England) Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies (Lon.

The Journal of Hellenic studies (Volume 19) online

. (page 1 of 42)
Online LibraryEngland) Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies (LonThe Journal of Hellenic studies (Volume 19) → online text (page 1 of 42)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook







<ri)c J5^0lilt)j fov tl)r iJionioliou of liKUfnic :5)(utiics







Reprinted by permission of


A Division of




Printed in Germany







III, l*:ilt II.

Rules of the Society

List of OHicers .111(1 Mt'inlxMs

Proceedings of IIk? Society, 1S!)S il

Proceedings of the Cambridge llruiuh of the Society

Additions to the Jjibrary

List of Periodical Publications in the Library

Andehson (J. G. C.) ... Exploration in (Jalatia cis Ilaly

(Plate IV.)

Some Karly Funeral Lekytlioi (Plates II., 111.). 109

See HoGAUTU (D. G.)

The Campaign of 716-71H, from Arabic Sources.

Exploration in Galatia cis Halyin, Part I

A new KaXos-vase

A Head of Athena, formerly in the Disney Collec-
tion (Plate I.)

An Inscxibed Scarab

The Scenery of the Greek Stage


Note on Coins of Nagid'us

HocAinii (I). G.) and I><>SAKQUtT (K. C.) Archaeology in Greece, 1898-9. 319

Notes on Amasis and Ionic 15 lack-figured Pottery
(Plates v., VL)

Some Remarks on the Persian Wars. I. The
Campaign of Marathon

A Letter from Antigonus to Scepsi.s, 311 B.C.

A new Vase of the l)ipylon Class (Plate VIII.) ...

Greek Graffiti from Der el Bahari and El Kab ...

Venatio Alexandri (Plate XT.)

On Representations of Helios and Selene (Plates
IX., X.) ... ..'

Athena Hygieia (Plate VII.)


>> >> >>

Brooks (E. W.) ...
cuowfoot (j. w.)
Dickson (Isabel A.)
Gardner (E. A.)

Gardner (P.)
Harrison (Jane E)
1Iill(G. F.) ...

Karo (G.)

Munro (J. A. R.)

Murray (A. S.)
Peers (C. R.)
Perdrizet (P.)
Savignoni (L.)

52, 280







Walters (H. B.) ...
Index of Subjects
Greek Index




f. Hciiil ol' AiIhiki formerly in tlic hisiicy Collect ion.

II. Lckyliios ill tliL- Athens Museuin.

III. I.ekyllios in (lie I'.erlin Musruin.

IV. (Jaliitia (IS Halyiii.

V. Annilioiaat W iirzburg.

VI. Ulack-li^Minnl I'sykter in the Ihilish .Mnsciiin.

\'ll. Athena llyijieia,

VJIl. Dipylon \'a>e t'roui Thebes.

IX. Lek}th<.s with ll(■li(^san^l Hcrikhs (Athens).

X. K rater with Selene (Athens).

XI. Venatio Alcxandri.



Head of Alliiii.i ill the Kitzwilliain Miiscuiii

Statue of Atlit'iia in the J>oiivi(;

Idol from Saiilar

Pot from Sarilar

Potsher<l from Kceoljriga

Relief at Yarre

Relief from Aiuaksiz-keui

Justiuian'.s Bridge at Sykeou (Plan and Elevation)

Decoration of Wiirzburg Amphora

iuscription of Louvre Auiphora (F 23)

Louvre Amphora (K 24)

Woman at Tumulus

Shoulder-Palmettes from Lekythos ( lierliii)

Figuie from Eretrian Lekythos (Athens)

Design of Eretrian Lekythos (Berlin) showing first sketch
Shouldex'-l'almettes from glaze-outline Lekythos of ' liygiaiuon '

Cliaron (Lekythos at Munich)

„ (Lekythos at Berlin)

Archer (Athenian Lekythos)

U.E. Lekythos from Eretria (Brit. Mus.)

Part ot design from Bourguiguon Am[)hora

Serpent-bodiu<l Nymphs

Votive Relief (Coll. Tyszkiewicz)

JJesi;;ii from PioLlie.sis Vase






Design from B.b\ Aiiij.lioi.i (Mus. (iregor.)
Maenad? (from liosenheig, ''Die Kriuyen ') ...

Design from Kotylos at Naples

General view of the .sjuiie

D&sigu from I^ekylhos at Naples

General view of the .same

Anodos of the Ejirth-Goddess ( IJerliii Kraler)

Ki-ater in Vagnouville tJolleclion

Lekythos at Athens witli llelio.'< and llerak]e.<

Kylix at Berlin with Seleno in l>i^M (o front

Reverse of Krater at Athens with Selene in biga ...
Inscribed Scarab















[Plate I.]

By the kiinlness of Pliilip Nelson, Esq., M.B., I am enabled to publish
another head which he has recently acquired, and which is, perhaps, even
more interesting than the head of an athlete from the same collection that I
published last year. The Athena, which forms the subject of the present
paper, was a part of the collection of sculpture made in Italy by Hollis and
Brand, mostly from 1748-1753; this particular head is said to have been
brought from Rome by Mr, Lloyd, and bought of him by Mr. Thomas Hollis
in 1761. Together with the rest of this collection it passed into the hands
of John Disney, and is represented upon Plate I. of the Museum Disneianum,
published by him in 1843 ; and this place of honour is certainly merited, for
it stands out most conspicuously for its artistic (piality among the rest of the
Disney marbles. When Disney in 1850 presented the greater part of his
collection to the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cambridge, this head of Athena, and
also the archaic statuette of Apollo,^ represented on Plate XXIV. of the
Museum Disneianum, remained behind at the Hyde, Ingatestone. There it
was left until disposed of by sale in 1885 ; but it aroused no attention until
its acquisition by Dr. Nelson, to whom I am indebted not only for my know-
ledge of the head, but also for the admirable negatives from which Plate I.
has been reproduced.

Perhaps it is not quite correct to call the head unpublished, since it is
figured in the Museum Disneianum ; but the plates of that publication are
inadequate to give any notion of the style and character of the work. The
type, however, is of such interest that it may be a matter of surprise that no
archaeologist has hitherto attempted to find out more about the Disney head.
This may be partly explained by the fact that a curious error has crept into
Professor Michaelis' usually most accurate catalogue of the Ancient Marbles
in Great Britain. Under ' Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, No. 39,' he
mentions first among the busts and heads from the Disney collection a head

> I do not know what has become of this interesting of Disney's marbles. It was a
ApoUo, which, after the Athena, is the most restored by Flaxman.

U.S. — VOL. XIX. K


of AthciKi; this licad lie describes as ' eitlier coini»letely restored <.r more
probably (jiiito modern. Coarse execution.' But to this perfectly accurate
description lie adtls the reference ' Museum Disneianum, Plate I.' Tlic head

Fk!. 1 — Heau ok Athena in thk Fitzwilliam Museum.

at Cambridge, No. 81) in Michaelis' catalogue, is here reproduced (Fig. 1)
from a photograph kindly taken for me by Mr. H. A. Chapman of
the Fitzwilliam Museum ; and a glance suffices to show that it has

J H.S. VOL XIX (1899) PL 1


lM)lhiii,!4' to (In with tin; vciy line licjul icpiddiici'd ii|Mtii Plate I. (tt" IIk;
Mu.s(Miiii DisiK'iainiMi and ulso upon our V\;\U-. I.' ( Jurioiisly enough, 1 can lind
no IvAcv (tt" tliis ( 'and)ridL;c licad anionn tlii! scidpf uics ic(;ordcd in tin;
Museum Disnc'ianuni ; and, bad as it is, it is no woise than nian\ Dt hei- thin<,'s
which are there li^uriid and (U'scrib(;il. It ina}' liavc been ac(|uired by Disney
ItetwiHMi 1<S4.S and KS'>(l,«»r it may |)ossil)ly \i:\\r been specially added by him,
to compensate foi' his retainini^f at the Hyde the L,'<'m of his whole collection.

For the following details, so far as they caimot be seen in the ]»bf»to;^frapli
or tlie cast, I have to thank Dr. Nelson. 'IMur head is of Parian mar])le, the
nose is restored, according to the Mus(Mnu Disneianum, in mar])Ie 'evidently
taken from the bunch of hair behiinl.' It is exceedin<j;ly l)a<lly modelled, and
takes off much from the l)eauty of the face. The front peak of the helmet
is also restored,'- partly, apparently, after Disney's publication, and a piece of
the back of the helmet and of the hair is a restoration. The neck is
modern ; according to Dr. Nelson it is Italian of the last century, and the
bust evidently has nothing to do with the head, but is probably latish Roman
work ; it is clear that both neck and bust are useless as evidence for the
statue of which the head once formed a part. The head should probably be
tilted ratlier more forward.

The goddess wears a helmet of the ordinary Corinthian type, .sucli as is
frequently seen on her statues, and also on those of Attic .strategi, Pericles
for example. There, is however, one peculiarity that is of great value to us ;
for the copies or replicas of this and similar tyiies of Athena are extremely
hard to distinguish from one another, especially when they are, most of them,
by no means trustworthy in respect of style. This is the felt cap worn under
the helmet, to prevent its chafing tlie head or the hair; the side of this cap
is distinctly visible where it is pressed out above either teni|)le between the
front and back portions of the helmet. Such caps were not uncommon ; an
obvious example is that worn by Patroclus on the famous vase by Sosias ; he
has evidently removed his helmet, but the close fitting felt cap remains.^ In
the well-known vase by Brygos with warriors arming, a similar purpose is
served by pads attached to a diadem before the helmet is put on.^ The way
in which this cap shows makes it easy to distinguish this type from other
more or less similar ones, such as the Athena of Velletri or the colossal
Albani head at Munich, in which the pose has some resemblance to the

' I'ossilily Prof. Miohaelis may li.ive added th<ic is no ground for imaf^ining tlie caji to he

this reference from a list of Disney's plates, his only head-covering. The .strange a.sscrt ion

without the plates themselves liefore him. of Baumeisler {Dcnkmakr, p. 8) that he is an

Then the identilieation of this head of Athena archer is due to a misinterpretation of the

with Mus. Disn. Plate I. would he a very loosened shouMcr-piecc of the breastplate,
natural inference. * .S(lneil>er-.\nder.son Atln.i, Plate XXXV.

- And wrongly restored ; it projects too far. The end of such a pad is visihle under the

as may easily he seen hy following the curve hack of the helmet in our head; it is in the

of the ancient portion. restored part, hut must have heen imitated hy

3 8o rightly descrihetl in Schreiber-Anderson the restorer from indications on the jiiece of the

JtJafi, ]>. 68. Patroclus un this vase is evi- original he cut away to make the nose out of it.
dciitlv represented as a fully armed iKijilite ;

n 2


Disney head. It is true that the style is so dissimilar that no confusion
might seem possible ; but, as we shall see later, certain other heads which are
also somewhat dissimilar in style must be identified — partly by the help of
this more or less accidental indication — as belonging to the Disney type.

The hair stands out freely on both sides of the helmet beneath the felt
cap ; at the back it has been partly cut away (the material for the restored
nose being taken from it) and then restored ; it is impossible therefore to say
how it was treated at the back of the neck ; and the neck and bust, not being
original, can offer no indication. Presumably it was once continued to a
greater length than it now has, and reached at least a little way down between
the shoulders. The treatment of the hair is characteristic ; while it has a
bold projection, and each tress is separately modelled and seems to have an
independent existence, there is nothing of that hard and wiry texture^
probably indicating derivation from a bronze original, that is so conspicuous
in hair like that of the Athena of Velletri. The softer and more pictorial
treatment may not indeed imply that the copy is derived from a marble
original ; but if it does not, then it shows that the copyist at least translated
his original from bronze into marble technique. The general character and
expression of the face have a simplicity and artistic restraint, combined with
softness and delicacy of modelling and contour, that can only belong to the
closing years of the fiftVi century. The brow is smoothly rounded ; the eyes
not set in deeply below it, the shadow afforded them being given quite as
much by the strongly projecting and firm frame of the eyelids. A marked
feature of the modelling of the eye is the very distinct rendering of the
caruncula lachrymalis at the inner corner. The eyelids show in the rim that
borders them a technical indication known on several works that must be
assigned to this period — among them the head of the Mattel Amazon (which,
it will be remembered, really belongs to the Capitoline type), and the very
similar head of an athlete in Dr. Nelson's collection, which I published last
year in this journal. This feature is doubtless originally derived from the
bronze casing of the eyes inserted into the sockets of a bronze statue. The
edges of these casings, as may be so clearly seen in the Charioteer at Delphi,
were often allowed to project so as to give the effect of eye-lashes. This
effect was evidently intentionally retained even in a marble work like this
Disney head ; for we cannot imagine that an artist, who was capable of trans-
lating so successfully the bronze technique of the hair, would have retained a
purely technical feature like this unless he had appreciated its artistic effect
in marble also. The mouth is slightly open, allowing the teeth to be seen.
This peculiarity, together with the treatment of the eyes, which, though
directed slightly downward,^ are not fixed on any near object, gives an
expression of kindly yet unconcentrated interest to the face, that may seem
inconsistent at first glance with a fifth century date. But if we compare this

'A v.Ty different effect may be obtained by But the Cretan Athena in the Louvre shows
tilting the furtlier back, as is often done, the true position, which is nearly as in the
rightly or wrongly, with some siniilar heads. photograph on Plate I.


head with otliers of a somewhat similar expression, and of undoubtedly fourth
century origin, we shall easily see the essential diHerence. Take the Hermes
of Praxiteles, for instance, the most conspicuous example of this expression
of a mood of kindly reverie ; not only is the modelling far softer and leas
definite throughout, but the expression of the eyes is mainly dependent upon
the depth of the socket, the consecjuent shadow around tlu; eyes, and the
delicate flow of the surrounding muscles. In this Athena, on the other hand,
the expression is almost entirely dejiendent upon the modelling of the eye-
ball and eye-lids, and so it is relegated at once to 'an eailier period. Again,
the half-open mouth, showing the teeth, suggests comparison witii heads of
the school of Scopas; but here again the compari-son, when made, shows a
difference as essential as the similarity The well known head from the south
of the Acropolis, for instance/ though its mouth is open so as to show the
teeth, has lips of less clear and definite modelling ; for actual form, though
not for the resultant expression, we find nearer analogy in the half-open lips
of earlier fifth century work, particularly in certain Myronic heads; but the
intention in these is evidently to give an appearance of physical life to the
face rather than to express any mood or emotion.

It is desirable to have a clear notion of these peculiarities of ex-
pression, and of the technical and material means by which they are
produced, because a superficial observation of these might well mislead us
as to the period to which the head must be assigned ; and indeed, in the
case of certain heads that at first may appear similar they have led to a
later dating than we can admit as possible for the Disney Athena. With
this Disney head before us we can clearly see that the original nmst go back
to a master of the closing years of the fifth century, tiained among the con-
temporaries and associates of Phidias, who yet, in the motives of his work
and the expression he tried to render, anticipated many characteristics of the
fourth century. There is one master beyond all others who is suggested by
this description ; and that master is Alcamenes.'^ To him, or to his innnediate
surroundings, the original of the Disney head and its various replicas must, I
believe, be assigned.

Having now gained a notion of the character and period to which this
head of Athena must be assigned, simply by examining its style and features,
we must next turn to consider its place relatively to other works of the same
subject and character. This is, in the present instance, a peculiarly difficult
task. So many heads of Athena are known, either on statues or separated
from them, which have a certain resemblance to this Disney head, that it is
not easy to classify them or to establish their relationship to it and to one
another. This very multitude is in itself an indication. We are clearly
dealing with a type of very wide prevalence, but with numerous variations

* Figured in my Ifundhoiik of Greek Sculp- ledge a fine and correct criticism in lii.s apitre-

tur<; Fig. 101. ciation of Alciinu-ncs as the (breninncr of

2 Whatever opinion we m.iy hold as to many Praxiteles, in ideas and feeling ratlier than in

details in Klein's I'rixiteles, we must aeknow- formal tiadition of style.

C, K. A. (iAlM)Ni:i{.

both ill style an. I in accvs^oiics. The pusc of tlic hrad an>l the Unui of tlio
liL'hnc't are similar, for example, in a work like the Athena of V'ellitii and
also in the colossal Athena Alhani at >runich ; yet the resemblance does not
appear to be more tlian superficial. When we have to deal with copies of
such great variety of exeoition and independence, it wouM be very dithcult.
juilging from style alone, to discriminate between the different varieties ot
this general type ; and, as a matter of fact, many comparisons an<l classifica-
tions have been attempted which will not bear the light of a fnller investi-
gation. Under these circumstances we might well despair ai' any further
j»rogress, but for an indication which I have already noted in describing tlie
Disney head ; this is the felt cap worn under the helmet, and showing clearly
on either side above the hair. This j)eculiarity is one which no co})yist —
whatever his skill or intention as regards style — could fail to reproduce, unless
he was <leliberately making a free imitation rather than a copy of the
original ; and so it affords us a safe clue for the selection of those heads that
merit a more careful consideration. Among these ^ one type is rejjresented
by the head, found between Pompeii and Castellammare, in the collection of
l*rince Karl of Prussia at Olienicke near Potsdam'-; the <jther, and the nearer
to the Disney Athena, is the head of the statue of Athena from Crete now in
the Louvre (Fig. 2), published by M. Jamot in Monninents (Irecs 21-22. It so
ha})pens that this very statue has recently been identified by Dr. Ileisch-'
upon external grounds as a variant of an Athena by Alcamenes. So remark-
able a coincidence re([uires careful consideration.

Dr. lleisch, starting from the two inscriptions C.I. A. i. 8T(S and 819, infers,
from the details referred to, that the two statues mentioned in the inscriptions
must be }Ie}jhae.stus and Athena, that they were probably dedicated in-ilV-
410 15. C, or not much later, that they were of bronze, about '1\ times life-size, and
that they were identical with the statues described by Pausanias^ as existing
in the Hephaesteum. These were a Hephaestus and an Athena of which,
unfortunately, the only thing he tells us is that she had blue {'yXavKoi) eyes.
As Dr. Reisch very justly remarks, the one artist working in Athens at this
tiin<.' most likely to have a connni.ssion for temple statues of such size and
importance given to him was Alcamenes; the famous statue of Hephaestus,
by Alcamenes, which is otherwise recorded, must most probably be identified
with this Hephaestus, and so the attribution of the two statues to him is
corroborated. So far, Dr. Reisch's suggestions certainly carry a very high
degree of |)robability, though of course they cannot be ab.soluti'ly i»r(ned.
Next, observing that among the materials provided is tin for the avOe/j,up or
Mower-ornainent below the shicdd of Athena,'' he compares certain statues of

' 'flu- 11. i|. ..r tlii- i:i|i, ill a I. ,1111 Kstiiil.liii.i,' ^ 1. M, C.

iIm'. >i:i.'ii ill tin- (Jli.iiickc li(:ii|, iitcius also ill '' J must ((inrcss ti> imik li doulit alioiit tin's

till- rail. IS <:iii.stiiiiiiiii ami its iiiiiiiiiiius n - ivOf/xuf ai<,'iini(iit ; it may he imicly an onia-

|.li.•.•^^ ; l>iit tills.; aiv tco ilillci.iit in typi- I" nn-nt alli.Xi-.l witliin tin: slii.i<l. liul. limliiiK

i-.iiisi- any < •nriisi'.ii. tliat Dr.'s ai-iiimnts liav.- l.d to a it-ii-

■-' Krii-ilnirlis W.ilti Is. 1138; .Mon. Inst. iv. i lii>i<>ii \\liirli is sinin'.<<ly in ai,(,f,l with m-w

1, Miill.M.\Virs.l.-i- ii. ]<», lltSa. evi.lcn.;.-, 1 tlnnk it ..nly fail t<. ,;^iv.' tin

^ .liilnrslirfl, i. |.. .-,.-, ; , r. Ktaiios Viml.i- i.l liis n a-..iiiii-,'.


Athena, wliich have the sliieM actually supported by an acanthus ornament,
as copies of this Athena by Alcanienes. These statues, unfortunately, are all
headless, or at le:ist have heads that do not belong to them. But the Athena
from Crete in the Louvre, though different in the arran^a^ment of the aegis
and of the left arm, is absolutely identical in drapery, fold for fold, with the
statues in rpiestion. Dr. Reisch is accordingly inclined to see in this Athena
from Crete a modification of the type introduced by Alcamenes.^ Perhaps, if
we accept the rest of Dr. Reisch's hypothesis, we may be inclined to a
different view of the relation of the two types. To this question we must
return presently.

M. Jamot, who published the Athena from Crete in the Monuments Grccs,
attributes its style to the closing years of the fifth century ; and so gives inde-
pendent confirmation to Dr. Reisch's views as to the period to which the type
must, at least in its origin, be assigned. He also assigns it to the immediate
siirroundings of Phiilias. The distinguishing peculiarity of this Athena is
that upon her left arm and the aegis, which is cast over lier left shoulder, she
supports a circular box or cista out of which rises a snake. This box is
Lvidi'iitly the one which she confided to the care of the daughters of Cecrops ;
it contained, as will be remembered, the infant Erichthonius, and on its being
opened a snake ajjpeared. The Attic legend assigned to Athena a >ieculiar
interest in this child ; she even, according to some accounts, acknowledged in
its birth a kind of vicarious maternit}^ while its father, Hephaestus, usually
stands beside her when she receives it from its mother the Earth (Ge).
Viewed in this light, the grouj) of Athena supporting on her left arm the
snake that is but a form of Erichthonius, has a different meaning from what
a})pears upon the siirface. The position of the statue, and the expression of
the, at once recall the Eirene and Plutus of Cephisodotus and the
Hermes and infant Dionysus of Praxiteles. And the resemblance is not an
accidental one. If M. Jamot, having only the Cretan statue before him,
could make so just an inference as to its period and character, we can go
further with the help of the Disney head, which is more careful in execution
and, in all probability, a more faithful copy of the common original. It was
no accident that led us to notice a similarity of expression, though attained
by entirely different mechanical means, between this Athena and the Hermes
of Praxiteles. The circumstances are in e "h case similar ; each holds a
child, or what represents a child, yet does not directly look at it or play with

' It has liceu sii-^gt-stt-d t ) iii'j Ijy Mr. G. F. mere conjectuie, was but another form of this

Hill that Atliiiui Ilcjiliaestia is a title very Athena He hatstia. In both alike the goddess

difficult to iiaralU-1 in Creek niytholofjy, if the was represe id in her more {>eaeeful aspect, as

Online LibraryEngland) Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies (LonThe Journal of Hellenic studies (Volume 19) → online text (page 1 of 42)