No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Measurements of the Zeus at Olympia
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 September 2015
Extract
‘Some writers have recorded the measurements of the image (of Zeus at Olympia), and Callimachus has made them known in one of his iambi.’ The words of Strab were the only evidence for a Callimachean poem on this subject. There is also some possibility that Pausanias, in his hit at the men who described the measurements, alludes to the same poem. Recently, considerable fragments of this iambus have emerged, bit by bit, in the course of a few years. It became evident that we had always been so fortunate as to possess at least the beginning of the first line (quoted by the Scholia to Pindar), and it is a little depressing that nobody had been clever enough to combine the words Ἀλεῖος ὁ Ζεύς, expressly attributed to Callimachus, with the iambus on the Olympian Zeus mentioned by Strabo. The complete first line and a summary of the whole poem came to light in 1934 (Pap. Milan 18, col. VII, 25–29); then scanty scraps of the first twenty-one lines turned up in 1935 (P.S.I. 1216, col. II, 79–99); and, finally, better-preserved pieces of the main part, containing the measurements and a few words from the end of the poem were published last Christmas (P. Oxy., 2171, fr. 2–5). P.S.I. 1216, excavated in Oxyrhynchus by the Italians in 1933, now in Florence (if not returned to Egypt), and P. Oxy. 21·71, found long ago by Grenfell and Hunt in Oxyrhynchus, now in Oxford, are parts of the same papyrus, probably second century A.D. This is not the only example in Callimachus of scattered pieces being assembled and taking shape; but in this, as in other cases, they are still far from forming a continuous whole.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1941
References
1 VIII, p. 354. See below, p. 2.
2 Paus. V, 11, 9. Speculations about common sources or relations to other writers Robert, C., Archaeolog. Maerchen, 51Google Scholar, 2 and von Wilamowitz, U., Der verfehlte Koloss in Strena Helbigiana 335Google Scholar ( = Kleine Schriften, V. 1, 515Google Scholar).
3 Διηγήσεις di poemi di Callimaco, Ed. pr. by M. Norsa and G. Vitelli, Florence, 1934. Second edition by Vogliano, A., Papiri della R. Università di Milano, vol. I (1937) p. 103Google Scholar, plate III. (PRIMI).
4 Publicazioni della Società Italiana por la ricerca dei Papiri. Papiri Greci e Latini, vol. XI (1935), p. 126Google Scholar, pl. XI (M. Norsa and G. Vitelli).
5 The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, vol. XVIII, ed. Lobel, E. (and others) 1941 pp. 56–62Google Scholar and Addenda, p. 183 sq., pl. IX.
6 It may be worth saying that I found the sense and partly the wording of lines 25 and 37, when I was kindly given an opportunity of going through the first proofs. This was before Mr. Lobel joined the small fragments 4 and 5 with the main piece.
7 ‘Long ’ really means ‘in depth,’ from east to west. The figure of the length, originally given by Dörpfeld, W., Olympia, II (1892), p. 14Google Scholar, as 9·93 metres, has been altered by Forbat, F. in Alt-Olympia, I (1935), 233Google Scholar sq. The western-most ‘Aufschnürung’ is no longer regarded as a part of the base. The decision between the two variants must be left to experts. But Callimachus seems to agree with Dörpfeld. See below, note 13.
8 Best reproduction in Jb., 46 (1931), p. 11, fig. 7; see Langlotz, , Antike, 4 (1928), 40Google Scholar.
9 On the measurements recently also: Eichler, F., Oe. Jh., 30 (1937), 105 sqq.Google Scholar; (a paper on the throne by an anonymous writer, said on p. 110 to be in prospect, seems not to have been published); Buschor, E., Bay. Ak.-Sb. 1938, 3, p. 7Google Scholar; Lippold, G., R-E XIX, 2 (1938)Google Scholar, s.v. Pheidias, col. 1920 sqq.; Wiesner, J., R-E XVIII, 1 (1939)Google Scholar, s.v. Olympia, col. 87, 90. Lippold, G., EA, 4524Google Scholar.
10 IG V, 1, 1 A 12, 13; 213, 9, 16, 19; cf. Theocr. 30, 27, 
.
11 The post-position of the multiplicative may sound rather strange; but there is hardly any other Greek writer who handled the order of words with such astonishing liberty as Callimachus.
12 My impression is that Dörpfeld and Lehmann-Haupt came nearest to the point; I have referred to their articles and to Riemann's dissertation (see von Gerkan's, A. review in Gnomon, 1937, pp. 84 sq.Google Scholar) in the notes to l. 25. But I am afraid I must leave it to specialists to decide which metrological system was used. It seems to be the so-called ‘Pheidonian’ foot. If Pheidias used this measure for the image, it does not necessarily imply that the same was used for the temple, see esp. Riemann, pp. 61 sq.
13 I venture to suggest only in this annotation 
. There were Doric multiplicatives in -τις, as it is attested by Hesychius, s.v. ὰμάτις (ὰμάτις cod.). Ταρα. Ταραντῖνοι, see Bechtel, F., Die griech. Dialekte, II (1923), p. 402Google Scholar. For the strange form ἴκατιν in l. 33 we have also no other support as a gloss of Hesychius ἴκατιν (sic), see Schwyzer, E., Griech. Grammatik, I (1939), p. 591Google Scholar. A trace before δ is reconcilable with the right-hand lower curve of ς and the combination ις is perhaps not too much for the gap between τ and δ.
14 Most modern estimates have been on the short side.
15 Paus. V, n, 7, 
seems not to conform to the clear statements of the poem. The head rose seven and a half feet above the back of the throne, the figures, if they stood on the top of the crossbar (
), no more than six feet. So the head of Zeus was still one foot and a half higher. Or may there have been pedestals on the crossbar, two or more feet high, not mentioned either by Callimachus or Pausanias? Graces and Horai, if set on such pedestals, would have risen 
.
16 Perhaps we had better write 
, since the third syllable is short. To 
which, though not verifiable, can hardly be doubted, one may compare the Latin proverbs Plaut. Aulul. 57, Cic. ad Att. 13, 20, 4, etc. ‘ne unguem latum discedere’ or ‘digitum‘ Plaut., , Bacch., 423Google Scholar, etc. Erasmus, Adag. 406Google Scholar (epist. 2911, 25), cites ‘ne culmum latum discedere’ as a ‘modern’ variant.
My thanks are due to Professor Beazley, who has kindly read and improved my manuscript. I have had the benefit of discussing the papyrus with Mr. E. Lobel and the subject with Dr. Paul Jacobsthal and Professor D. S. Robertson.