publication of the results of the excavations carried on at Corinth by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens is in charge of the Publication Committee of the School. The general editor is Professor Harold North Fowler. Opinions expressed are those of the individual contributors. GEORGE H. CHASE HAROLD N. FOWLER DAVID M. ROBINSON Publication Committee

PREFACE WHILE a member of the American School in 1922 and 1923, I made a catalogue of the

sculptures in the museum at Old Corinth. In November, 1924, Professor Fowler asked me to prepare, on the basis of that catalogue, the volume dealing with sculpture in the general publication of the excavations at Corinth. He observed that the material could not well be published until the excavation should be at an end, since I was expected to include the sculptures found in the later campaigns as well as those that I had catalogued. In February, 1927, he asked me to proceed with the publication of the sculptures found before 1923, the rest to be dealt with otherwise. In August, 1926, I had sent to the School a request for photographs, and after various developments the first and principal batch arrived in the autumn of 1928. With the aid of these photographs, the revised and expanded version was prepared in the summer of 1929, and has undergone little alteration since then. Through the kindness of Professor Leroy Waterman of the University of Michigan, I had an unexpected opportunity for a very brief visit to Greece in the latter part of that summer, and spent about twenty-four hours at Corinth. The original catalogue embraced many sculptures that were not found in the excavations. Of course they have no proper place here, but a few of them have been retained for one reason or another. It was sometimes impossible to ascertain whether sculptures that were not in the inventory had come from the excavated area or not. Presumably none of them was found in the regular course of a campaign, but new fragments are likely to become visible in the trenches after any rain. The inventory number is placed in parentheses after each title. Where no such number appears, the piece had not been entered in the inventory before 1923. In the text, "No. 100" means the sculpture so numbered in this volume; "100" means the sculpture numbered 100 in the inventory; but where any confusion seemed possible, the inventory numbers are preceded by "Inv." In the original catalogue there was usually no indication of the places in which the sculptures were found. It would be a difficult task to find such indications in the notebooks and to state them in terms which would be clear as applying to the excavated area as it is at present. In the official publication, however, the lack of information on this point is a grave defect. I have had no opportunity to mend it except during my day at Corinth in the summer of 1929. At that time I copied from the inventory the notes to be found there in regard to the places of discovery of the more important pieces. These notes now appear almost word for word as in the inventory. In some instances it has been possible to reproduce statements that appeared in previous publications. A "Martyr" is of course a column of earth left standing to show the original surface of the ground. " Simadi" has the same meaning. Some of the photographs were printed from plates made years ago as the sculptures were found, but the great majority are newly made. The heavy task of finding the sculptures and supervising the photography was performed by Dr. F. J. DeWaele. Adequate illustrations are the really essential part of such a publication as this; and since

Dr. DeWaele's name does not appear on the title-page, I wish to make it clear that he deserves credit for a great portion of the work. It is regrettable that additional views of some of the more important statues could not be presented. Some of them are so placed in the museum that they can be photographed from only one angle. In two sections of the excavated area, the theatre and the "Julian Basilica," the fragments belong to a relatively small number of figures, joins are found frequently, and future excavations will unquestionably go far to complete many sculptures that now are fragmentary. In most of the area, however, fragments that belong together - even fragments that can possibly belong together - are comparatively few. It is planned that all the sculptures found at any time in the theatre will be published eventually by Edward Capps, Jr. In general, however, those that were included in my catalogue are included here also; but two series of reliefs, a Gigantomachia and an Amazonomachia, have been omitted. Both have been greatly increased by the recent campaigns, and it seemed useless to publish a study based on only a part of the known material. Pausanias found in Corinth few works of art belonging to the period before Mummius, and the excavators have not been more fortunate. Not a single piece of sculpture in any sort of preservation remains from the great Greek period. There are, however, valuable copies from several noteworthy originals: Nos. 4-11, 13, 53, 96, 83 (the last a tantalizingly small fragment which, we may hope, will be completed by continued work in the theatre). The portraits from the "Julian Basilica" present interesting problems in iconography, but others, as Nos. 168, 169, and 182, have greater intrinsic value. The "Miscellaneous Reliefs" include a number of puzzles that I have not solved. The great majority of the sculptures belong to the first three centuries after Christ, with a sprinkling of fragments from the classical Greek period; but the really remarkable things are earlier or later. The Mycenaean face, No. 2, whose character was discerned by Blegen, is a unique monument. The magnificent portrait of the fourth century after Christ, No. 321, is very poorly illustrated, but will not be forgotten by anyone who has seen it. In figure sculpture of the fifth and sixth centuries after Christ, the little building at Old Corinth has an assured place among the world's great museums. In conclusion I wish to express my gratitude to the General Editor and to the other members of the Publication Committee. They have chosen the illustrations to be included and determined the size of the cuts. Furthermore they have all read the proofs and made many suggestions of great value. I cannot evade responsibility, however, for anything in the text except the spelling of proper names and similar formal details. FRANKLINP. JOHNSON UNIVERSITYOF CHICAGO, January 22, 1931

CONTENTS SCULPTURE SCULPTURES EARLIER THAN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD, NOS. 1-3

.......3

4-320

THE CLASSICALPERIOD, Nos.

...... Sculptures Other than Portraits, Nos. 4-133 .. .. Portraits from the "Julian Basilica," Nos. 134-158 . . . . Other Portraits, Nos. 159-202 . . . . . Animals, Attributes, etc., Nos. 203-216 . Sculptures from the Stoa of the Colossal Figures, Nos. 217-226 . Other Decorative Sculptures, in the Round and in High Relief, Nos. 227-237 Sarcophagi, Nos. 238-244 . . . . . . . . .111 . . Grave Stelae, Nos. 245-262 . . . . Votive Reliefs, Nos. 263-274 . ... . . Miscellaneous Reliefs, Nos. 275-320 . FOURTH CENTURY AFTER CHRIST AND LATER, NOS.

321-332

TABLES

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

..

INDEX

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. .

120 126 131 .

......

7 70 85 98 101 107

148 157

.

.

.

.

.

..

159

ABBREVIATIONS A. J. A ...........................

American Journal of Archaeology.

Amelung, Fuhrer durch Florenz ......

Amelung, Walther: Fuhrer durch die Antiken in Florenz. Munich, 1897. Amelung, Walther: Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen Museums. Berlin, 1903-1908.

Amelung, Skulpt. d. Vat. Mus ....... Ann. Scuol. It. At. ...............

Annuario della Regia Scuola Archeologicadi Atene.

Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung ....

Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung zum sechzigsten Geburtstag. Berlin and Leipzig, 1928.

'Apx. AEr7 ........

'ApXatoXo'yLKovAEXTrov.

.................

'Apx. 'E . .........................

Arndt-Bruckmann

................

'ApXaLoXoytLK 'E %4epLs.

Griechischeund rcmischePortrats, nach Auswahl und Anordnung von Heinrich Brunn und Paul Arndt. Munich, 1891-.

Art Bull. .........................

Art Bulletin.

Ath. Mitt. ........................

Mitteilungen des deutschenarchaeologischenInstituts, Athenische Abteilung.

B. C. H ...........................

Bulletin de CorrespondanceHellenique. Bulletino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di

B. Corn.Rom. .....................

Roma.

Boll. Arte .........................

Bollettino d'Arte.

Brunn-Bruckmann .................

Denkmaler der griechischenund romischen Skulptur, herausgegebenvon H. Brunn, fortgesetzt von P. Arndt. Munich, 1888-.

B. S. A ..........................

Annual of the British School at Athens. Carpenter, Rhys: Ancient Corinth: A Guide to the Excavations and Museum. 1928.

Carpenter, Guide.................. C. I. L. .......................... Cumont, Musees Royaux ............ Daremberg-Saglio ................. Diitschke ......................... Einzelaufnahmen .................. Esperandieu, Recueil General ........

Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum. Cumont, Franz: Musees Royaux: Catalogue des sculptures et inscriptions antiques. Brussels, 1913. Daremberg, Saglio, Pottier: Dictionnaire des antiquites grecqueset romaines. Paris, 1877-1918. Dutschke, H.: Antike Bildwerke in Oberitalien. Leipzig, 1874-1882. Arndt, Paul, and Amelung, Walther: PhotographischeEinzelaufnahmen antiker Skulpturen. Munich, 1893-. Esperandieu: Recueil general des bas-reliefs, statues et bustes de la Gaule romaine. Paris, 1907-1929.

Hekler, Romische weibliche Gewand- This is contained in: Minchener archdologische Studien dem Andenken Adolf Furtwdnglers gewidmet. Munich, statuen 1909. Helbig, Fuhrer ....................

Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner ........

Jb. Arch. I ....................... Jh. Oest. Arch. I.

.................

J. H. S . .......................... J. Int. Arch. Num. ................ Lippold, Antike Skulpturen ......... Lippold, Kopien ................... Marbres Antiques .................. Michaelis, Ancient Marbles ......... Mon. Ant.

.......................

Helbig, Wolfgang: Fuhrer durch die offentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertumer in Rom. 3rd edition, Leipzig, 1912-1913. Imhoof-Blumer, F., and Gardner, P.: Numismatic Commentary on Pausanias. Reprinted from J. H. S. VIVIII. London, 1885-1887. Jahrbuch des kaiserlich deuttschenarchaeologischenInstituts. Jahreshefte des oesterreichischenarchaeologischenInstitutes in Wien. Journal of Hellenic Studies. Journal international d'archeologienumismatique. Lippold, Georg: Antike Skulpturen der Glyptothek Ny Carlsberg. Leipzig, 1924. Lippold, Georg: Kopien und Umbildungen griechischer Statuen. Munich, 1923. Catalogue sommaire des marbres antiques (in the Louvre). Paris, 1918. Michaelis, Adolph: Ancient Marbles in Great Britain. Cambridge, 1882. Monumenti Antichi publicati per cura della Reale Accademia dei Lincei.

Not. Scav.........................

Notizie degli Scavi di Antichitd comunicate alla Reale Accademia dei Lincei.

Pauly-Wissowa ...................

Pauly's Real-Encyclopadie der klassischen Altertumswissenschaft. Neue Bearbeitung. Unter Mitwirkung zahlreicher Fachgenossen herausgegebenvon Georg Wissowa und Wilhelm Kroll. Stuttgart, 1894-.

Poulsen, Portratstudien ............

Poulsen, Frederik: Portratstudienin Norditalienischen Provinzmuseen. (Historisk-Filologiske Meddelelser udgivne af det Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, XV, 4). Copenhagen, 1928. Revue archeologique.

R. Arch. .......................... Reinach, Recueil ...................

Reinach, Salomon: Recueil de tetes antiques ideales ou idealisees. Paris, 1903.

Reinach, Repertoire................

Reinach, Salomon: Repertoire de la statuaire grecque et romaine. Paris, 1897-1924.

R. Et. Anc.........................

Revue des etudes anciennes.

Rev. de 1'hist. des religions ...........

Revue de l'histoire des religions.

Robert

..........................

Robert, Carl: Die antiken Sarcophagreliefs. Berlin, 18901904.

Rom. Mitt ........................ Roscher, Lexikon ................. Ruesch, Guida .................... Springer-Wolters .................. Statuenkopien.....................

Tod and Wace, Catalogue ......

Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischenInstituts, Romische Abteilung. Roscher, W. H.: Ausfilhrliches Lexikon der griechischenund romischenMythologie. Leipzig, 1884-. Guida Illustrata del Museo Nazionale di Napoli, compilata per cura di A. Ruesch. 2nd edition. Naples, no date. Springer, Anton: Die Kunst des Altertums. 12th edition, revised by Paul Wolters. Leipzig, 1923. Furtwangler, Adolf: Ueber Statuenkopien im Alterthum (Abhandlungen der bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Miinchen, XX, 1896). T M., Tod..... Tod N., Wace, Wace, A. J. B.: A Catalogueof the Sparta N, and Musetnum.Oxford, 1906.

SCULPTURE

SCULPTURES EARLIER THAN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD 1. Female figurine (786). Found 1 m. southwest of Martyr VI, 0.40 m. above virgin soil; May 1, 1907. Height, 0.121 m.; width, 0.055 m. The arm is represented by a rounded projection; the foot is not represented at all, though the flat bottom of the left leg is original. Grooves indicate the knee and ankle. A huge scratched triangle represents the pudenda. The breasts and buttocks are shown in approximately their natural proportions; otherwise the figure is virtually unmodelled. The head, the stump of the left arm, and most of the right leg are lost. The material is a white stone not marble; the surface is slightly polished. Close parallels are not known to me; a certain similarity, however, to Thessalian figurines of the third period is discernible.

A figure found at Sesklo (Tsundas, ALlIpoiaroptKatl

pl. 34, 3; cf. Wace-Thompson, Prehistoric Thessaly, p. 69) shows arm-stumps similar to those of our figure, the breasts in approximately natural proportions, and a great triangle for the pudenda; on the other hand it is markedly steatopygous and ends in a round, flaring base. In a figurine from Dimini (Tsundas, op. cit., pl. 35, 8; Wace-Thompson, op. cit., p. 83) the hips are treated more as in our figure, and the lower part is lost. Tsundas, op. cit., pl. 36, 7 is a pair of legs ending much as in our figure; cf. for this feature also Wace-Thompson, p. 147, fig. 91b, though in other respects that figure, of the second Thessalian period, shows little likeness to ours. Numerous other figurines which resemble this in their roughly normal proportions and in the arm-stumps may be found in the two works cited; but in no case is the resemblance so close as in the figurines mentioned. All of these figures are of terracotta: the contemporary stone figures are different and more primitive in form (Tsundas, op. cit., pls. 37-38). Among finds from other regions, the only one known to me that suggests a comparison with our figure was found at Tchukurkend in southwestern Asia Minor (Ormerodin B. S. A. XIX, 1912-13, pp. 48 ff., and fig. la; Reinach, Repertoire,V, 173, 10). Here the legs end in surfaces flat or nearly so, the knees are indicated by grooves, and the pudenda by a large triangle. The proportions also, as seen from the side, are quite suggestive of our figure. On the other hand, the hips are very broad across the front and the arms are shown, though very rudely, crossing the chest; while the breasts apparently are not shown at all. This figurine does not fit into any known class, and its relations are not determined. Ormerod 1.c. mentions " a figurine of almost similar form except that it is not steatopygous, and shows differences of the head " in the Liverpool Public Museum. This figure, which was bought in 'AKpoTro6XEiS AL/?tloV

Kal

oe-KXoV,

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

:'!:?

x

~

..............'

.

..

... ....................................................................................

No. 1

But unless it is an importation from outside Greece, it seems best to regard it as a product of Thessalian culture with influence from some other quarter. This influence might come from the Cyclades; the use of stone for such figures was usual in the islands and not in Thessaly, though in general the Cycladic figurines are of wholly different type. A figurine resembling this to some extent is said to have been found by Miss Walker (now Mrs. Kosmopoulou) in her excavation on the temple hill; I have not seen it. 2. Mycenaean face (343). Apparently found in 1901. Soft brown stone. Height of fragment, 0.30m.; width, 0.28m.; thickness, 0.03m.; height of face, 0.23 m.; relief height, 0.04 m. Back roughly shaped. The top edge is original, the edge at the spectator's left is broken; the other two are doubtful because of the roughness of the work. The end of the nose is broken, and the mouth, chin, and lower part of the left cheek are lost.

holes indicate the pupils of the eyes, and dark circles for the irises around them are perceptible. There was also a mustache represented by grooves containing dark color; such a groove remains at the right end of the mustache and below the left side of the nose, but is broken away elsewhere. All the grooves are partly filled with a white substance in the nature of plaster, which also covers much of the surface of the face and presumably covered it all originally. Where this plaster remains in the grooves it conceals the black pigment. Since

.

..

...

lg} .}

t -. .8. *

.

... -

..

.......

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&:

"'~

a

few

th~_B_i3iJe': traces

red

2::-

. origin..

color,buttheseareappat.ea...,

time over the originalalso,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2S. painted surface. Probably the new surface white painted was 2 No. oign f ew t r a c e s of red clor uexternaheeaeapaetyo ti Th caace o hi ieewa oitd lee,whowrot' u t e yMr " I

The

a

of

No..

character

notheitae t al

of

this

o

piece

..It was

acrbe

pointed

out

to

me

by

Mr.

Blegen,

who

wrote:

is

t oerl (L,.H.Ioo..Prircniee Myeneada-te Probably the new white surface was painted also,

time over the original painted surface.

exactly thewssort stone mould on which gold masks, like those from Mycenae, were shaped. But it is more than a mould; it was intended as a piece of sculpture for exhibition..... I do not hesitate at all to ascribe it to early Mycenaean date (L. H. I or so):: Pernier considered it Mycenaean - a mould." Large sculpture of the Mycenaean period is rare. The obvious analogy is offered by the familiar head in painted plaster which Tsundas found at Mycenae. Compare also a terracotta head, about six inches high, found at Asine (Ill. London News, Sept. 25, 1926, p. 548).

metal and ivory; it is used for details in the stelae from the grave-circle at Mycenae and in the gold masks. In four of the masks the brows are marked by rows of parallel incisions, and in the two that have mustaches these are similarly treated. In our head there is a single groove, approximately horizontal, for each eyebrow, and apparently a similar one for each side of the mustache. The treatment is analogous in the fifth mask from Mycenae (No. 253 in the museum), which is poorer than the others and possibly somewhat earlier, although two of the other masks were found in the same grave. A painted stele found at Mycenae affords a parallel for the redecoration of the head: the stele was at first ornamented with engraved designs, then these were covered by a layer of lime on which new decorations were painted (Stais, Collection Mycenienne, p. 187, No. 3256; 'E+. 'ApX. 1896, pls. I-II).

_

_

.

.-

iE

Ne. 3 3. Head (342).

Apparently found in 1901. Brown stone, but not exactly the same as in No. 2. Height, 0.20 m. The nose and mouth

are indicated by incisions. Although the surface is battered, it seems improbable that the eyes were ever represented. The back is rounded. I have thought it as well to keep this piece together with No. 2, though there is little reason for assigning it to one period rather

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

THE CLASSICAL PERIOD SCULPTURES OTHER THAN PORTRAITS 4. Head of youth (425). Found May 20, 1902, in the Theatre. Almost all the neck is preserved. Height, 0.27 m.; width, 0.18 m.; depth, 0.22 m. The nose is mostly lost, also a little above the right eye; otherwise the preservation is excellent. Howard and Amelung recognized in a statue in Cleveland a copy from the same original. The statue (Bull. ClevelandMuseum of Art, Nov., 1924; Jb. Arch. I. XLI, 1926, pls. VI-VII) is almost perfectly preserved, lacking only the right hand. Its position is nearly that of the "Apollo on the Omphalos": the weight rests on the right leg, so that the right hip projects somewhat, but not so much as in Polyclitan statues; the left foot is equally advanced and the head is turned to the right; but the left arm hangs and the right forearm is raised and extended to the front, while in the Apollo this is reversed. In this point our type agrees with the Polyclitan bronze in the Louvre (Furtwangler, Masterpieces, pl. XIII; Hyde, Olympic Victor Monuments, p. 139) and related works (see Anti, in Mon. Ant. XXVI, 1920, pp. 561 ff.); the Idolino also is similar, though freer. Another copy, considerably better in quality but not so well preserved, was identified by Amelung: it is a statue formerly owned by the sculptor Monteverde and now in the Museo Nazionale in Rome (Boll. Arte, III, 1923-24, p. 549, good illustration; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos. 135-137; Jb. Arch. I. XLI, 1926, figs. 20-26 on pp. 263-265; cast of statue in Rome with Corinth head, ibid., figs. 34-35 on p. 271). The copy to which our head belonged was much the best of the three. Amelung has pointed out the resemblance in posture, proportion, and the rendering of bodily structure between our type and the "Apollo on the Omphalos." There are, however, differences of some significance: the torso is more strongly modelled, the structure made more conspicuous, in the Monteverde statue than in the Apollo, and there is a much clearer horizontal groove at the level of the navel. In these points the Monteverde statue suggests the Conservatori charioteer (Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori,p. 211, No. 4, pl. LXXX; Beazley has called attention to the virtually nude charioteer on the Euphronius cylix, Hoppin, Red-Figured Vases, I, p. 389, and to the completely nude figure mounting a chariot, J. H. S. XLVII, 1927, pl. XIII; here, however, the real charioteer is evidently the man wearing the long chiton). This statue has always been recognized as closely related to the Apollo, but is earlier, suggesting comparison even with such works as the torso in the Louvre from Miletus (Bulle, Der schone Mensch,2pl. CIII; Brunn-Bruckmann, text to pls. 601-604, fig. 15), while the Monteverde statue is evidently later than the Apollo. If the sculptor of a nd others following Furtwangler think probable, it is the Apollo was Calamis, not likely that he had a style original with or peculiar to himself in the treatment of the

question to assign our type to the artist of the Apollo, or to any one strongly influenced by him, because, as Amelung observed (p. 270), the heads are totally different. The well-known head from Perinthus, now in Dresden (Hyde, Olympic Victor Monuments, p. 179, with references) closely resembles our head in the shape of the face and of the skull. "It has the same long face and the same high round cranium, the line over the top from front to rear being almost an unbroken curve" (Richardson). The Perinthus head is of course considerably earlier. The hair of our head is in some degree Polyclitan, suggesting the Diadumenus, but the locks are less regularly curved; and over the forehead they are treated in a distinctive way, being comparatively long and separate from one another.

No. 4

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

suggested that the two heads were derived from one original, but Amelung (Jb. Arch. I. XLI, 1926, pp. 269 f., figs. 37-38) more reasonably regards them as derived from two works Pythagoras.

Einzelaufnhmen,

Withthe

erinthus

Nos. 505506).

head

certaily

belongs

a bearded

ead

in Leningrad;?in

Here the locks curl somewhat as in the Perinthus head.

It may be noted that some of the hair above the centre of the forehead in the Perinthus head has been chiseled away at some time, so that the manner of its treatment is not accurately known (Herrmann, in Ath. Mitt. XVI, 1891, pp. 314 f.). There must have been an interval of thirty years at least between the originals of the Naples head and of ours, and in this interval comes the Perinthus head. A cast in Copenhagen from a lost original may belong here, but the illustration is inadequate (Arndt, Glyptothque Ny Carlsberg,p. 61). The Naples and Perinthus heads have been associated with Myron, the latter also with Pythagoras. With the Perinthus head certainly belongs a bearded head in Leningrad; in-

deed Curtiushas assertedthat both are from the same originaland that the copyist merely left the beard off in one instance (Brunn-Bruckmann, text to pls. 601-604, p. 8, figs. 8-10), while Sieveking and Lippold (Rom. Mitt. XXXII, 1917, p. 103) think that the original was

beardlessand that one copyist added the beard. Neither of these hypotheses is easily credible. Whether these two and others with them are to be removedfrom the circle of Myron,and whether,if so, they can be assignedto Pythagoras,are very doubtfulquestions. A parallel for the Monteverde statue in regard to bodily structure, better than the "Apollo on the Omphalos," is found in the Myronic athlete brilliantly recovered by Ame-

lung in his last days (Jb. Arch.I. XLII, 1927,pp. 152-157). The head does not permitthe ascriptionof our type to the authorof that statue, who was almost certainlyMyron himself. However,it may be concludedthat the original,made about 440, was the work of a sculptor who, while acquaintedwith the style of Polyclitus, was influencedprimarilyby Myron or somebodyvery like Myron. Ath. Mitt. XXVIII, 1903, pp. 451-460 and pl. VI, with comparative illustrations of this

and the Perinthusheads (Richardson);Lechat,Pythagorasde Rhegion,p. 114; Jb. Arch.I. XLI, 1926,pp. 264-268 (Amelung);Carpenter,Guide,pp. 72 f., No. 8. 5. Female figure (67). Found May 17, 1899, "back of the north apse of Peirene." Lacks head and left hand, whichwereinserted,and most of the right arm. Height, 1.92 m. The figurewearsan Ionic chiton with buttoned sleeves and a heavy himation that reachesthe ankles. The weight rests on the left leg; the right foot is drawnback slightly. The left arm is bent at a right angle at the elbow, and the forearmextends straight forward;the right arm apparently hung straight down. The himation covers the left shoulder and passes behind the back; the

top of it crossesthe body in a heavy fold just below the breastsand falls over the left arm. The differencein texture between the two garmentsis not successfullyindicated. On the feet are sandals. There is another copy from the same original, with its head, in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori,p. 108, No. 56, pl. XXXVIII; Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 408, 9; Bocconi, Musei Capitolini, fig. 6; Mariani, B. Corn.Rom. XXXII, 1904, pp. 299-316; Lehmann-Hartleben, Die Antike, V, 1929, pls. VII-XII and pp. 85-97, good

illustrations). This figure was put together from a large numberof fragmentswith some restoration;because of this the fold of the chiton that appearsoutside of the himation on the right side in our copy, and undoubtedly in the original, is lacking in the example at

Rome. The figure at Corinthwas made by a workmanof individualityand considerable ability, but the Conservatoricopy apparently follows the original more closely. Jones mentions also "a statuette-replicain the possessionof Sig. Bassanti." As freerimitations may be mentioned a statue in Naples (Reinach,Repertoire,I, 207, 1), another at Delphi (Repertoire, III, 200, 9 and IV, 417, 1), and a third in Leyden (Repertoire,II, 675, 10). A

more remotely, the "Artemisia" of the Mausoleum and its descendants (Lippold, Kopien, p. 213; cf. Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung, p. 50). There is a good copy of the head in Boston (Caskey, Catalogue,pp. 129-131, No. 62; Die Antike, V, 1929, p. 93, fig. 6; A. J. A. XXI, 1917, pp. 102 f.), and an exceedingly poor one in Venice (B. Com. Rom. XXXII, 1904, pls. XI-XII; Einzelaufnahmen, No. 2485; Guida Pellegrini, No. 17, pl. IX; Die Antike, V, 1929, p. 92, fig. 4). Another copy of the head, on the Palatine, is mentioned by Anti (Ann. Scuol. It. At. IV-V, 1921-22, p. 75). A Greek relief in Eleusis (Buschor, Die Skulpturen des Zeustempels, text, fig. 27; Kjellberg, Studien zu den attischen Reliefs, p. 35) is regarded by Anti (article cited, pp. 82-84 and pl. III) and apparently by Lehmann-Hartleben as a fairly accurate copy of a statue earlier than the original of our type; but the relief is probably a free imitation of that original itself, though the head apparently is quite different. There is certainly no intimate connection between the relief, the type represented by the following entry, and the bronze in Vienna (Jh. Oest. Arch. I. XIV, /F I 1911, p. 46, fig. 51; Roscher, Lexikon, article Kora, col. 1355, fig. 6; Schmidt, in Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung, p. 225), all of which Anti would derive from a single prototype. Any statue the garments of which are arranged somewhat as these are will show folds more or less similar: so the Albani "Core," the Dresden Zeus, the Athena of Velletri. A genuine and close analogy is found in the "Nemesis" (No. 6). A comparison between the two figures at Corinth is risky, since the No. 5 copyist was certainly the same in both instances; but in comparing the Torlonia copy of the "Nemesis" with the Conservatori statue of this type, one finds the same broad, shallow folds with sharp edges in almost the same places in the himation; the character of the drapery in the lower part of the two figures is identical so far as the himation is concerned, and there is similarity also in the chiton at the ankles. A statue in Venice (see under No. 6) shows equal similarity in the himation and more in the bottom of the chiton; and in the heavy cross-fold of the himation at the waist there are folds of the same sort, divided by narrow grooves, that occur in our type, more clearly in the Conservatori copy. The statue in Venice is a Greek variant of a type more or less accurately represented by several Roman statues (Lippold, Kopien, pp. 10 f.). One of these,

in the Lateran (Hekler, Romische weibliche Gewandstatuen,fig. 12; Helbig, Fiihrer,3II, p. 14, No. 1168) is more severe in style than the others and probably closer to the original, and it resembles the Conservatori statue in the folds of the chiton not only at the ankles, but also on the chest; the likeness in the himation is not so close. The examples of this type that have heads are portraits. The "Nemesis" has the same position of the feet as our type, while the Lateran statue and its fellows have the right foot drawn back; in the figure in Venice it is drawn back only slightly, but more than in this type. The " Nemesis " is on the whole more archaic, while the others might well be contemporary with this type, and either might be derived from the same sculptor, so far as the treatment of the body is concerned. The three copies of the head that have been illustrated differ considerably from one another. In the Conservatori copy many observers have seen a resemblance to heads of the style called "Calamidian" by Furtwangler and others (Mrs. Strong, in Strena Helbigiana, pp. 293-298). This resemblance is genuine; it is discernible in the treatment of the hair and in the type of features; compare particularly the "Aspasia," the Spinario, and the delightful Ward head. But with none of them is the relationship close enough to justify the assumption of common authorship. Although the wavy hair above the forehead suggests the "Aspasia," a still closer analogy is found in the Demeter of Cherchell (illustrations in Schrader, Pheidias, pp. 48 f.); and the Boston copy of the head, which in itself is better than the Conservatori copy, resembles the Demeter in general character rather than the "Calamidian" works. Yet here again the analogy is far from complete: the proportionate height of the head above the eyes is decidedly greater in the Boston head than in the Demeter. It is difficult to decide which of the two heads is closer to the original. The presumption is in favor of the Conservatori copy, since reason has been found for considering it trustworthy in the body. On the other hand, the curls in the Boston head may be regarded as reflecting more clearly the bronze technique of the original; bronze curls are not necessarily like them, but no marble curl would naturally assume such a form. Furthermore the Boston head is loftier in expression than the other, and this quality is not likely to be contributed by the copyist. The miserable head in Venice throws little light on the question: it agrees with the Conservatori copy in showing less fullness in the lower part of the face, while in the hair on the head the treatment is broader, as in the Boston head. The head more or less certainly connected with the statue in Venice bears no sort of resemblance to any of the heads of this type, and we know nothing of the head that belonged to the original of the Lateran statue. Mariani suggested an attribution to Calamis, Lehmann-Hartleben to Polyclitus, Caskey to Phidias; Buschor considers the original Argive (Die Skulpturen des Zeustempels, text, p. 35). There is very little to be said for the attribution to Polyclitus; against it there is the relief in Eleusis, probably indicating that the original was in Attica, and the right foot flat on the ground and virtually as far advanced as the left, which some scholars seem to regard as a strong indication of Attic origin (Lippold, Kopien, pp. 10 f.). As for Calamis,

there is less xapis and more loftiness, even in the head of the Conservatori copy, than in any of the heads called Calamidian; and the figure as a whole possesses an imposing majesty that is vastly different from the modest dignity of the Hestia Giustiniani. The grandeur of Phidian style, as known from the sculptures of the Parthenon and from descriptions of the Zeus and Athena Parthenos, may be resolved into three qualities: stateliness and ease and opulence. It is the third that was most distinctly an innovation, and it is scarcely present in this type. There is no other example of the severe style, however, which so effectively combines stateliness and ease in posture; and even the drapery, when compared with the "Nemesis," the "Aspasia," and many others, is seen to look forward toward the new style. An attribution to the young Phidias is altogether reasonable. His teacher Hegias, suggested by Anti as the author of the imaginary predecessor of this type, would also be a possibility. There is nothing that justifies an attempt to date the original work closely. The Lateran type, which ought to be contemporary with it, seems to be earlier than the Albani "Core," which is surely earlier than the Parthenon; 460-55 is about the right period. The copy probably belongs to the first century after Christ. Since the head was inserted, it probably was a portrait. In the absence of attributes it is uncertain who was represented by the original. The figure in the relief at Eleusis is probably Core, since the garment slipping from the shoulder is surely more suitable to her than to Demeter; and Anti has shown that the two goddesses were not always clearly distinguished in art. On the other hand the matronly figure is more suitable to Demeter. If this type and No. 7 were originally a pair, this was certainly Demeter and the other Persephone; see under No. 7. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pp. 430-431 and pl. XV (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire,III, 192, 10 (not 8); Carpenter, Guide, p. 73, No. 9; Einzelaufnahmen,Nos. 2485-2487 (cited byBuschor). 6. Nemesis or Tyche (427). Found May 28, 1902, in trench dug to find west end of South Stoa. From waist down. The plinth, of irregular shape, is complete; height, 0.06 m.; width, 0.70 m.; depth, 0.47 m. Height of figure, 0.97 m. The Ionic chiton and himation are worn. The weight rests on the right leg; the left is set slightly forward and turned to the side. On the plinth beside the right foot is part of a wheel, and above it are traces of an attachment on the figure, doubtless for the upper part of the wheel. Traces of the end of the himation, which hung from the left shoulder, are perceptible at the top of the fragment. The wheel is usually an attribute of Nemesis in art, though in literature the wheel of Tyche-Fortuna is familiar (Cook, Zeus, I, pp. 268 ff.; Perdrizet, in B. C. H. XXXVIII, 1914, pp. 89-100). Pausanias mentions no Nemesis in Corinth, while the statue of Tyche in a temple was erect and made of Parian marble (ii, 2, 8). It is just possible that our fragment belongs to that statue; (the marble does not appear to be Parian, but Pausanias

better called Nemesis. There is another copy from the same original in the Museo Torlonia (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 658, 10; Museo Torlonia, No. 495, pl. CXXVII; Antike Plastik: WaltherAmelung, p. 222, fig. 1), a second was seen at Hierapytna in Crete (ibid., pp. 223 f., figs 3-4), and a third is in the Antiquarium Comunale in Rome (ibid., p. 223, fig. 2). The drapery of the last is much elaborated, and no attributes are preserved; the copy in Crete shows changes in the character of the folds and has a quiver-strap, which indicates that it represented

. ..........

No. 6

Artemis.

The Torlonia and Corinth copies correspond closely, so far as the latter is preserved, except that the Torlonia example has no wheel and, so far as I know, no traces of attachments. The head that it now wears does not belong to it, and neither of the others has its head. There is a relief in Athens,

from Megara

(ibid., p. 224, fig. 5; Svoronos,

'EOv'cKV MovO.e.ov,

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

this type may be reflected. The figure in the relief holds a bird and is probably Aphrodite. The profile of the face is markedly similar to that of the head of a Greek statue in Venice (Furtwhngler, Griechische Originalstatuen in Venedig, Abh. Bayer. Akad. XXI, pls. I-II; Hekler, R6mische weibliche Gewandstatuen, fig. 11; Ruesch, Guida,2 p. 67, fig.24), which in

the lower part of the body distinctly resembles this type. It has been questioned whether the head belongs to the statue (Lippold, Kopien, pp. 10 f.; Einzelaufnahmen, IX, p. 48), but Furtwangler felt sure of it. As he pointed out, the head has Peloponnesian connections: it resembles the heads of certain figurines used as mirror-handles, of the kind said to have

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

The relief suggests that the original of the type may have represented Aphrodite. In our copy it became a Nemesis or a Tyche, and in the Cretan copy an Artemis; the other two examples have nothing to aid in identification. The original resembled in costume the Albani "Core," but does not appear to be in any definite sense a precursor of it. This fragment and the statue described under No. 5 were unquestionably made by the same copyist: this is evident particularly from the curious wide, flat folds of the chiton. A consideration of the other examples of both types shows that there was a close relation also between the two originals. They could hardly proceed from one artist; but the "Nemesis " could well be the work of a sculptor in whose studio the artist of the "Demeter" began his career. 7. Female figure (68). Found May 18, 1899, "back of the north apse of Peirene," about six feet from No. 5. Lacks head, which was inserted, and arms below elbows, which were dowelled on. Height, 2.025 m. The left forearm extended straight forward from the elbow; the right apparently hung down, a little forward and to the side. The weight rests on the right leg; the left foot is equally advanced, but turned out. The figure wears an Ionic chiton with buttoned sleeves, which reaches the ground in the back, but not quite in the front, and a Doric peplus with overfold, which passes under the left arm and across the left breast and is clasped on the right shoulder. The overfold ends somewhat above the knees, and the lower fold halfway between the knees and the ankles. The peplus is girt with a doubled cord higher than the natural waist-line; no kolpos is formed. On the feet are sandals. There is another copy from the same original, preserved only from the shoulders to the waist, in the Giardino della Pigna of the Vatican (Amelung, Sculpt. d. Vat. Mus. I, p. 825, No. 28, pl. XCI; Reinach, Repertoire,III, 284, 5). There are no significant differences between the two copies. Jones (Palazzo dei Conservatori,p. 109) mentions a statuette of this type "in the possession of Sig. Sangiorgi in Rome," which has by the right foot the head of a horse springing from a calyx of acanthus. The preservation is not stated; I suppose that the head at least is lacking. The Doric peplus is usually clasped on both shoulders, reaches the ankles and has many vertical folds in its lower part. For the costume as it appears here there seems to be no satisfactory parallel in sculpture. The peplus is clasped on only one shoulder in a statue at Eleusis (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 426, 5; Furtwangler, Statuenkopien, pp. 12 f.), which is somewhat similar to ours in other respects; and it is obviously archaistic, a work of the fourth century. Somewhat similar also is the Caryatid of the Tralles type (Lawrence, Later Greek Sculpture, pp. 43 and 96, pl. LXX; Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, II, p. 257, No. 541; cf. Fowler, in The Erechtheum,pp. 233 f.), which seems unquestionably to be archaistic. Amelung regarded our type also as archaistic, and Buschor (Die Skulpturen des Zeustempels, p. 31) says that it "gibt kaum ein strenges Werk getreu wieder."

the girdle, may be found on Greek vases (amphora in Boston: A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, p. 416; compare also the relief on the Acropolis: Dickins, Acropolis Museum, p. 117, No. 577; good illustration in Melanges Perrot, p. 261; Ann. Scuol. It. At. IV-V, 1921-22, pp. 86 f.). Archaistic style is usually not hard to recognize, and it does not strike the eye here. For the flat surface of the lower part of the peplus compare, e. g., the Atlas metope at Olympia. In attitude and general effect the figure is similar to peplus-statues of normal type; and the drapery, both the heavy peplus with its simple folds and the chitoh with its fine folds, finds an analogy in the "Aspasia." It seems on the whole probable that the statue is a copy, accurate in essentials, from an original of about 460. .$ Neither our statue nor the Vatican copy has any \~~~~~~~~~~~0 attribute to aid in identification, but Amelung and Jones have pointed out that the horse's head with the Sangiorgi statuette indicates that the figure is Demeter or Core: more probably Demeter, so far as this evidence is concerned (Roscher, Lexikon, article Kora, 1299 f.; Pauly-Wissowa, article Demeter, 2733 f.). The somewhat similar archaistic figure at Eleusis, though itself a canephorus, may suggest that the original of this type stood there. Now this statue and No. 5 were found together; and although both were probably portraits and there is no definite indication that they were set No. 7 up as a pair, it may be that the originals belonged together; No. 5 also appears to be Demeter or Persephone, and probably its original stood in

Eleusis. If this is so, No. 5 is certainly Demeter and this type Persephone, since it is distinctly the more youthful of the two. The two originals were surely not made by the same sculptor, but they belonged to about the same time, whether associated or not. To judge from the best discoverable analogies, the original of this type was Attic. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pp. 431-436 and pl. XVI (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire,III, 281, 12; Art and Archaeology,XIV, 1922, p. 199 (Fowler); Carpenter, Guide, pp. 73 f., No. 10. 8. Artemis (812, 820). 812 was found 1 m. north of the Byzantine foundation wall of St. John's; 820 was built into a Roman wall continuing the line of the " Boudroumi " shops.

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

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

1.49 m. On the back of the left shoulder, over an area ca. 0.40 m. X 0.20 m., the surface is lost to a depth of ca. 0.04 m. The goddess wears the Doric peplus, clasped on both shoulders and sewn on the right side. The kolpos and overfall are of almost equal length, reaching nearly to the waist in front and lower on the sides. From the right shoulder a quiver-strap crosses the body, disappearing under a fold of the garment just below the left breast. Behind the right shoulder the quiver-strap leads to the top of a diagonal break, obviously resulting from the breaking away of the quiver; apparently the bottom of the quiver was in the bottom of the large break on the back of the left shoulder. The weight rests on the right leg; the left foot is drawn back. A marble support on the front of the right shoulder indicates that the right arm was bent at the elbow and turned upward, the hand approaching the quiver; it could not have reached the quiver, because the arm is not sufficiently raised. The left arm must have been bent at a right angle; a triangular scar on the fold that covers the quiver-strap shows where the forearm, just below the elbow, touched; below the shoulder is a trace to indicate that the upper arm extended backward slightly. The hand, apparently supported by a piece of which there is a remnant just below the point at which the quiver-strap disappears under the garment, held some object of which a trace remains, 0.15 m. long and 0.015 m. wide,: on the left side of the overfall near the bottom. This trace, if continued upward, would pass about 0.15 m. in front of the support below the strap. Probably a Scythian bow was held by the middle. For the position of the arms compare Reinach, Repertoire,II, 319, 3, and many other statues of Artemis. Buschor (Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung, pp. 54 f.) has pointed out that a statue in the Uffizi (Reinach, Repertoire,II, 241, 4; Diitschke, III, p. 107, No. 187; Einzelaufnahmen, No. 91) is derived from the same original. A third copy was included in the sale of the Lansdowne marbles in 1930 (catalogue of the auction, p. 69, No. 106, with illustration; Michaelis, Ancient Marbles, p. 445, No. 33; Reinach, Repertoire,I, 224, 7). Here the left hand holds a cornucopia, which is in large part antique and justifies the name Fortuna. It may have been a Roman lady as Fortuna, though the Trajanic portrait head that the statue now wears does not belong to it, according to Poulsen (text to Einzelaufnahmen, No. 3056, which illustrates the head). The position of the left arm is not very different from that indicated for our statue; but the right arm, preserved to the wrist, comes straight down; the rudder that the hand now holds may well be correctly restored. The copy in the Uffizi, restored as Hera and usually supposed to represent Hera or Demeter, has no attributes preserved. The head and both arms are modern; I do not know whether there were traces to indicate the positions of the arms.

respects the Fortuna is 6loser to the Artemis than to the Hera. In some details, notably in the long folds between the legs that are drawn toward the " Spielbein," the Artemis and the Hera stand together against the Fortuna. One of the Grimani figures in Venice (Furtwangler, GriechischeOriginalstatuen,p. 299, pl. VI, 2; text to Einzelaufnahmen, Nos. 2594-2595, which is the head; Reinach, Repertoire, III, 185, 6 and I, 292, 8; Lippold, Kopien, p. 11, where the note wrongly refers to Furtwaiingler'splate VI, 5; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, fig. 324) resembles this type enough to suggest that it was influenced by the original. The upper part of the right arm is antique and starts down close to the body; on the right shoulder there is a hole for a bronze peg. Here the garment is full, but in several points, particularly the folds just below the kolpos, it resembles the Corinth and Lansdowne copies rather than that in the Uffizi. I am inclined to believe also that a Greek relief in Athens (No. 1597; Svoronos, To 'EOvtKcov MovaeZov, is pl. 129) directly influenced by the original. The specific likenesses are in the upper part; compare with the other two copies rather than with the Artemis. The right arm is about as in the Lansdowne copy; the left hand is raised and holds a long sceptre. Since there is no trace of a quiver-strap in any of the related sculptures, it was evidently added by the copyist of our figure. Because of this addition the character of the original in this part is obscured in the Artemis; it is to be seen rather in the Fortuna, though it is poor, than in the elaborated Hera. The right arm of the original came down, close to the body; it is probable that the No. 8 left arm was bent at the elbow, somewhat as in the Artemis and the Fortuna, though it may have held a long sceptre. There is little basis for conjecture as regards the attributes of the original. The style of the type, broadly considered, is that of a great many statues of the later fifth century. Among its smaller features may be noted: the folds that radiate from the right breast and form one triangle with its long side parallel to the strap and another with its long upper side about horizontal; the transverse folds descending from the left breast; the place near the right side where the edge of the overfall turns up; and in general the irregularity and ridge-like character of the folds of the overfall. In the lower part the left leg is clearly modelled beneath the garment, but folds occur in the garment everywhere except near the knee; the columnar folds of the right side are in some cases divided by shallow vertical furrows; more distinct bifurcations are visible just below the kolpos; the last of the heavy folds toward the left begins at the knee and grows wider downward, being drawn toward the left leg without other change. This last is the most unusual feature. For the lower part of the figure excellent analogies may be found in the "Ceres" of the

Vatican (Helbig,3 I, p. 192, No. 291; Furtwangler, Masterpieces, pp. 85-88, fig. 35; SpringerWolters,'2 p. 287, fig. 535) and in a Greek statue at Eleusis (Reinach, Repertoire,II, 242, 4; Brunn-Bruckmann, pl. 536; Jb. Arch. I. XLII, 1927, p. 69; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, fig. 325). Both have the widening fold, and the drapery of the "Spielbein" is almost exactly like that of the Artemis. The Eleusis statue also has furrowed folds; such folds are common, but the "Ceres" apparently does not have them. The figures of the relief in Stockholm (Kjellberg, Studien zu den attischen Reliefs, fig. 24), which seems to be imitated from the base of the Nemesis of Agoracritus, resemble our type a good deal in both upper and lower parts, but are somewhat more severe. The draped deities on the east frieze of the temple of Athena Nike may also be compared. No strong resemblance is discernible in any of the existing sculptures of the Parthenon. For the treatment of the overfall the Maidens of the Erechtheum offer a good analogy. Compare the figure in the British Museum (Paton and others, The Erechtheum,pl. XXXVIII), with the folds descending from the left breast, and the one at the southwest corner (Schrader, Phidias, p. 190, fig. 168; Paton and others, The Erechtheum, fig. 145A, pl. XXXIV, 1), with the edge of the overfall turned up. In both figures many of the folds are mere ridges, comparatively irregular in arrangement. The Caryatids resemble our type somewhat in the lower part also, but not so closely as the figures previously mentioned. The Eurydice in the Orpheus relief also, in the upper part, suggests our type. The drapery in the relief is richer than in the Artemis, and a further increase in opulence is seen in the Caryatids. It may be noted that the copyist's elaboration of the Hera in the Uffizi does not really bring it closer to these works. The "Ceres" and the statue at Eleusis have girdles outside the overfall and because of this are not directly comparable with the other figures, as regards that part. It is clear, however, that they are severe in comparison with the Maidens of the Erechtheum, in the upper as well as the lower part of the garment. The style of our type is between these two limits. The Maidens are known to have been in place before 409, and the usual assumption that dates them about 415 is no doubt correct. Hekler considers that the statue at Eleusis is imitated in the Athena of a relief, also at Eleusis, which is dated by the accompanying inscription to 421-420 (Jb. Arch. 1. XLII, 1927, p. 71 and Beilage 2). Whether or not so definite a relation is demonstrable, the resemblance in style is sure; such statues must have been made in the twenties of the fifth century B.C. or slightly earlier. The frieze of the Nike temple is usually referred to this period, and Kjellberg plausibly places the Nemesis shortly before 432 (op. cit., p. 124). It is probable that the original of our type and the original of the " Ceres " were made by the same sculptor. I should regard the statue at Eleusis as a third product from the same studio, though it scarcely has the excellence that would be expected from the master himself. This figure and the " Ceres " might be dated about 430, our type 425-420. Of course we cannot assume a continuous and regular development in style from the "Ceres" to the

slight. Because of the resemblance of the " Ceres" to the sculptures on the base of the Nemesis of Rhamnus, Furtwangler assigned it to Agoracritus and suggested that it might be a copy of the Nemesis. Lippold denies this possibility (Kopien, p. 249, note 62). A decision must depend on a comparison of the " Ceres " with the fragment of the head of the Nemesis in the British Museum (No. 460; Cook, Zeus, I, pp. 275, 281, pl. XXIII; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, fig. 633). Whether it is the Nemesis or not, the attribution to Agoracritus is very reasonable. In addition to pointing out the relation between the and the Artemis, Uffizi Hera Buschor suggested that the Cepparelli "Demeter" in the Museo Archeologico at Florence (Reinach, Repertoire,V, 163, 2; J. H. S. XXXVIII, 1918, pp. 5 f., fig. 2) was a derivative, modified in the direction of greater severity, from the same original. It does not seem that any connection is quite certain; if there is one, perhaps there was a Greek imitation between the original and the Cepparelli statue. A. J. A. XIII, 1909, pp. 321-324 (Gardiner); Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 190, 7; Guide, p. 80, No. 23. 9. Female figure (55, 1180). Found May 26, 1898, near Peirene. Lacks head, which was inserted, and most of right arm, which was attached by cement; the left hand, which was dowelled on, is preserved separately (1180). Height, 1.49 m. This is an ordinary Roman copy of one of the commonest of all types, best known by the "Petite Herculanaise" in Dresden. The only variation in the figure is that the fold held in the right hand does not fall to the knee, as ordinarily, but ends at the left arm. The original probably represented Persephone, being grouped with the original of the No. 9 "Grande Herculanaise," a Demeter. The two have often been ascribed to Praxiteles, but this is almost certainly wrong; an attribution to Lysippus is much more probable, but cannot be considered certain. Our figure itself was doubtless a portrait, as most of the copies were. The type is discussed and copies are listed in my Lysippos, pp. 158-163. No. 24 in the list does not belong to the type; cf. Collignon, Statues Funeraires, p. 162, fig. 93. As free imitations in relief may be mentioned a sarcophagus in Tebessa (Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 4, 2; Gsell, Muse'e de Tebessa, pl. VIII, No. 2, pp. 24-26) and numerous small grave-stelae (Reinach, op. cit., II, 532, 4 and III, 530, 4; two in the museum at Thebes; Nos. 1149, 1155, 1162, 1229, 1232, 1241, 1249, 1271, 1300, and 1325 in the National Museum

longs to the "Grande" type: 'Apx. AeXr.IX, 1924-25, ~rapaprT71a,p. 72. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pp. 424-427 (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire, III, 192, 11 (not 7); No. 26 in the list in Lysippos. 10. Female figure (813). Found June 22, 1907; west end of Roman Shops, 2 m. below track level. Lacks head, hands, and legs below calves. Height 1.40 m. The head was inserted. A part of the inserted piece remains; it does not fit closely, but leaves considerable interstices to be filled with cement. The hands were attached by dowels. A chiton and himation are worn. The latter covers both shoulders, falling straight in front from the left, but from the right the top IF: ?I? %r: :-:?? r of the himation passes down for some distance and then crosses ,. i the body, being caught between the left arm and the body and then falling vertically over the forearm. Both arms are extended the right at a higher level than the left. The weight ?::1::I?? forward, Xi?? *!; rests on the left leg. ?;? ?? ?:?? ?: There are five statues that clearly represent a common orig:.slir? :??iir ?:: n ? inal: one in the Louvre (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 166, 7), another, in ?I?:e from Herculaneum, in Naples (op. cit., I, 258, 7; Ruesch, Guida,2 ?;?:ln:,i :;r:: )?'?.Y * :r". :':8ii.rii ':i ??:*I I,gi,?? I? ":: ""' No. 51), another in the Hermitage (museum No. 305; Reinach, " *j?:I? f! ? Repertoire,II, 305, 4), another at Olympia (op. cit., II, 670, 10), and a fifth found at Brindisi and now in Naples (Not. Scav., 1910, p. 148, fig. 1). Although the various copies differ someLiii I:? ?:x what, especially in the position of the hands, they agree as No. 10 closely as could be expected. The statue in Corinth is derived from this original also, but the right hand projected forward and up more than in the more accurate copies, where it rests against the chest. As two derivatives still further removed from the original may be mentioned a statue in Parma (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 667, 7; Poulsen, Portratstudien, p. 51, figs. 120-121) and another found at Sparta (B. S. A. XXVIII, 1926-1927, pp. 30 f.); in both, the right hand is covered. Our statue, with both hands extended, suggests the attitude of prayer. A type of praying woman known in two examples (Naples bronze: Ruesch, Guida,2 No. 785, Reinach, Repertoire, I, 460, 6 and II, 654, 3; statue in Louvre: Reinach, op. cit., I, 133, 4, Lippold, Kopien, p. 208) is somewhat similar, but a distinct type. The earlier praying woman, ascribed with great probability to Euphranor (cf. my Lysippos, pp. 46 f.; Lippold, Kopien, pp. 207 f.), appears to be a predecessor of our type. Euphranor's woman probably belongs to about 350 B.C., the other praying woman and the original of our type to the end of the fourth century. The characteristic triangle, made when the cross-fold is caught under the

Reinach, Repertoire, II, 244, 4), apparently taken over from our type. Since the Themis belongs to the beginning of the third century, our original is not later than the end of the fourth. The statue at Corinth was undoubtedly a portrait, and so were the other copies. It is probable that the original was a portrait also.

r

..

|

%

_'

-.

. .

.t.

,

. f,_

No. 11

11

Enyo? (827). Found April 8, 1908; from wall in area south of "simadi" B. A seated figure, lacking head, left breast, left arm, right elbow, right foot; the left knee is broken, the left leg below the knee is not fully modelled, but appears on the surface of the rock. Height of base, 0.08 m.; above base, 0.99 m. The head and left arm were attached by dowels. The figure sits on a rock, but appears to be on the point of leaping up to her right. On the side of the rock, at her right, there are in relief a helmet, a cuirass, a shield, a spearand two point, things probably intended as a greave and the hilt of a sword. The right hand rests on rests on the the shield shield and and holds holds a sword-hilt; forwardand down. The action the blade and down. blade extended The action extended forward sword-hilt; the

of the left hand cannot be determined, but apparently it extended forward. A thin chiton is girded at the waist and leaves bare the right breast and the legs below the knees; there is also a mantle, which passes from the left shoulder down across the back, around the right side and

across the lap in front. The hair, partly at least loose, is visible on the back of the neck. The top of an elaborate shoe remains on the right leg. The back and left side are sketchily treated and evidently were not intended to be visible. This is probably Nike or Enyo. The latter is more likely, since the figure seems to express warlike ardor rather than triumph; besides, we know many types of Nike, and none like this. Recognizable representations of Enyo are rare (see Pauly-Wissowa s. v.). It is recorded that there was in Athens a statue of Enyo by Cephisodotus and Timarchus, the sons of Praxiteles (Pausanias, i, 8, 5). The sculptures in Cos, which are validly assigned to these artists (Bieber in Jb. Arch. I. XXXVIII-XXXIX, 1913-24, pp. 242-251) show no discernible resemblance to this figure, but there are no fragments such that a strong re-

semblance could be expected. It is probable, however, that our figure is copied from an original of a later period. Assignment to the "Timotheus" school of the early fourth century has been suggested. The most obvious characteristic of the Timothean style is the use of transparent, clinging

drapery; and where it does not cling it is likely to appear in long flourishes or in wadded bunches. Our figure has none of these traits. It is doubtful whether so alert a posture is to be found before Lysippus. Guide, p. 75, No. 14. On the Enyo of Cephisodotus and Timarchus see Mirone in R. Arch. XVI, 1922, pp. 316 f. (standing figure on a coin perhaps derived from it). 12. Apollo Citharoedus (814). Found June 21, 1907; 1 m. north of Byzantine foundation wall of St. John's, 1.50 m.

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

middle of the chest just above the belt, for the right forearm. Locks of hair appear on the shoulders. The costume consists of a thin garment, visible only on the arms, a long robe reaching the feet and girded on the chest, a heavy cloak, falling behind and clasped on the shoulders, and sandals. This is a copy from an original that is represented also by the Apollo of the Sala delle Muse in the Vatican (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 255, 6; Helbig, Fiihrer,3 No. 263; Ausonia, II, pi. VIII, 2; Reinach, Recueil, pl. 225). There is another copy in Stockholm (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 255, 8; Brising, L'Art antique au Musee National de Stockholm, pl. XVII) and

Repertoire, II, 105, 9); another was found near Rome, and another, as it seems, at Lepcis Magna (Not. Scav., 1926, p. 280). The Apollo in Geneva (Deonna, Catalogue, No. 61; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos. 1911-1913; Reinach, Repertoire,II, 105, 10) is a variant. A head in the British Museum, No. 1795, is declared an example of the type by Furtwangler (Masterpieces, p. 305, note 6), but is catalogued as female. The type used to be identified with the Palatine Apollo of Scopas. It now seems fairly sure that that statue was quite different (Amelung, Rom. Mitt. XV, 1900, pp. 198-204; cf.

..'...

.... .

.75Gutde, . .Carpenter,

No. 13.

No. 12

No. 13

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

13. Melpomene (842). Found Found April April

'.: 1908, in same 12 1908 in same vicinit as No. No. 12. 11, vicinity as

The plinth is roughly dressed and somewhat irregular in shape. Height of plinth, 0.07 m.; width, 0.20 m.; depth, 0.34 m. The figure lacks head and nearly all the right arm:

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

peplus, with broad girdle just below the breasts; and a cloak which passes from the left arm behind the back to the right knee. The right foot is set forward, the left back. The left hand rests on a tragic mask on the left knee; the right hand rested on the right knee. On the feet are shoes. At the top of the back is a broad mass of hair, consisting of several braids. The figure is seated on a rough stone. Poor work. A figure in Zagreb, known to me only through Reinach's drawing (Repertoire,IV, 179, 3), seems to be derived from the same original. Our figure was found a short distance from the Apollo (No. 12) and shows the same style and scale; without doubt the two were set up to-

gether. The Apollo in the Vatican was found with a group of Muses, including a Melpomene wholly different from this. Our figures tend to show that the Apollo was not included in the original group from which the Vatican Muses were copied; since in that case

Muses, when set up with it, would naturally be chosen from its original companions. However, there are several known instances in which Muses from different groups were brought

together by the copyists. The original of this Melpomene should belong to the later part of the fourth century. Carpenter, Guide, p. 80, No. 22. On various groups of Muses see Lippold, in Rom. Mitt. XXXIII, 1918, pp. 98 ff., and Kopien, pp. 169-171, with references. 14. Melpomene? (311). Found west of the Sacred Spring. Shoulders to slightly above waist; right arm entirely lacking, left partly; left breast and

adjoining parts are broken away. Height, 0.25 m. The figure wears a thin chiton; a heavier garment falls back over the left shoulder. There is a broad, flat girdle below the breasts. A similar strap extends diagonally across the front of the body from the right shoulder; at

the back it disappears under the heavy garment. At the left side is a sword, which doubtless is supposed to be attached to this second strap. The left arm comes straight down and presses against the sword. A figure found at Pergamon (Pergamon, VII, pp. 76-80, No. 47, pls. XIV-XV; Reinach, Repertoire,IV, 180, 5), headless but nearly complete in other ways, has a sword and straps very like those in this fragment; the figure is somewhat similar otherwise, but not a replica. Winter regards the Pergamene figure as Melpomene; and in fact there is a Melpomene with a sword on a coin, though there are apparently no certain examples in sculpture. It is altogether probable that the Pergamene figure and ours represent the same subject. Copy from a Hellenistic original. 15. Thalia (223). Navel to thighs; height, 0.255 m. The weight rests on the right leg. A chiton with kolpos is worn, and outside it a tight-fitting skin of an animal. There are nine statues with a similar arrangement of garment and skin: Marbury Hall (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 389, 5;

Michaelis, (Reinach, op. cit., I, Marbles, p. 505, 10); Vatican, 265, 1); Worlitz (ibid., II, 304, 6); Abamelach (ibid., V, 129, 7); Stockholm (ibid., I, 266, 3); Ny Carlsberg, No. 396 (ibid., III, 119,8); Delos (ibid., III, 178, 7); formerly Villa Madama (ibid., II, 399, 6); Antiquarium Comunale in Rome, known to me only through Amelung's mention. Eight of these resemble one another closely and may be derived from a single original, though this is questioned. The figure in Delos differs from the others considerably; but there is no reasonable doubt that all nine have the same subject. A skin could be worn by Artemis or a Maenad. The absence of other attributes virtually excludes Artemis, and the quiet demeanor makes a Maenad improbable. There are

various indications that the subject is the Muse of comedy, Thalia. It was once stated (B. C. H. XXXI, 1907, p. 406) that in the Stockholm figure the mask was original, which would make the identification certain for that copy; but later examination is said to have shown that the mask is partly restored and that the antique part does not belong to the figure (Amelung, text to Einzelaufnahmen, No. 1993). However, several of the statues were found with other Muses or in circumstances that suggest the identification. Our fragment does not correspond to any of the nine closely enough to indicate immediate derivation from a common original, but without doubt the subject is the same. It is not improbable that this figure and the "Melpomene" (No. 14) belonged together: they are

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

Found May 17, 1907; circuit-boundary wall of St. John's, northeast corner. Height, 1.21 m.; width, 0.74 m.; thickness, 0.29 m. The figure stands with the left thigh against a pillar with mouldings at the top, around which a serpent is coiled. The body is preserved, in front, from the waist to the ankles, and in the back considerably higher; but

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

~,

, .

_

l_...............

No. 16

No. 17

back is covered by another garment which also covers the lower part of the right leg and obviously covered the left also. Another edge of a garment, descending from behind the right shoulder, crosses the body near the genitals. Upon the pillar are remains of an object, doubtless a lyre. I have observed no close analogies for the drapery. Figures somewhat similar: Reinach, Repertoire,III, 27, 9; III, 234, 5; IV, 57, 6; V, 35, 1. If there was an earlier original, it was Hellenistic. 17. Bust of Apollo (751). Found in 1905. Bottom and left side, with part of neck; head entirely gone. Height, 0.37 m.; width, 0.213 m.; depth, 0.288 m. On the side is a cutting for the insertion of an arm-piece. The hair falls straight down in the back in a thick mass; two curls are visible on the shoulder. In spite of its imperfect preservation, the fragment is recognizable as an example of a type sometimes called Ariadne, but now generally agreed to represent Apollo. Examples were

type

by Savignoni (Anusonia, II, 1907, pp.

ff.), Amelung (Rdrm.

Mitt. XXXVIII-XXXIX, 1923-24, pp. 44 f.) and Lippold (Kopien, pp. 159, 160, 224-228). Three double-headed herms were found in the stadium at Athens, each consisting of an example of this type united with the Hermes of Alcamenes; one is now in the National Museum (Amelung, 1. c.; Stais, Marbres et Bronzes, No. 1693), while the other two have been set up again in the stadium (Savignoni's fig. 16; Jb. Arch. I. XXXII, 1917, p. 84, fig.52; Weller, Athens and its Monuments, p. 177, fig. 96). There is a similar double herm in Geneva (Deonna, Catalogue, p. 31, No. 52, with illustration; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos. 1872-1873), and a copy in the Lateran (f in Savignoni's list; Benndorf-Sch6ne, p. 255, No. 378; Einzelaufiah-

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

and a torso in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Galleria 69) were copied; the Barberini Apollo in Munich, whose head somewhat resembles the " Ariadne," would be a copyist's variant, influenced by the Palatine Apollo of Scopas.

The various examples of the " Ariadne " differ from one another so much that it is difficult to reach a confident conclusioniabout the original, but it is on the whole probable th:at Savignoni is right at least in regard to its period.

No in-

ferences can safely be drawn from a comparison with either the Eirene or the Barbarini Apollo. 18. Head of Apollo? (451). Found April 28, 1903. Lacks all the face except right cheek and part of right eye. Height, 0.18 m. The hair is confined by a band, outside of which it ends in a series of rich locks; in the back a flat mass apparently fell on the shoulder. Probably a head of Apollo after an original of the late fifth or the fourth century. Coarse work.

?::.:y; ;

i,, **V^ ti S^ .^ ^ f

;::'^ .

No. 18ai

19. Apollo (795, 796, 807). Found June 13 and 18, 1907; northeast corner of St. John's. Head to genitals; lacks face and nearly all of both arms. Height, 0.943 m. There is a garment slung over the left shoulder and covering most of the back, and a lyre-strap descending across the body from the right shoulder. The small fragment 796, which does not appear in the photograph, belongs to the front of the figure. It joins by contact, and has part of the lyre-strap. The weight rested on the right leg. The right arm was raised to a position

The left arm started down from the shoulder and doubtless held the lyre; there are remains of an attachment on the front of the body. There is a long lock of hair on each shoulder, coarsely worked in a manner suggestive of shavings. The head was turned to his left and apparently the gaze was directed upward. A few leaves of a wreath remain in the hair. There is no pubes. A wreath is most commonly worn in sculpture by Dionysus, but sometimes by Apollo (cf. Overbeck, KunstI' ? mythologie, III, 5, pp. 123-127). Dionysus should not * 41 wear a lyre-strap or any other strap. The action of the right hand is uncertain; in figures of Dionysus the hand sometimes holds a bunch of grapes high in the air. No exact replicas are known to me; for a fairly close analogy *5 see a statue in Vienne (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 100, 4; Esp6randieu, Recueil General, III, p. 397), where the arms are differently placed. The original, if any was t closely imitated, belonged to the fourth century or later, though the poor workmanship of the copy gives some appearance of early style. ic

s

^

.

#

No 19

20. Head of Helios? (889). Found April 21, 1908. Only the top of the head is preserved. Height, 0.19 m.; width, 0.24 m.; depth, 0.17 m. Curling hair. There is a fillet with two holes, probably for metal pieces representing rays. Coarse work. 21. Hermes Criophorus (686). Found May 16, 1904. Shoulders to genitals; the right arm is mostly lost. Height, 0.40 m. The hands hold against the chest the legs of a ram, the left hand grasping the hind legs. A garment falls from the shoulders in archaic folds. This is closely related to the Criophorus of Wilton House (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 363, 6; Michaelis, Ancient Marbles, p. 702, No. 144), even to

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

quarter of the fifth century: one by Calamis, one by the Aeginetan Onatas. In the latter work the ram was carried under the arm, while the figure by Calamis was nude and beard-

less, and the ram's head was probably above the left shoulder of the god. Svoronos suggested that the original of our type was one of a group of three statues represented on a

Sicyonian coin of Julia Domna. However, the two feminine figures are in the style of the late fifth or fourth century, and the chlamys worn by the male figure is freer in style than

No. 22

No. 20

No. 21

in our figure. On examining the coin in the Numismatic Museum in Athens, by the courtesy of Mr. Konstantopoulos, I was unable to discern the hands or the ram's head against the chest. It is probably right to assume from the position of the arms that the figure was a Criophorus, but it certainly is impossible to tell on which side the ram's head was. No connection between the coin and our type is apparent. (So Lippold in Pauly-Wissowa, article Sikyon, col. 2546.) It is probable that the original was itself a late archaistic work. This is suggested by the drapery, which if genuinely archaic could hardly be later than 480 B.C., and by the head of the copy in Wilton House. Compare a relief in Athens (Reinach, Repertoirede Reliefs, II, 353, 1). A. J. A. VIII, 1904, pp. 439 f. and pl. XVIII (Heermance); Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 97, 2; Carpenter, Guide, p. 71, No. 7. For various Criophori see Svoronos, in J. Int. Arch. Num. XVI, 1914, pp. 71-80 and 166 f. 22. Criophorus (718). Found June 15, 1904; south of St. John's, high level. The front of the left shoulder is preserved, with a little of the neck. Height of fragment, 0.22 m.; width, 0.16 m.; depth, 0.186 m. The hind legs of the ram are visible, and part of a

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

evidence previously known has indicated the existence of a sculptural type of Criophorus at this later period, though there are some bronze and terracotta figurines that have the same motive, as well as the Sicyonian coin mentioned under No. 21. None of these appears to reproduce the type of our fragment. It is just possible that the original of it is imitated in a coin of Aegina (Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner, pl. L, No. 5); the figure there represented does not look archaic, the ram's head is above the right shoulder, and it can scarcely be

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

-

........ -._ ------

:

No. 23

23. Serapis (908). Found May 15, 1908; at the bridge, 1 m. below track level. Height of plinth, 0.09 m.; width, 0.925 m.; depth, 0.84 m. The figure is preserved to the

lap, the upper part being much battered; height 0.79 m. He sits on a throne and the feet rest on a flat footstool. On the feet are sandals; the only garment is a himation. On the sides of the throne are wheat-stalks in relief, and at the figure's right are the hind legs and tail of an animal on the plinth. Part of the body of the animal is visible on the side of the throne, in relief. So far as can be discerned, the figure corresponds closely to the usual type of Serapis, which is justly ascribed to Bryaxis (Amelung, in R. Arch. XI, 1903, pp. 117 ff. and Ausonia, III, pp. 115-121). The animal is Cerberus and indicates that in this copy

Serapis was identified with Pluto, as frequently (Reinach, Repertoire,II, 19 and V, 9, 1-3; here No. 3 is particularly close to our copy; Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, p. 231, No. 8). Usually the fore feet of Cerberus are placed on the plinth, but in this case they apparently

wheat is not preserved in other representations of Serapis, so far as I know; but, like the cornucopia that is found occasionally, it is appropriate to a god of the underworld and hence of the earth. It is very probable that this figure had a cornucopia; cf. No. 214. The figure was found just south of the west end of the northwest stoa, which would probably not be very far from the two precincts of Serapis mentioned by Pausanias (ii, 4, 6). On Pluto-Serapis see Roeder in Pauly-Wissowa, article Sarapis; Cook, Zeus, I, pp. 188-190. 24. Hephaestus? (1139). Smaller than life-size. The front part of the head is preserved, from near the top of the pilos to the eyes. Height, 0.16 m.; width, 0.125 m.; depth, 0.085 m. This is apparently a copy from an original of the fifth century. The hair is simpler than in the head in the Vatican (Amelung, Skulpt. des Vat. Mus. I, p. 584, No. 420, pl. 61), which is plausibly ascribed

No. 24

to Alcamenes (Furtwangler, Masterpieces, p. 89; Helbig, Fiihrer,3 I, p. 52, No. 86); but the general arrangement is the same, and a reduction in size might cause such simplification;

it is possible that both heads are derived from a common original. The pilos could be worn also by Odysseus. Good work. 25. Head of Dionysus (194). Found in the Agora, southwest of the west end of the Propylaea; Parian marble, ac-

cording to Richardson. There is a little of the neck preserved; on top of the head is the right hand and wrist. Height, 0.35 m. The surface is almost perfectly preserved. The head is encircled by a fillet and an ivy garland. Both appear only in front, and the back of the head is very roughly finished. The hair is gathered into a knot at the back, and curls fall from behind the ears. The work is poor and belongs to the second century. As a detail of workmanship may be noted that the upper eyelids have a distinct ridge parallel with the edge. The statue represented Dionysus leaning languidly on a support, probably a vine-clad tree-trunk, with his left arm, while the right arm was raised and the hand rested on the

7; I, 139, 1; II, 123; II, 787; II, 786, 6; III, 236, 7; V, 48, 2. But no two of these can be regarded as accurately copied from a common original. The same type is used for Dionysus in groups: Reinach, Repertoire, III, 35, 7, 9; Brunn-Bruckmann,

620, figs. 3-5 in text; Levi,

in Ausonia, IX, 1919, pp. 52-64. Apparently there was no single famous original representing Dionysus in this scheme, but it became customary to borrow for this god a type created for Apollo, the "Lyceus." This Apollo was imitated very freely in some instances, but the original can be reconstructed with reasonable certainty except in regard to the object held in the left hand. The statue that Lucian describes as in the Lyceum at Athens (Anacharsis, 7) had a bow, and so

. .. . ......

*

?

_

||

*- ,,

.

'.'. ::::'. n:::'.'::'?

.. ....

f

if -

-

No. 25

do some of the copies. But in view of the freedom with which adaptations were made, it cannot be considered certain that Lucian's statue was the original. A greater number of the copies have a lyre in the hand. This is much more satisfactory; instead of a tired archer we

have the musician in moody revery. So understood the conception is original and profound; and this Apollo, as it appears in good copies (e. g. that in the Louvre: Reinach, Repertoire,I, 135, 2; Warrack, GreekSculpture, No. 79) is the only nude Apollo of later origin that does not seem contemptible when compared with the splendid creations of the middle of the fifth century. The original is often ascribed to Praxiteles, but this attribution appears to have very little in its favor. In spite of the support, the figure has not the relaxation of Praxiteles, and the position of the feet is not known to have been used by him. The head has no clear

Praxitelean character, and the elaborate hair is opposed to Praxitelean simplicity as it is known from other works. The original should belong to some Attic sculptor of the first half of the fourth century. A. J. A.. VIII, 1904, pp. 294-296 and pl. XIII (Richardson); Carpenter, Guide, p. 77, No. 17. On the type see Thraemer, in Roscher's Lexikon, I, col. 1142; Farnell, Cults, V, p. 277; Lippold, Kopien, pp. 175-177. On the "Lycean" Apollo see Farnell, Cults, IV, pp. 350-352 (good interpretation); Klein, Praxiteles, pp. 158-176 (Barracco copy of the head on pp. 168 f.); Reinach, Recueil, pls. 252-253; Furtwangler, Sammlung Sabouroff, text to pl. XXXVI; Bieber, Die antiken Skulpturen ... in Cassel, p. 19, No. 20, with references; Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, 1923-24, pp. 259 f.; Smith, II, p. 336, No. 602; Bieber, Jb. Arch. I. XXXVIII-XXXIX, Catalogue of Sculpture in the British Museum, III, Nos. 1550-1552; B. S. A. XXVIII, 1926-27, pp. 23-26 (Woodward); Reinach, Repertoire,V, 40, 3-4; Jones, Museo Capitolino, p. 346, No. 7. 26. Torso of Apollo or Dionysus (811, 349). Found June 21, 1907, 1 m. north of Byzantine foundation wall of St. John's, 1.50 m. below track level. From above the navel to the right knee; the left leg is broken just below the hip. Height, 0.93 m. At the top on the left side is some object, probably the end of a garment or skin; otherwise the part preserved is nude. The weight rests on the right leg. There is no pubes, which would suggest Apollo or Dionysus as the subject. The figure could very well have belonged to the type just discussed, and the material is the same as in the head No. 25;

but that head and this fragment hardly belonged to the same statue, since the workmanship of No. 26 is better. 27. Head of bearded Dionysus (987). Found June 22, 1910; in the great drain in the peribolus of Apollo. Lacks most of nose; otherwise in excellent preservation. Height, 0.46 m. The neck ends in a piece 0.12 m. high, shaped for insertion into the body. A fillet, which appears only in front, and an ivy wreath encircle the head. At the back the long hair is gathered into a large knot. The surface is polished. This is a poor Roman copy of a type known by several other examples, of which the most familiar is the "Sardanapallus"

of the Vatican.

The original has been assigned to Praxiteles by many scholars, to Cephisodotus by Wolters, and to Alcamenes by Miss McDowall. The face, so far as it is not covered by the beard, is thoroughly Praxitelean; and in the drapery the figure seems to take its place between the Muses of the Mantinean relief and the "Herculanaises," more distinctly separated from the latter than from the former. The numerous recent attempts (Lawrence, Later Greek Sculpture, p. 102) to separate the Mantinean relief entirely from the great Praxiteles do not

The Dionysus is a figure of an unusual kind, and bases for a positive conclusion are lacking, but every feature of it is entirely favorable to an ascription to Praxiteles. As Carpenter has written, "the wax-like finish and coarse deep drill-furrows in beard and hair" indicate for this copy a date around A.D. 150 (Guide, p. 74, No. 11). For the type see B. S. A. XXIV, 1919-21, pp. 78-87 (Ashmole); this head is mentioned on p. 84; the base mentioned by Ashmole is too small to belong. A good new copy, now in

No. 27

the Museo Nazionale at Rome: Not. Scav. 1928, p. 354, pl. III. The best published illustrations of any head of the type are those of the Naples herm, published by Macchioro, Jh. Oest. Arch. I. XII, 1909, pp. 190 f.; Reinach, Recueil, pl. 197. New discussions: J. H. S. L, 1930, p. 142 (Ashmole); Jb. Arch. I. XLIII, 1928, pp. 281 ff (Curtius).

28. Dionysus (69, 69A). Found "back of the north apse of Peirene"; May 20, 1899. The plinth is in two pieces, which fit by contact; parts of all four sides are original. Height of plinth, 0.17 m.; width, 1.00 m.; depth, 0.65 m.; height of figure as preserved, almost to knees, 0.58 m. The figure wears sandals and a garment of heavy material. The left foot is set forward as though in a stride. At the figure's right are the four feet and the

tail of a panther. Pausanias (ii, 2, 6) describes an archaic statue of Dionysus, which seems to be represented on a Hadrianic coin (Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner, pi. E, LXXVII). The god is bearded and fully clad; his right leg is drawn back; he holds a cantharus in his right hand and a long thyrsus in his left, and a panther stands at his feet. The principal features

*?? .

;?i?? :CI

?

:?'L

?ir? i:

a

?i

?

I

.i.

.

'

':

"'i? ":"'

:::?i?:ic? ? I

*

.si

s??: ?r $:i.. :? ..gii8i.? ?*?:

?:::'???:; r

?:: a.:, :r a ':Sie i iSC"'*.;i \?

??;n:

:"

i;

i

''''?ri.:: ??:?;:? ?;ar?:

?ti' r .,,1??? ?:t;? ?;?,. :$

i

ii

i

:;? :''?? ;-%

?:;:a:*;;?::: ?;r?...

c:??

"` :.:?s..;??::

:.:???-:?i ?:?.??Xs:i:i7:*li::flLiir;' 'r.B-lii;i:.C::

'"*::4-ii:.:'',.?:(-JZ;* ljBBbsmR i.ceii.?? .;,. .., 'r8tsELi:aisrrssl%BBPJE?,

i":.3:'*':'::!;.5li6h:Oi";rP*S :.? ?.i::::::,i.?::. ??:?;::

No.

;i:[('Lli:i,': .za..?:lr:?d:

'?:? ;?? ;???? *,l??:::.i:i' ???;: :?-*;c:ii8: ?;,

28

of this old image are apparently imitated in our statue. Fully draped figures of Dionysus are not common, except for the "Sardanapallus" type (see No. 27). A J.A. VI, 1902, pp. 427ff. (Tucker); Reinach, Repertoire, III, 32, 8; Carpenter, Guide, p. 78, No. 19.

29. Dionysus, nymph, and Pan (12). This group, which has been stolen, is described from Richardson's publication and the photograph. Found "near the Panagia church, just south of the limits of the Agora." Parian marble. Height of central figure, 0.52 m. Dionysus is in the centre. His legs from the thighs down are covered by a garment, which appears also on his left arm; otherwise his body is nude; a lock of hair is visible on each shoulder; the head and right arm are lacking. Of the nymph, the body from the navel down is preserved; a garment crosses the body diagonally, just disclosing the pudenda. Dionysus was doubtless seizing the nymph with his right hand; his posture suggests instability; he is supported on the other side by Pan, a small grotesque figure with goat legs. The feet of all three figures are lacking.

No.29~~~~

groups 9; IV, 69; (cf. Reinach, Repertoire, III, 35, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 17, 1; II, 255. 1; II, 343, 3; III, 68, 4); but no really close analogies

are known to me. The work is rude and careless, but clever. A. J. A. VIII, 1904, p. 288, No. 1, fig. 1. 30. Dionysus (673). Found June 4, 1903, in the theatre. Shoulders almost to knees; lacks left arm and most of right. Height, 0.27 m. The right arm extends down and a little to the side; the direction of the left is not determinable.

No. 30

No. 31

Locks of hair appear on the shoulder. On the back of the neck is a rectangular raised surface. The nebris passes across the body from the left shoulder. The weight rests on the right leg; the figure was erect; on the right thigh are some remains of the support. A statue in the Vatican (Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 63, 1; Amelung, II, p. 306, No. 102c, another in Madrid (Repertoire, IV, 63, 3; Einzelaufnahmen, 1532; Ricard, pi. XXIX), Marbres antiques du Musee du Prado, No. 28), a third in Cherchell (Repertoire, III, 31, 4) and a group at Richmond (J. H. S. XXVIII, 1908, p. 11, N. 12, pi. IX) may be compared. The first and third have bands visible on the shoulders. The statue in Cherchell has its

head unbroken; it corresponds in general to No. 25. In these figures both arms are lowered; the objects held in the hands are lost. Our figure shows hasty workmanship and was probably not intended as a close copy of any original.

Found May 27, 1902, "back of the line of shops bordering the Lechaeum road toward the north end of the system. Parian marble." Height with neck, 0.22 m. Nose and most of the lower part of the face are lost; the surface is well preserved otherwise. This is an example of the archaistic type, remotely related to the Hermes of Alcamenes. The long hair is confined by a fillet and makes a triple row of tight curls over the forehead; a lock falls

from behind the ear. Careful Roman work of the second century. A. J. A. VIII, 1904, p. 296, No. 5 (Richardson). 32. Dionysus? (562). Found May 21, 1903, in the theatre. A right leg, from just below knee to ankle, against a tree-trunk. Height, 0.60 m.; width of leg, 0.13 m. At the bottom is the beginning of a skin boot, such as is worn by Dionysus. 33. Dionysus? (36). Thigh to just below knee, which is slightly bent. Length, 0.155 m.; diameter, 0.09 m. On the thigh an animal's leg, ending in a cloven hoof, falls straight down. Probably from a statuette of Dionysus wearing a fawnskin.

::.

34. Artemis (312). Found April 23, 1901, "near Sacred Spring (?)." Lacks head, nearly all of both arms, and legs below knees. Height, . :34.. *:.:.No. 0.32 m. She wears a Doric chiton that ends at the knees and has a kolpos that reaches slightly below the waist, and over it a skin, which seems to be fastened with a clasp on the left shoulder. The figure is striding forward with the left leg; the chiton is blown back and the forms of the legs appear clearly through it. The right arm extended downward and back from the shoulder, the left apparently out to the side. Perhaps the statuette was intended to represent Artemis-Bendis. This divinity, of Thracian origin, appears in a relief in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (No. 231; Arndt, Glyptotheque,pl. LXXXVIII; Lippold, Antike Skulpturen, fig. 15), where an inscription makes the identification certain, in a relief in the British Museum (Smith, Catalogueof Sculpture, III, No. 2155, pl. XXIV; Reinach, Repertoirede Reliefs, II, 462, 1), and in at least two statuettes, both found at Laurium (Reinach, Repertoirede la Statuaire, II, 325, 3 and III, 255, 5). In these monuments the goddess wears a chiton and skin, as in our statuette, and on the head a Phrygian cap. The closest analogies for our figure, however, are two statuettes: one in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (No. 82; Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 185, 5) and one in the British Museum (No. 1559; Farnell, Cults, II, pl. XXXII A, p. 535; Reinach, Repertoire, II, 316,

it was dedicated to Artemis Soteira; so the skin worn in this manner is not peculiar to Bendis. The heads of the two statuettes

are different from each other; neither wears a cap. They

and our figure are apparently influenced by a single original, though no two of the three correspond exactly. The original would be a work of the fourth century. On Bendis see articles in Daremberg-Saglio

(Lenormant)

and Pauly-Wissowa

(Knaak;

chiefly Supplement I, 247). 35. Artemis (93). Left shoulder and breast. Height, 0.25 m.; width, 0.20 m. The figure wears an Ionic chiton. A quiver-strap suggests the identification. Coarse work.

No. 36

No. 37

36. Torso of Aphrodite (54). Found May 26, 1898, near Peirene. Lacks head and nearly all of both arms; broken at thighs. Height, 0.86 m. The left shoulder is somewhat lower and more advanced than the right. On each shoulder fall three thin locks of hair. It is probable that the right hand covered the left breast, the left hand the pudenda, as is usual in figures of the "pudique" type; but there are no traces of contact. The weight rested on the left leg. Material, workmanship, and posture suggest that right foot 339 and right hand 116 could have belonged to this figure. None of the common types shows locks on the shoulders exactly in this manner. The modelling of the figure is hard. 3. 105, 3. f. (Tucker); A. Jr. A. VI, VI, 1902, J. A. A. Repertoire, III, 105, Reinach, Re.pertoire, 436 f. 1902, pp. pp. 436 (Tucker); Reinach, III,

Found July 5, 1911; Roman reservoir of Peirene, west. From just below breasts almost to knees. Height, 0.95 m. Before the pudenda are remains of a shell; otherwise the figure is nude. The weight rested on the left leg; against it are remains of a support. A row of irregular small holes, within a roughly cut band, encircles the figure near the top of the fragment. This might have served for the attachment of a garment at some degenerate period, but more probably it is connected with the use of the statue as a fountain figure. There is a carefully bored hole, 0.05 m. in diameter, through the figure from front to back, piercing the shell and the left leg. Beside it in front is the beginning of a smaller hole in the centre of the shell; this may have been begun with the intention of boring it all the way through, but more probably it served for the attachment of some ornament. The shell so placed with a figure otherwise nude is unusual; cf. however, Winter, Typen der figiirlichen Terrakotten, II, p. 218, 2. The modelling of the figure is naturalistic and vastly superior to that of the preceding figure. A part of a right foot on a fragment of plinth (Inv. 1023) was found with the figure and may belong to it; the foot rests flat on the plinth. For such figures used in fountains see 'Apx. 'E+. 1923, pp. 80-83, where Oikonomos publishes an actual fountain, apparently of Roman date, in the museum at Sparta. Here there are four figures of this sort in relief, and the shells have holes from which the water flowed as in our figure. A figure in the museum at Tarragona has a shell with a hole in it as in our statue. According to the label it belonged to a fountain. So far as I know it is published only on post-cards. A mosaic in Tunis (Gauckler, Musee Alaoui, p. 26, No. 123, pl. VII) shows figures with shells from which water appears to be flowing. Figures with shells commonly have the legs covered by a garment, which is gathered between the legs in front. This type is illustrated by another figure at Corinth (Inv. 29) which was not found in the excavations. The figures sometimes appear in groups; in addition to the two monuments mentioned above, see Reinach, Repertoirede Reliefs, II, 492, 3 (not of the usual type); III, 79, 4; III, 386, 1. In such groups they are certainly nymphs, but it is not sure that all the single figures of the type were intended as nymphs. The shell is of course equally appropriate for Aphrodite. 38. Part of nude figure. Right shoulder and breast of a woman not quite mature. Height, 0.355 m.; width, 0.23 m. The statue to which this fragment belonged was very much better than any other female nude at Corinth; probably Hellenistic work. It was not found in the excavations.

i No. 38

Found April 30, 1901, in a shop on the Lechaeum Road. Height, 0.20 m. Much of face lost: left eye, left cheek, forehead and part of right cheek remain. The hair is parted in the middle and gathered into a knot at the back of the head;

a fillet is wound twice about the head. Fair Roman work. This is a copy from the Aphrodite of Cnidus, the masterpiece of Praxiteles. Of the various reproductions of this work, that in the Vatican is most frequently repro-

duced, since it is nearly complete and has a head; but the head, though an example of the type, does not belong to the statue and is incorrectly adjusted. The statue is disfigured also by tin drapery, but casts were made while it was nude. The British Museum has acquired a part of a copy, bust with head unbroken, which is the best evidence for the exact position of the head (Illustrated London News, Dec. 6, 1924, pp. 1090 f.). A head in the Ny .........

.......

.. ..

......

No. 39

No. 40

....

...

No. 41

Carlsberg Glyptotek has been found to join a torso in Brussels (Illustrated London News, Jan. 21, 1928, p. 83; the torso is No. 10 in Cumont's catalogue); this copy differs somewhat from the original in the arrangement of the hair. The best copy of the head is in the Kaufmann collection in Berlin; the head of the British Museum bust has been described as still better, but it does not appear so in the illustration. No satisfactory clue has been discovered to the date of the original, nor is there any external evidence in regard to its place in the career of Praxiteles. Apparently, however, it is later than the pouring satyr and the Aphrodite of Arles, somewhat earlier than the leaning satyr and the Sauroctonus, and considerably earlier than the Hermes.- The belief of Bluimel (Griechische Bildhauerarbeit, pp. 37-48; criticized by Miss Richter, A. J. A. XXXIII, 1929, p. 334) and Picard (R. Arch. XXVII, 1928, p. 208), that the Hermes is a copy, will hardly win recognition. -The Aphrodite was a figure of mature form and ideal beauty, noble and free from any sensual suggestion; the position of the right hand is due to instinctive and

unconscious modesty. Like the Zeus of Phidias, it held a position of overwhelming prestige

remainto us, however,imitations of the Cnidiangoddesshave but a small place; and most of them are characterized by one or more qualities - youthfulness, naturalism, sensuality, very conscious modesty or no modesty - which make a complete contrast with the style of

Praxiteles. The Aphroditeof the Capitol, which is certainly independentof the Cnidian, perhaps earlier, and probably a work of Scopas, appealed to the popular taste more strongly.

Similarlyin moderntimes, theremust be a hundrednudesmorefrequentlyreproducedthan the Venus of Giorgione. For the type see Helbig, Fiihrer,3 I, p. 204, No. 310; Bulle, Der schone Mensch,2 cols. 333 ff. and 533 ff.; Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, pp. 195-197, second ed., pp. 258-260; some remarks in my Lysippos, pp. 55-57; Lippold, in Fra Ny Carlsberg Glyptoteks Samlinger, I, pp. 77 ff.; Einzelaufnahmen, 3068; Lawrence, Classical Sculpture, pp. 248 f. . . ...........

i!_

No. 42

40. Drapery and vase (1030). Found July 18, 1911; bottom of large drain north of Peirene. Broken at top and bottom, though at bottom it must be nearly complete. Height, 0.10m. The draperyis suspendedoverthe vase and reachesthe groundon both sides. This is doubtlessfroma statuette imitatingthe Aphroditeof Cnidus,but it was not an exact copy. 41. Drapery and vase (934). Height, 0.271 m. This fragmentmay be describedin the same terms as the preceding. The work is much coarser. Traces of red, which seem to be stucco rather than paint, are preserved. 42. Head of Aphrodite (19). Found April 21, 1897. Height with neck, 0.17 m. The upper left part of the head was a separatepiece and is lacking. The end of the nose is broken;otherwisethe preservationof the face is excellent. There is no fillet about the hair, but the head bears a general resemblance to the Cnidian type.

Found May 21 and June 8, 1904; southwest of St. John's. Height of head, with neck, 0.034 m. The coiffure is approximately that of the Cnidian Aphrodite. Calf of leg: length, 0.044 m.; diameter, 0.01 m. The two fragments doubtless belong to the same statuette; work not fine. Apparently this was paired with a similar figure of Pan (No. 70).

i':''

:dlii? i ""::? ?::"": '::?'?::'?"' i:ill ??'r:':'"" :?: ?:?lr?::? ..:rii;:.:;?r:l?:::::::: ?::ili::?i

44. Aphrodite Anadumene (1181). Lacks head, almost all of both arms, and legs below thighs. Height, No. 43 0.21 m. The right arm was dowelled on. On the outside of the left thigh are remains of a support. The weight rested on the left leg. The right arm and shoulder were raised; the left upper arm extended forward from the shoulder. This is an example of

? :

X

....??.. .:........:..I

a

....... _.... :,

No. 44

a common type, in which the nude goddess has her hands on her hair as if to bind it up. The most famous occurrence of this motive was in a painting by Apelles, the Aphrodite Anadyomene, in which the goddess was represented wringing the water from her hair after rising from the sea. The name Anadyomene is often used for the type in sculpture also, but since the same action is often represented in half-draped figures it is doubtful whether the statues were intended to show Aphrodite at her birth. It is probable that the original in sculpture was later than the painting by Apelles and belonged to the third century. The Aphrodite of Cyrene is a variant of this type.

Lawrence, Later GreekSculpture, p. 45. 45. Aphrodite Anadumene (1043; labelled 1042). Found May 9, 1914; Byzantine

level, about 2 m. below surface, over northeast corner

of peribolus of Apollo. Waist almost to ankles; height, 0.23 m. The upper, nude part of the body was attached

by a dowel. The legs are covered by a garment, which is carried around the hips and knotted

For the type see Reinach,Rpertoire

i~~

No.

N46. Aphrodite

IV, 200,Bernoulli--, 6;

4S

3 .::

Aphrodite, pp. 295-299.

::':,:::.',:

~~

s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

118).

46. Aphrodite ................(1182)

Lacks head, which was dowelled on, most of both arms, and the legs below the knees, which also were dowelled on. Height, 0.322 m. Against the right thigh is the tail of a dolphin; it was attached to the body of the dolphin by a dowel. The left leg is slightly advanced; the weight rested chiefly on the right. Slight remains of the right hand are peron the the right breast. There There are ceptible on are remains remainsabout about the the pudenda pudenda also, also, probably probablyof of the the ceptible right breast.

front of the body. It is very unusual for the hand to be placed on the breast belonging to the same side of the body; but in this case it is almost certainly the goddess's own hand, since the presence of the dolphin indicates that there was no second figure on that side.

Coarse work. 47. Aphrodite (766). Neck to navel. Height, 0.13 m. Lacks head, which was dowelled on, all of right arm and most of left. The left arm apparently came straight down. On the right breast is a .^....... ..g......

No. 49

No. 51

right hand, which, in this fragment, might be supposed to belong to a second figure; but see the preceding entry. Coarse work. 48. Aphrodite (198). Navel to knees. Height, 0.13 m. The back is covered by a thin garment. The front is nude above the thighs, around which is the top of a heavy garment in a large fold. The right hand apparently held the garment against the right thigh. The weight rests on the right leg. Exact analogies are not known to me, but a somewhat similar type is fairly common: see Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 203, 2.

49. Aphrodite (734). Navel to ankles. Height, 0.125 m. A fold of the garment descends from the left side, crosses at the back just below the buttocks, and passes across the thighs in front; the end is held by the left hand on the left thigh. The other end of the garment falls at her left in such a flat mass that the legs appear to be in relief. The weight rests on the left leg. Poor work. 50. Aphrodite. Shoulders to waist; both arms lost; much battered. Height, 0.195 m. Nude.

Shoulders to below breasts; the arms are lost. Height, 0.13 m.; width, 0.14 m. The garment is thin and hangs from the right shoulder; the left breast is covered, however. A lock of hair appears on the left shoulder. The left arm extended down; the direction of the right is not determinable. The treatment of the drapery suggests the "Timothean" sculptures at Epidaurus. 52. Aphrodite? (826). Buttocks from a statuette. Height, 0.12 m.; width, 0.11 m. The front of the body is concealed by a garment which, as appears from its workmanship, was not intended to be seen. The figure may have been the middle one of a group of three Graces, which was seen

No. 52

No. 53

from the rear. Such a figure does not appear but they vary considerably from one another, (see Bagnani, in J. H. S. XLI, 1921, pp. 233 same general sort as the Aphrodite Kallipygos

in any of the existing groups of the Graces, indicating that there was no canonical type ff.). Or the statuette may have been of the (Reinach, Repertoire, I, 328, 1-3).

53. Aphrodite (429). Lacks head and most of right arm. Height, 0.35 m.; width at hips, 0.095 m.; thickness, 0.07 m. The figure wears a sleeved Ionic chiton, girded below the breasts, and another garment that hangs over the left shoulder, whence it passes behind the back and in front of the right leg. The weight rests on the left leg; although the drapery is intelligible only on the

assumption that the right leg is advanced, it is in fact drawn back. On the back of the left shoulder is an object of which the upper part is broken away, but it is unmistakably a nude child. The left hand is closed and rests on the hip; the right probably hung down and

touched the right thigh. The breasts are very far apart for late work, the figure is very slender and flat, and the work very poor. Some expert has jotted down in the inventory a question whether the piece is not a forgery; but it was entered in the excavation notebook of Professor Richardson, then Director of the School, in 1902. A figure in Munich (Reinach, Repertoire, III, 93, 6; Einzelaufnahmen 922) corresponds closely, except that there is no child. A figure in Athens (Repertoire,V, 164, 1; 'Apx. AeXr. 1916, irapapT?i7ua, p. 79, fig. 9, No. 3367) is also close; the right hand rests on an ithyphallic Pan that serves as support. A figure in the museum at Rhodes, about half life-size, corresponds pretty closely, but I cannot give the details about it; the left shoulder is broken away, but there is no reason for supposing that there was a child there. A statuette in Thasos (Repertoire,II, 307, 2; Jh. Oest.Arch. I. XI, 1908, p. 156, figs. 49-50) is close to ours except that the arms are bare; it is Hellenistic work with minor variations. A figure in the British Museum (Smith, Catalogue, III, No. 2091, pl. XXIII; Repertoire, III, 195, 6) and one in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (No. 312; Repertoire, V, 392, 1) are very similar to each

other; the left hand on the hip is open, and the right arm was raised. Other figures somewhat similar: Repertoire,II, 681, 2; II, 307, 7; IV, 199, 4; Berlin, No. 504. All these figures appear to be derived from one original, though those in the British Museum and the Glyptotek must have had an immediate model of their own. Although the type has generally been supposed to represent Aphrodite, no other ex-

ample is so clearly characterized as ours. The little Eros on the shoulder appears frequently in statues of the goddess: see Repertoire, I, 342, 5-6; I, 342, 4 (Diitschke, IV, p. 105, No. 283);

V, 165, 6; II, 377, 2; II, 377, 1; II, 307, 1; Repertoirede Reliefs, III, 313, 1 (figure in gable); Bernoulli, Aphrodite, p. 119; Schrader, Pheidias, p. 314, fig. 284. In terracottas women often have such Erotes; cf. Sieveking, Sammlung Loeb, Terrakotten,I, pl. LV. The original should belong to the end of the fourth century or later. There is a markedly

similar, but seated, figure in Vicenza: Repertoire, II, 308, 5. On the type see Lawrence, Later GreekSculpture, p. 103, with citations. 54. Head of Cybele or Tyche (802). The front part of the top of the head, the right ear, most of the forehead, the left eye, the left cheek, and part of the mural crown remain in the principal piece. Height, 0.36 m.

A part of the crown is a separate piece (802b); it fits above the left side of the forehead. Another fragment, which also joins, includes the mouth and the end of the nose. The eyes

were inserted. The hair is parted in the middle and brushed back in wavy masses. The crown is interrupted by a cutting 0.03 m. wide, over the middle of the forehead, for some

ornament, which was probably only a tower higher than the others. In the back, downward from a line slightly below the eye, the surface is smooth; this is most naturally explained by the assumption that the head belonged to a seated statue and that the back of the throne fitted here.

temple-statue. Corinthian coins show a head of Tyche with a mural crown (ImhoofBlumer and Gardner,pl. E, LXXXV) differingsomewhatfrom our head, but not too much to be explained as a modificationby the die-cutter; and the temple of Tyche was in the Agora,wherethis head was found. The temple-statueof Tyche was erect, however (Pausanias, ii, 2, 8). The periegete'sdescriptionof the imagein the temple of Cybele (ii, 4, 7) is marredby a flaw in the text; but there are Antonine coins (Imhoof-Blumerand Gardner,pl. F, CXX) which show a Cybele that could very well be imitated from a temple-statue. The figureis seated and wears a mural crown. It is probablyto this statue that the head belonged. The head is influencedby the style of the fifth century, but it is doubtfulwhetherit followedany particularoriginal. Onthe mural crown see Furtwangler,SammlungSabouroff,text to pl. XXV; Lawrence,LaterGreekSculpture,p. 103, with references. 55. Cybele (855). No. 54 Found April 18, 1908, in a wall west of St. John's. The goddessis seated on a rock. Lackshead, left arm, right forearm,part of rock under forepart of lion. Height, 0.72 m.; width, 0.38 m.; depth, 0.44 m. The feet rest on a lion,

which lies flat, facing right. On the rock at her right is an archaistictriple Hecate in relief; on the other side of the rockis a condensedrepresentationof a pine tree with a syrinx leaning against it; and from the front corneron this side extends a long, curvingobject which, from its companionsand from comparisonwith other representations(see Baumeister, Denkmaler, II, p. 1169, fig. 1360) is to be regarded as a shepherd's crook. The goddess

wearsa chiton with buttoned sleeves and overfall (IId in Barker'sscheme,A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, pp. 410 ff.) and a himationwhich falls before the left shoulder;from the shoulderit passes behind the back and crosses the lap, reachingthe ankles in front. Locks of hair appearon both shouldersin front. The right upperarm extends down and a little forward; at the front cornerof the rock there is the beginningof a support,which servedfor the outstretchedforearm. The left arm was raised;on the top of the left shoulderare traces of a support. The left foot is pressedback against the rock, the right slightly advanced. Cybele is regularlyrepresentedwith a lion or lions, but the animal usually either rests in her lap or sits at the side of her chair. For figuresresemblingours in this respect see Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 163, 4 (Mendel, Musees Imp'riaux Ottomans, III, p. 1, No. 799)

and II, 270, 7; the formerresemblesour figure quite closely and is almost the same size. The customaryattributes held in the hands of Cybele are the patera and tympanum, and they are doubtless to be restoredhere: the patera in the right hand, the tympanum supportedby the left hand against the left shoulder;the supporton the shoulderindicatesthat

it did not actually rest on the shoulder, as it often does. The Hecate on the rock is interesting as indicating association or identification of this goddess with Cybele. Otherwise this connection is but little attested; there is, however, an inscription (C. I. L. VI, 1, 511), and see Tzetzes, Commentaryon Lycophron, 77. The objects on the other side of the rock are symbols of the orgiastic Phrygian cult of Cybele and Attis; for somewhat similar groups see Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 388 f., III, 134; Repertoirede la Statuaire, I, 129; Not. Scav., 1922, pp. 81-87 (Marucchi). No exact replicas are known to me, and probably no original was closely copied. There are seated figures with costume similarly arranged in the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Jones, p. 16, No. 5, pl. VI) and the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (No. 141). Carpenter, Guide, p. 74, No. 12. 56. Cybele (1124). Lacks head, neck, part of left arm, and part of the plinth on which the feet rest. Height, 0.215 m. The back is flat and roughly dressed. The goddess is seated and holds a lion in her lap. She wears an Ionic chiton and a himation which appears on the front of the left shoulder, passes behind the back and under the right arm, crosses the lap and falls at the side of the left knee. The right hand holds the patera on the right knee; the left apparently rested on the arm of the thronosin which she sits. At the top of the thronosis a lead clamp, repairing an ancient break. Casual but not bad work. Compare Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 162, 5; V, 116, 2-3. 57. Cybele (1109). From the lap down. Height, 0.15 m.; width, 0.12 m.; depth, 0.085 m. The costume, so far as can be seen, is arranged as in No. 55. A lion is held in the lap; other attributes are lost. 58. Cybele. The part above the lap is lost, and the back part of the seat. Height, 0.22 m.; width, 0.185 m. The goddess sits on a rock or chair. A himation reaches her ankles; below it is the end of a chiton. In her lap is a lion. On its haunch are slight remains of her left hand. Coarse work. 59. Cybele. The right part of the figure is preserved from shoulder to lap; also the stone on which she sits; the right forearm is lost. Height, 0.27 m. The costume consists of a Doric chiton, girded below the breasts; it is not clear from the fragment whether there is an Ionic chiton beneath. In relief on the stone, at the figure's right, is a lion sitting erect. Compare Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 163, 7. A right hand holding a patera (Inv. 845) may belong to this figure; at any rate it does not belong to any of the others.

:i~.

t.

,?

:

'Li'~~~~~~~~ ~~

:?

E

_

_

t

_

_

_

?..jp1

.

i l ~~~~~~~~~~~~~N. _55

_.

,.

No. 57

:.

No. 58

?

Height, 0.25 m. One head is preserved to the full width of the rear part, though the face is almost entirely lost; of another the extreme right side remains; of the third there remains a little of the neck. The bottom of the fragment is smoothly dressed; in it is a vertical dowel-hole. 61. Hecataeum (1025). Found June 28, 1911; south of the east end of the museum, ca. 1.50 m. deep. Three figures with their backs against a pillar. Part of one head is preserved, with a low calathus; at the bottom the figures are preserved to the waists. Height, 0.185 m. The

:

:0

-"

No ....

No. 60

.

No

No. 61

.6

No. 62

figures wear Ionic chitons and are somewhat archaistic in style, as is frequently the case in

such Hecates. The hands were not placed on the breasts; otherwise the fragment corresponds closely to the Hecate in Leyden (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 322, 6). 62. Female figure (325). Found May 15, 1901, near Glauce. Lower part, from slightly above knees. Height of plinth, 0.07 m.: width, 0.27 m.; depth, 0.18 m.; height of figure, 0.22 m. The only visible garment, of thin material, just reaches the plinth. On the feet are sandals with thick soles. The weight rests on the left leg, the right is set forward and to the side. On the plinth at the figure's right is what ap-

pears to be a helmet; on its top is an oblong scar where something, probably the crest of the helmet, has been broken away. Presumably Athena. 63. Satyr (918). Found May 28, 1908, in trench near south stylobate in peribolus of Apollo. Only the torso is preserved. Height, 0.44 m. The nebris descends across the body from the right shoulder. The left hand rests on the hip. This is a poor copy, reduced in size,

(renowned) satyr by Praxiteles (Pliny, Nat. Hist., xxxiv, 69). The reasons for the identification are obvious: the type very clearly has the general qualities of Praxitelean style, and, as indicated by the number of copies and derived types, it was the most famous satyr in as though it were set up antique sculpture. It is true that Pliny describes the repLtqobros with figures of Dionysus and Methe, while this type appears to be an independent figure;

*

. .

?...... ............................................. .....: ..

No. 63

but the Praxitelean figures can hardly have made a group in any strict sense, because in that case the satyr would not have acquired an individual surname. It has been argued also by Wolters (Furtwangler-Wolters, Beschreibung der Glyptothek zu Miinchen, No. 228) that the type of head is not Praxitelean; but the sculptor would naturally give a satyr a head different from that of Hermes or Aphrodite. Finally Miss Richter sees in the type a "pic-

turesqueness" alien to Praxitelean style; but it is not safe to draw from three sculptures of any artist conclusions as to the exact degree of picturesqueness, or any other such quality, that may appear in his work. On the type see Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors, pp. 199 f.; 2nd. ed., p. 264; Bulle, Der schone Mensch,2 cols. 129 f. 64. Satyr (765). Found "north of St. John's, 7 m. east of the bridge." Shoulders to knees; lacks nearly all of both arms and the genitals. Height, 0.70 m. The skin is knotted on the left shoulder and covers the front of the body, leaving bare the right breast and the legs. The weight rests on the right leg; the left is set forward and, as other copies show, crossed it. On the front are the beginnings of two rectangular attachments:

one below the left breast, the other on the right hip. The two knees and a bit of the skin are separate fragments and join by contact. In most copies, at least, the skin is a swineskin. Another copy fromthe same original, in the British Museum (No. 1626; Reinach, Repertoire, II, 137, 4), holds a bunch of grapes in the two hands, in front of the left breast.

The same detail occurs in a drawing in the Album of Pierre Jacques, which presumably reproduces some ancient statue (Reinach, op. cit.. III, 32, 4). Our statue is not to be restored according to these models, because there would then be no explanation for the attachment on the hip. A figure in the Museo Arqueologico in Seville (Reinach, op. cit., V, 53, 4) appears to be influenced by the original, though not a true copy, and has traces of an attachment on the right thigh approximately as in our figure, which apparently served as support for the right hand; the left hand holds what seems to be a wineskin, which certainly was

not present in our figure. A rough imitation in Brussa (Reinach, op. cit., IV, 73, 9; Mendel in B. C. H. XXXIII, 1909, pp. 262 f.) is described as having a flute, but none is perceptible in the illustration; presumably there are some traces of it. In a copy in Berlin (No. 261; Reinach, op. cit., II, 136, 2) a flute is restored, and Conze says that the restoration is right; but he mentions no traces that support this opinion. The flute as held in that figure would not account for the attachment on the hip of our statue much better than the grapes, but a flute might well be held more nearly vertically. A copy found at Cyrene (Reinach, op. cit., V, 51, 9) has traces of two attachments so placed that they would serve better for grapes than for a flute, though possibly they could be used with a flute. The copy at Algiers

(Reinach, op. cit., II, 137, 3) has remains of one large attachment, on the left breast; it can scarcely be doubted that a bunch of grapes was held. The copies in the Vatican (Reinach, op. cit., I, 403, 5), Ny Carlsberg (No. 479; Arndt, Glyptotheque,pi. 110), and the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Jones, Sculptures in the Palazzo dei Conservatori,p. 236, No. 33, pi. 90) are described as having no traces. I do not know what there is in the copies in the Villa Albani (Reinach, op. cit., I, 406, 4), Cherchell (Ibid., III, 37, 3), the Kopf collection (Ibid., IV, 75, 8), and Cos (excavation house), or in that sold in New York in 1925, from the Castellani Collection (Anderson Galleries Catalogue 2020, No. 254; no attachments visible in the illustration), or in the rough imitation in Philippeville (Gsell, Muse'e de Philippeville, p. 44, No. 4, pl. V). The figure at Cyrene is the only good copy that has its head. It is boyish, to correspond with the body, has horns, and is somewhat animal in character. The poor statue in Philippeville has a grotesque head which might be influenced by the same original. The figure in Brussa has its head; from the inadequate illustration it appears to resemble the head of the 7repL36OTOS.. The Cyrene head probably follows the original closely, and suggests the third century as the period of the original. The two copies with the grapes do not definitely prove that the original had grapes, but there seems to be very little evidence that points to any other conclusion. In the copies in

Berlin and Algiers there is a syrinx on the support, and it seems rather improbable that a

on the support in two other copies (Cyrene and Conservatori) and the swineskin, as well as the syrinx, indicate that the satyr is conceived as closely related to bucolic humanity; eating grapes is more agreeable to this conception than playing the flute, which was not a shepherd's instrument. The copy at Corinth was modified in some way, to judge from the attachments.

It may have had a flitte, or it may have held the grapes with the left hand and something else with the right. A. J. A. XIII, 1909, pp. 325 f. (E. M. Gardiner); Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 76, 2. For the

type see Arndt, GlyptothequeNy Carlsberg,p. 158.

No. 65

No. 64

65. Silenus. From the theatre; first pieces found 1902. Fragments of a figure slightly above natural size, clad in a shaggy garment or garments, the Xopratos XLTrwVof Pollux, which was the proper costume for the actor playing Silenus

in the satyr-plays. It is probable that some of the monuments were intended to represent Silenus himself rather than the actor, but there is usually, if not always, some connection with the theatre. The hair on the legs is in horizontal rows of short curls. 430a and 430b, which join, are from the left leg and show the garment above exactly as in Reinach, Ripertoire, IV, 32,3; 430 is the right leg; 483 is the right hand and wrist, with veins coarsely indicated; 484, 485, 486, 486a, 487, 675, 937, and 982 are pieces from the arms or legs. All these pieces unquestionably belong to the figure. 936 and 674 are two fragments cemented together: crown of head to below eyes.' On the hair, which is thin, are remains of red color. These two fragments are shown in the cut.

god. The heads of the Sileni in the theatre at Athens are not altogether dissimilar, and it is possible that this head belongs to our Silenus. Silenus appears in this attire on fifth-century vases, and the statues found in the theatre

at Athens belong to the fifth century or the fourth. Others, including this one, are much later. Compare Reinach, Repertoire, II, 53, 5 (B. C. H. VIII, 1884, pp. 161-167); II, 53, 6 (Berlin, No. 278; Bieber, Denkmdler zum Theaterwesen, p. 100); II, 64, 8 (Einzelaufnah-

men, 643; Bieber, op. cit., pp. 98 f.); IV, 32, 1-3 (B. C. H. XXXI, 1907, pp. 517-522); I, 533, 1 (Jb. Arch. I. XXIV, 1909, pp. 216 f., Versakis); Bieber, op. cit., pp. 88-101; Lawrence, Later Greek Sculpture, p. 125.

No. 69

No. 68

66. Part of nude figure (264a).

Height, 0.28 m.; width, 0.16 m.; thickness, 0.13 m. Veins are represented in a curiously coarse and regular way, as in the Silenus, No. 65. This piece cannot belong to that figure, as the marble is different; but it may belong to a figure of similar kind. 67. Pan or satyr (639a, 950, 951). These are fragments of thick, coarse hair, in the first of which a horn is visible. There are various smaller pieces of the same sort, all found in the theatre. The material is the same

as in the Silenus, No. 65, but Silenus ought not to have horns. 68. Head of satyr (900). Height, 0.13 m. Much battered.

Beardless.

The long, grotesque ear permits the identi-

fication as a satyr. 69. Head of satyr (724). Only the left half is preserved. Height, 0.117 m. Ears as in the preceding. Beardless.

Found southwest of St. John's. Neck to waist. Height, 0.055 m. Pan is wrapped in a cloak, his beard is seen at the top,

the phallus at the bottom. In generalsimilar:Reinach, Repertoire,II, 67, 3. The work is not fine. Cf. No. 43. 71. Leg of Pan? (295). Broken at top and bottom; height, 0.28 m. The surfaceis much battered, but the leg seems to be shaggy. Against it is a small cloven hoof, perhapsbelongingto a goat carried by Pan.

No. 72

72. Palaemon (760). Found 1905, south of St. John's. Length of group, 0.45 m.; height with plinth, 0.25 m.; depth, 0.22 m. Palaemon, an infant, reclines on and between two dolphins, supporting his head, which is mostly lost, on

his left hand. The groupis fully workedat the back. The descriptionsof Pausaniasand the coin-types render it certain that this is Palaemon or Melicertes (cf. Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner, pp. 10 ff.), though the presence of two dolphins, instead of one, is singular. Roman work.

For the cult of Palaemon and Leucothea see Farnell, in J. H. S. XXXVI, 1916, pp. 36-

44. 73. Eros or Palaemon (350). Head and left shoulder;the face is lacking except for a small part at the right side. Height, 0.21 m.; of head and neck, 0.12 m. The hair is arranged as in the Eros of Lysippus, with ringlets and a braid going back from the centre of the forehead. It is not a copy of the Lysippian figure, since the head looks straight forward. The same arrangement of the hair

Eros; but the popularity at Corinth of the equally infantile Palaemon makes certainty im-

possible. 74. Head of Eros? (1039 labelled 1038). Face entirely lacking. Height, 0.19 m.; width, 0.15 m. Thereis a band aroundthe hair, which falls in short curNI;a plait is carried straight back from the middle of the forehead, as

in the precedingentry.

.

...

No. 73

....

.? :..

No. 75

No. 74

75. Head of Eros? (787). Height, 0.16 m. Battered. Four parallel braids are drawn back across the head from the middle of the forehead, and there seems to be a fillet around the edge of the hair. Fair work.

No. 76

No. 77

76. Head of Eros? (863). Height, 0.15 m. The surfaceis largely lost; apparentlygood work. 77.i Head of Eros? (99). Left side only; battered.

Height, 0.122 m.

78. Eros? (723). Left side from above navel to thigh. Height, 0.185 m. Parts of a garment appear, hanging vertically on both front and back. The plump form and the absence of pubes suggest

that the subject may be Eros. 79. Heracles (157). Shoulders almost to navel; right arm lacking entirely and left mostly.

Height, 0.13 m;

width, 0.12 m. The figure apparently leans on an object under the left arm. This is probably an imitation of the type of the Farnese Heracles, created by Lysippus. On the type see my Lysippos, pp. 197-205. A bronze statuette freely adapted from the type: 'Apx. AEXr.IX, 1924-25, rapaprmya, p. 35. An example declared modern: Historia, I, 1927, p. 38 (Albizzati). 80. Marsyas (309). Found April 2, 1901, back of Sacred Spring. Part of a tree-trunk, with two legs from just above the knees to the ankles. Height, 1.17 m.; circumference at ankles, 1.15 m.; length of legs, 0.58 m. There are two small holes on each knee, and one is visible on the right ankle; there may have been others on the ankles, since they are much broken. These holes doubtless contained fastenings for fetters. So far as I know, no other copy has ancient traces of such fetters, so they probably were not

present in the original. It appears from coins, sarcophagus-reliefs, and other reliefs that the original was grouped with figures of Apollo and a Scythian slave sharpening his knife. Marsyas was about to be flayed, as punishment for daring to compete with Apollo in music. There is one good copy of the Scythian, in the Uffizi, and Klein's identification of a torso found at Pergamon (Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 55, 3) may be considered certain after Schober's article. Marsyas

was in the middle, the Scythian at the spectator's left, looking up at the victim, and Apollo sitting at the right with his hand nonchalantly resting on his head. Amelung noted that some of the copies are in reddish marble and that these differ con-

sistently from the copies in white stone. He inferred that there were two distinct originals: the "white" Marsyas stood by itself, and a later sculptor modified it to make the "red" type, to which he added the other figures. Lippold, with Bulle, Wolters, Dickins, and Schober, at first rejected the theory of two originals; but later he proposed a modification, according to which the "white" Marsyas belonged to the group and the "red" type was later and stood alone. This is accepted by Lawrence, who dates the group about 250 B.c. and the "red" type about 200 B.C., and appears to be correct. The group was in bronze, the later figure, like its copies, in reddish marble. Amelung, Fiihrer durch Florenz, No. 87, with theory of two originals, and illustrations of heads of the two types, of the Apollo, and of the disc with reliefs in Dresden; Helbig,

Fiihrer,3 I, p. 539, No. 951; Schober, in Strena Buliciana, pp. 31-34, with drawing of the

Recueil General, I, p. 117, No. 138) and additions to the list of copies given by Overbeck, Kunstmythologie, V, pp. 476-478; Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, II, p. 246, No. 534; Dickins, Hellenistic Sculpture, pp. 6 f.; Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, p. 165, No. 18, with appreciation of "red" type and Amelung's reply to Lippold; Caskey, Catalogue of Greek and Roman Sculptures in Boston, pp. 165 f., Nos. 87-88; Lippold, Kopien, pp. 109 f.; Lawrence, Later Greek Sculpture, pp. 18, 22, 109; Gauckler, Musee Alaoui, Supplement, pl. XXXIV, 2, p. 56, No. 1013 (Marsyas in relief on support of a statue of Apollo).

No 80

No. 81

No. 82

81. Winged figure or Ganymede (989). Found June 13, 1910; in the big drain in the peribolus of Apollo. A left leg, preserved from knee to ankle; at its side is a piece worked on the inside to represent a wing and smoothly rounded on the outside. Height, 0.55 m. The modelling of the leg suggests that no weight was resting on it. It may be that the figure was a Ganymede, somewhat as in Reinach, Repertoire, II, 473, 3. In this case, however, the eagle would have been of very great size, and could hardly have been supported in any pleasing way. It is more likely that the appearance of the leg is due merely to poor workmanship, and that the wing belonged to a standing figure. If it was an Eros, the original would not be later than Praxiteles, since the figure evidently was not that of a boy.

82. Male figure (852). Found April 16, 1908; from a wall in the region of the est Shops. Lacks the head, which was dowelled on, the hands, and the legs below the knees. Height, 0.36 m.; width at shoulders, 0.17 m.; depth, 0.09 m. The right leg is advanced.

forearms extend forward. There is a garment that reaches the knees. The navel is clearly visible through the garment. Probably a boy; cf. the ~raltsa' iaToas (Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori,p. 115, No. 68, with references; Jb. Arch. I. XLI, 1926, pp. 255 f.). The work is extraordinarily poor. 83. Male head (668, a and b). Found June 4, 1903, in the theatre. Two fragments which join: the right side of a head, from the top to the ear and the outer corner of the eye. Height, 0.20 m.; width, 0.08 m.; thickness, 0.18 m. Red color on the hair is preserved. The ear and hair resemble those features of the Apoxyomenus of Lysippus. The work is good; perhaps Greek.

:,

i

No. 83

84. Bearded head (190). Height, 0.15 m. Nose lacking, head considerably battered. Around the hair is a fillet. 85. Bearded head (186). Height, 0.14 m. Perhaps from a relief. Hair unkempt; perhaps a satyr.

No. 84

No. 85

No. 86

No. 87

86. Bearded head (693). Height, 0.16 m. Much battered. Around the head is a fillet. 87. Bearded head (788). Height, 0.16 m. Nose lost, head battered otherwise. At the back is a perfectly flat surface, extending below the head. Very coarse late work. 88. Beardless head (721). Found apparently in 1904. Top of head, forehead,, and right eye. Height, 0.095 m.; width, 0.10 m.; depth, 0.12 m. Considerably weathered. The eye is prominent, the lids are little more than ridges, and the

sacs are not indicated. The hair consists of very flat, curving locks. Poor work, but apparently Greek, of the second quarter of the fifth century. 89. Beardless male head (741). Height, 0.12 m. Face much battered; back of head lost. The hair falls about the face in long locks. 90. Beardless male head. Height, 0.185 m. The nose and mouth are lost, and the face is much battered otherwise. Around the head is a fillet.

No. 88

No. 89

No. 92

No. 91

92. Beardless male head (711). Height, 0.15 m. Much battered.

A Phrygian cap is worn.

There is thick hair at the

sides of the face. The back is broken away, so that it is impossible to see whether the figure was used as a support. Poor, coarse work. 93. Thigh and hand (414). 414 was found April 8, 1902, in south stoa, 2 m. above stylobate. A nude right thigh (2 fragments not numbered) and a left hand (414), which are similar

in material, scale, and excellence of workmanship; they perhaps belonged to the same figure. Life size. Probably Greek work of the fourth century B.C. 94. Male figure (818). Found June 27, 1907; 0.70 m. above virgin soil, in front of the west end of the Roman shops, in a wall.

genitals; the left breast (not shown in the illustration) is a separate fragment, but joins by contact. The weight rested on the right leg. The only garment is a chlamys around the shoulders. This is probably a copy from an original of the fifth century B. c., which represented a boy. Excellent Roman work. A left thigh (Inv. No. 705) may belong to the same figure. As a similar figure may be cited No. 96 in the museum at Geneva.

?

. ... .. ....:.

No. 93

No. 94

95. Right leg (898).

Found May 5, 1908. Thigh to below knee, which is not bent; height, 0.58 m. At the figure's right is a support, over which drapery hangs; a garment is visible also in the rear, evidently hanging from the

back. The leg is slender, and in its modelling suggests Lysippian style. It is evident from the support that the leg was not vertical, but leaned forward from the foot.

It appears also

that the left leg was separated from the right by a considerable distance. A reversed replica of the "Jason" would have approximately the position required. The workmanship of the leg is excellent; the drapery is very sketchy. 96. Male torso (841). Found April 11, 1908; north of St. John's and near it, 1 m. below track level. From neck to waist, with beginnings of arms; the lower part of the front is broken away.

Height, 0.49 m.; width at shoulders, 0.50 m. The right arm hangs straight down; the left swings back a little from the shoulder; most of it is a separate fragment. The end of this arm, above the elbow, is dressed smooth; there is no trace of any means of attachment

for the rest of the arm. Apparently the arm suffered some damage and was cut off at this place in order that a substitute arm might be attached, but this intention was not carried out. The weight rested on the right leg. On the front of the left shoulder is the beginning

of a rectangular piece, which must have helped support something held in the left hand; the arm then was bent forward at the elbow. The position of the figure, as regards its existing parts, is similar to that of the Doryphorus; the treatment of the back suggests the "Apollo

on the Omphalos," which also is not very different in position. In general the copyists gave little attention to the backs of their statues, but here, to all appearances, the back was accurately copied. The original should belong to the neighborhood of 450 B.C. 97. Leg of Gaul (709). Thigh and knee; the knee is slightly bent; height, 0.47 m.; diameter, 0.215 m. The leg, which probably is the left, wears close-fitting trousers. It is doubtless from a copy of an early Pergamene figure of a Gaul, like the fragment in the Metropolitan Museum (Richter,

Handbook of the Classical Collection, 1927, p. 276, No. 54, fig. 194). 98. Male figure. Shoulders to navel; right arm mostly lost and left entirely; surface battered away on the

whole front. Height, 0.37 m. A chlamys is clasped on the right shoulder and covers the back. 99. Right foot. Three toes only.

Width, 0.17 m.; length, 0.122 m.; height, 0.09 m. A sandal is worn.

The fragment would belong to a figure about 4.70 m. tall. The only other fragment on an equally large scale is the nose found in the theatre (No. 229), which probably did not belong to a complete figure. At any rate it almost certainly did not belong to the same figure as this foot, because the nose is made of Pentelic marble, the foot of island marble. It is not recorded where the foot was found. 100. Seated male figure (684). Found May 16, 1904, 1.50 m. deep. Lacks the head, which was inserted, the right arm and shoulder, nearly all the left arm, and the body below the waist. Length, 0.53 m.; height, 0.295 m. A chlamys is worn. The sag in the chlamys indicates that the upper part of the body was approximately erect. The figure was in a seated or half-reclining position, with the upper part of the body turned back to his right. Compare a figure found at Cyrene (Reinach, Repertoire, V, 76, 7). Hermes is often represented in a somewhat similar position, and the chlamys is of course appropriate to him. The twist of the body is unusually marked in our figure, however, and probably had some justification in the subject. Copy after an original of the fourth century or later. Apparently the head and neck were chiseled out in antiquity.

Found June 12, 1907; in the foundation of the circuit wall of St. John's, north. Right side of the back, apparently from shoulders to waist. Height, 0.50 m.; width, 0.40 m.; thickness, 0.19 m. At the figure's right is a piece smooth on top and adorned with a moulding; on the back is a mark 0.06 m. high, like an inverted S. This piece can hardly be a mere support, which would not reach so high.

No. 97

No. 100

101 N.11No.

No 102

102. Boy with animal (858). Shoulders to waist; lacks right arm, left hand, and part of animal. Height, 0.23 m. The left arm is bent, and with the hand the boy holds against the body an animal having the proportionate size of a small dog; a mass of drapery also falls from the bent arm. The

forms of the body are soft and feminine, but the treatment of the breast shows that the figure is male. The animal may be a dog or possibly a hare. Boys with pets are numerous in Hellenistic and later sculpture.

103. Male figure. Front part of the lbft side, including navel and genitals, and left hand and wrist. Height, 0.157 m. The left hand, hanging against the side, holds a ball. Very coarse work. 104. Male figure (737). Chest to thighs. Height, 0.14 m. On the back of the left thigh are remains of a support.

The back is scarcely shaped. Poor work. 105. Male figure. Lacks head and neck, left arm, almost all right arm, right leg below knee, left leg below thigh. Height, 0.35 m. The weight rested on the right leg. The right arm crossed the breast;

the left did not hang at the side. There is no pubes. 106. Male figure (736). Height, 0.25 m. Shoulders to left thigh; right thigh lost. Back very rough. The left leg was extended to the side in vigorous action.

The figure is very muscular; the style suggests

the Pergamene altar. 107. Male figure from group (830). Lacks head, right arm, and right half of front of body. Height, 0.24 m.; width, 0.23 m.; depth, 0.14 m. The left arm apparently extended to the side; the right was raised; the body

was bent to the left. On the back are the remains of fingers belonging to a person at the figure's left. This may be from an erotic group, such as the satyr-hermaphrodite

symplegma

(Reinach, Repertoire, I, 373, 4-5; V, 62, 3; Bieber in Jb. Arch. I. XXXVIII-XXXIX, 1923-24, pp. 267 f.). 108. Two figures (991). Section across the buttocks of a figure smaller than life-size; beside it, the leg of a larger figure. Height, 0.20 m.; width, 0.40 m. 109. Figure with wreath (100). Height, 0.28 m.; width, 0.225 m.; depth, 0.17 m. A left hand holding a wreath appears before a torch, over which drapery falls. The left side of the nude body is visible against the torch. The figure leaned on the torch, which was upside down. The body is poorly modelled. Such figures, representing Sleep or Death, appear frequently on sarcophagi and occasionally in the round. Cf. Amelung, Skulpt. d. Vat. Mus. I, pls. XCI, XCVI, CIV, CIX; Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, pls. X, XI, CI; Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, II, p. 82,

No. 321. 110. Armored figure (380). Left side, from shoulder almost to navel. Height, 0.30 m.; width, 0.24 m. The arm was outstretched above the shield, which is pressed close to the body and held by a strap which

is indicated only by the strap on the shoulder. The shield is oval. 111. Armored figure (152). Front part, neck almost to navel; both arms entirely lacking. Height, 0.195 m.; width, 0.25 m.; depth, 0.095 m. A cuirass is worn.

........... ...... ..... ...... .... ............ . ::)Fi ...:i~:...::' _, No. 105 :110 i,:!~1%No.

No. 109

___:!!: .'"'!~ No. ::::

,':~'

No. 112

112.Lowepat offemlefgur ..... Foundi"~~: :prl;2,: From hips

1899"na'ern down. Height of plinth,

ar.....

::::::::: The ~' wegtrsso?helf

:ec:gize

no repicas

Poo

No. 110

:work.:

..: .

....

?. 0.06 m.; of statue,

ot Frma,rgnlo

h

igtis

..

1.16 m.

e h

The

chiton

and himatio

akadttesd.Ihv futetr

rltr

No. 111

112. Lower part of female figure (63). Found April 25, 1899, "near Peirene (?)." From hips down. Height of plinth, 0.06 m.; of statue, 1.16 m. The chiton and himation are worn. The weight rests on the left foot; the right is set back and to the side. I have recognized no replicas. Poor work. From an original of the fourth century or later.

Found in the theatre. From slightly above the knees; both feet, where they project from the garment, are

bruised. Height of plinth, 0.10 m.; of figure, 0.79 m. A himation is the only visible garment. The weight rests on the left leg; the right foot is set back and to the side. The back is more fully worked than is usual in Roman statues. Probably copied from a Hellenistic original. Good work. 114. Female figure (583). Found in the theatre. Only the left shoulder is preserved; much battered. Height, 0.39 m.; width, 0.34 m.; depth, 0.23 m. The back is only roughly picked. An Ionic chiton is worn. On the front of

No. 115

the shoulder are two curiously stiff curls. Other fragments of the same figure have been found in the recent excavations and will doubtless be published, with this, later. 115. Draped figure (773).

Found May 17, 1907; in the circuit boundary wall of St. John's, northeast corner. Height, 0.63 m.; width, 0.63 m.; complete in section. At the top of the fragment the left hand is visible, held forward horizontally at the side; beside it is something resembling a lock of hair; and apparently some of the lower part of the garment is gathered up and supported by the wrist. The folds on the right side are probably vertical when the piece is in its true position. There is no modelling of the body whatever. I do not understand the drapery. The stiffness of the folds is an indication of archaistic style; or possibly the figure is very late.

Front of left shoulder and breast. Height, 0.42 m.; width, 0.285 m.; depth, 0.153 m.

The arm was inserted. Above the breast appearsa lock of curly hair. The body is covered with a thin garment, and over the shoulder is slung a heavy fold of drapery, in a manner

more usual in male than in female figures. 117. Female figure (803). Left shoulder. Height, 0.205 m.; width, 0.24 m.; depth, 0.21 m. A Doric chiton is clasped on the shoulder. The arm starts down and a little back. Part of the socket for the

insertionof the head remains. Good work.

No. 116

No. 120

118. Female figure (237). Left shoulder,with half of the socket for inserting the head. Height, 0.33 m.; width, 0.31 m. Only one garment is visible; it is heavy, with few folds, and evidently was drawn

close aroundthe head. Althoughit is not clearthat the originaledge of the garmentis preserved,it apparentlydid not form a veil over the head. Copy from an originalof the fourth century. 119. Thighs (4). Two legs joining, somewhat less than life-size. Width of fragment, 0.29 m. The left leg

is vertical, the right raised almost to the horizontal. Although much battered, the figure seems to be female. Perhaps an Amazon. 120. Female torso (789). Shoulders to navel. Height, 0.37 m.; width, 0.27 m. The breasts are flat and the body hard and muscular-looking. This appearance may be unintentional, since the work is poor.

The right arm and part of right side of figure, from shoulder to waist. The arm is bent at the elbow and holds against the body a child. There are traces of a garment. There are many such figures, usually given the name

KOUpoTpo'oL.

This term was applied to various

goddesses, but primarily to Aphrodite. The statuettes were doubtless offered to the divinities by parents.

Cf. also the reliefs dedicated, in the second and third centuries after Christ,

to Nutrices Augustae (Jh. Oest. Arch. I. XVIII, 1915, Beiblatt, pp. 189 ff., Wigand). I have not been able to consult Snijder's study: De Forma Matris cum Infante sedentis apud Antiquos.

122. Nemesis? (165). Thighs to calves; left side much battered. Height, 0.20 m. The figure wears a garment ending at the knees. The right foot apparently was set on some elevation. At the top of the

fragment the left hand is visible, holding a round object. This is probably Nemesis; cf. Reinach, Repertoire, V, 202, 3 (Jh. Oest. Arch. I. XV, 1912, p. 77).

B I P': :::iiH ::::::

No. 121

'

;i'

No. 123

123. Female figure (720). Neck to waist; both arms are lacking. Height, 0.15 m. The chiton and himation are worn; the latter is arranged in an unusual manner, approximately as in Reinach, Repertoire, II, 669, 11. 124. Female figure (759). Chest to hips. Height, 0.32 m. The left hand holds some object against the front of the body; before the forearm falls a fold of drapery, starting from the right elbow. Very poor work.

before it.

Left side of face only; nose and part of forehead lacking. Height, 0.14 m.; width, 0.075 m.; depth, 0.095 m. The surface is sufficiently preserved to show that the eyelids were

very slightly indicated; it is therefore probable that the head is Hellenistic. The modelling is poor. . .......... ......... .....:

jll. ;'

........

,::',~..;.

. '"

?

.... ......... ..

No. 127

No. 126

127. Small face (1046, labelled 1045). Height, 0.06 m.; width, 0.06 m.; depth, 0.04 m. The nose is partly lost and the surface somewhat scratched, but in general form the piece is complete. The back surface is rounded and dressed smooth. The eyes were inserted. There are no traces of hair; this and the rest of the figure must have been made of different material.

No. 128

128. Head. Lacks the middle part of the face; whole surface much battered. Height with neck, 0.27 m. Sex uncertain. The hair is secured in a bunch at the back of the neck; its arrangement above is not easily made out. 129. Female head (64). Height with part of neck, 0.10 m. Nose gone, otherwise battered. or crown. wreath or crown. wreath

Around the head is a

Height, 0.15 m. There is a veil over the head and a band across the forehead. Surface much battered. Possibly a portrait; but more probably a copy from a Hellenistic realistic statue. 131. Female head (310). Height, 0.16 m. The face is almost entirely destroyed by some tool. Soft stone.

No. 130

No. 133

No. 131

132. Female head (1114). Height, 0.095 m. Much battered.

133. Female head (1077). Lacks most of the face, from the left ear to the right eye; part of the neck remains.

Height, 0.25 m.; width, 0.155 m.; depth, 0.18 m. The eyes were inserted. The hair is encircled by a fillet or diadem, or both; the arrangement is hardly intelligible. The hair in front is parted and waved as in the works of Praxiteles, but it falls on the back of the neck in an older manner. Clearly archaistic. PORTRAITS FROM THE "JULIAN BASILICA" In the campaigns of 1914 and 1915 a small area was dug east of the road leading south

from the centre of the modern village. The sculptures bearing inventory numbers 10501148, which were all found in this region, include a large proportion of portrait statues and

fragments. The principal building discovered is the "Julian Basilica" (Art and Archaeology, XIV, 1922, pp. 207-209). Most of the portraits were actually found within the limits of this building, and it is probable that all of them stood in it originally.

:X WII :::r:?i:iii$.............,

..

I, I

"

I

l

I

1

g:

..1 M.,eis;?~i~:

iiiii~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~."Ei'

i-i??iil

a~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1-|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Mi'P;; iii?p?l .... I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' l~~~ ~ ~l-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

l

""

::'iii,'. . _ .?

. .

_?:

No. 134

134. Augustus(1116A-E). Lacks right forearmand left hand, which were dowelledon, right ankle and both feet. The face is a separatefragment (C) and the neck and back of the head another (B); these

join each other and the body by contact. D and E are pieces of the left ankle, which also join each other and the leg by contact: combined height, 0.225 m. Height without fragments D-E, 2.00 m.; breadth at shoulders, 0.55 m. A tunic and toga are worn; the latter is an example of the "imperial toga," according to Miss Wilson's classification (The Roman Toga, pp. 61-88; here figure 29 is one of many close parallels). It is drawn up over the head. The right hand probably held a patera, as is usual in statues of this type. The weight rests on the right leg; the left apparently was set slightly in advance. Virtually all the surface is excellently preserved; traces of red on the hair, still perceptible, were much clearer when the statue was found. The proportions are noticeably slender. The head has the usual scheme of locks over the forehead and is an unmistakable Augustus, but distinctly idealized and without much character. The style is broad and simple in comparison with many contemporary works, e. g. Hekler, Greekand Roman Portraits, 165. The covered head indicates that the emperor is represented as making a sacrifice according to the Roman rite (Daremberg-Saglio, article Sacrificium). Many such statues exist that do not represent emperors; it seems impossible to establish any rule as to the circumstances in which they would be set up; and there is no clue, in this statue, by which to date it. A. J. A. XXV, 1921, pp. 144-157 and pls. V-VII (Swift); Art and Archaeology, XIV, 1922, p. 208 (Fowler); Carpenter, Guide, p. 81, No. 26; Reinach, Repertoire, V, 315, 3.

135. Lucius Caesar (?) (1065 A-B). Lacks left wrist and hand, which was dowelled on, the thumb and forefinger of the right hand, and part of the nose. The right forearm (B) was broken off, but joins by contact and has been replaced; part of the left forearm with the adjacent drapery was broken off after the recovery of the statue, but also has been replaced. Otherwise the preservation is virtually perfect. Height of plinth, 0.10 m.; width, 0.60 m.; depth, 0.46 m.; height of figure, 1.98 m. In the front of the plinth is a cutting for a hook clamp. The upper part of the back is roughly worked and partly cut away, which indicates that the figure stood against a wall or in a niche. The head is turned slightly to his right. The right arm hangs at the side; the left is bent at the elbow, the forearm extending forward. The right hand held some cylindrical object, doubtless a staff of some sort, of which the front part pointed forward and down. The weight rests on the right leg; the left foot is set forward and turned out slightly. The

only garment rests on the left shoulder, whence it comes down behind the body and passes over the left forearm, falling between the latter and the body and coalescing with a treetrunk support slightly above the ankles. The body is imitated, though not closely, from a Greek type originated in the first half of the fourth century, which was often used for portraits. They vary considerably in the rendering of the bodily forms: the Mercure Richelieu in the Louvre is perhaps the latest in this respect, while our figure is almost Polyclitan. Whether the original was a Hermes is quite uncertain, as most of the copies have no attri-

butes to identify them. Lippold, without cogent reasons, has suggested that it may be the

siii :::?c:n?;::: ::.: ?;::::?:?i: liiiii ?:a?ii :?:

?i:r?

;W :? i:

'i

I:

"EIPcPe i: :I* hi?::ii

-?-p

': ? ?I:?i'll:B:HLlifIlti%

?;:

:'::

:i ??: ??:6S;n

?:i,.? ?ilBet4.ii

rr;???1:'

%3E$ibkir; ?''

'8 8 i::i: i?:?i

.ii;.

?. i"B'itiE IB18iiii l le8b::.'i:;?:(:? e!'lC!:riiiPii!? B:

r

r?x???-r

??

??? I .: .

-CI--

:i'

?

i :i::iii ...ii

.iz9ssr.::i

''?

:li: ?i:'?2?

*

1':

?;?i;

:?

t?:'

:;?:: iii ?I::

:i:':': fi :i

iii

.i -?

tlllll?

'slisrar:?:;

.:. LF

'52 ;?:?? ?;iai:

i:,?i:? .iac "i:;"""i?2:

' E:, ? ;r i,i"?rCsB.-TggsiB.';'R

?s. "?

(b

ii:-.?? ;??"*Pli,r:?,Prsh8;

?

:i'

?; asr:

.;?r ?i

lz,? . 'ii.

:i: .i .iCici"i

:?;*

Ib

No. 135

?CrriiFi!

ii: ''ia?

:;? ..:i ?:lifB

ti F

i

i

: '`::;?0i

Theseus of Silanion. The wrists and hands of our figure are rather small and delicately formed; the fingers are remarkably long. The subject of the portrait was a youth of some twenty years, bearing a strong likeness to Augustus; for the identification see the following entry. On the left elbow are two small lumps, about 0.013 m. in diameter at the base, with a

tiny hole like a pin-prick at the top. These are probably "puntelli" used in transferring the statue from a model, and were left through negligence. Reinach, Repertoire, V, 315, 5; Carpenter, Guide, p. 82, No. 28 (called Gaius); for other

references see the following entry. For other existing "puntelli" see Furtwangler, Statuenkopieen im Altertum, pp. 22 f.; and for the process of pointing, Daremberg-Saglio, IV, 2, pp. 1138 f., and Bliimel, GriechischeBildhauerarbeit. For the sculptural type, see myLysippos, pp. 182-184, with references. 136. Gaius Caesar (?) (1080, 1053, 1059). Head almost to navel. The nose is gone and the face somewhat battered; right upper arm

partly preserved, left to a little below shoulder. Height, 0.90 m. The statue corresponds in most respects to the preceding. The head, however, is turned to his left, and the carriage of the shoulders is different, which has suggested that the weight rested on the left leg. The direction of the median line, and the treatment of the muscle above the left hip, which can

be seen just above the break, prove that the weight rested on the right leg, as in the preceding statue. The workmanship of the two figures is similar, and they are probably by the same hand, though the hair of this figure is not only differently treated, but less completely finished. A right arm and hand (1053 and 1059), lacking forefinger and end of thumb, join by

contact. The hand resembles closely, though not completely, the hand of the companion statue. Apparently a flaw in the marble was observed where the break later occurred, and a hook clamp, for which the cutting remains, inserted to prevent fracture. Repair of an actual break in this way would be scarcely possible. A left thigh (1148) probably belongs to the figure. On the outside is a vertical trace (height, 0.235 m.), probably from drapery falling at the side of the figure. The drapery of the preceding figure does not touch at exactly the same point, nor is the thigh in that statue exactly the same size; but the two fig-

ures differ to this extent in various measurements. Nos. 135 and 136 are obviously companion statues, set up together. In workmanship they are similar to the Augustus, and without doubt stood on either side of it. It is evident from the directions in which the heads are turned that this statue stood at the right of Augustus, the other at his left. The "Lucius," at least, markedly resembles Augustus, and in both statues the arrangement of locks over the forehead suggests the scheme usual in portraits of Augustus. From all these considerations it appears that Gaius and Lucius Caesar, sons of Agrippa and Augustus's daughter Julia, are the only pair who can be repre-

assignment of the names. To Swift the better preserved figure appeared to be the elder. Perhaps this was due to

its better condition; it seems also to have been a more vigorous portrait originally. The

:,

_

.;* 4

...... j ..:?

_

_

i. ;.

Jti:

IIi:ij; :??i::?.o.13

othersttue hasa leane face, ess proinent eys, and traightr and havier bows; al h aead nfc,smthn fte"ovts fArpa ti these. add'mauiyt be to~~~~~~~~~ cosdrdas~~~~~ htsvrlpotat fGisCea ae enietfe,wt ra prbaiit adgeerlcosnt b tuniza.I th tau in betri: prsevaionrpe

No. 136

other statue has a leaner face, less prominent eyes, and straighter and heavier brows; all

these add maturity to the face and, in fact, something of the "torvitas" of Agrippa. It is to be considered also that several portraits of Gaius Caesar have been identified, with great probability and general consent, by Studniczka.

If the statue in better preservation repre-

sents the same man as those portraits, it is utterly devoid of iconographic value; while the other figure resembles them in many points. Banko, accepting Swift's identifications, has published a bronze bust in Vienna as Lucius (Jh. Oest. Arch. I. XXIII, 1926, pp. 47-52). So far as the Corinth statues are concerned, it could be one as well as the other, and is probably neither. He mentions as a probable Gaius a statue found at Formia (Boll. Arte, I, 1921-22, pp. 316 ff., figs. 9-13; cf. Art and Archaeology, XV, 1923, pp. 73-75), but it does not seem to be either of the brothers. As a probable portrait of Lucius Caesar, I would suggest a head in the Hermitage

(Waldhauer, Roman Portrait Sculptures in the Hermitage, in Russian, fig. 5; museum No. 196). In the features and the arrangement of the hair, this head resembles the better pre-

served of our two figures. Gaius Caesar lived from 20 B.C. to A.D. 4, Lucius from 17 B.C. to A.D. 2. The statues clearly represent them at ages reached not long before their deaths. Statues such as these, presenting them not in ordinary costume but in heroic style, would more naturally be set

up after their deaths; and presumably soon after, since it is improbable that statues of any kind were erected in their honor much later. Our statues then were doubtless set up, together with the Augustus, in A.D. 4 or soon thereafter. Reinach, Repertoire, V, 316, 1; Carpenter, Guide, p. 82, No. 29 (called Lucius).

For full

discussion of the two statues see A. J. A. XXV, 1921, pp. 337-363 and pls. X-XI (Swift) and my supplementary remarks (A. J. A. XXX, 1926, pp. 169-172). Swift once suggested that not only these two and the Augustus, but several other portrait statues found in the "Basilica" belonged to a single group; later he discarded this hypothesis (Ibid., p. 175).

137. Nero, son of Germanicus? (1088). Head from a veiled statue of type similar to the Augustus (No. 134). In front most of the neck is preserved; the break slopes upward toward the back, the veil being broken at the level of the ears. Height, 0.38 m. The surface is perfectly preserved. The veil is somewhat

more elaborately treated than in the Augustus. A light beard (barbula) appears on the cheeks and below the chin, doubtless as a sign of mourning. The workmanship is better and the portraiture more individualized than in the three preceding figures; indeed this head is a fine thing. It is still to be classed among the more idealized portraits of the time. This head was published as Tiberius by Swift. Poulsen has suggested Caligula as the subject (R. Arch. XVII, 1923, pp. 229 f.). It seems to be possible to disprove both of these identifications, and the former has been discarded by its author. Studniczka has correctly pointed out that the subject is the same as that of several other portraits, of which the best (and closest to this) is in the museum at Cagliari (Taramelli, in Not. Scav., 1919, pp. 118120, figs. 3-4 on pp. 116-117). Studniczka suggests for this type the name of Drusus, son of Germanicus; Poulsen, Agrippa Postumus (IkonographischeMiscellen, p. 60); Taramelli, Drusus, son of Tiberius.

There is, however, a different type which so closely resembles the

Agrippa Postumus, since his Claudian features are unmistakable. By a process of elimination, the possibilities may be reduced to the sons of Germanicus; but there is nothing, so

far as I know, to suggest Drusus rather than Nero. Drusus is supposed to have plotted the death of his brother; but neither this head nor any other portrait of the type appears to

represent a vicious man. Nero, therefore, is perhaps more probable.

No. 137

The beard is presumably worn as an indication of mourning. The death of Livia, in A.D.

29, is the only occasion on which either of the sons of Germanicus, at approximately

the age represented in this head, would wear mourning. In 29 Nero would be 23 or 24, Drusus about 20. This consideration, though not decisive, favors Nero. A piece of drapery (Inv. No. 1089; 0.165 m. X 0.065 m. X 0.05 m.) was found with the

"Nero" and may belong to it. A. J. A. XXV, 1921, pp. 248-265 and pls. VIJI-IX (Swift); Arch. Anz. 1921, col. 338 (Studniczka); A. J. A. XXX, 1926, pp. 158-169 (Johnson); Carpenter, Guide, p. 82, No. 27. 138. Colossal male figure (1098). From the left shoulder to slightly below the knees; lacks the right arm and shoulder and

left forearm; the drapery is chipped in many places. Height, 1.52 m. The only garment is a pallium, of which the two ends fall from the left shoulder and the left forearm respectively;

it covers the back and legs, but leaves bare all the upper part of the body except the left shoulder. This arrangement is common in portraits: compare Reinach, Repertoire, II, 573, 3; 570, 6; etc. There is nothing to show whether or not the head was inserted. The workmanship is good, decidedly better than that of the statues of Augustus and his grandsons.

presumably Zeus; for the same reason Swift suggested the name of Julius Caesar. A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, pp. 131-135 and pl. I (Swift); Reinach, Repertoire, V, 348, 5. 139. Fragments (1129, 1140, 1103). 1129 is a plinth. Back and side edges are ;.... original. Height, 0.13 m.; width, 0.80 m.; depth, 0.625 m. There are slight remains of both feet, "~ ;? the left slightly in advance; length, 0.37 m. ~.'. ~;'" ?:' . Behind and at left of the left foot is a tree-trunk support, as preserved 0.20 m. high. The plinth No 3 may belong to the preceding figure (compare Swift, in A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, p. 132), though it rather appears that the left leg of that figure is advanced more than it would be in the statue belonging to this plinth. 1140 A and 1140B join, making a right forearm and hand, which lacks all fingers and thumb. Combined length, 0.57 m.; upper diameter, 0.145 m. 1103 is a left hand, lacking all fingers and thumb. Length, 0.17m.; width, 0.135 m. In the wrist is the end of a dowel-hole. These two hands almost certainly belong together; and it may be that both belong to the colossal statue: scale and material correspond, and the left hand of the statue would project from the drapery and might well be attached by a dowel. 140. Male figure (1052). Lacks head, which was inserted, both arms, and much of shoulders; the legs are broken off somewhat above the knees. Height, 1.10 m. The figure wears a sagum or chlamys: it appears on both shoulders, hangs at the back, and passes around the right side to the front, where it is gathered between the legs; the left hand probably held the end on the front of the left thigh. Most of the front is thus left nude. The weight rested on the right leg. This costume is not very common; compare however the seated Tiberius in the Vatican (Amelung, Skulpt. d. Vat. Mus., I, p. 572, No. 400, pi. LX; Reinach, Repertoire, II, 582, 2), two statues in the Mus6e Rodin in Paris (Reinach, Re'pertoire,V, 347, 5-6), and one found at Fano, which belongs to the year 27 after Christ (Reinach, Repertoire, III, 177, 5). The back is

poor. There are no fragments that seem likely to belong to this figure. A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, pp. 135-138 (Swift); Reinach, Repertoire, V, 348, 4. 141. Armored statue (1125). Lacks the head, which was inserted, most of the right arm, which was dowelled on a little below the shoulder, the left arm from a point approximately corresponding, and the

legs from slightly above the knees. Height, 1.15 m. The figure wears a cuirass over the

..

..*..:~,

t

No. 140

:

.!.

~i~"',~

No. 141

tunic, and a paludamentum hangs behind from the left shoulder. The cuirass is adorned only with a gorgon-head and two small ornaments near the nipples. I have not observed these last on other cuirasses; in many instances there are holes a short distance below the

epaulettes, through which cords pass, but these are not directly below the epaulettes and are purely ornamental. One would suppose that they were intended to cover the nipples, but in this cuirass the nipples clearly appear beside them. A belt is wound twice round the body and tied in front; the ends of the belt are arranged somewhat like the letter M. The downward curve at the bottom of the cuirass in front is less marked than usual. There are short leather straps with fringes at the shoulders and at the bottom; but the long flaps below them have no fringes and are probably intended to represent metal. Small metal pieces above long leather flaps are common, but I know no parallel for this arrangement (cf. Mancini, p. 177); long metal pieces are rare anyhow (cf. however Hekler, figs. 152-153). The joining surface of the right arm is dressed roughly, not as similar surfaces are in the Augustus and

indications of pointing; but they are quite unlike the lumps on the left arm of the "Lucius." They are symmetrically placed on the two flaps of the sleeve, and they probably represent some fastening. A close parallel may be found in a statue in Cagliari (Reinach, Repertoire, IV, 362, 1; Not. Scav. 1908, p. 193, figs. 1-2; Mancini, p. 166, No. 7). Here the shape of the cuirass is similar, the leather flaps are very similarly treated, and the belt is arranged in about the same way. The Cagliari statue is dated certainly, though not precisely, by its Claudian portrait head. Our statue doubtless belongs to the same period. A. J. A. XXVI,

1922, pp. 138-141 (Swift); Reinach, Repertoire, V, 321, 5. For armored

statues in general see: Hekler, in Jh. Oest. Arch. I. XIX-XX,

1919, pp. 203 ff.; Mancini, in

B. Corn. Rom. L, 1923, pp. 154-204; cf. also Hagemann, Griechische Panzerung (1919).

142. Left hand grasping sword-hilt (1084). Length, 0.25 m.; width of hand, 0.10 m. The end of a dowel-hole is visible in the wrist;

in the middle of the back of the hand is a small hole; in the end of the hilt are two small holes, probably for the attachment of decorations.

There is a ring on the third finger. The

No. 142

hand is bent back at the wrist. Swift has suggested that this hand might belong to the torso No. 143; but if so the sword would project almost horizontally, which is hardly possible. Probably it was held as No. 141 would hold it, with the point on the ground. The hand is of virtually the same size as the hand of the "Lucius," except that the fingers are shorter. No. 141 is on the whole smaller than the "Lucius," but its hand could have been as large as this. One would have expected, however, that the hand of that statue would be of better workmanship than this. No. 142 closely resembles the large pair of hands, No. 151. A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, p. 145 (Swift). 143. Armored statue (1081). Lacks the head, which was inserted, the left wrist and hand, which was dowelled on, most of the right arm, which also was dowelled on, the right leg from just below the knee, and the left leg from above the knee. A part of the right shoulder was broken off, but has been cemented in place. Height, 1.40 m. Over the tunic the figure wears an elaborate cuirass, decorated with a gorgon-head, two winged Victories adorning a trophy, and

and a shield on a pole with arms. Below the pteryges of this cuirass is the end of a tunic. Two greaves stand against the pole, and two helmets lie on the ground at its foot. The helmet at the right has an unusually strong projection at the back. At the bottom of the (large) cuirass are two rows of fringed straps, the lower row much larger; there are similar

straps at the shoulders. The paludamentum passes down across the back from the left

No. 143

shoulder, crosses the front of the body and hangs across the left arm, which is bent at the

elbow and projects toward the front. The right arm apparently came down and a little to This figure is distinctly larger than No. 141 and inferior in workmanship; probably it is considerably later. Similar Victories, slender and bare-legged, occur on a statue of Hadrian in Constantinople (Reinach, Repertoire, II, 576, 9; Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, II,

No. 585); and on the whole it is probable that this statue belongs to the period of Hadrian. A. J. A., XXVI, 1922, pp. 141-147 (Swift); Reinach, Repertoire, V, 320, 7. For Hadrianic armored statues see Hekler, in Jh. est Arch I. XIX-XX, 1919, pp. 229-237; ManR cini, B. Cor. Rom. L, 1923, pp. 189 f.

144. Right arm and hand (1085 and 1100). From just below shoulder; large dowel-hole in upper end. Lacks all fingers and thumb, which were dowelled on; the discoloration from the iron remains. (1100 is part of a finger; dowel in one end, dowel-hole in the other; from dowels and resultant discoloration, it probably belongs to 1085). Exterior length, 0.773 m. The hand was open. This may belong to

the statue, No. 143. Of the joining surfaces, so much is broken away that hardly any points that would meet remain; but the dowel-holes, workmanship, and size correspond. 145. Arm from toga-statue (1060). Three pieces, now joined; right forearm and hand, lacking forefinger, thumb, and end of little finger. The fingers are loosely closed. The scale is distinctly larger than in any other fragment from the "Julian Basilica." The work is poor; the upper end, in which is a dowel-

hole, is very roughly dressed. 146. Plinths of toga-statues (1113 and 1143). 1113 is a fragment of plinth with the front part of a right foot. The plinth has its original edge on the front and on the figure's right: height, 0.075 m.; width, 0.25 .; depth, 0.145 m.

Width of foot 0.11 m.; it wears a calceus senatorius or patricius. In the broken edge at the figure's left is a clamp cutting. 1143 is a fragment of plinth with original edge on the front and on the figure's left: height, 0.065 m.; width, 0.265 m.; depth, 0.15 m. The tip of a left foot is preserved, and beside it the end of the toga. The shoe is of the same kind as in 1113. The two pieces are identical in workmanship, but scarcely belong to the same figure, since the distance between the feet would have to be unusually great. The plinths are not so high as that of the "Lucius" (No. 135) and are much more roughly finished. 147. Fragments of toga-statues (1070, 1134, 1142). 1070 includes left shoulder and upper arm, small life-size: height, 0.30 m.; width, 0.23 m.; depth, 0.18 m. 1134 is a right shoulder, same scale and workmanship: height, 0.25 m.; width, 0.25 m.; depth, 0.13 m. 1142 is a left hand, lacking part of forefinger and thumb: length, 0.18 m.; width, 0.095 m. The fingers are closed about a small cylindrical object; on the third finger is a signet ring. The wrist is only roughly shaped; the hand evi-

dently protruded from a garment as in the Augustus. It is probable that 1070 and 1134 belong to the same figure; the likelihood that the hand also belongs to it is much less. 148. Arms from toga-statues (1096, 1094, 1132). 1096 is a right forearm and hand, lacking most of forefinger and thumb: length, 0.49 m.; diameter, 0.125 m. The piece was attached by a dowel just above the elbow. The fingers

are closed loosely, as though to hold a staff. From the position of the dowel and the slight bend of the elbow, it is probable that the hand belonged to a toga-statue. It is too large to belong to the Augustus and closely resembles the arm of the "Lucius" in workmanship.

0.125 m. In the upper end is a dowel-hole. The piece resembles 1096 in all respects. 1132 is a left hand, lacking most of forefinger and thumb: length, 0.20 m.; width, 0.11 m. In the wrist is a dowel-hole. The fingers are closed about a cylindrical object, of which the continu-

ation was attached by a dowel at one end and perhaps by cement at the other. The hand is coarsely formed: the wrist is much larger than in the "Lucius," the hand of about the same width, the fingers much shorter. A. J. A., XXX, 1926, p. 174 (Johnson). 149. Mass of drapery (1086, 1079). Two pieces that join. Height of 1086, 1.75 m.; width, 0.20 m.; depth, 0.20 m. 1079: height, 0.26 m.; width, 00.09 m .; depth , 0.07 m. The drapery hung at the left side of a figure,

more or less as in the "Lucius." It is too large to belong to the "Gaius." It was doubtless supported from below; there is no indication on its sides of contact with anything else. It could well belong to an armored statue.

150. Leg from armored statue (1081c). Left leg from just below knee; fore part of foot lacking. %.':.l:*;ya>'.;:**'T No.150~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t Height of plinth, 0.135 m.; width, 0.63 m.; depth, 0.47 m. The plinth was rounded; the left front part and the right back part, with the tree-trunk, have their original edges. Height of leg, 0.59 m. An elaborate shoe reaches above the ankle. At the back of the leg is a tree-trunk support. This has been supposed to belong to the larger armored figure (No. 143). The width of the support at the bottom is 0.178 m., and it tapers to 0.135 m. at the break; while the width of the support at the lowest measurable point in the statue is 0.174 m. It is therefore very improbable that the two pieces belong together. A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, p. 144 (Swift). 151. Hands from armored statue (1057, 1095, 1058, 1093). 1057 is a left hand grasping a sword-hilt; it lacks the first two fingers. Length of fragment, 0.32 m.; width of hand, 0.13 m. In the wrist is a dowel-hole; a little of the joining surface remains. 1095 is a right forearm and hand, lacking first finger except one joint and other fingers entirely.

Length, 0.37 m.; width, 0.13 m. Apparently the hand was open and

empty. These hands doubtless belong together; the statue was larger than either of the armored torsos that are preserved. 1058 completes the index finger of 1095; 1093 is its thumb. A. J. A. XXX, 1926, p. 174 (Johnson).

1090 is less than half the circumference of the arm; length, 0.075 m.; width, 0.145 m.

1159 includes about half the circumference; length, 0.145 m.; width, 0.12 m. Both fragments have joining surfaces dressed in the same way; in 1090 is a dowel hole; the two were probably joined by the dowel. 153. Male head (1118). Right side and back lost; surface almost entirely destroyed. Height, 0.225 m.; width, 0.15 m.; depth, 0.12 m. Small life-size.

No. 153

No. 154

154. Bearded head (1073). Left side, from the outer corner of the eye to the front of the ear. Height, 0.24 m.; width, 0.125 m.; depth, 0.06 m. Second century after Christ.

155. Neck shaped for insertion (1104). Height, 0.145 m.; width, 0.145 m.; depth, 0.13 m. In front the edge of the tunic is visible. This should belong to a statue of life-size or slightly smaller; it does not fit any torso in the museum. 156. Hands (1091, 1105, 1092, 1099, 1121, 1122, 1087, 1117). 1091 is a fragment of a right wrist; less than half of circumference; in the end is a dowelhole; 0.105 m. X 0.085 m. 1105 is a left hand, lacking thumb and fingers; length, 0.155 m.;

width, 0.12 m. 1092 is a bent finger; part of first joint lacking; length, 0.13 m.; workmanship as in 1084 (entry No. 142) but larger. 1099 is part of a large finger, apparently; length, 0.065 m. 1121 is a finger, from the end to the second joint, apparently; length, 0.083 m.; poor work. 1122 is a fragment of an arm; length, 0.175 m.; diameter, 0.11 m. 1087 is a fragment of an arm, incomplete in section, 0.105 m. X 0.10 m.; the end is dressed as a joining surface, and in it is a dowel-hole. 1117 is a right hand and wrist, lacking all the fingers; length, 0.275 m.; width, 0.135 m.

1144 is a piece of a draped leg; incomplete in section; length, 0.425 m.; diameter, 0.22 m.

1146 is a bit of drapery on a plinth; one edge of the plinth is original; height, 0.06 m.; 0.13 m. X 0.11 m.; apparently from a life-size statue. 158. Fragments of female figures (1145, 1078, 1064). 1145 is a bit of hair, still colored red, 0.10 m. X 0.05 m.; 0.075 m. thick. The hair is simply waved, as in Antonine coiffures. 1078 is from the left side of a statue, neck to below the breast: height, 0.435 m.; width, 0.16 m.; depth, 0.19 m. Two garments are visible. 1064 is drapery from the left side of a female figure: height, 0.317 m.; width, 0.262 m.; depth, 0.15 m. The work is not like that of 1078. OTHER PORTRAITS 159. Male head (1155). The neck is shaped for insertion into a statue. Nose and chin broken; somewhat battered otherwise. Height of head, 0.25 m.; of whole piece, 0.35 m. On the back is a cutting

/: !i?:
No. 159

for a piece attaching it to the wall or pillar against which the statue stood.

The subject of

the portrait is a beardless man of about forty. The forehead is rather high and sloping, the eyes deep-set under straight brows, the lips thin and straight and the upper one long. The face is lean, with prominent cheek bones and lines about the eyes and mouth. The nose, separated from the forehead by a distinct depression, was aquiline and somewhat broad. The hair is a raised surface on which the locks are well indicated, but never deeply cut. The

health. The portrait probably belongs to the Flavian period. 160. Female head (706). Lacks nose and part below mouth; surface battered. Height, 0.23 m. From the centre of the forehead two wavy masses pass to the sides, covering the upper parts of the ears;

while a braid goes straight back over the head. Ordinary work; the coiffure indicates a date at the beginning of the empire (cf. Pauly-Wissowa, VII, cols. 2135 f.).

No. 161

No. 160

m_v.

No. 162

. . ........ ......

No. 163

161. Head of girl (16). Nose mostly lacking; considerably battered. Height, 0.14 m. The subject was a child of some eight years. The hair is arranged in the "melon" style, with a knot at the back. This coiffure is properly Greek, but appears occasionally

in Roman portraits of various

periods; it is usually employed for girls or young women. This head is good; first century after Christ. It may not be a portrait, but a copy from a Hellenistic original. For the hair see Pauly-Wissowa,

VII, col. 2127; Anti, in Die Antike, V, 1929, pp. 11 f.

162. Female head (15). Back and right side missing; much battered. Height, 0.185 m. The hair is simply parted in the middle. Early first century after Christ.

Lacks central part of face. Height, 0.16 m. The thick hair is parted in the middle and encloses the face; the subject probably was a young girl. Good work of the early part of the first century after Christ. Not certainly a portrait.

~i

..... ...... ..

; *

i....

.. ....... . . .. .. ........... No. 164

164. Female head (986). Nose and chin battered; ?f.. ' . . ineck Xshaped ,...... for insertion into a statue. Height with neck, 0.34 m. The hair, except for two locks in the middle of the forehead, is enclosed in a hood which is held in place by a band around the head. On the hood, above the forehead, is incised a figure like an inverted U with a vertical mark inside. I have observed no close parallels for the headdress. First century after Christ.

No. 165

No. 167

165. Beardless male head (1040; labelled 1039). Much battered. Height, 0.12 m. On the head is a wreath. The head is turned slightly to its right. Perhaps from a relief. First or second century after Christ. 166. Bearded head.

The fragment is fromethe right side; the face is entirely lacking. Height, 0.253 0.09 m.; 0.172 m. width, m. First First or second second century century after after Christ. Christ. m.; depth, depth, 0.172 width, 0.09

.;

167. Female head. Height, 0.215 m. All details are lost, chiefly through weathering. 168. Bearded head. The end of the nose and the left part of the chin are lost. The neck is shaped for insertion into the body. Total height, 0.445 m.; of head only, 0.295 m. The beard and mustache, which is separate from the beard, are rather scanty; the hair is a thick mass with wavy lines

on the surface. The eyebrows, fully modelled, are heavy; the forehead is very low. The irises of the eyes are represented only by small holes just below the eyelids. The lips are thick, the eyes bulging, the jaw heavy, the chin high but not prominent, the nose rather short but high, fleshy and aquiline.

The treatment of the hair and beard do not correspond

to the Roman style of any period, but, judged from the eye and the surface, the head doubtless belongs to the early part of the second century after Christ. It is an excellent portrait of a most unattractive man. 169. Herm of Herodes Atticus. Height of rectangular part, 1.305 m.; width, 0.29 m.; depth, 0.25 m.; height above this,

0.465 m. The head is broken off, but joins by contact; it is much weathered, particularly on the right side. The hair and beard are thick; the irises and pupils of the eyes are incised. On the front of the herm is an inscription: 'Hpcbr3seve0ae repLEWrarTl(Herodes used to walk here). The herm was presumably set up soon after the death of Herodes, which occurred in 177 or 178 after Christ. It is the only portrait identified as Herodes on certain evidence. As Philadelpheus showed, it justifies the same identification for a bust in the Louvre, which is better preserved (Salle des Antonins, 1164). The inscription suggests that the herm was placed in some garden in the environs of the city. It was found after a flood, which washed it from the bank of a torrent in New Corinth. B. C. H. XLIV, 1920, pp. 170-180 (Philadelpheus). 170. Bearded head (697). Height with piece for insertion into body, 0.38 m. The head is unfinished. It can be seen that the hair was to be thick, in the style of Hadrian and his successors. This head was found standing in the socket in the shoulders of No. 198, a statue much too small for it; it was probably placed there after Corinth became a ruined site. 171. Bearded head (22). Height of head, 0.33 m.; of neck as preserved, 0.055 m. Irises of eyes incised. The nose and upper left part of the face are lost, and it is much battered otherwise. Apparently fair work of the late second century after Christ. 172. Bearded head (932). The chin is lacking and the head is very badly battered otherwise. Height, 0.115 m. Probably second century after Christ.

'*

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ '": ?

.?

i;? '':,.:? .

.:f

No. 168

':

' ......... ........ "~~' *'*'~'*'*~.ii!':.:!;:

.

. .

.,

.

1 -I_5:

v@

:??:::,.:?: ::, : ?.

:4?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

:,~;:::~,;?: i?a:,i iii~

iiii?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~...

i.!::

No. 169

. No.

? ",,o.':?'i:~:**~'~:~r~aa

N.

171

i::,>~:BP~?YI~.~i: . ..ii~:ii: ::::.:

i? l~~~~~~~~~~.

17..

' 89.

.

:. '.~

..

.

.

. :'...:;:,..._...

. .

~i~

...-.: ....-:. :-~.~.~. ................ :: .....

No. 170

. . .

.

. . . . No. 171

. . . i::0;?

. . . . . !!,:r

:

: .;:'.

' :.

..

!,? : ,i::ii~iii!i : !~!!!;? . ~~::,..;: No. 172

E 89 ]

The slab from which the medallion projects is a pentagon, with right angles at the bottom corners; width, 0.725 m.; height at sides, 0.43 m.; in centre, 0.55 m.; total depth, 0.145 m.; relief height from face of slab, 0.28 m. The rim of the medallion has a conventional vine pattern in relief. The man is seen in front view. The end of the nose and lower lip and chin are lost. He wears a closely cropped beard. The hair about the forehead is a monotonous succession of short locks. Around the head is a fillet, above which the head is left quite

rough. A small, shallow hole in the eyeball is the only indication of iris or pupil. The eyebrows are not represented. There are two vertical grooves between the eyes. The costume consists of a tunic and toga. Coarse work, probably of the late Trajanic or the Hadrianic period. Other portrait medallions: Amelung, Skulpt. d. Vat. Mus., II, p. 111, pl. XI; Jones, Museo Capitolino, pl. XXIII, Galleria 65; Mendel, Mus6es Imp6riaux Ottomans,III, p. 519, No. 1309. 174. Portrait medallion (324). In three pieces which join; parts of all sides except the top are original. Width, 0.86 m.; height, 0.70 m.; total depth, 0.125 m.; relief height, 0.095 m. The man, in front view, wears a chlamys; the head is entirely lost. The medallion proper projects from the rectangular slab on the left and does not reach its edge on the right.

Bottom and left side original, though the corner is broken away. Height, 0.572 m.; width, 0.27 m.; depth, 0.10 m. Only the left shoulder remains of the portrait. On the outside of the rim is a bead-and-reel. In scale and workmanship this resembles No. 174. 176. (640, 941, 942, 946, 947). These are fragments of medallion frame, on approximately

the same scale as No. 174.

177. Portrait head (891). Surface much battered, especially at top and back. Height of head, 0.11 m.; of neck remaining, 0.03 m. Probably second century after Christ.

.......:.......

No. 177

No. 178

178. Bearded head (919).

End of nose broken, preservation otherwise good. Height, 0.28 m. The beard is indicated by a roughened surface; the hair is a slightly raised mass with wavy grooves in it.

The irises of the eyes are not indicated, but the treatment of the hair indicates a date in the third century after Christ. In the forehead is scratched a cross. Good work for the time. A head of Aphrodite in the National Museum at Athens ('Apx.'E0., 1900, pp. 89 f.) has a similar cross on the forehead, probably scratched there, long after the statue was made, to sanctify a work of art which would otherwise be ungodly. The cross on our portrait head is doubtless nearly as old as the sculpture and had some significance in relation to the subject. The man was an adherent, or possibly a conspicuous opponent, of the new religion. 179. Part of bearded head (1047, labelled 1046). Face, from the upper lip down, with a little of the neck. Height, 0.18 m. Badly broken. The beard is represented by a roughened surface, indicating a date about the middle of the third century after Christ. The work is much coarser than in the preceding head.

Back of the head, with parts of both ears. Height, 0.16 m. The hair is represented by curved scratches. Middle of the third century after Christ. 181. Bearded head (72). This head, apparently of the same general sort as the foregoing entries, has been lost or stolen. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pp. 437 f. and fig. 1 on p. 423 (Tucker). 182. Bearded head. The face is well preserved except for the end of the nose; some pieces of the hair have been lost. Height, 0.30 m. The ears and the part of the head behind them are very roughly finished, and from front to back the head is very short; it is also narrow in proportion to the height.

The hair is a raised surface, roughened by irregular lines. The mustache, distinctly

No. 182

No. 183

separate from the beard, is similarly treated; the beard and the brows are indicated only by a roughening of the plane surface. The irises of the eyes are raised; in them are small holes to represent the pupils. The mouth is small, the eyes deep-set; between them is a vertical groove. This interesting portrait is obviously not earlier than the latter part of the third century after Christ, and may be later. The faulty proportions and complete neglect of the back particularly suggest a late period. 183. Bearded head (909). Lacks nose, entire upper part of face, and head behind ears; mouth much battered. Height, 0.25 m.; width, 0.20 m.; depth, 0.125 m. The hair and beard are raised masses, on

which are parallel wavy grooves. Late third century after Christ or later.

The head and part of the neck are lacking; the bottom is broken also. Height, 0.26 m. The form of the bust is Flavian, showing just the beginning of the arms. 185. Headless bust with garment (833). Height, 0.36 m. The form is the same as in No. 184. 186. Headless bust (57). Left shoulder also lacking. Height, 0.18 m. The whole upper part of the body, almost to the navel, is included in the bust; this indicates a date late in the second century after Christ. The right arm projects from the garment on the breast. The bust rests on a cylindrical base, 0.09 m. high and 0.10 m. in diameter. 187. Part of bust (603). Height, 0.18 m.; width, 0.22 m.; depth, 0.14 m. The left side of a bust, including the shoulder and most of the neck. The head was veiled.

Billi ?;,::??;?iilltitP'

i;%l'liiiiil ?.i?.:::? ?:'??I ?':;???-;?

??

:.i

??:::i;

i, n..*?4iFa'

? :?

iiiili: .:*.::?

?-n:

.. I?:?? ?B:

:?:::?I: ii* r;? ?? :-: Bifii :"in P

Ci:liiii

i??l ??r::?

':''"'

:I:;?::??i

No. 186

188. Armored figure; two fragments. One fragment consists of the shoulders; height, 0.62 m.; width, 0.80 m. The head was inserted. Both arms are broken off at the shoulders; the right was raised. The paludamentum is secured by a clasp on the right shoulder. The other fragment: chest almost to knees. Part of the front is smoothed for use as a building block. On the cuirass is a pair of griffins. The pteryges of the cuirass have decorations in relief, much mutilated; some are conventional designs, some apparently monsters. Across the back is a row of holes, probably made to facilitate breaking the statue. The two pieces obviously belong to the same statue and were found together; they probably join by contact. The mutilation of the figure makes judgment of the style difficult, but it is probably Hadrianic. It is likely that such a colossal figure represented the emperor himself. 189. Male figure (1183). Lacks head, left hand, which was dowelled on, right arm except a little at the shoulder and part of the hand, and lower part of right leg; the left foot, with part of the plinth, is a separate fragment. Height of plinth, 0.08 m.; of principal piece, 1.35 m. At the back of the foot is a tree-trunk support. The garment is arranged as in No. 138, leaving the upper right part of the body bare. The right hand holds the garment against the right thigh. The weight rested on the right leg. The physique is fat and flabby. Ordinary Roman work, first or second century after Christ.

190. Male figure (438). Waist to slightly below left knee. Height, 0.47 m.; width, 0.42 m. The fragment evidently belongs to a figure whose upper part was mostly nude; the garment crosses the body approximately as in No. 140. Good work of the first century after Christ. 191. Male figure (61). Lacks head, which was inserted, most of left shoulder and arm, and legs from slightly below knees. Height, 1.11 m.; width at shoulders, 0.53 m. The weight rests on the left leg. The tunic and pallium are worn. The left arm rests on the hip and the right hand protrudes from the pallium on the breast. The position and costume are the same as in the Aeschines

in Naples (University Prints, 395), which is nearly the same as in the Lateran Sophocles. This is very uncommon in Roman portraits. There is a similar figure in Constantinople, which Mendel considers perhaps Hellenistic (Musees Impe'riaux Ottomans, III, p. 339, No. 1100). The workmanship of our statue is good, and it may possibly belong to the Greek city; but probably it is Hadrianic. 192. Male figure (308). Lacks head, which was inserted, three fingers of right hand, and feet. Height, 1.47 m. The figure is clad in the pallium and tunic. The position and arrangement of the garments

are as in the preceding figure, but the workmanship is much inferior. The period is probably the same. 193. Male figure (50, labelled 51). Lacks left wrist and hand and right forearm, which were dowelled on; head, right foot,

front part of left foot. Height, 1.69 m. The weight rests on the right leg, the left being set forward slightly. The tunic and toga are worn. There is no umbo, but in view of the ample sinus this cannot be considered an indication of early date. This was found with the following figure. Both probably belong to the latter part of the first century after Christ.

194. Male figure (51, labelled 50). Lacks head, which was inserted, left wrist and hand and right forearm, which were

dowelled on, and ankles and feet. Height, 1.59 m. The tunic and toga, with umbo, are worn. See preceding figure. 195. Male figure (180). Lacks head, arms, and projecting parts of the feet; the projecting left arm was attached.

Height, 1.72 m. The tunic and toga are worn. 196. Male figure (59). Lacks head, left wrist and hand, right fore, or,

right foot, and front part of left foot.

Height of plinth, 0.10 m.; of figure, 1.65 m. A toga and tunic are worn, with calcei sena-

*

No. 191

__lssl':.;

No14

~~~~~~~~ii":

No. 192

.s..?/":':

w

!

:: \:

No. 193

i

-B:

o.19

N.

9

I?.1~~~~~~~~~~~[9

No. 194

No.

*

195

No.

196

95

sl*

set back slightly.

When found, purplish red color was well preserved on parts of the toga.

Poor work of about the time of Trajan. 197. Male figure (200 and 200a). Lacks the head, which was inserted, left shoulder, part of left arm, and fingers of right

hand. The feet and plinth are broken off, but well preserved (200a). Height of 200, 1.56 m.; of plinth, 0.105 m. The figure wears the tunic and pallium, arranged in the usual manner: the right hand protrudes from the pallium on the breast, the left is bent forward at the elbow and the ends of the pallium fall from it. The weight rests on the right leg. The shoes have

a broad central strap and leave the toes bare. Beside the left foot stands a bundle of book-

No. 197

No. 198

rolls with a band about them, indicating that the man portrayed was an author or orator. Ordinary work, perhaps of the time of Hadrian. 198. Male figure (696 and 696a) Lacks head, which was inserted, and left foot; the right foot, with a part of the plinth, a is separate fragment (696a). The figure is much battered. Height of 696, 0.965 m.; of plinth, 0.07 m. The figure wears tunic and pallium, arranged as in the preceding figure. The

ends of the pallium fall over a post, on which is incised a curious ornament; apparently it is supposed to hang from the corner of the pallium.

Late second century after Christ.

Shoulders to navel.

Height, 0.40 m.; width, 0.57 m. The head was inserted.

The figure

wears a tunic and pallium, arranged as in No. 197. Probably second century after Christ. 200. Male figure (896). Shoulders to navel; lacks right hand; the head was inserted. Height, 0.40 m. It is a figure of the same type as the preceding. 201. Male figure (862). From the upper right front part of the body, with part of the right arm. Height, 0.23 m.;

width, 0.41 m.; depth, 0.19 m. The lower part of the arm is bare. A tunic is worn, and prob-

No. 200

No. 201

No. 202

ably a pallium above it; but the direction of the folds is singular. The folds are rounded and smooth, the surface polished. Late second century after Christ or later. 202. Male figure (47). Lacks head, which was inserted, part of right shoulder and upper arm, left hand, which was dowelled on, and feet. Height, 1.45 m. The figure wears tunic and pallium and elaborate high boots, remains of which are visible on the left leg. The weight rests on the left leg; the right foot is set to the side and slightly back. The work is extraordinarily poor. The statue is not earlier than the latter part of the third century after Christ, and may be later.

203. Horse's head (815). Found June 20, 1907, 5.50 m. west of the limit of the Roman shops, 0.50 m. below track level. The muzzle is broken off, but joins by contact. Height of plinth, 0.12 m.; of neck and head, 0.74 m.; length of face, 0.27 m. The plinth is complete on the animal's right, and the

neck is more carefully modelled on that side. On the other side is a trace of a human foot, bare, and the line of the leg is visible on the horse's neck. The length of the foot, heel almost to end of little toe, is 0.32 m. The figure was probably a Dioscurus; the Dioscuri, as patrons of horsemanship, are accompanied in several monuments by horse's heads of this sort (Reinach, Repertoire,I, 485, 2; II, 109, 3, 5, 10; IV, 59, 4). They may occur also in portraits in the type of the Dioseuri (Ripertoire, V, 43, 1-2). In at least one instance a female figure, doubtless Demeter or Persephone, is accompanied by such a head (see under No. 7); and it

No. 204

No. 203

No. 207

is probable, as Jones and Amelung have suggested (Jones, Palazzo de'iConservatori,p. 109), that the horse's head at Eleusis accompanied such a figure; the foot on the plinth with it wears a sandal. There are two such heads at Sparta (Tod and Wace, Catalogue, Nos. 118 and 285). 204. Dolphin (316). Found May 8, 1901; near St. John's, slightly above virgin soil. Front part only. Length, 0.95 m.; height, 0.52 m.; width, 0.34 m. As parts of its right side are only roughly picked, it stood at the left side of a colossal statue, doubtless Poseidon. The rear part of the dolphin rests on a sloping base, so the top is level. Pausanias mentions only one statue of Poseidon with a dolphin, and it was bronze (ii, 2, 8). He writes of two other figures of Poseidon (ii, 3, 4 and ii, 3, 5), in neither case with any statement of material or any description. 205. Dolphin and Eros (183). The dolphin's head lies on the plinth; its body is erect; the nose is broken off. The curved edge of the plinth, on the figure's left, is original. Height of plinth, 0.11 m.; total

above the waist are lacking. Such groups occur not infrequently as supports for statues of Aphrodite. In this case the group evidently stood at the left of the goddess. 206. Dolphin (345). Length, 0.71 m. It evidently served as support for a statue of Aphrodite, standing on its head at the figure's left; there are remains of the connecting piece. 207. Snail or worm (145). A rounded piece of marble; length, 0.13 m.; maximum diameter, 0.063 m. There is a horizontal line along each side, and three lines across the back.

?..........

:..... ....

.. ..:' * .:':' :::: :::: ., .:.::.: ::::'.:.::: No. 205

No. 208

208. Serpent (750). Fragment 0.15 m. X 0.215 m. X 0.09 m. The head and neck of a serpent appear before two larger cylindrical objects, which are scaled and doubtless are two coils of the serpent. This was probably associated as an attribute with a statue of Asclepius, Apollo or Hermes.

209. Bird (5). Height, 0.334 m. The back and one side of the plinth and the rear corner of the other side are original. The bird stands erect with outspread wings; it lacks the head, parts of both wings, and most of both legs. The back and sides are smooth. It is doubtless an eagle. Eagles were used sometimes as funerary monuments (Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, III, p. 369, No. 1135; Cumont, Rev. de l'hist. des Religions, XXXI, 1910, pp. 119 ff.) and sometimes as votive offerings (Cumont, Musees Royaux, p. 67, No. 54). They also stand beside statues of Zeus and emperors; but the plinth on which this bird stands is not part of a larger one.

Shoulders and forelegs, except the lower part of the right leg. Height of plinth, 0.08 m.;

above plinth, 0.35 m.; width, 0.25 m.; depth, 0.30 m. The left leg is doubled under the animal; the right is extended, as though in an effort to rise. 211. Tree-trunk with vine (810). Height, 0.63 m.; diameter, 0.20 m. It stood at the left side of a figure, probably Dionysus or a satyr. The vine and clusters of grapes are well observed, but not particularly well executed. A. J. A. XIII, 1909, pp. 326 f. (E. M. Gardiner).

No. 211

No. 214

No. 216

212. Tree-trunk with vine (901). Broken at top and bottom; surface partly lost. Height, 0.27 m.; width, 0.19 m. Probably stood at the right side of the figure. Similar in design to No. 211, but inferior in execution. 213. Tree-trunk with skin (28). Height, 0.63 m.; width, 0.24 m. The skin is recognizable by two cloven hoofs. Apparently there is drapery in addition. This probably belonged to a satyr; cf. Reinach, Reper-

toire, II, 137, 1, etc. 214. Cornucopia (906). Found May 12, 1908; north of bridge, at track level. Broken at top and bottom. Height, 0.25 m.; 0.17 m. X 0.15 m. A bunch of grapes, two heads of wheat, a pine-cone and a pomegranate are recognizable in the cluster, which includes three other kinds of fruit. This probably belongs to the Serapis, No. 23, which was found near by; the marble appears to be the same. The Nemesis (or possibly Tyche), No. 6, is made of different marble.

Base, 0.096 m. X 0.045 m.; height, 0.054 m. On each shoulder is part of a fillet. The rectangular form of bust is essentially Greek, derived from the herm; the Romans used it in imitations of Greek busts and especially for decorative heads. 216. Pestles (933, 118). In the form of fingers, with first and second joints in a straight line and a larger piece at a right angle. One, unnumbered, is complete; length of straight part, 0.084 m. (This is illustrated.) In 933 only the larger piece remains; 0.085 m. X 0.05 m. X 0.04 m. 118 is broken at both ends; length, 0.17 m. For such pestles see Daremberg-Saglio, article Mortarium; Robinson, Excavations at Olynthus, II, p. 106. SCULPTURES FROM THE STOA OF THE COLOSSAL FIGURES This building served merely as an ornamental boundary for the Agora; it extended along the north side, west of the Propylaea. It had two stories, according to Wood's restoration (to be published in Vol. I). On the upper story were four colossal supporting figures. 217. Male figure (176, 176a, 178, 184, 328). This statue is now restored in cement and complete except for the right forearm. New: nose, a piece just below the waist, including a section of the figure complete except at the left side; right knee, part of right instep, left calf, part of left instep. Total height, 2.57 m.; breadth at shoulders, 0.75 m. The figure wears a thin tunic and trousers, appearing only on the arms and legs; then a heavy cloak, girded to form a kolpos at the waist and reaching to the knees; a chlamys which is clasped on the centre of the chest; and shoes. On the head is a Phrygian cap. The head is inclined slightly to the figure's right. The face is enclosed by rich locks, such as are common in sculpture after Lysippus. The figure stands with his back against a pillar crowned with a Corinthian capital. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pl. I; p. 8, fig. 1; p. 9, fig. 2; Reinach, Repertoire, III, 137, 3.

: .. :. :..::.... . . ::::. . ....... ::

. : :: ?:

..: ::.i :....i::.:

.

:.. ..ii.i::...i: .:.

Nos. 217, 225

Corresponds closely to the preceding figure, but is reversed in respect to the position of the arms and the direction of the glance. Preserved to thighs; lacks left forearm, which was

a separate piece. Height, 1.46 m. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pls. II and IIa; Reinach, Repertoire, III, 137, 1 (restored).

. . . ....ii!i!ii!iiiii!i

No:

: . .218, 224

No.:

218

........ ......

219. Feetof No 218 (412, 440, 416). ......' .....1 ~::$ :~i;i?* ii'll!i: i.iii

........

}tiS

,!i ........... ::: ;!?::ili':~/,11!?~i!ii;~i!i:;? :

.: ...........

;!i~;!il~;iiiii~?; ;;

'

N os~ril:: :::::..i::;:iii: -----------i~ii::::: ???;.

219: 24.so i. 412:.clo 2

o to...... 1

7s

f

l

..

..224 ... 21

............. ......2.. ..i. i...id.

part of foot, lacking tip; probably a right foot. This resembles exactly the corresponding part of the foot of No. 217; it doubtless belongs to the same foot as 440.

415 is a part of a draped arm; length, 0.24 m.; width, 0.155 m.; depth, 0.06 m. 221 is a fragment of a draped figure; length, 0.275 m.; width, 0.14 m.; depth, 0.04 m. Material, scale, and workmanship suggest that both fragments belong to the Phrygians. 221. Female head (181). Lacks parts of the nose and upper lip, and a bit from the left upper eyelid. Height, 0.37 m. The back of the head is cut off, leaving a vertical surface roughly dressed from the top to a line at the level of the top of the ears. At this line is a shelf, 0.025 m. wide, of which

No. 221

the top was somewhat more carefully dressed than the vertical surface above. Behind and below this shelf the vertical surface is resumed, but little of it remains. The hair is parted in the middle and drawn back to the sides. In front are some large locks more deeply undercut than the others; similar locks descend from the top of the head, on which there was

probably a large knot now lost, to the ears. A colossal head in the Salone of the Villa Borghese, unpublished so far as I know, shows similar treatment of the hair and some resemblance otherwise, though it is much better. Our head is inferior even to the heads of the

male figures. Richardson

(A. J. A. VI, 1902, p. 12, note) mentions two battered torsos as possibly

belonging to this head and the following. I have not been able to identify the torsos referred to, or to find any considerable fragments that could possibly belong to the female

figures. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pl. III, at right. Restoration: A. J. A. VI, 1902, pl. IV (Reinach, Repertoire, III, 185, 1).

Correspondsin all respects to No. 221; preservationvirtually the same. A. J. A. VI, 1902, pl. III, at left.

223. Left foot (417). Front part only. Length, 0.23 m.; width as preserved,0.10 m. At the front of the foot there is a roughlydressedhorizontalsurfacejust underthe sole, joined at its rearside by a similarly dressedvertical surface;evidently this piece below the foot fitted into a plinth. In generalappearancethis foot resemblesthose of No. 217, but does not correspondexactly either to them or to those of No. 218 and seems somewhat smaller.

It probably belonged

to one of the female figures. 224. Base of statue No. 218 (175).

Some parts of the base are restored,but none of the reliefs,which decorate the front. Width of relief-field,0.835 m.; height, 0.535 m. A shelf (depth,0.05 m.) extends acrossthe field; each end is ca. 0.05 m. from the edge of the base. On this shelf are the figures in relief. The height of the tallest figure is 0.445 m.; relief height, 0.08 m. At right stands a bare-headed man, facing the front and clasping his right hand with his left. He is bearded and has long hair. The nose is knocked off and the face battered otherwise. The work is so rough that his costume cannot be made out with certainty; apparently

it consists of thin, tight-fitting garment or garments covering the whole body, a long cloak clasped in front as are the chlamydes of the colossal figures, and shoes. Next this figure is a trophy consisting of a helmet resting on two crossed shields. The helmet is too large and the shields too small, in proportion not only to each other but to the man. Next is a boy,

supports his chin on his right hand, and his right elbow rests apparently on the knee of the last figure, a woman. The boy's head and face are so much battered that it is not clear what sort of headgear he wears, but it may be a pointed cap. The woman is seated in profile to right, with a veil over her head and her left hand raised to her face. A. J. A. VI, 1902, p. 15, fig. 8.

. ....

....

._..

......

No. 224

225. Base of statue No. 217 (178a). This corresponds closely to No. 224 In the top is a socket in which the plinth belonging to No. 217 fits. At the left side of the relief-field there is lacking a piece 0.17 m. wide, but it is improbable that this contained any additional figure. In the centre is a trophy, consisting of a suit of armor set up on a stump. At right a winged Victory, wearing a Doric chiton with overfall reaching the knees, rushes forward to crown the trophy with a wreath. Her head is mostly lacking. At left stands a figure in full front, clad as are the colossal figures, with his hands bound behind him; the head is lacking. A. J. A. VI, 1902, p. 14, fig. 7.

226. Slab from coffered ceiling (195). Broken only at one end. Length, 1.83 m.; height, 0.95 m.; thickness, 0.145 m. Around the slab and between the coffers is an ornamental band consisting of conventionalized floral ornament between two astragals. At each of the two extant corners is a rosette. There are three coffers of slightly differing sizes, approximately 0.43 m. X 0.41 m. and 0.06 m. deep.

its ends appear above her shoulders. Her bust is in full front, her head turned slightly to her left. In the middle coffer is Helios, a draped young man with seven rays about his head. In both figures the irises of the eyes are indicated by incision and the pupils by small holes. The work is very coarse in places, but was doubtless fairly effective when seen from a distance. The third coffer is decorated only with an interior border, in the form of a Lesbian cymatium, and a rosette in the centre. A part of the lost end is preserved in a separate

th acho Cnsatie R Ach X,190,p. VI) A. J.A. VI) 1902, V.~;r** PI. such as the colossal were Figures Phrygians frequently used as supports or pseudo-~ mroal ha hyweeawy 7,ec.,aditi suprs(c.Riac,R"eror,II he elefson hebass,howve, d ceary rfe tomiitay chive thoghtofas apive. he eatd wman ha aaloie nueros an No. 226 mens; inpaticlar inrepesetatonsof enim pd oans SmlarsBabru qusedpope (f Bekosi,D p.9 f) Iti ikl ht h0.42agd a slab eetdwas ncmemrtono atcua of itoy u m. This 0.65 m. piece, tentatively ascribed tooethe building the ColosX sal Wood's architectural study confirmed the hypothesis. by Richardson, thrFigures s oeidnea htandtws t With Thestye the head th off Selene a head of Apollo oncnuyatr one of the medallions ol compared cltre may be nict aeintescn hof hit coosa ussinth ntral adth ofes1910,reodiay hchwol the archfgre of Constantine (R. Arch. XV, pl. XVII). ors wr, A. J. A. VI, 1902, pl. V. Figures such as the colossal Phrygians were frequently used as supports or pseudosupports (cf. Reinach, Repertoire, II, 471, etc.), and it is improbable that they were always thought of as captives. The reliefs on the bases, however, do clearly refer to military achievements; the seated woman, in particular! has numerous analogies in representations of vanquished peoples (cf. Bienkowski, De Simulacris Barbarum Gentiumapud Romanos, pp. 9 ff.). It is likely that the fagade was erected in commemoration of some particular victory, but there is no evidence as to what it was. The style of the sculptures would indicate a date in the second century after Christ. The colossal figures and the busts in the coffers are ordinary coarse work?which would naturally

altogether barbarous; and their presence in the elaborately and, for its time, fairly well decorated building is hard to explain. There is no evidence, however, that the reliefs were carved after the original use of the bases, and a change of the bases after the erection of the building would be very difficult. Since the reliefs would be very inconspicuous, their poor quality was not of great importance. For a discussion of the building and its sculptures, see Richardson, A. J. A. VI, 1902, pp. 7-22; Fowler, Art and Archaeology, XIV, 1922, pp. 210 f.; Carpenter, Guide, pp. 21-23 and 67-70. OTHER DECORATIVE SCULPTURES IN THE ROUND AND IN HIGH RELIEF 227. Left foot (746). The front and left side of the plinth are original: height, 0.11 m.; width, 0.24 m.; depth, 0.205 m. The fore part of the foot, to the instep, remains: length, 0.32 m.; width, 0.175 m. It projects over the front of the plinth. The foot wears a shoe very similar to those of the colossal Phrygians, though not exactly the same; the foot is slightly larger and the finish much rougher. There is nothing about the fragment that proves that it was a supporting figure; but such a shoe is not often worn by figures of ordinary types, and the large size and rough finish render an architectural use virtually certain.

No. 227

228. Medallion (431, 431a, 431b). 431: from the lower left portion; part of the round frame, with drapery and locks of hair with traces of red coloring. Height, 0.49 m.; width, 0.152 m.; depth, 0.27 m. 431a-b: two fragments that join, including the bottom of the medallion from the middle to near the

right edge. Height, 0.475 m.; width, 0.605 m.; depth, 0.29 m. Drapery and locks of hair are preserved. The part in which the face was is hollowed; apparently the face was chiselled out with some care. These fragments were found in the theatre and probably formed part of its decoration.

It has been reasonably suggested that the medallion represented Medusa.

A. J. A. VI, 1902, Supplement, p. 22. 229. Part of colossal face (421). Nose and part of right cheek, with right lower eyelid. Length of nose, 0.155 m.; width of fragment, 0.17 m. For the upper part of the nose there is some sort of covering, which ends in three points; higher up there is another set of three points, presumably belonging to an upper layer. On the cheek, at the broken edge, on a level with the end of the nose, is the beginning of a line with no apparent naturalistic purpose. This piece was found in the

theatre and doubtless formed part of the decoration there; it was probably an imitation of a mask or a Medusa.

I know no close analogies to the points on the nose. It has been sug-

gested that the fragment may belong to the medallion preceding; this is possible. A complete figure on this scale would be about 4.70 m. tall. 230. Draped male figure (769). Shoulders to navel; height, 0.15 m. There are remains of a pillar at the back. The left hand rests on the front of the body at the left side; the right is bent sharply at the elbow,

the hand evidently approaching the face. The position is similar to that of the colossal Phrygians. This and the following figures served as decorations for the legs of tables or chairs or something of the sort. 231. Male figure (56). Shoulders to genitals; lacks left shoulder and arm and nearly all right arm. Height, 0.26 m. The weight apparently rested on the left leg; the right arm hung down. About the

shoulders is a chlamys. At the back is a pillar, 0.09 m. wide. Just below the top of the shoulders the pillar ends in a semicircular surface, which is roughly finished. An upper member evidently fitted here. 232. Male figure (437). Shoulders to navel, lacking greater part of arms. At the back is a pillar. Height of pillar, 0.23 m.; width, 0.11 m.; depth, 0.09 m.; width of figure, 0.195 m. The only garment

is knotted on the right shoulder. Small holes are punched in a line around the figure and pillar along the line of breakage. 233. Female head (731). Height of head, 0.075 m.; of fragment, 0.18 m. The back of the head is against a pillar; supported on the head and the pillar is a flat member, apparently circular on the outside, with the top dressed to receive another member. Cf. No. 231. 234. Male figure (331). Height, 0.355 m.; width, 0.22 m. On its right side the figure is in the round, though the back is only smoothed, and it is probable that a separate piece fitted here against the pillar. On its left side it is in relief against a background that extends from the pillar to the broken edge. Relief height, 0.06 m. The face is broken away, but the ears and parts of the hair and beard remain. On the head was a cylindrical object with slightly flaring base. At a point 0.045 m. above the bottom of this object is a rough horizontal cutting. With the right hand the man holds the edge of his garment at the breast; the left hangs almost straight and apparently held something not recognizable from the slight remains. Insignificant work.

Fragment broken at top and bottom, otherwise complete. Height, 0.21 m.; width, 0.065 m.; depth, 0.085 m. On a projection 0.10 m. from the top stands the figure, preserved to a point above the knees. The rest of the fragment apparently represents natural rock.

No. 229

No. 230

i

.

.

No. 232

236

No. 231

No. 233

o_rc(3)

Fiur

fwdst^ Traglri eto,boe ttpadbto.Hih0.25m;wdt side

O

n

No. 234

_6m

_

No. 235

p

etio

nmasceryrpeetngruhr_,s

No. 236

236. Figure on rock (137). Triangular in section, broken at top and bottom. Height, 0.265 m.; width of widest side, 0.16 m. On one side, on a projecting mass clearly representing rough rock, stands a

right is set well to the side. 237. Pedestal (762). Found in 1906. Front and sides original, except for projecting bands at top and bottom; possibly the back also. Width, 0.39 m.; height, 0.195 m.; depth, 0.205 m. On the front is a relief representing Ariadne, in the usual scheme. She lies asleep, nude above the waist; her head is supported on a stone; her right hand rests on the stone above her head, while the left lies by her side; it is incised on the band which bounds the field at the bottom. There was

No. 237

some object between the stone and the right corner of the field, but the surface is mostly broken away. In the field above the woman is some object not now determinable. At her feet sits a winged Eros. The work is rough and poor. On the top of this base is the bottom of a rectangular piece: width, 0.25 m.; depth, 0.14 m. At the back, which is almost continuous with the back of the larger base, it is broken away; and also at the top, where there is a rectangular broken surface: width, 0.14 m.; depth, 0.085 m. As appears from a similar object in the museum at Aegina, a high, slender shaft arose from this place. On top of the larger base, in the margins left vacant by the base for this shaft are: on the left edge, the front part of a right foot, pointing forward; on the front edge, occupying a base of its own and pointing to right, the front part of a left foot, larger than the other; at the right front corner, close to the second foot,

drapery. Except for the similar base in the museum at Aegina, which is unpublished, and another which I know only from Reinach's drawing (Repertoire,II, 459, 6), no analogous monuments have been observed. The shaft would be too tall and slender to have supported, alone, anything of weight. It could be a stand for some dish or other small object, or possibly a leg of a table. The standing figures may have been Dionysus and two attendants.

SARCOPHAGI 238. Sarcophagus Cover (775). Length, 1.23 m.; width, 0.635 m.; height without figure, 0.13 m. The figure lacks the head: length, 0.98 m.; present height, 0.08 m. The figure reclines on the left side; the elbow rests on a cushion. The left leg is not represented at all. The left hand, on the cushion,

. ':..:.~

..4.. ._....... .:

No. 238

holds a pomegranate; the right, resting on the right leg, holds an object that is recognizable, by comparison with other sarcophagi, as a wreath. The work is poor, careless, and conventional, as is usual in such figures on sarcophagi. There is a particular resemblance to a sarcophagus in Athens (National Museum, No. 1497; Stais, Marbres et Bronzes,2 p. 254; Art Bull. X, 1927-28, p. 48, figs. 5-6), which appears from the character of its mouldings to belong to the middle of the third century. The example in Corinth probably belongs to about the same time. The lid in the form of a couch, with half-reclining figure, is Etruscan in origin, but occurs in many parts of the Roman empire in the second and third centuries (Collignon, Statues Funeraires, pp. 346-360). The sarcophagus itself (776) has no decoration.

Length, 1.25 m.; width, 0.69 m.; height without figure, 0.12 m. The figure lacks the head; length, 0.96 m.; present height, 0.11 m. The description of the preceding entry applies also to this, except that the right hand holds a bunch of grapes. The drapery is not so plain in design, the execution is in some parts inferior; the left leg is not so completely suppressed. The date is about the same. The sarcophagus itself (778) has no decoration.

No. 239

240.

Corner of Sarcophagus Cover (43).

Found April 11, 1898; trench XXIII, 1.70 m. below the surface. Right front corner. 0.44 m. X 0.315 m. X 0.165 m. On the upper surface is a left hand and arm, almost to the elbow, of a draped figure about half life-size. The drapery reaches the wrist. The hand holds a pomegranate, as in the two preceding entries. The lid was in the form of a couch, with curving corner and end, which is broken away.

On the

corner is an acanthus leaf in low relief. On the front next the corner are two plain bands with an acanthus leaf in low relief between them. This design was repeated at intervals, and part of a second example is preserved at the left end of the fragment. In the panel between the two is a representation of two dogs chasing a stag through a wood. On the end of the cover is a design consisting of a diamond enclosed in a rectangle, with five rosettes in the centre and four corners of the rectangle. The rosettes are merely raised circles with four lines radiating from their centres: in three instances these lines are straight, in the other two

curved. The corner of a second similar design remains; between the two is a tall figure resembling two braces joined.

not often separate sculptured panels. Such panels are found in the famous sarcophagus in the Museo Capitolino with sculptures representing Achilles at Scyrus (Jones, Museo Capitolino, p. 77, No. 1, pl. XVI; Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, III, 175; Robert, II, pls. XIVXV; Strong, Roman Sculpture, p. 316, pl. XCVIII), and the decoration is very similar in

style and subject to this. Furthermore the Achilles sarcophagus has an acanthus leaf on the corner and between the plain bands, and, to judge from Jones's description, the end of the

lid has decoration similar to that on the fragment at Corinth. Apparently the two works belong not only to the same time, but to the same atelier. The portrait heads of the reclining

No. 240

figures on the Achilles sarcophagus are preserved and belong to the first half of the third century. The sarcophagus belongs to the class originally called Graeco-Roman by Robert, but shown by Altmann (Architectur und Ornamentik der antiken Sarkophage, pp. 87 f.) to

be merely a special group among the Greek sarcophagi. The material is Luna marble, according to Jones, which presumably means that the sarcophagus was made in Italy, but the artificers could be Greek. A sarcophagus found in Athens ('Apx. AeXr. IX, 1924-25,

2rapapTX,ua,

pp. 29 and 32) also

has sculptured panels; and the decoration on the end of the lid is like that in our fragment, even to the curved lines in some of the rosettes. Without doubt the two are closely related. The head of the figure seems to belong to the early part of the third century. Another sarcophagus with such sculptured panels on the lid was found beside the Appian way near Rome (Ill. London News, Feb. 22, 1930, p. 296). Here the sarcophagus itself is decorated with Erotes. From the illustration it seems to belong to the end of the second century or the early part of the third. A fragment in the museum at Sparta (Tod and Wace, Catalogue, p. 210, No. 765), which I have not seen, may belong to a similar lid. The decoration on the end of the cover is found in No. 1497 in Athens (see under No. 238, supra) and in a sarcophagus at Delphi (Robert, III, 3, pl. XXXVIII, No. 433; Fouilles de Delphes, IV, pl. XCI). Although the latter is probably at least fifty years earlier than the

former, the design on the end is almost exactly the same; it is somewhat less meagre than in the fragment at Corinth. According to Taylor (Art Bull. X, 1927-28, p. 48) the same pattern occurs in five other examples: No. 1498 in the Athens museum, one near the Dipylon

(Strena Buliciana, p. 104), two fragmentary lids in the court of the Athens museum, and a fragmentary lid in the court of the museum at Sparta (possibly Tod and Wace, Catalogue, p. 210, No. 765?). It is probable that many other examples exist; the ends of sarcophagus covers are not often illustrated. In the list as it stands Athenian provenance is conspicuous, and Taylor terms the design "a specific Attic feature." The Melfi sarcophagus (Morey, The Sarcophagus of Claudia Antonia Sabina, p. 34, fig. 39, with citations), which is dated by Delbruick about 170 after Christ and is said to be made of Pentelic marble, has the double brace on the upper surface of the lid, though it does not have the rest of the pattern. The sarcophagus found at Sardis (Morey, op. cit., p. 6), which Morey dates about 190 after Christ, has what he calls a conventional foliate design, " which resembles the double brace and might be its ancestor, between oblong panels on the end of the couch; but the designs within the panels are wholly unlike those on our fragment. The oblong with enclosed diamond is found frequently in Byzantine work (Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans,II, p. 510, No. 711, with citations). 241. Sarcophagus (763, 763b, 779, 780, 781, 782, 782a, 782b). The right end is almost complete, the front lacks the upper part and a little at the left end; only a little of the back remains, and none of the left end. Interior length, 2.20 m.; exterior width, 1.154 m.; height,

1.24 m.; height of relief field, 0.764 m.; relief height,

0.063 m. At the bottom is a band with picked surface, 0.14 m. high. Above it are sculptured bases at the corners; the two at the right end show a lion pulling down a bull, and a boar; the one preserved at the front is decorated with a lion. At the same level, on the front

and end but not on the back or at the corners, is a broad, shallow scotia, with fillet at top and bottom. In it is a projecting band of oak leaves. The upper fillet of the scotia is the lower boundary of the main sculptured area, which is bounded at the top by a Lesbian cymatium. The departure of the Seven Against Thebes is represented on the front of the sarcophagus. The first figure remaining at the left is a woman, who is holding out a helmet toward a warrior clad in a chlamys who turns his head away from her. As Amphiaraus is frequently represented taking leave of Eriphyle, this is probably he; on his head is a wreath, indicative of his calling as seer. The upper part of the head consists of two small fragments, which join each other and the main piece by contact. Between Eriphyle and Amphiaraus another woman, in low relief, is visible; of her face, in profile to the right, the chin and mouth remain. The second warrior, wearing a chiton, holds a horse, which is seen in low relief behind him; this renders possible the identification as Adrastus, who had a celebrated horse named Arion. Then come two more warriors, of whom the first carries a bow and wears a

.......... .

~ ~ ~ ~

........ ... ... ............

. ..

.

..... .

........

..... ......... ..:::

... ........ . .... ....:?? . .. ...

?i: ??

?.??. i

....

Ifk;:

:.?i.No.

... .:?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

24

chlamys or small himation in a very unmilitary manner, and the second wears a boar's hide; he is doubtless Tydeus, who according to Hyginus (Fabellae, 69), though apparently to no other author, arrived at the court of Adrastus clad in thisBehins d these two there is a way. in The fifth low relief. warrior in full armor a ladder on has left his dog shoulder, by which he is identified as Capaneus. Between his legs is a quiver in low relief. The sixth has no distinguishing mark, unless it is to be discovered in the Corinthian helmet in low relief between his legs. He wears a chlamys. He and the third are presumably Parthenopaeus and Hippomedon, the two in the list as given by Hyginus (Fabellae,70) who are not identifiable elsewhere on the sarcophagus. The seventh warrior, in full armor, is evidently the leader of the expedition, Polynices.

Between his legs is a shield in low relief, with a seated sphinx as

ornament; this suggests a connection with the house of Oedipus. Finally, at the right end of the composition, is a draped female figure, apparently treated as a Caryatid.

A similar

figure is to be assumed at the left end, though only a bit of drapery remains of it. On the end of the sarcophagus is represented the death of Opheltes or Archemorus, which occurred during the sojourn of the Seven at Nemea and was the occasion of the institution of the Nemean games. The child is seen on the ground, caught in the coils of a serpent; at the right his nurse rushes forward with arms raised in horror, while on the other side a warrior attacks the serpent with a sword.

At the extreme right was a base on which

a sphinx was seated; it is mostly lost, but the face and paw of the sphinx remain near the top of the field. Between the sphinx and the nurse is an uncertain object. Very little of the back of the sarcophagus is preserved: the lower part of a female figure at the corner next the Opheltes group, the end of a fillet like that on the Maenad relief (No. 275) and traces of a garland with fruit. Without doubt there were two such garlands, each occupying half of the area. The cover, of which two large pieces are preserved (Inv. Nos. 1021 and 1022), is of the couch type with bands on the front and a single reclining figure, which is lost except for the left knee and heel and part of the drapery. Apparently no other representation of the departure of the Seven is known, but the death of Opheltes is a fairly common theme. By numerous criteria (Altmann, Architectur und Ornamentik der antiken Sarkophage, pp. 86 ff.) this is a Greek and not a Roman sarcophagus, of the second century after Christ. As a conspicuous feature may be noted the occurrence of the Lesbian cymatium, alone, at the top of the relief field on the end of the sarcophagus. I have not observed any other that is similar in this respect. It frequently happens, however, that the mouldings are less rich on the ends than on the front, and perhaps it was so here; none of the mouldings on the front is preserved. A sarcophagus in the National Museum in Athens (No. 1183; J. H. S. XXVIII, 1908, p. 27, pl. XIX) is similar in many respects: the rough band at the bottom, the band of leaves, the sculptured bases at the corners, and the Lesbian cymatium at the top. The only additional moulding is an egg-and-dart below the cymatium. The sculptures of this sar-

...

... ...

..~".

.

rA~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~;

i::

?'

. 241: C~~~~N .i; ii?

i,?I ~

~

~

~

17

cophagus represent Bacchic children; and it is placed, with other monuments representing the same theme, in the Hadrianic or early Antonine period. Closely related in another way is the sarcophagus from Kertch, now in Leningrad (Robert, II, pls. VIII-IX, No. 21). Here the mouldings are much richer; on the front there is an elaborate band of foliate ornament instead of the oak leaves, and pilasters instead of Caryatids; but the sculptured bases exist at the corners, the oak leaves are present on the back and right end, there are Caryatids on the back, and garlands with fillets like those at Corinth. A sarcophagus found in Rome and now partly in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek (Robert, II, pl. XIII, No. 24) has the oak leaves, the sculptured bases, and mouldings above the relief field like those of the Kertch sarcophagus. A sarcophagus in the Louvre, from Saloniki (Robert, II, pls. XXVIII-XXIX, No. 69; Marbres Antiques, No. 2119, pl. LII; Collignon, Statues Funeraires, p. 358, fig. 228) has Caryatids and garlands on the back with fillets like those at Corinth; there are no carved mouldings at all above the relief field; there is a band of foliage and fruit instead of the oak leaves; the two figures on the lid have their heads and certainly belong to the Antonine period. A sarcophagus at Kephissia (Robert, II, pl. III, No. 9; Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 344) has Caryatids and, in the plain decorative panels on the rim and the absence of mouldings, resembles the foregoing. A sarcophagus in Constantinople, also from Saloniki (Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, I, p. 119, No. 32), has the oak leaves, the sculptured bases at the corners, and pilasters above them as in the Kertch example; no carved mouldings above the relief field. A sarcophagus found on a Greek island and later in the Stroganoff collection in Leningrad (Robert, II, pi. VI, No. 20; Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, III, 517 f.) has the same sculptured composition as that from Kertch and resembles it closely in various respects, but is inferior and apparently later. Robert places it in the third century, while all the others belong to the second. The other five make a coherent group, probably manufactured in one place and distributed over no very long time. The Kertch example is the only one that has a Lesbian cymatium; it departs farther from the classical type than the cymatium on our sarcophagus, and hence is presumably later. A sarcophagus probably found at Saloniki and now in Constantinople (Robert, III, 2, pi. XLIV, No. 144 and III, 3, pl. CXXIV, No. 429; Reinach, Repertoirede Reliefs, II, 173; Mendel, op. cit., I, p. 98, No. 21) has on the back garlands with fillets like those at Corinth, and two griffins and an eagle in the centre: the decoration is very closely similar to that on the back of the sarcophagus from Saloniki in the Louvre. It also has Caryatids and sculptured bases at the corners. On the front it has a wealth of mouldings, notably a Lesbian cymatium and a guilloche below the sculptured area. This combination is the hallmark of a considerable group whose members are more closely related than those of the former group: Athens from Patras (Robert, III, 2, pl. LXX, No. 216; 'Apx. 'E+. 1890, pl. IX), British Museum from Crete (Robert, II, pl. XI, No. 23; Smith, Catalogueof Sculpture, III, p. 297, No. 2296), Delphi (Robert, III, 3, pl. CXXXVII, No. 433; Fouilles de Delphes, IV, pi. XCI),

and Constantinople (Robert, II, pl. XXX, No. 74; Mendel, op. cit., I, p. 82, No. 15). The similarity between the last two is particularly close. All of this group except the sarcophagus found at Patras have Caryatids and sculptured bases. The combination of Lesbian cymatium and guilloche occurs on a sarcophagus found in Italy and now in Leningrad (Robert, III, 2, pl. XLVIII, No. 154). Here we find the clue to a third group in the frieze of tall acanthus leaves behind the heads of the figures. On the back it has a band of leaves like that at Corinth. A sarcophagus at Girgenti (Robert, III, 2, pi. XLVII, No. 152) has the same composition in the sculpture and is very similar in all respects, but on the front it has a broad band of foliate ornament as in the Kertch sarcophagus. An example that came from Ephesus to Woburn Abbey (Robert, II, pl. XXII, No. 47) has along with the acanthus frieze a broad foliate band on the front as in the Kertch sarcophagus and on the end a band of leaves as at Corinth. In an example in the Louvre, which probably came from Rome (Robert, II, pl. XVI, No. 26), the mouldings are largely lost, but apparently they were originally like those of the Girgenti sarcophagus. The Achilles sarcophagus in the Museo Capitolino (supra, No. 240) has no acanthus frieze, but

seems to belong here; it has the broad band of foliate ornament. Three others that have the acanthus frieze, but stand somewhat apart from the rest of the group are: Athens, National Museum 1176 (Robert, III, 3, pl. 103, No. 322), Arles (Robert, III, 2, pl. L, No. 160; Esperandieu, Recueil Gene'ral, I, p. 109, No. 133), and Spalato, from Salona (Robert, III, 2,

pl. LXXIII, No. 220). The first two of these three groups unquestionably belong together. All except one (Robert, II, pl. XIII, No. 24; "Graeco-Roman") of the sarcophagi placed in them were found in Greek lands, and Altmann (Architectur und Ornamentik der antiken Sarkophage, pp. 88-91) suggested Athens as much the most probable place of manufacture. In regard to the third group the facts are not so clear; several of its members were found in Italy and were placed in Robert's Graeco-Roman class, and the group seems to cover a considerable range in time. In ornament and structure, however, these sarcophagi show strong indications of the traditions followed in the former two groups. The Spalato sarcophagus, at least, shows certain similarities in mouldings to the later Attic group represented by No. 1497 in the National Museum at Athens (supra, No. 238), and the "specific Attic" decoration on the end of the lid (see preceding entry) appears on the Delphi sarcophagus in our

second group. There is no doubt that the sarcophagus at Corinth and its close companions belong to the Antonine period. To arrange them in order and date them more closely would require an exhaustive study. Such a study was planned by Young, who tentatively assigned the Corinth sarcophagus to the period 145-161. So far as the composition and style of the sculptures are concerned, the nearest relative is perhaps the Hippolytus sarcophagus in the Hermitage (Robert, III, 2, pl. XLVIII, No. 154), a member of the second group as given above.

A. J. A. XXVI, 1922, pp. 430-444, and XXIX, 1925, pp. 82 f. (Young); Carpenter, Guide, pp. 79 f., No. 20. 242. Part of large animal (832). Broken on all sides.

Height, 0.26 m.; width, 0.26 m.; total thickness, 0.146 m.; relief

height, 0.04 m. The tail and haunch of an animal, probably a lion, facing left. Such animals are common on sarcophagi. 243. Helmeted head (418). Height,

0.12m.;

width,

0.09m.;

depth, 0.065m.

Evidently

from a relief, though

nothing remains of the background, and in all probability from a sarcophagus. The crest

No. 243

No. 244

of the helmet is lost, and the end of the nose is bruised; otherwise the preservation is perfect. Details are not worked out. The head is seen in profile to left. The features seem somewhat feminine; perhaps an Amazon. The polished surface indicates a date in the second half of the second century after Christ. 244. Nude figure (428). Found May 28, 1902. Chest to thighs; height, 0.16 m. The weight rests on the left leg. The figure is male. The surface is highly polished, indicating that the figure was made toward the end of the second century after Christ. There is no clear evidence that it was not a free-standing figure; but from its size and its period it is probable that it belonged to a sarcophagus. GRAVE

STELAE

245. Female figure (704). Found May 21, 1904. Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.205 m.; width, 0.25 m.; total thickness, 0.044 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. The figure is preserved almost from shoulders to waist. Only one garment is visible, a chiton with sleeves. The left arm is bent sharply at the elbow,

severalblack spots, probablyresultingfromcontact with burningtimbers. There are traces of archaismin the renderingof the hand and breast, but the draperydoes not look very early. Greekwork, slightly before450 B.C. 246. Head of girl (60 and 729, reentry). Found "a little east of Peirene and north by 10 m." Height, 0.21 m.; width, 0.23 m.;

total thickness,0.104 m.; reliefheight, 0.04 m. Brokenon all sides; back rough. The head is in profile to left. The nose is gone, and the head somewhat battered otherwise. The relief

No. 245

No. 246

is so managedthat the chin is fully shown,while the backgroundjust touches the cornerof the mouth and cuts the right eye, which is not clearly workedout. The locks of hair are "brushedup loosely from all sides and caught in a little knot on the top of the head." The fragmentis correctlydated by Miss Gardinerin the decade after 440 B.C. A. J. A. XIII, 1909, pp. 159-161 (Miss Gardiner). 247. Man with dog (187, 196). Both fragmentsfound in 1900, west of the Propylaea. 196 includesthe part from shouldersto thighs; height, 1.14 m. 187 includesthe plinth, the feet and legs halfwayto the knees, and the rear part and forepawsof the dog; height of fragment, 0.45 m.; of plinth, 0.16 m.; width of stele, 1.05 m.; relief height, 0.09 m. Total

height of stele above plinth as restored,to top of upper fragment,1.745 m. The head, left hand and wrist, right hand, middle of the legs, and fore part of the dog are lacking. The man stands somewhatstiffly, facing the front. His right arm hangs at the side; his left arm is so bent at the elbow that the hand must have been at the level of the shoulder; in this hand he held what is without doubt a hunting spear, though the point is not preserved; it stands on the ground. The only garment is a chlamys, clasped on the right shoulder. At the man's left sits the dog, facing away from him. The stele has several peculiarities. The feet are almost entirely in the round, but only

right side than on his left, and the proportions are remarkably poor. The folds of the chlamys are divided vertically in a way that is not reasonable for that garment. These imperfections are balanced by a good deal of freshness and vigor. Miss Gardiner noted all this and came to the conclusion that the work was Greek, of about 400 B.C. On the other hand Carpenter writes: "The oversmooth clear workmanship, the mistakes in anatomical scale, and certain forms used in the drapery furrows indicate that the work is Roman and probably Hadrianic." Life-size figures on grave stelae are very much less usual in Roman than in Greek times. When they do occur they are likely to be reproductions of standard types, which this certainly is not. Fa~C

81 j

-

8 i| ' '|

_i

_

~

?I:?_ '?:_

_~:

?

!?

i.?

2. | ':""::i':"'"

| lee

. fif 111 3

X

.

|

.'

::' .

.S l

Wi .. ..,:s | l R

--r

_

247.

:

*e

iiE:

l

_

i:,

i

:?:

:i;.:

_-

-

*

E~~~~~~~~~~.?a ~:

_

...::* .........

No

Nos. 248, 249

Nevertheless Carpenter's judgment is confirmed by the only satisfactory analogy for the drapery that I have observed: a terminal female figure formerly in the Lansdowne Collection (catalogue of the sale, p. 29, No. 41, with illustration; Michaelis, Ancient Marbles, p. 462), which was found in Hadrian's villa at Tivoli. A. J. A. XIII, 1909, pp. 165-169, and pl. V (Miss Gardiner); Carpenter, Guide, p. 71, No. 6. 248. Large stele (91, 91 A). The two fragments join; height, 0.86 m.; width, 0.45 m.; total thickness, 0.22 m.; relief height, 0.12 m. Broken on all sides, except possibly for the curving edge at top and figure's right; back roughly dressed. The extreme right side of the head and neck and the right

face and is presumably parted in the middle; from behind the ear a lock falls on the shoulder. The head is turned slightly to the figure's left. This is part of a grave-stele with a life-size female figure in high relief; cf. Nos. 966 and 1005 in the National Museum at Athens, and No. 249 in the Glyptothek at Munich. Good Greek work of the fourth century. 249. Large stele (323). Found May 14, 1901. Left shoulder of a draped figure. Broken on all sides; back roughly dressed. Height, 0.415 m.; width, 0.28 m.; total thickness, 0.145 m.; relief height, 0.055 m. The arm is pre-

served to the elbow. Although the scale, material, and workmanship are about the same as in the preceding fragment, it is unlikely that the two belong to the same stele: the relief is much lower in this piece, and the treatment of the drapery indicates a different hand. 250. Large stele (609). Broken on all sides; back rough. Height, 0.34 m.; width, 0.40 m.; total thickness, 0.175 m. The end of the himation is visible, and the chiton beneath. Coarse work.

No. 251

No 252

251. Large stele (589).

Broken on all sides; back rough. Height, 0.36 m.; width, 0.18 m.; total thickness, 0.165 m. Left shoulder of a draped figure. This may belong with the following. 252. Figure with snake (397). Broken on all sides; back rough. Height, 0.42 m.; width, 0.24 m.; total thickness, 0.165 m.; relief height, 0.09 m. A left leg with a garment covering it, and beside it a staff, round which a serpent coils. This suggests an identification as Asclepius, who might appear either in a votive relief or in a large composition on a mythological theme. In either, however, figures of life size would not be expected. Probably, therefore, the fragment belongs

the dead in the guise of chthonian Hermes is analogous (Collignon, Statues Funeraires, pp. 316-321).

This fragment is inferior in workmanship to Nos. 248 and 249, and is doubt-

less Roman. 253. Grave stele (358). Upper right corner, with moulding at top. Height, 0.24 m.; width, 0.13 m.; total thick-

ness, 0.075 m.; relief height, 0.015 m. A bearded man facing left, with outstretched right arm, is preserved to the waist. The left arm comes down, the hand somewhat forward. The only garment is a himation, which leaves bare the upper part of the body except the left shoulder. Reddish stone. Greek work of the fourth century B.C.

No. 253

No. 254

No. 255

No. 256

254. Grave stele (1037). Broken on all sides; back rough. Height, 0.205 m.; width, 0.18 m.; total thickness, 0.05 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. A bearded head in profile to right; an interesting portrait even in its battered condition. Hellenistic. 255. Grave stele (48). Lower left corner; back rough. Height, 0.35 m.; width, 0.175 m.; total thickness, 0.12 m.; relief height, 0.04 m. A female figure, very slender, lacks head and left arm; the right hangs

by her side; the weight rests on the right leg. She wears an Ionic chiton and himation. Probably Hellenistic. 256. Grave stele (53). Broken on all sides; back rough. Height, 0.145 m.; width, 0.12 m.; total thickness, 0.07 m. A man is seated on a thronos,facing right; the upper right part of the body is nude. Poor work.

Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.13 m.; width, 0.10 m.; total thickness, 0.055 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. A seated man is preserved from head to waist, with the ex-

ception of the right shoulder and arm; the head is much battered. The upper part of the body is nude. The man faces right; the left arm is extended in that direction.

Good work.

258. Grave stele (1082). Lower left corner; back smooth. Height, 0.37m.; width, 0.15m.; total thickness, 0.08 m.; relief height, ca. 0.007 m. At the bottom is a vacant space; above this a seated woman facing right. Legs and head wanting.

No. 258

No. 259

No. 260

259. Grave stele (730). Lower right corner. Height, 0.21 m.; width, 0.115 m.; thickness, 0.055 m. A female figure is preserved except for the head. She wears a Doric chiton with overfold and girdle. The weight rests on the left leg, the right hand is pressed against the breast, the left comes

down and holds an object of uncertain nature. Good Roman work, with suggestions of archaistic style. 260. Grave stele (877). Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.11 m.; width, 0.16 m.; total thickness, 0.05 m.; relief height, 0.015 m. A bearded head in profile to right; much battered.

261. Grave stele? (82). Right edge original; back smooth. Height, 0.185 m.; width, 0.195 m.; total thickness, 0.045 m.; relief height, 0.015 m. A male head in profile to right; only the forehead, nose, and corner of the eye remain. The wrinkled forehead indicates age.

262. Grave stele (1026). Height, 0.29 m.; width, 0.29 m.; total thickness, 0.12 m.; relief height, 0.025 m. The stele is surmounted by a gable, in which is a rosette in low relief. On the border at the

XAIPEIN. A top of the relief-field is an inscription: TYPANIA:Q:ITTATPATTTOAEMAIQ man standing at right clasps the hand of a seated woman. The stele is broken below the waists of the figures, and part of the right side of the gable is lost. Poor work, battered, of the second century after Christ. VOTIVE RELIEFS 263. Sepulchral banquet relief (322). Lower edge original, and sides to heights of 0.16m. and 0.10m. Width, 0.495m.; maximum height, 0.285 m.; thickness, 0.065 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. A seated feminine figure and a reclining masculine figure, which is almost wholly lost, occupy a couch behind a table, on which are various viands. Behind the woman, on the left, is a standing figure, and in the foreground three small figures advancing toward an altar; the foremost leads a pig. Under the table is a serpent, stretching its head toward the food. At the right end of the table stands a volute-handled crater. At the right edge of the relief is a nude youth, presenting to the reclining man a dish. Reliefs of this sort were votive offerings to the heroized dead. Many examples are extant; for one especially similar to ours see Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 163, 1. The serpent is frequently absent, and the altar still more commonly, even when the procession is present. Frequently there is a horse, usually only his head, in an upper corner. For a brief discussion of such reliefs, see P. Gardner, Sculptured Tombs of Hellas, chap. VII. For many references, Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans,III, p. 95, No. 879. For the significance of the horse, Jb. Arch. I. XXIX, 1914, pp. 179-255 (Malten). A recent discussion: Atene e Roma, IX, 1928, pp. 20-32 (Neppi Modona). 264. Sepulchral banquet relief. Top, bottom, and right edge are original. Height, 0.44 m.; width, 0.25 m.; total thickness, 0.095 m.; relief height, 0.023 m. At the right edge is a pilaster; then, with her thronos partly in front of the pilaster, is a seated woman facing left. With her right hand she apparently takes something from a table. Behind the table is the upper part of a reclining male figure. The surface is badly battered. 265. Sepulchral banquet relief (46). Bottom and left side are original. Width, 0.31 m.; height, 0.295 m.; total thickness, 0.10 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. At left stands a draped male figure facing right; then there is a couch, on which are slight remains, probably of a reclining figure. On the border at bottom is an inscription: CYKAPTTOCTT, EvKapWr&is a feminine name; Ew is doubtless the

...,..~"~

.

.

.

.

.

.

:::::::':~:

.

.......~~~~~~~~~ ... .

i#

......

~

A:

..'~

....

,,. ,:,

. ... .... .

j

:11!! ;::::.:

1 R

...

: : :.:.

..... ::?:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~? sSa~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o 26

N o. 264 -BS

'?:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' %~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~?..:: :.. ..

...

':?;?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a?~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ :~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ :

i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.... r""l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~r 4 ..-

No. 263 o. N 263 No. 263LNo.

N 265 o. 265 No. 265

beginning of the name of her husband or father. The inscription, with its cursive forms and small apices, seems to belong to the period 50-150 after Christ. A. J. A. VII, 1903, p. 56, No. 32 (Powell); Meritt, Corinth, Vol. VIII, Part I, No. 132;

inventory of inscriptions No. 84. 266. Stele with reliefs on both sides (419). Bottom and one side (the left of the face first described) are original. Height, 0.28 m.; width, 0.30 m.; thickness, 0.12 m.; relief height, 0.035 m. On one face is a woman, wearing chiton and himation, seated in a klismos; she faces right; her feet rest on a footstool. Under

and behind the chair are the coils of a serpent. The figure is preserved to a point slightly above the seat of the chair. On the other face there seems to be a bull running to left. Behind (i. e., farther from the spectator than) the bull is visible the foot of a man; and in the path of the bull is the left leg of another figure, who must have faced the front with his feet far apart. Certain remains above the bull's back, presumably belonging to the first man, are difficult to interpret. The scene apparently represents an exploit of Heracles, or possibly of the Dioscuri; and the stele is doubtless an offering in the shrine of the hero or heroes represented. 267. Votive relief (199). Broken only at left; back rough. Height, 0.397 m.; width, 0.32 m.; total thickness, excluding bands at top and bottom, 0.10 m.; relief height, ca. 0.02 m. Seven figures are preserved in procession to left. The first figure preserved at the left, of whom the upper front part is broken away, is distinctly taller than the others and is doubtless a priestess. Behind her are two women in profile to left. Then a veiled woman faces the front and clasps the hand of the woman behind her, in profile to left. At the end of the procession is a man, with the upper part of his body, except the left shoulder, nude; and in front of him a nude boy. Details are no longer discernible, and the work was not highly finished originally. The women wear shoes or possibly sandals. Greek, late fifth or early fourth century B.C. On Greek religious processions see Jb. Arch. I. XXXI,

1916, pp. 309-339 (Nilsson).

268. Votive relief (450). Height, original, 0.24 m.; width, 0.14 m.; thickness, 0.09 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. At

right an altar; approaching it a man, behind him a woman, in foreground three small figures leading an animal. 269. Votive relief (8). Broken on all sides. Height, 0.175 m.; width, 0.135 m.; total thickness, 0.052 m.; relief

height, 0.015 m. A seated woman, in profile to right, holds in her left hand a rectangular box, while her right hand rests on a table (?), largely broken away, in front of her. Behind her, on a much smaller scale, is a bearded man.

.41?.

\^:?r

:~ ? " '"'~ ~:i'

',i'i~i~,~:,,':-~:~ *I,_

.............

.I

No. 267

No. 266 No. 269

[ 129 ]

Lower left corner.

Height, 0.235 m.; width, 0.14 m.; thickness, 0.09 m.; relief height,

0.025 m. A draped female figure is preserved except for the head, and by her side a small draped figure. Surface much destroyed. 271. Votive relief (625). Lower left corner.

Height, 0.15 m.; width, 0.19 m.; thickness,

0.06 m.; relief height,

0.015 m. The border at the side represents a square pillar with a round Attic-Ionic base, resting on a square plinth. Part of a draped figure remains.

No. 271

No. 270

No. 272

272.

No. 273

No. 274

Cuirass (89, 742).

Two fragments that join; the part below the navel is lost; back roughly dressed. Only 89 is illustrated. Height, 0.32 m.; width, 0.58 m.; total thickness, 0.048 m.; relief height, 0.015 m. The cuirass, which has no occupant, was either a decorative relief or a votive offering. The following fragment is apparently a thing of the same kind, and the two are evi-

dently not related; probably both are votive offerings. A terracotta relief representing a cuirass was found at Corinth; cf. A. J. A. X, 1906, p. 171, and pl. XIII, No. 22, where Robinson shows that it was votive.

See also Rouse, Greek Votive Offerings, pp. 369 f.

273. Helmet (373). Broken on all sides; back smooth. 0.31 m. X 0.19 m.; total thickness, 0.06 m.; relief height, 0.027 m. The helmet is seen from the front; both edges are somewhat broken. At the left are remains of a cheek-piece and of some decoration; at the right is a feather.

The

space below the visor has its original surface, so it is evident that the helmet had no wearer; it was a votive relief like the preceding. For helmets with feathers see Daremberg-Saglio, II, 2, p. 1437, especially fig. 3426. 274. Visor of helmet (1156). Right side, to slightly beyond centre. Width, 0.105 m. It is decorated with a palmette at the apex, a round boss at the right end, and a conventional floral design on the front. The hollowed back indicates that the helmet was not worn; compare the two preceding entries.

MISCELLANEOUS RELIEFS 275. Dancing Maenads (193). Found in the Agora, "southwest of the west end of the Propylaea, about 12 m. to the south."

Height, 1.25 m.; width, 0.98 m.; depth, 0.45 m.; relief height, 0.10 m. The front

is slightly convex. The back apparently had a corresponding curve; it is very roughly dressed and much broken. The Maenad on the left lacks head, right arm, left hand, right foot, and bits of drapery.

The left leg is not represented; it is presumably behind the right, which is turned straight to the front. The figure is whirling to her left and the body is twisted, the upper part still turned slightly to her right. Her head was turned in that direction, to judge from the slight remains of the neck, and the right arm probably extended out to the side. She wears a very thin sleeved chiton and over it a slightly thicker Doric chiton with overfold and kolpos, which is clasped on the shoulder; and on the outside a fawnskin, held tight by a girdle just below the breasts. Below the girdle is the head of the fawnskin; small holes indicate the pupils of the eyes. The drapery flutters about gracefully, but a considerable space remains between this and the second Maenad. The latter figure lacks left foot, fore part of right foot, and all the body above the waist except part of the right arm, above and below the elbow. The lower part of the body is in profile to right; the weight rests on the left leg and the right foot is set back, touching the ground only with the toes. The hips show that the upper part swung back to her right, and the existing part of the right arm indicates that it was almost in full front. Two garments are worn as by the other figure. The right foot wears a shoe, which is adorned with a palmette design. At the top of the relief is the end of a fillet, with a string for tying, which was doubtless held in the hand of the Maenad. The finish is rather rough: long strokes of the chisel are perceptible not only on the background but on the figures.

Gardiner agreed. Carpenter correctly classifies it as Neo-Attic, of the first century after Christ. The most definite evidence against an early date is the fillet. There is a similar fillet on the sarcophagus (No. 241) and on many other monuments of Roman times, but so far as I know it is never found in Greek work. It is doubtful also whether the ornamented shoes occur as early as the fourth century, though they are found on the frieze of the great

I

i' No. 275

No. 276

altar at Pergamum. Such dancing girls are common in Neo-Attic reliefs, but these are unusual in both size and quality. The monument thus decorated could hardly have been circular, for the curve is so slight that the size of the whole would be very great. In any event it must have been of considerable size. A. J. A. VIII, 1904, pp. 291-294, with fig. 2, reversed (Richardson); A. J. A. XIII, 1909,

pp. 169 and 304 (remarks by Miss Gardiner); Carpenter, Guide, pp. 76 f., No. 16. 276. Birds (518, 519, 529, 545, 557, 753, 938). Except 557 and 753, the pieces join; those two join each other and their place in the composition is sure. Parts of the bottom and right side are original; back rough; background

0.07 m. A bird lies dead, with the shaft of an arrow in its breast; the head of the bird and part of the arrow are lost. A similar bird stands on the first, with one talon raised and wings outspread in defiance. The second bird is virtually complete. Behind its head is a third, in flight; it is much smaller than the others and lacks the head, tail, and part of the wing. If the subject of this relief is any of the usual mythological

themes, it is the slaughter of

the Stymphalian birds by Heracles. Dinsmoor found a fragment which, in his opinion, belonged to the relief and represented the knee of Heracles. I did not find, or did not recognize, this piece and do not know its number in the inventory. Roman work, coarse in details but effective from a distance.

No. 277

277. Female head (1038). Height with neck, 0.14i.; width, 0.085 m. Nothing remains of the background. The head was turned slightly to the figure's right, as appears from the direction of the break at the back and from the more careful work on the left side toward the back. The preservation is excellent except for the tip of the nose, which is bruised. The hair is parted in the middle; a broad, gently waved mass passes to each side and covers the top of the ear. Behind these masses the hair is confined more closely to the head by a fillet, which is wound around twice. In front of each ear is a spiral curl; or rather, as appears on the left side, two spiral curls. The iris of the eye is indicated by a lightly incised line. The coiffure is similar to, though not identical with, that of several heads sometimes regarded as portraits of Sappho, and at all events belonging to the style of the third quarter of the fifth century B.c. (On these heads see Robinson, Sappho and her Influence, pp. 110113; Beazley, Greek Vases in Poland, p. 9.) The resemblance to the coiffures of Faustina the Younger, to which attention has been directed, is only superficial. Such an archaic mode would be expected particularly in the reign of Hadrian: a period that is suggested also by the technique of the eye. Compare also the curls of the Antinous Mondragone (University

ticular prototype was imitated. Speculation as to the subject is hardly worth while, though a search among the sculptures on sarcophagi might yield something. This charming head was found "imbedded in dry earth, which had come up originally as mud from the great drain running north from Peirene." "Pentelic marble." The head has been removed to the National Museum in Athens; there is a cast at Corinth. A. J. A. XX, 1916, pp. 350-355 (Swift); Art and Archaeology, XIV, 1922, pp. 224 f.

No. 278

No. 279

278. Head of Athena (821). Original edge at top and right, back rough. Height, 0.44 m.; width, 0.40 m.; total thick-

ness, 0.045 m.; relief height, 0.03 m. The goddess wears an Attic helmet with cheek-piece turned up and high horsehair crest. The visor of the helmet is adorned with spirals which spring from the centre. Above this band is a griffin. The crest is seen in profile to left, but

the face is in three-quarter view. Adjustment is made, to some extent, in the lower part of the helmet. This appears to be an imitation, though very inexact, of the Athena Parthenos of Phidias. Coarse work of the second century after Christ. A. J. A. XV, 1911, pp. 495-498 (Robinson), with list of imitations of the Parthenos. Three others: R. Et. Anc. XXI, 1919, pp. 20-26 (Deonna), Bull. Mus. Fine Arts, XXI, 1923, pp. 19 and 25, No. 3, and A. J. A. XXVIII, 1924, pp. 117-119. Many doubtful points in connection with the Parthenos are discussed by Vannoy (Studies on the Athena Parthenos of Pheidias: University of Iowa Monographs, Humanistic Series, vol. I, No. 5, 1917).

279. Relief: Bearded head (764). Fragment broken on all sides, but face virtually complete; back smooth. Height, 0.28 m.; width, 0.18 m.; total thickness, 0.05 m.; height of face, 0.21 m. The face is in pro-

file to right. The subject is a dignified man of middle age. The relief is low and flat. See the three following items.

Broken on all sides, but face virtually complete; back smooth. Height, 0.31 m.; width, 0.165 m.; total thickness, 0.06 m.; height of face, 0.23 m. The head is turned to right, but not in profile. At the top of the fragment is a curved surface, like the rim of a medallion; at the side of the face is a raised surface concealing the ear and adjoining parts. The signifi-

cance of this is not clear. A furrow descends from the inner corner of the eye to the cheek. This and the preceding fragment could well belong to the same composition or series; this might be a barbarian, the other a Roman. ...:.:__ ...... ...... ' . .C:,::::,.: :'. :.,:.,:, : ..:':'...

No. 280

No. 281

No. 282

281. Relief: Male head (413).

Top edge original, elsewhere broken. Height, 0.28 m.; width, 0.17 m.; total thickness, 0.06 m.; relief height, 0.03 m. The head is in profile to right. The back of the head is covered by a cap, apparently leather, which seems also to pass just under the chin. The hair is

only slightly indicated. There is a groove in the forehead, appearing chiefly on the part perpendicular to the surface of the relief. The work is coarse but vigorous. This piece, like the two preceding, probably belongs to the time of Trajan or Hadrian. The name tutzlus is applied, perhaps correctly, to such a cap; cf. J. R. S. I, 1911, pp. 212-226. 282. Relief: Female head (856). Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.16 m.; width, 0.12 m.; total thickness, 0.12 m.; relief height, 0.015 m. The front of the face is preserved from forehead to chin. The relief is very flat. There is a furrow leading from the corner of the eye as in No. 280. The form of the lips is like that of No. 281. This fragment has been published as a work of

the fifth century B.c., largely because the eye approaches full front. It does not differ essentially, in this respect or in any other, from the three preceding heads, which are certainly Roman; this also is Roman, though much better than any of the others.

A. J. A. XIII, 1909, pp. 161-165 (Miss Gardiner). For such eyes in Roman relief cf. Strong, Roman Sculpture, pl. 49. 283. Relief: Head of Eros (14). Height, 0.15 m.; width, 0.124 m.; thickness, 0.045 m. Right side only. The treatment of the eye indicates that this is from a relief, though nothing remains of the background.

Good Roman work. 284. Relief: Bearded head (420). The top edge is partly original; elsewhere broken. Height, 0.245 m.; width, 0.22 m.; total thickness, 0.053 m.; relief height, 0.035 m. The face is seen in front view. The hair is a mass of small separate curls. There is a furrow in the forehead; the eyes are deep set; the nose is flat. The right ear protrudes at the side, the left apparently was not represented. The work is summary but not bad; it is much better, for example, than in the head of Athena

(No. 278). 285. Relief: Face (260). Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.14 m.; width, 0.155 m.; total thickness, 0.055 m. The face is in front view; it lacks the part below the nose. The relief is low. The

right eye is unmistakably closed, the left unmistakably open. Very rude, sketchy work. 286. Relief: Male head (1041, labelled 1040). Broken on all sides; the back, though quite rough, is probably original. The head is preserved from eyes upward. Height, 0.175 m.; width, 0.16 m.; total thickness, 0.055 m. There is a curious headdress, suggesting an arched gate in a wall. This is perhaps a variation of

the mural crown; if so the figure would probably be a personification of a fortified citadel. 287. Head of Heracles (829). Found March 31, 1908; in West Shop I, 0.40 m. below floor level. Broken except at top; back smooth. Height, 0.18 m.; width, 0.21 m.; total thickness, 0.042 m.; relief height, ca. 0.01 m. Head of Heracles, with lion-skin helmet, in profile to right. Along the top of the slab is a bough with leaves, which doubtless is the hero's club. The eye is in front view as in the most archaic sculpture. Otherwise the work does not look early; there is much modelling and no regard for planes; the piece is probably Hellenistic.

Good work, though not fine in detail. 288. Dancing Satyr (785). Left edge original, elsewhere broken; back rough. Height, 0.192 m.; width, 0.162 m.; total thickness, 0.023 m.; relief height, ca. 0.02 m. The satyr, recognizable as such by the stump of a tail, is preserved from shoulders to knees. Both arms are lacking; traces remain

of the left, extended almost horizontally. The body is twisted: the lower part is in profile to left, with the right leg slightly in advance, while the shoulders are seen almost directly from the rear. Unskilled but fresh and vigorous work, probably Hellenistic.

""5

No. 285

No. 284 _

No. 283

r

~*#

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"

-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ???:~~~~~~~~~~~~. :i:~iii-':~'~i:,~; ??:r: '"" . :. . ?:~ iiii:;?.;:!~i~:?:ri;': ..... ii' i~

i~

i~;~-~ , ,

No. 286

?

,.i '"'~~~~~~~~~~i No. 287

? .:":.~ '.,~..-.:..:..:.:....

.

.

.

.

28 NoNo. ~'

r~'":'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . ..... .

.^.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

,

1E ...::

. .... .... ,

No. 287

No. 288

E 1s7

Right edge original; back smooth. Height, 0.24 m.; width, 0.215 m.; total thickness, 0.043 m.; relief height, 0.023 m. A tongue pattern is carved on the lower part of the vase, above which rises a tapering neck. At the left of it is the end of a garment; at the right, at the edge, an object that may be the other end. The garment is not resting on the vase, but hanging from above. The shape of the vase is not a common one: compare Richter, Catalogue of Bronzes in the Metropolitan Museum, Nos. 480 and 505; Schumacher, Beschreibung der Sammlung antiker Bronzen zu Karlsruhe, pl. X, 25. 290. Male figure (87, 143). Two fragments that join; no edge original; back smooth. Height, 0.24 m.; width, 0.395 m.; total thickness, 0.066 m. Right shoulder, arm and breast of a man who wears a tunic and apparently another garment. The shoulder and arm are bare. The man is turned to his left, the arm crossing the chest. Life size. Roman.

No. 289

No. 290

291. Base with reliefs (189). 1.475 m. X 1.01 m. X 0.79 m.; height of relief field, 0.61 m.; relief height, 0.05 m. On all sides there is a large egg-and-dart at top, below it a small bead-and-reel. On the west

side there is a large garland with fruits and a vase. On the south end there is a garland and a plain disc, like a shield; this is perhaps a variant of the patera, which frequently is associated with the vase; both are sacrificial implements. On the north end of the base, which is much battered, only a garland is now perceptible. On the east side are a garland, which apparently stretched across the entire block, and two draped figures, 0.43 m. apart. Between them, and 0.14 m. from the one at left, is some object extending from the bottom to the wreath; probably it is an altar. There is something on it which is seen above the wreath.

The figure at the left holds something in her extended left hand, and there are slight re-

4t,i~U?~k

~

?

I~fi _

E..

,:.

~

~

~

_l

i:

r~~~~~~~~~I ~ ~

~

~

~

~

~

-' 11

'

c~~~~~~~~~~

:" lc?1~:":': ala~ ii.*.. .*':,*~'

*

I .:l]lli ~I IIX I[ IIpII [II~:I~IIii[i~ I~ J'' J:':. J ?

~,..:?

~

i t~

?j :,... :

~~~~~ i :;1:I]l~~

ii:[ ~~-? ..... ~

[: Ii :' ~i''' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*.,

..'.......

.

'40

s?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

?.?: ~

F"""ii

:**.-"/T.~

.ZE.

?'

.

. ...291 No . 291....l

?:~~~~~~~~~~N.

291

[

~.[

' I

thing is much battered. There are a few letters of an inscription (TEREN) on the east side. The garland is in high relief, but heads of grain and leaves appear in very low relief and die away into the background. This manner belongs to the first century after Christ and chiefly to the first half of it. 292. Foot (875). Broken except at bottom; back smooth. Height, 0.225 m.; width, 0.365 m.; total thickness, 0.044 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. The foot, in profile to right, rests on the front part; the heel is raised. The footgear consists of a great number of narrow bands. At the left edge of the fragment is a small object, probably the toe of a second shoe. Inv. 280 is a small fragment of a foot with a similar shoe, and probably belongs to the same composition.

. ........ ...

... ...

::

No. 292

.

No. 293

No. 294

293. Sheep (207). Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.44 m.; width, 0.245 m.; total thickness, 0.095 m.; relief height, 0.05 m. The rear part of a sheep is visible. The feet seem to hang rather than to rest on anything. To the rear of the sheep a small hand holds a club which, to judge from the direction of the sheep's tail, must have rested on the ground. Poor work. 294. Lower part of figure (263). Broken on all sides. Height, 0.27 m.; width, 0.23 m.; total thickness, 0.098 m.; relief height, 0.05 m. From the waist to the calf of a figure clad in a garment reaching the knee. Only one side, presumably the right, is seen; the figure is striding to right. At the bottom of the fragment is the uppermost lace of a high boot (?). To the left at bottom is a circular object with some attachment at left, possibly a wineskin. Coarse work. 295. Four legs (74).

Bottom and left side are original. Height, 0.23 m.; width, 0.43 m.; total thickness, 0.067 m.; relief height, 0.03 m. At left, a right leg turned slightly to the figure's right; then

Behind the last, in very low relief, a third foot, in profile in same direction; so also the fourth, at right end. These last two probably belong to one figure. The legs are preserved from slightly below the knees down. All wear shoes; the legs seem to be bare. 296. Seated figure. Bottom edge original; back generally smooth, though not carefully dressed. Height, 0.397 m.; width, 0.345 m.; total thickness, 0.138 m.; relief height, 0.055 m. The figure, wearing a chiton and himation, sits upon a rock; the upper part is lost. The right arm apparently crossed the front of the body.

No. 295

No. 297

297. Bull and man (88). At bottom is a smooth band, height, 0.095 m.; the left end of this band is original. Elsewhere the fragment is broken; back smooth. Height, 0.297 m.; width, 0.465 m.; total thickness, 0.06 m.; relief height, 0.035 m. At left is a right foot, resting on the toes only and turned almost to the front; next, a cloven hoof, which from its proportionate size should be that of a bull; next, a left foot, in profile to right. These rest on a slightly roughened surface above the band at bottom. The proximity of the edge indicates that the hoof is a rear one and that the two feet belong to one man. Unskilled but vigorous work. 298. Female figure (752). Broken on all sides and at back. Height, 0.11 m.; width, 0.26 m.;

total

thickness,

0.13 m.;

relief

height, 0.05 m. Of the figure there remain the lower part of the abdomen and part of the thighs; at her right the hand is preserved. Apparently both hands held the garment, which passes across both thighs. Mediocre work.

V.

- ---- - ---No. 298

.

Broken on all sides; back somewhat rough. Height, 0.10 m.; width, 0.07 m.; total thickness, 0.02 m.; relief height, 0.01 m. The figure lacks feet, head, and upper right part of body. The weight rests on the right leg; the left is crossed behind it. The left arm is bent at the elbow and placed at the side. At right is an object on a table (?), on which the figure leans. The relief apparently presents a barbarous imitation of some Apollo type. Cf. Reinach, Repertoire de Reliefs, II, 9. 300. Draped figure or monster? (210). Broken on all sides; back rough. Height, 0.15 m.; width, 0.10 m.; total thickness, 0.025 m. Barbarous work and not entirely intelligible.

No. 300

No. 301

301. Right arm (801). Broken on all sides; back smooth. Height, 0.18 m.; width, 0.22 m.; total thickness, 0.04 m.; relief height, 0.01 m. The arm is bent at a right angle, and the forearm raised; the hand holds a club, which slants to the shoulder. Fragments of other objects appear at Heracles. Very poor work. is doubtless and but are not The top left, subject intelligible. 302. Bearded man (218). Right edge original; back rough. Height, 0.445 m.; width, 0.34 m.; total thickness, 0.07 m. The upper part of the man's head is lost, and his body below the waist; a part of his left arm is cut off by the original edge. The body is seen in front view; the head in profile to his right. His hands are bound behind him. Very rough work.

303. Three spears (131). One edge original; back smooth. Height (parallel with edge), 0.33 m.; width, 0.25 m.; shafts part of of the the shafts with part m. Three Three spearheads spearheadswith 0.015 m. total m.; relief relief height, height, 0.015 total thickness, 0.045 m.; thickness, 0.045

were not vertical or horizontal; probably they were carried on a man's shoulder. Good work. 304. Spearhead (84). Broken on all sides; back smooth. 0.25 m. X 0.10 m.; total thickness, 0.039 m.; relief height, 0.02 m. An object 0.105 m. wide and defined by wavy lines may be a serpent.

A

spearhead is apparently directed toward it. .::=. ..:..... ;

.............................:.:

_|,

No. 302

No. 303

305. Serpent (733). The edges seem to be original, though rough, except at bottom. Height, 0.09 m.; width, 0.155 m.; depth, 0.09 m., at bottom; it narrows to an edge at top. The serpent is writhing, ~~~~~~~~~~~.......... his head toward the top; he is surrounded by decoration faintly resembling a palmette, but possibly representing rays. It is probably a religious symbol of some sort. ?..

No. 305

...

...

..

No. 306

306. Wheat (351). Height, 0.13 m.; width, 0.17 m.; total thickness, 0.17 m.; relief height, 0.075 m. Several heads of wheat.

Broken on all sides; back smooth. One edge of the relief-field is preserved, probably the top.

Height, 0.106 m.; width, 0.06 m.; total thickness,

0.018 m.; relief height, 0.005 m.

The wing is of the conventional sort, with curling tip. Below it is the head and part of the handle of a double axe. 308. Bird? (267). The piece is of irregular curved form. 0.14 m. X 0.13 m.; 0.09 m. thick; relief height, 0.015 m. The bird has a long neck and a long bill. The neck is curved back and the beak touches the body, which has a scaly appearance. Perhaps it is a monster of some sort.

No. 308

No. 310

309. Bird and figure (985). Broken at top and left end. Height, 0.18 m.; width, 0.378 m.; total thickness, 0.138 m.; depth of plinth ( = relief height), 0.05 m. At right is the lower part of a pillar; then a foot

in profile to left; then a bird, preserved except for head and feet. The bird is not an eagle or a hawk.

On the back of the slab are two grooves parallel with the bottom, which return

upward 0.10 m. from the right end. Rather poor work. 310. Tripod (26). The left edge is original.

Height, 0.255 m.; width, 0.19 m.; total thickness,

0.08 m.;

relief height, 0.01 m. At the original edge is a tripod; before it is an object largely broken away, which seems to have the long legs of a bird. Probably very late. 311. Uncertain object. The shape now is that of a quarter-cylinder; one end and one flat side, as well as the curved surface, are original.

Height, 0.13 m.; radius, 0.083 m. On the curved surface are

not marble. 312. Relief (90). One edge original; back smooth. Height, 0.24 m.; width, 0.41 m.; total thickness, 0.047 m. A ridge parallel with the original edge divides the relief into two parts, in each of which are waves in relief, presumably representing folds in drapery. In the part farther from the original edge there are also other things that seem to be partly floral in nature, but

include two diamond-shaped objects. It seems probable that these things are pendants from a necklace.

If this is right the fragment belongs to a female figure in relief. The best

parallels, none too good, are found in the Palmyrene reliefs; especially in one in the Metropolitan Museum, unpublished so far as I know.

. ...... ...

~~

...... ??i~~~~~~aaa~~~~ k~~~Yp??-~~ ~::i

..

.

:::~i:~ :................. :.

:

J ...

.

No. 312

-

_

No. 313

313. Chariot (1066).

Broken on all sides, though it must be nearly complete at the bottom. Height, 0.40 m.; width, 0.38 m.; total thickness, 0.14 m.; relief height, 0.039 m. A racing chariot of saucer

shape; upon it is a nude figure with his right leg outstretched behind him; the left is almost horizontal, evidently pressed against the front of the chariot. The right foot is lacking, and all above the navel. Probably third century after Christ. For such chariots see Daremberg-Saglio, article Circus; Nachod, Der Rennwagen bei den Italikern, pp. 95 ff. 314. Pedestal (1150). Broken at top and bottom. Parts of three faces are preserved, of which two are decorated and the third is dressed. Height, 0.255 m.; width of complete face, 0.145 m. The decoration is in two bands separated by a moulding; neither is preserved to its full height. The decoration of the lower band consists of several plants naturalistically treated. One of them is a

lotus, and the treatment suggests Egyptian style. In the upper band are remains of two identical figures, each consisting of two concentric circles. I know no satisfactory parallel for the decoration of the fragment. 315. Laurel branches (1128). Broken on all sides and apparently at back; remains of a moulding are visible at top. Height, 0.34 m.; width, 0.165 m.; thickness, 0.07 m.; relief height, 0.01 m. Well cut.

316. Vines. Slab with reliefs on both faces. Broken on all sides. 0.40 m. X 0.39 m.; total thickness, 0.095 m.; relief height, 0.01 m. On one face is a grapevine, on the other an ivy. In each instance a thick, curving stalk encloses the field. Good work of the first century after Christ. Such reliefs, in which the two sides are decorated with approximately equal elaboration and care, were suspended or placed on stands. They do not often have plant decoration

as here. (Lippold, in Jb. Arch. I. XXXVI, 1921, pp. 33-44). 317. Hare (838). Broken on all sides. 0.15 m. X 0.175 m. X 0.055 m. On one face is seated a hare in a concave surface with a rim around it; the head and shoulders are lost. The other face is also sculptured; the representation is not clear, but is some part (probably a leg) of a large animal. Relief height ca. 0.01 m. on both sides. Probably a decorative relief like the preceding. 318. Wing. Broken on all sides. 0.23 m. X 0.175 m.; 0.131 m. thick. On the face is the curling tip of a conventional wing; at the broken edge is a possible trace of another similar wing. On the other side of the slab are faint remains of decoration, apparently floral. Perhaps it is a support of a table or bench (Richter, Ancient Furniture, pp. 141-142). Such pieces are Roman in type, not Greek. 319. Wings (637, 638, 636, 964). Four fragments that join. The upper left corner and part of the left side are original; back smooth. Height, 0.685 m.; width, 0.31 m.; total thickness, 0.06 m. Parts of two conventional wings, probably belonging to a sphinx or some similar creature. 320. Grotesque figure (204). Right side original, and part of top. Height, 0.28m.; width, 0.265m.; thickness, 0.08 m.; relief height, 0.008 m. There is a plain border at side and top: width, 0.03 m. to 0.05 m. The figure is in flat relief. The head is in profile to left, the shoulders in full front. The nose, mostly broken away, seems to have been raised as though seen from the front. The large, staring eye is in full front; there is a hole near the inner corner to represent the iris. The hair is flowing. Very rude and extraordinary style. 839 is perhaps another piece

part of a human being, though the thing at the right may be a humanfoot.

ta a, 4 .t0SS :

Fv~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~? X,0,, ffAS ;f:-. ?. . A?,: P IIE:

';iB

~~~:

*A

.

'f'

~;ii~iii?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~iii'' i i

*

~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~..._* ~

...

No. 315

No. 314

No. 317

J~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:,: :.-

...

::

*...17 :;. ...

.. ......:...

:

-

:

..

:.?~~

:...... ........ _ .......~~~~~~~~~~~~.......

*

,

...

;

*::.:

. .?

:::

:::

. ~: .............~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~............ ~ .....__ ........~ ~~~~~~~~~L . *

s

_

:. }

4:'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ......_ :.... .. ....... .._.

No. 319

Nio'

320

No. 320

I

|E'

AND LATER 321. Bearded head (920). Found May 30, 1908. Most of the chin is lost. Height below wreath, 0.175 m. Around the head is a rounded fillet and above it a conventionalized wreath. A small piece on the right side of the wreath was apparently attached by four small dowels; it is lost. Above the middle of the forehead the hair is thin and is represented by wavy grooves on a slightly raised surface. At the sides .

...... . . ..

.

No. 321

..

..

No. 322

shown as a beam-shaped depression. The face is that of a strong, determined man somewhat past middle age. There are horizontal lines in the forehead and a vertical groove between the brows; the cheeks also are somewhat lined. The eyes are set deep under the brows. The treatment of the mustache indicates a date not before Constantine. There is a very isc onventionaliz other portrait eas (ArndtBruckmann, Nos. 54 and 907) have fillets and close parallel for the fillet and wreath in a head of Julian in the National Museum at Athens man somewhat that both in treatment; it is supposed arermined wreathsas here, though less conional (No. 2006; Kastriotis in 'Apx. 'E. 1923, pp. 118-123); there can hardly be a great difference

in date between i and our head. A head in Ephesus (Jh. est.Arch. . II, 1899, p. 245) has a Constantine. There beenis a of a warriore indicates of our portrait has the datiognomy Thesubjecatment very a similar fillet and somewhat similar wreath and is shown by other features to represent a

priest. Two other portrait heads (Arndt-Bruckmann,Nos. 54 and 907) have fillets and The subject of our portrait has the physiognomyof a warrior,but he may have been a

an emperor. The head is among the most powerful of later Roman portraits. 322. Male figure (1141). Shoulders to navel. Height, 0.335 m.; width, 0.37 m.; depth, 0.13 m. The head was inserted. The back has been cut away. The front of the body is almost a plain surface in the middle; on each side a fold falls from the shoulder. The arrangement of the garment is not clear. Probably fourth century after Christ.

324.

Male

figure

(367).

~~~~ .. .

..

:ic~~~~~~ ~.':..

':

?

.:fi ::

..

.

..

No 324

No. 323

N j, vf* ',g,, . ....... o.323No,.,swt.,

just aboveit, including

32.

:

(14): 'Mi:::r .: .'

:32::.

Mal

heayd, whih Found

0.1'.;

(:7fue...

foot. Height, 0.61

s"in <>of

s

hos

.

.; width,

3

_

2

d

, 0.14 m.

thepm

ad

(?)."

found in the excavations. .Not

Notfound in the exca1vations. The head, which was inserted, and the arms are lacking; also part of the plinth and part

other reaching the ground. The elongation of the figure and the lack of modelling indicate a date not earlier than the third century and probably in the fourth. 325. Draped male figure (903). Found in the theatre.

I>W

~

i

j

*:'

:t,

,, No..3:2

i 5

i

No. 325

The head, right arm, part of left hand, and body below the knees are lacking. The remainder is broken into three parts, which join: (a) the front, (b) the upper part of the back, (c) the lower part of the back. Height, 0.90m.; breadth at shoulders, 0.45 m. A tunic is worn, and outside it a long chlamys clasped on the right shoulder. The left arm hangs at the side and is slightly bent at the elbow; apparently it projected slightly from the chlamys. The position of the right arm is doubtful: slight traces on the breast, as well as the analogy of the following figures, suggest that the hand was placed there. The back is very little worked. The drapery shows, in the arrangement of the folds, the continued influence of classical tradition; but the folds are all very shallow, so that there is little play of light and shade and the surface approximates as nearly as possible to that of a smoothly rounded pillar. The weight evidently rested nearly, if not quite, equally on the two legs, and the posture was stiffly erect. It is impossible to see whether the head was turned to one side.

See remarks after No. 328. Reinach, Repertoire, V, 534, 2. 326. Draped male figure (822). Found June 25, 1907; north of St. John's, 2 m. above virgin soil. Lacks head and all below waist. Height, 0.63 m.; width at break, 0.53 m.; depth at break, 0.275 m. The costume consists of a sleeved tunic and a long chlamys as in the preceding figure; but here the chlamys appears to be of heavier material than in the preceding instance. It is difficult to say how far this difference is in the garment, and how far in the method of sculpture. The left arm hangs at the side, covered by the chlamys; the right is bent at the elbow and the hand is pressed against the breast. The hand holds an object identifiable, by comparison with consular diptychs, as a handkerchief (mappa). Just below

tunic. The entire chlamys, both front and back, and a part of the tunic which would be concealed by the arm, are left with the surface only roughly picked, as though by a pointed hammer. So far as the chlamys is concerned, this could be regarded as a method, not ineffectual, of rendering the rough texture of the garment. The folds are very few and very

? . .1 |~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~.

.

~:......:,.~..~:,.,,:.~ ...:

..:::,.:~.~::7 '~"l : ...I .~ .~-'?' ::::::::::::: __~~~~~~~~~. ...... . :e.:.: . -

": .

.

::.::id::e:,,~..

are .......so~:.<~ cutig

Th.malfod.hihwol-ntrll shown

.':n

:wh::ich:::::::::

....

. .

,

sipife

:

manne.' :The,'~~,~:'~~,:,,,:'':,:~,:.''~",, .'at

...

iue(1) ?97

;:.:::: ..

,.':-.:~

<:?::~:,,~~3.....26..: .~N.o.:....

.

:.:.~.,~-.

?roe ...::

alon ppa.o.h

",c

".

::~ ~ ~.o:

,

. :'~-

the~: righ

~

unior

roude

'!

.... late' a.. the~:: wal .

stoa :~~"....:'~ .....?..

.

"

.

:..:.. :.:..:

..:,:~:....:.:::.:::......:,:.

.

.

?'.

~

.: .z. ~:,-,-~.,:, :.,.

side,' ==and======================= one. along:':':'

.breast .h '

:

~:~::.:~:.,: .::~::::,.

,~,

..

righ.han :ufae

.h block, had::prenously:::been::used::as:an:archi:tectural 328~'~:.-.:j,::':::::i:'::'::

:..

:~,:::~':... ,~:..:i:!(.':' __ :,~~{::'e..~:.

.

.

:

: 534 ~:::::::: 7 '- V, :::~:i :einach,::":: R"epertzre, 5.: . 32.Dae?ae :.:.:ou.nd''::::::'i~:,' June '",:

.

..............-ove.~:o.,...:.,..,

indicat

Se after.~::.. rem arks::::::::::

.

._..:::::::::::::::

......... .........................p,:.straight

sim.',ndi-"e: .........., ..............e~ lef

::_...

.

:~~~,....~~::.:~:

.:

',:-:.:':::::.

..... = ========1

i.

_.......-::

..

::iliE

.. E~!i'iiii~:

'E:'I:~~;

::::.,.::,:.~::~

..:..

: except for::::.'::''':::!;'::":::i!. ':: : member.

,

'

"

.~ ':J ==================

:otnun .

.

....

etiitoteRoa

No. 326

The:had:islackig:::so:a:iece:rom:te:le::sid:at:te:kne,::h.-:on:part.f::h:lef

simply indicated: there are two deep, straight grooves along the right side, and one along the

left side. The small folds which would naturally appear on the breast above the right hand are also shown in a simplified manner. The back is a uniform rounded surface, except for cuttings which indicate that the block had previously been used as an architectural member. See remarks after No. 328. Reinach, Repertoire, V, 534, 5. 327. Draped male figure (819). Found June 27, 1907, in a late wall continuing the line of the west limit of the Roman

stoa. The head is lacking; also a piece from the left side at the knee, the front part of the left foot and part of the plinth; otherwise the preservation is excellent, though the figure is in two pieces joining at the knees. Height of plinth, 0.10 m., of figure, 1.70 m.; breadth at shoulders, 0.47 m.; depth, 0.31 m. The costume, position, and motive are the same as in the preceding figure; the only difference is that the mappa, instead of hanging from the hand, is

which the part for the great toe is seemingly separate. Across the back, just below the shoulders, there seems to be a cord; but there is no indication of its presence on the front or sides, and it evidently belongs to a previous use of the stone. The left foot is set slightly

No. 327

to the side, indicating that the weight rests on the right leg, but this has no effect on the rigid erectness of the figure. The folds on the right sleeve are treated much as in the preceding figure, and those of the tunic, visible on the right side, are rather less conventional than in that figure. In the chlamys, however, a wholly different method is used. From the right arm on the breast almost to the bottom of the garment extend four precisely similar grooves: broad, shallow, parallel, and straight. Three of them are visible also above the arm, starting from the shoulder. These are separated by flat ridges, of the same width as the grooves. At a short distance above the ground, this system abruptly breaks up into smaller and less conventional folds. The end of the garment, resting on the instep, is rendered with some approach to The part naturalism. naturalism. The of the the chlamys chlamys which which covers covers the the left left arm arm shows shows aa series series of of diagonal diagonal part of

the garment over the arm. An effort is made to show naturalistically the folds below the left hand. Except for the cord, mentioned above, the back is a regularly rounded surface. See remarks after No. 328. Reinach, Repertoire, V, 513, 5; Carpenter, Guide, p. 83, No. 30. 328. Draped figure (925). Lower part, broken probably at about the waist. Height of plinth, 0.12 m.; width, 0.45 m.; depth, 0.39 m. Height of figure as preserved, 1.025 m. A chlamys and tunic are worn, as in the preceding figures, but here the tunic reaches the ankles. No belt is visible. The drapery is rendered in broad, shallow, straight folds as in the preceding figure; but in this figure they occur on the back as well as the front, and continue without change of character to the bottom. Pointed shoes are worn; both feet point exactly to the front. Neither arm is visible on the part preserved. This statue was made from an architectural beam, and the original rectangular form is only slightly modified. These four statues form a unique series illustrating the final decadence of antique sculpture. The first of them (No. 325) suggests comA parison with the reliefs on the pedestal of the Theodosian obelisk in Constantinople, which almost certainly belongs to the year 390 after Christ; but the statue is evidently much later and should belong to the late fifth century. A miniature in the Etschmiadzin gospel (Art Bulletin, XI, 1929, fig. 4 opposite p. 5) offers a fairly close analogy. No. 328 The last two statues (Nos. 327 and 328) show a strange and quite unclassical style, which appears in only a few other monuments. It is found at an early stage in a miniature of the Paris Psalter (Art Bulletin, XI, 1929, fig. 35 opposite p. 28); then in the mosaics of San Vitale at Ravenna; in the earlier series of mosaics in S. Demetrius in Saloniki; in several miniatures of the Rossano gospel; in the later series in S. Demetrius; and in the mosaics of S. Apollinare in Classe at Ravenna. I have arranged these works according to style in the rendering of drapery; but the chronological order is the same except as regards the miniatures, about which there is much disagreement. The statues at Corinth most closely resemble the earlier series in S. Demetrius and the Rossano miniature. On this evidence it appears that the two last statues belong to the latter part of the sixth century. No. 326, as transitional between No. 325 and the last two, would belong to the earlier part of the sixth century. Many cities were embellished in various ways in the reign of Justinian (527-565), and it may be that the three later statues all belong to that period. They probably represent either emperors or governors of the province of Achaea, whose capital was Corinth. There is a considerable likelihood, however, that the fourth statue is female. The long undergarment, with no short one outside it, indicates this conclusion,

p. 82). The chlamys is worn sometimes by women, though not commonly; and the garment

worn by Theodora in the mosaics of San Vitale, though not a chlamys, is similar in its lower part. If the figure is female, there is fully an even chance that it represented Theodora. From the standpoint of archaeology, these uningratiating statues are by far the most valuable of the sculptures found at Corinth. No heads were found that could belong to them, and none (with the possible exception of Nos. 182 and 183) that could be even approximately so late. I discussed these and other Byzantine statues in A. J. A. XXVIII, 1924, pp. 253-265, and XXIX, 1925, pp. 34-37. The idea that the base of the Theodosian obelisk belongs to the time of Constantine is accepted by Casson (Illustrated London News, April 14, 1928, p. 641); Picard (La Sculpture Antique, II, p. 478) and Miss Lawrence (Art Bulletin, X,

1927-28, p. 40) correctly regard it as Theodosian. Mr. Francis H. Bacon examined the base and assures me that the figures of disputed sex are really female.

No. 329

329. Bird on capital (749). Height of fragment, 0.26 m.; 0.25 m. X 0.24 m. The bird stands with wings outspread, almost in the round, at the corner of the capital, which is formed by two concave sides meeting at an acute angle. Along the upper edge of the capital is a band 0.068 m. high with simple ornament: a waving line, from which diverge short spirals, above and below. The adornment of capitals by birds at the corners was frequent in the fifth and sixth centuries (for many references see Mendel, Musees Imperiaux Ottomans, II, p. 539). The decoration of the abacus is in general a later feature (see Mendel, op. cit., III, pp. 463 ff.). Our capital should belong to the sixth century.

330. Bird on capital. The bird lacks the head, legs, and left wing; the wings were outspread. Height of fragment, 0.22 m. The eagle stood at tthe corner. This piece resembles th preceding entry and doubtless belongs to the same time, though the abacus has no decoration.

Found May 4, 1898; trench XXIV, 8 ft. deep. Left edge original; back smooth. Height, 0.17 m.; width, 0.14m.; total thickness, 0.082 m.; relief height, ca. 0.008 m. Brown stone. Very flat relief of a figure playing a three-stringed instrument having the shape of a banjo. The figure is preserved from the lower part of the face to below the waist.

No. 331

The garment fits closely; it has a square-cut neck

No. 332

and apparently long sleeves. About midway between shoulder and elbow a cross indicates some decoration on the sleeve. The shell of the instrument is against the stomach and presses the garment out to the side. The man is strumming it with his right hand; the left hand, which is lost, evidently held the handle at about the level of the shoulder. The fragment belongs to the later Costume, style, and subject are non-Byzantine. mediaeval period, and probably represents a Frankish troubadour. 332. Face (112).

Above forehead to mouth. Height, 0.15m.; width, 0.14m.; depth, 0.065m. Hair rather thick, forehead low; considerably battered. The style is barbarous, suggesting late mediaeval tomb-effigies more than anything else. Probably Frankish.

TABLES I Numbers in Carpenter's Guide

Inventory Numbers Catalogue

50 ............

Numbers

51 ..............

1 .......... 217,225 2 .......... 218,224 221 3 ..... ... ... 4 ... ... ..... . 222 226 5 .. ........... 247 6 .............. 21 7 .............. 4 8 .............. 5 9 .............. 7 10 .............. 11 ........... 27 .. 12 ...... 55 ....... 12 13 .............. 14 .............. 11 16 .............. 275 17 .... 25 ......... 28 19 ......... ... 241 20 .............. 22 ........ 13 .... 23 .............. 8 26 .............. 134 27 .............. 137 28 .............. 135 29 .............. 136 30 ............ 327 II Inventory

Catalogue

Numbers

Nubers

4 ........ ... 5 .............. 8 .............. 12 .......... .. 13 ............. 14 ........... .. 15 .............. 16 .. ... ...... 19 .......... .. 22 ............ . 26 .... ...... .. 27 .............. 28 .............. 36 .............. 37 ...... ....... 43 .............. 46 .............. 47 ...... ...... 48 .............. 49 ..............

119 209 269 29 280 283 162 161 42 171 310 199 213 33 235 240 265 202 255 331

Catalogue Numbers

Inventory Numbers

Catalogue Numbers

53 ............ 54 ..... ....... 55 ............. 56 . ............ 57 ....... ..... 58 ............. 59 .............. 60............. 61 ... .......... 63 ............. 64 . ............ 67 . ............ 68 .............. 69 . ............ 72 .......... .. 74.............. 82 .......... .. 83 .............. 84 ............ 87............. 88 .............. 89 .............. 90 .............. 91 .............. 93 .............. 99 ............. 100 .............

193 194 256 36 9 231 186 126 196 246 191 112 129 5 7 28 181 295 261 289 304 290 297 272 312 248 35 77 109

187 ........... 189 ............. 190 ......... .. 191 ............ 193 .. .......... 194............. 195 ............. 196 ............ 197 ............. 198 ............ 199 ... ......... 200 ..... ....... 204 .... ........ 207 ............. 210 ..... ....... 218 ............. 221 ............. 223 ............. 237 ............. 260 ............. 263 ............. 264A ........... 267............. 280 ............. 295 ............ 308 ............. 309 ............ 310 ............. 311 ............

112 ..... ...... 116 .............

332 36

312............. 313 ............

118 ......... ... 131............. 137 ... ......... 143 ............. 145 . ........... 152 ............. 157 .... ....... 158 ............ 165 ............. 171 ............ 175 ............ 176 .... ....... 178............. 178A . ....... 179 .... ....... 180 .... ....... 181 ... ......... 183 ............ 184 ............. 186 ...........

216 303 236 290 207 111 79 116 122 121 224 217 217 225 218 195 221 205 217 85

314 ............. 316 ............. 322 . ... ........ 323 ............. 324 ............ 325 ............. 328 ............. 331 ..... ....... 339 .... ........ 342 ............. 343 ............. 345 ............. 349 ............ 350 ............. 351 ............ 358 ............ 363 .... ....... 367............. 373 ............. 380 .............

247 291 84 210 275 25 226 247 222 48 267 197 320 293 300 302 220 15 118 285 294 66 308 292 71 192 80 131 14 34 39

323 204 263 249 174 62 217 234 36 3 2 206 26 73 306 253 180 324 273 110

Inventory Numbers

Catalogue Numbers

397 ... .......... 252 412 ............. 219 413 ............ 281 414 ............ 93 220 415 ............. 416 ............. 219 417 ............. 223 418 ............ 243 419 ............. 266 420 ............ 284 421 ........ 229 .... 426 ............ 31 427 .......6.... 6 244 428 ............. 53 429 ............. 430 ............ 65 28 431 ............. 432 ............. 257 437 ............. 232 438 ............. 190 440 ............ 219 450 ............. 268 451 ............. 18 456 ............. 270 483 ............. 65 484 ............. 65 485 ............. 65 486 ............. 65 65 487 ............. 518 ............ 519 ... .........

276 276

529 . ........... 545 ............. 557 ............ 562 ............. ........ 564 .... 583 ............. 589 ............. 603 ............. 609 ............. 625 ............. 636 ............. 637 ............. 638 ............. 639A ........... 640 ............. 668 ............. 673 ............ 674............. 675 ............. 684 .............

276 276 276 32 113 114 251 187 250 271 319 319 319 67 176 83 30 65 65 100

Inventory Numbers

Catalogue Numbers

686 ............ 687 ............. 693 ............. 694 ............. 696 ............. 697 ............. 703 ............ 704 ............. 705 .. .......... 706............. 709 ............ 711 ............. 716 ............ 717 ............ 718 ............ 719 ............ 720 .. .......... 721 ............. 723 ............ 724 ........ .... 728 ............. 729 .. ........ 730 .. .......... 731 .. .......... 733 .. .......... 734 .... .... .... 736 ............ 737 ..... ...... 741 ............ 742 ............ 743 ............ 746 ............. 749 ............ 750 ............. 751 ............. 752 ............ 753 ............. 759 ............. 760 ............. 761 ............. 762 ............ 763 ............ 764 ............. 765 ............ 766 ............ 769 ............ 773 ............. 774 ............ 775 ............. 776 ............. 777............. 778 ............. 779 ............ 780 ............

21 175 86 91 198 170 43 245 94 160 97 92 43 70 22 299 123 88 78 69 184 246 259 233 305 49 106 104 89 272 130 227 329 208 17 298 276 124 72 163 237 241 279 64 47 230 115 16 238 238 239 239 241 241

Inventory Numbers

781 782 785 786 787 788 789 791 795 796 801 802 803 807 810 811 812 813 814 815 818 819 820 821 822 826 827 829 830 832 833 838 839 841 842 845 852 855 856 858 862 863 875 877 889 890 891 896 898 900 901 903 906 908

............. ............. ............. ............ ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ........... ........... ........... ............. .. .......... .. ....... .. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. . ............ ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. .............282 ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............. ............ ............. ............. ............ .............

Catalogue Numbers

241 241 288 1 75 87 120 101 19 19 301 54 117 19 211 26 8 10 12 203 94 327 8 278 326 52 11 287 107 242 185 317 320 96 13 59 82 55 102 201 76 292 260 20 173 177 200 95 68 212 325 214 23

Inventory Numbers

Catalogue Numbers

909 ............. 918 ............. 919 .. .. ....... 920 ............. 925 ............. 932 ... ........ 933 ............. 934 ............. 936 ............. 937 ............. 938 ............ 941 ............. 942 ........... 946 ............. 947 ............. 950 ............. 951 ............. 964 ............. 982 .... ... ...... 985 ............. 986 .. ........ 987 ...,,,...... 989 ............. 991 ............. 992 ............. 1023 ............ 1024 ............ 1025 ............ 1026 ............ 1030 ............ 1037 ............ 1038 ............ 1039 ............ 1040 ............ 1041 ............ 1043 ............ 1046 ......... 1047 ............ 1052 ............140 1053 ........... 1057 ............ 1058 .......... 1059 ............ 1060 ............ 1064 ............ 1065 ............ 1066 ............ 1070 ............ 1073 ............ 1077 ............ 1078 ............ 1079 ............ 1080 ............ 1081 ............

183 63 178 321 328 172 216 41 65 65 276 176 176 176 176 67 67 319 65 309 164 27 81 108 51 37 37 61 262 40 254 277 74 165 286 45 127 179 136 151 151 136 145 158 135 313 147 154 133 158 149 136 143

Inventory Numbers

Catalogue Numbers

1081C........... 1082 ............ 1084 ............ 1085 ............ 1086 ............ 1087 ............ 1088 ............. 1089 ............ 1090 ............ 1091 ............ 1092 ............156 1093 ............ 1094 ........... 1095 ............ 1096 ............ 1098 ............ 1099 ............ 1100 ............ ........ 1103 .... 1104 ............ 1105 ............ ...... 1109 ... 1113 ..... ...... 1114 .. ......... 1116 ............ 1117 ... ......... 1118 ............ 1121 ............ 1122 ............ 1124 ............ 1125 ............ 1128 ............ 1129 ............ 1132 ............ 1134 ............ 1139 ............ 1140 ............ 1141 ............ 1142 ............147 1143 ............ 1144 ............ 1145 .......... 1146 ........... 1148 ............ 1150 ............ 1155 ............ 1156 ............ 1159 ............ 1180 ............ 1181 ............ 1182 ............

150 258 142 144 149 156 137 137 152 156 151 148 151 148 138 156 141 139 155 156 57 146 132 134 156 153 156 156 56 141 315 139 148 147 24 139 322 146 157 158 157 136 314 159 274 152 9 44 46

INDEX

INDEX With few exceptions, portraits are entered only under the heading "Portraits" and reliefs only under the heading "Reliefs." The numerals refer to pages. Aphrodite, Anadumene, 42 f.; with child on shoulder, 45; Cnidian type, 40-42; with shell, 39; statuettes, 43-45; torso, 38. Apollo, Citharoedus, 22; draped, 26; head, 27; herm, 26; with wreath and strap, 27; torso, 33. Armored figures, 64 f., 79-81, 83. Artemis, fifth century type, 15; with skin, 37; shoulder, 38. Athena, with helmet on plinth, 50; relief, 134. Augustus, 71. Bird, 99. Boy, draped, 58; with animal, 63. Bull, 100. Busts, 93, 101. Capitals, 154. Colossal Figures, 101-107. (ornucopia, 100. Criophori, 28 f. Cybele, head, 46; statue, 47; statuettes, 48. Demeter, 9. Dionysos, draped, 34; head with hand, 31; archaistic head, 37; head of Sardanapallos type, 33; legs, 37; with nebris, 36; with nymph and Pan, 35, torso, 33. Elnyo, 21. Eros, 55-57, 98. Face, Mycenaean, 4; late, 155. Female figures, draped, 20, 65-68; nude, 39, 67. Figurine, prehistoric, 3. Foot, colossal, 62. Gaius Caesar, 74. (anymede, 58. G(aul,62. (roups, 64. Heads: crude, 6; related to Myron, 7; Helios, 28; athlete, 59; bearded, 59; beardless, 59 f.; female, 69 f., 103 f. Hecataea, 50. ITelios, 28. Hephaestus, 31. lHeracles,57.

Hermes Criophorus, 28. Horse's head, 98. Lucius Caesar, 72. Male figure, seated, 62; with torch, 64; torsos, 60-62. 64. Marsyas, 57. Melpomene, 23 f. Muses, 23 f. Mycenaean face, 4. Nemesis, 12, 68. Nero, son of Germanicus, 76. Palaemon, 55 f. Pan, 54 f. Persephone, severe, 9, 14. Pestles, 101. "Petite Herculanaise," 19. Phrygians, 101-103. Portraits: Augustus, 71; Gaius Caesar, 74; Lucius Caesar, 72; Nero, son of Germanicus, 76; Herodes Atticus, 88; male figures, draped, 77 f., 82 f., 9397, 149-153; armored, 79-81, 83 f., 93; male heads, 84 f., 87 f., 91 f., 148: female figures, 85, 153; female heads, 85-87; busts, 93; medallions, 90 f.; hands, 84. Reliefs: Ariadne, 110; head of Athena, 134; large base, 138; birds, 132, 144; bull, 141; chariot, 145; cuirass, 130; figure with musical instrument, 155; grotesque figure, 146; head resembling "Sappho," 133; heads, 134-136; helmet, 131; Heracles, 136, 142; Maenads, 131; serpent, 143; slabs with reliefs on both sides, 146; spears, 142; in stoa, 104 f.; tripod, 144; vase, 138; wheat, 143; wings, 144, 146. Sarcophagi, 111-120. Satyr, heads, 54; Praxitelean type, 50; with swineskin, 51. Serapis, 30. Serpent, 99. Silenus, 53. Thalia, 24. Tree-trunk, 100. Tyche, 12, 46.