No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
The marble head (Pl. XLV. 2) in the Museum of Madrid has elicited considerable notice, especially because of its peculiar style; and its attempted classification in this respect has produced much difference of opinion. Hübner, who first supposed it to be the head of Athene and then of an Aphrodite, thought that it must be a marble copy of a bronze original belonging to the age of Pheidias. Friedrichs considered it to belong to the type of Aphrodite heads, but did not feel in a position to assign to it a definite date. He says: ‘It decidedly gives the impression of an Hellenic work, but for the more exact dating we have no sound ground to go upon. We should only like to remark that it does not appear to us to be older than the fourth century, because it no longer contains traces of the severer style.’
page 171 note 1 Nuove Memorie delľ Instituto di Correspondenza Archeologica (Rome, 1865) pp, 34 seq.
page 171 note 2 Die Antiken von Madrid, p. 247.
page 171 note 3 Bausteine zur Geschichte der Griechisch-Römischen Plastik, ii. pp. 271, seq.
page 172 note 1 Ausgrabungen zu Olympia vol. v.; Cf. Bötticher, , Olympia &c. p. 285Google Scholar; Overbeck, , Gesch. d. Griech. Plastik, i. p. 445.Google Scholar
page 172 note 2 Nuove Memorie d. Inst. l.c.
page 172 note 3 Dubois, and Blouet, , Expédition Scientifique de la Morée, i. Pl. 74–78Google Scholar; Clarac, , Musée de Sculpture, vol. ii. Pl. 105BGoogle Scholar; Müller-Wieseler, , Denkmäler d. Alten Kunst, i. taf. 30Google Scholar; and in their complete condition: Ausgrabungen zu Olympia, v.; Overbeck, , Gesch. d. Gr. Plastik, i. 442Google Scholar; Bötticher, A.. Olympia, p. 279.Google Scholar
page 175 note 1 This detail may prove of some importance in determining the chronological relation between the sculptures of the Olympian pediment and those of the Parthenon, as well as in determining the exact chronology between the Parthenon sculptures among each other.