DOI Heft:
No. 3
DOI Artikel:Daszewski, Wiktor Andrzej: The so called "Attis Statue" from the National Museum in Warsaw
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.17138#0084
most of the "unąuestionable Attisses" do not liave it27. That is wiry in this case, even if it is
impossible to establisli finally whom reprcscnts this figurę, it is better not to use rashly the
name Attis, but use the definition "young man" or "servant".
An analogous attitude should be taken with regard to the object of the INational Museum
in Warsaw. In this case, too, if we omit the "typical posturę", which cannot serve as an ade-
craate criterion, we have no premises to define this sculpture as a statuę of Attis. The only doubt-
ful point, which is not elear yet, is the ring on his middle finger. Among the known figures of
3. Table from Hcrculanum. Decoration of the base, the so called
"Attis" leaning against a column.
Attis none has a ring. It seems, however, that, in spite of this very hypothetical argument
that this is a figurę of a deity, it is better to define prosaically, but perhaps more corrcctly,
as a "servant" or "young man" which terms suit better the part to be played by the statuę in
supporting the table-8.
The date when the statuę was sculpted is still to be established. This item is defined as a
27. Cf. R. S., op. cit., p. 471 and 472.
28. Only at the end of this year i. e. 1962, I could read the very interesting nrticle of M. Charles Picaxd published in
Sl:.rinar, Beograd 1956 — 57. However I do not agree that we can generally use the term ,,Attis" in case of table feet
in form of the "tomb Attis" with no other indications for the divine character of the statuę but its posturę and
garments. There certainly are rcal Attisses used to this purpose (cf. Hesperia, 1935, IV, no 3, pp. 396 — 397, fig. 23),
but this to my mind are rare manifestations. On the other hand we know quite certainly that figures of barbar scrvants
dressed exactly like Attis (cf. Museum of Naples N° 6118) werc also used as supports and the only slight differencc
lay in posturę.
70
impossible to establisli finally whom reprcscnts this figurę, it is better not to use rashly the
name Attis, but use the definition "young man" or "servant".
An analogous attitude should be taken with regard to the object of the INational Museum
in Warsaw. In this case, too, if we omit the "typical posturę", which cannot serve as an ade-
craate criterion, we have no premises to define this sculpture as a statuę of Attis. The only doubt-
ful point, which is not elear yet, is the ring on his middle finger. Among the known figures of
3. Table from Hcrculanum. Decoration of the base, the so called
"Attis" leaning against a column.
Attis none has a ring. It seems, however, that, in spite of this very hypothetical argument
that this is a figurę of a deity, it is better to define prosaically, but perhaps more corrcctly,
as a "servant" or "young man" which terms suit better the part to be played by the statuę in
supporting the table-8.
The date when the statuę was sculpted is still to be established. This item is defined as a
27. Cf. R. S., op. cit., p. 471 and 472.
28. Only at the end of this year i. e. 1962, I could read the very interesting nrticle of M. Charles Picaxd published in
Sl:.rinar, Beograd 1956 — 57. However I do not agree that we can generally use the term ,,Attis" in case of table feet
in form of the "tomb Attis" with no other indications for the divine character of the statuę but its posturę and
garments. There certainly are rcal Attisses used to this purpose (cf. Hesperia, 1935, IV, no 3, pp. 396 — 397, fig. 23),
but this to my mind are rare manifestations. On the other hand we know quite certainly that figures of barbar scrvants
dressed exactly like Attis (cf. Museum of Naples N° 6118) werc also used as supports and the only slight differencc
lay in posturę.
70