No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Pythagoras of Rhegion and the Early Athlete Statues
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
Extract
Since what I last wrote on the subject of Pythagoras of Rhegion in this Journal, much evidence has accumulated to verify what was then brought forward in a more or less hypothetical form. I was greatly encouraged to carry on this research by the sympathetic criticism of archaeologists both published and privately communicated, but all, with one slight exception, evidently written with the view of facilitating an increase of information, of advancing the common object—the study of classical archaeology. Among the published criticisms, I have received the greatest stimulus to continue my research from the reports of a lecture delivered by Professor C. T. Newton at University College, London, in January of this year; and, among the unpublished, a letter from Professor Michaelis with a full and detailed criticism; while the fact that in the Berlin Museum of Casts the ‘Apollo’ is now entirely severed from the ‘Omphalos,’ and that, in the new catalogue of the Museum of Casts at Munich the words ‘nicht zugehörigen,’ are inserted into the phrase ‘Apollo auf dem Omphalos’ is the most important of confirmations I have received from without: for, it was the possible, and formerly firmly maintained, association of the statue with the omphalos as its base that I felt to be the only positive evidence against my hypothetical assumption.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1881
References
page 332 note 1 No. I. pp. 168–201.
page 332 note 2 The Times of January 10th, and fuller in the Builder of the same week.
page 332 note 3 Kurzes Verzeichniss des Museums von Gypsabgüssen, Klass. Bildwerke in München, No. 218, B.
page 335 note 1 But we must also take a warning from the evils of a former ‘fashion,’ and not, in combating this very exaggeration run to the other extreme of over-humanising Greek art, of seeing scenes from human life everywhere, and of ignoring the fact that, after all, divinities were the subjects most commonly thought worthy of artistic representation by the Greek artists.
page 336 note 1 Overbeck, , Geschichte der Griech. Plastik., 3rd ed., vol. I. p. 152Google Scholar.
page 340 note 1 Antike Bildwerke, Taf. vii.
page 343 note 1 Cf. Matz, , Antike Bildwerke in Rom, new ed. p. 319Google Scholar; Ficoroni, , Breve descriz. di tre particolari statue scopertesi in Roma, l'anno 1739, viii., &c.Google Scholar; also in Raccolta d'opuscoli scientif. e filolog. pubbl. da A. Calogierà, vol. xxii., 491–506, Venezia 1740; Fea, , Misc. i. cxxxv. 57Google Scholar, and, Singolarita di Roma Moderna, 61; Gerhard, , Antike Bildwerke, lxviii. 3Google Scholar; Clarac, Pl. 858 D n., 2187 A.
page 343 note 2 The restoration was made for the Marchesa Gentili by Vincenzo Pacetti between 1770 and 1775. Mem. Enciclop. iii., 85. It is not quite certain whether the antique head belongs to this statue or not. In it are restored the nose and a piece of the left eyebrow. Further restorations are: the neck, the left hand, right upper arm, and right hand (the fore-arm, with puntello, is original), and both legs, the right from above the knee down, the left from below the knee, also trunk and base. Cf. v. Duhn, Matz, l.c. The restorations are marked with dotted lines in our engraving.
page 345 note 1 Paus. v. 25, 12; Quintil. Inst. Orat. xii. 10, 7, ‘duriora et Tuscanicis proxima Callon atque Hegesias, iam minus rigida Calamis,’ &c. Cf. Overbeck, Sq. pp. 81 and 82.
page 345 note 2 Plin. xxxiv. 59, 8.
page 345 note 3 As quoted in my first paper.
page 348 note 1 Millingen, , Considérations sur les Monnaies de l'Ancienne Italie, &c. Notices des Monnaies gravées, &c., suppl. P. 5, Pl. i. No. 1Google Scholar; Sambon, Recherches sur les Monnaies de la Presqu'ile Italique, &c, Naples, 1870, p. 264, Nos. 13 and 14, Pl. xix. 7 and 9; Jahn, , Arch. Zeit. 1862, t. 168, 4, p. 321Google Scholar.
page 349 note 1 Sambon, ibid., P. 342, Pl. xxiii. No. 13; Catalogue of Gr. Coins in Brit. Mus. (edited by R. S. Poole), Italy, p. 370, No. 1.
page 349 note 2 Gardner, P., River Worship, &c. Transact. of R. Soc. of Lit. vol. xi. p. 173Google Scholar.
page 349 note 3 Whoever has been called upon for the first time to look through a microscope to notice the likeness between minute structures, will see how much practice it needs to perceive similarity in such instances. I have ever found it more difficult to teach people to perceive similarity than difference. Perhaps because the perception of likeness is more a matter of feeling, while difference is more a matter of the intellect.
page 349 note 4 e.g., the Athenian coins with regard to the reproduction of the Promachos, the Tyrannicides by Kritios Nesiotes, the Eirene with the infant Plutos by Kephisodotos the Elder, &c.
page 350 note 1 Soph, . Trach. 510Google Scholar, &c. Cf. Gardner, l.c.
page 350 note 2 Vid. first paper.
page 350 note 3 Il. xxiii. 142–148, Aesch. Chocph. 6, Paus. viii. 41, 3, &c.
page 350 note 4 Pind. Ol. xi. 48.
page 350 note 5 Paus. v. 14, 5.
page 351 note 1 L.c.