Papers of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens — 5.1886-1890

Seite: 130
Zitierlink: i
Lizenz: Creative Commons - Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen Nutzung / Bestellung
1 cm


of the feet to a line drawn across the neck in a position corresponding
to the line of breakage in L, I found the height 1.55 m., exactly equal
to that of the extant portion of the relief of I., so that the figures were
evidently of the same height. The /cp?;7rt9 of A. is about eleven centi-
meters higher than that of I. The width of the steles at the /cp??7rt?
is 0.435 m. in A., 0.485 m. in I.; while the width at the top is 0.42 m.
in A., 0.41 m. in I. Thus, the total diminution in A. is only 0.015,
while I., though shorter by 0.38 m., shows a diminution of 0.075 m.
In A. there is a diminution of 0.02 m. in the thickness of the slab,
while in I. the diminution is 0.015 m. The width of the rim on the
sides of the relief is the same in both. I. is .sculptured in somewhat
higher relief than A.

In A., the inscription giving the artist's name is upon a narrow
projecting band at the top of the KpTyiris, while in I. there is a band,
not projecting, but indicated by a fine line cut below it, on which are
four rosettes but no inscription. It is probable, however, that the
/3d9pov of I., like that of A., bore an inscription giving the name of the
person to whom the monument was erected.

The general arrangement of the space is the same in the two reliefs ;
in Z, however, the whole figure above the knees leans further forward
than in A. The result of this is, that, while the sculptor of A. is cramped
for space in the back of his figure, where it encroaches on the outer rim
of the slab, notably at the shoulders, the hips, calf and heel, the sculp-
tor of I. has ample space within the rim for his figure, though he has
not profited by it to give to legs and hips their true relations. On
the other hand, the variation on the two slabs in the relative posi-
tions of the figures causes A. to have more room in front, so that the
arm of the hand which holds the spear is visible, whereas in L the hand
alone projects from behind the bust with an awkwardness that calls
attention to the cramped space.

II. Sculpture.—In I., enough of the beard remains to show that the
tip was not, as in A., of a separate piece ; furthermore, its projection is
far nearer a horizontal than in A. The lower end of the helmet crest
which is visible behind the neck of /. shows that this also was not cut
from a separate piece. In L, the chiton on the shoulder is not repre-
sented in sculpture, as it is in A. In A., the armor below the armpit
is cut away to permit free action, while in I. it is fitted tightly around
the whole shoulder, not, however, coining so low down over the shoul-
der as in A. A rude attempt is made in L, not seen in A., to mark, by
loading ...