DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.5065#0043
34 FURTHER PROOFS OF THE TYPE OF AJAX.
If the opinion of Visconti were adopted, that the erect figure in the three groups was
a Menelaos, what possible relation could this principal ornament of the casque (an exploit of
Hercules) have had with its owner ? If it be answered that none is required ; that it is
there merely as an ornament; I should be much better satisfied with this reply, than with
the forced and far-fetched explanation which Visconti gives.3 But it would still be quite in the
modern way of thinking, and very unsatisfactory to those who are at all acquainted with
Greek antiquity. A Greek artist of such powerful intellect (as the conception of the group itself
proves him to have been), and in a time in which every Greek mind was intimately imbibed
with all the bearings of national creed and tradition,4 a Greek artist of that stamp never
executed any ornamental accessories to his works without some well determined motive. They
understood too perfectly the spirit of their heroic antiquity, to give to the Pelopidce the
attributes which were adapted only to the JEacidce. As those heroes themselves had been
too high minded and haughty to borrow from each other, in the same manner the artists
of that people knew too well the national heroes and their types, ever to confound the charac-
teristical emblems of one of them with those of the heroes of a different lineage. Thus, as
it was not without motive that Menelaos bore upon his shield the figure of a dragon,5 and
Idomeneus that of a cock,6 we are warranted in concluding, in the instance before us, that
there must have been a direct connection between the Homeric hero who wore the casque,
and the ornament drawn from the achievements of Hercules, which was upon it.7 The slightest
acquaintance with the mythos concerning the parentage of Hercules and of Ajax, and the
intimate union which had subsisted between the former, and the father of Ajax (see above,
j). 28, note 5), prove the propriety of the ornament on the casque. The speech of Ajax to
Achilles, in the first book of the Paralipomena, is quite in the spirit of the son of Telamon
as an iEacida, and as a pupil of Hercules.8
3. What I have above advanced respecting the true type of ancient art in regard to Ajax,
and upon the subject of the four groups of Rome and of Florence, is strongly confirmed
by the great resemblance of the head in the Vatican to that of the hero on No. I. of the
Bronzes of Siris. This resemblance is so striking that it cannot escape the notice of any one,
who will carefully compare the two productions. For those who have not seen the originals,
it may be sufficient to say that the two designs of the heads, of which I here annex the
engravings,9 were executed with great exactness ; the one marked M. V. (marmor vaticanum)
is upon a reduced scale, the head of the bronze No. I. marked JE. S. (Ms Sirisium) upon
an increased scale.
These two heads are, as any one can see, absolutely the same, not only in the general
:) In other respects Visconti very sensibly felt the difficulty of reconciling this subject with his Menelaos (Museo Pio-
Clementino 1. 1. p. 30) " La relazione di questa storia con Menelao non e molto chiara," &c.
4 That is to say, centuries before the avyxymg, or confusion of all national feelings and traditions, took place
among the Greeks. It begun under the Ptolemies, who gradually lost sight of every thing Greek, except the vices
of the nation ; and it was finally consummated by the selfish power of Roman ascendency, which annihilated all but the
resources and the machinery of its own growth.
5 See above, page 9, note 9.
6 See above, page 9, note S.
7 The shield of Achilles might be objected to this position ; but that piece of armour, Hephzestos' own work-
manship, was an individual and miraculous gift, representing upon its broad surface the entire picture of human life;
in the words of Ovid : " clypeus vasti ccelatus imagine mundi." With respect to this work, I am rather disposed to
adopt the ideas of Heyne in his 3d excursus on 1. XVIII. of the Iliad, and particularly those expressed in the Vllth
Vol. of his edition of that poem, p. 589-592, upon the origin and insertion of this beautiful episode.
8 Quintus Paralip. 1. I. v. 502 et seq. (ed. Th. C. Tychsen. Argentorati, 1807, in 8vo.) :—
--------------ov yap toiKE Ai6e /ueyaXoTo ytyawrag
alcrxyvav Traripwv upbv ytvog, o'l pa kcu avroi
Tpdjwv ayXabv arrrv SuirpaSov, a<j>paSiym
to irp\v, a/x' 'HpaicAfj't $ai<j>povi, AaopioovTog'
wairep vvv TtXhcrSai v<j>' )i/i£r£pr)<nv oi'tu
Xcpmv, brtl fxiya Kaprog at^erat afx<pOTipoiaiv.
9 See the Plate VI.
If the opinion of Visconti were adopted, that the erect figure in the three groups was
a Menelaos, what possible relation could this principal ornament of the casque (an exploit of
Hercules) have had with its owner ? If it be answered that none is required ; that it is
there merely as an ornament; I should be much better satisfied with this reply, than with
the forced and far-fetched explanation which Visconti gives.3 But it would still be quite in the
modern way of thinking, and very unsatisfactory to those who are at all acquainted with
Greek antiquity. A Greek artist of such powerful intellect (as the conception of the group itself
proves him to have been), and in a time in which every Greek mind was intimately imbibed
with all the bearings of national creed and tradition,4 a Greek artist of that stamp never
executed any ornamental accessories to his works without some well determined motive. They
understood too perfectly the spirit of their heroic antiquity, to give to the Pelopidce the
attributes which were adapted only to the JEacidce. As those heroes themselves had been
too high minded and haughty to borrow from each other, in the same manner the artists
of that people knew too well the national heroes and their types, ever to confound the charac-
teristical emblems of one of them with those of the heroes of a different lineage. Thus, as
it was not without motive that Menelaos bore upon his shield the figure of a dragon,5 and
Idomeneus that of a cock,6 we are warranted in concluding, in the instance before us, that
there must have been a direct connection between the Homeric hero who wore the casque,
and the ornament drawn from the achievements of Hercules, which was upon it.7 The slightest
acquaintance with the mythos concerning the parentage of Hercules and of Ajax, and the
intimate union which had subsisted between the former, and the father of Ajax (see above,
j). 28, note 5), prove the propriety of the ornament on the casque. The speech of Ajax to
Achilles, in the first book of the Paralipomena, is quite in the spirit of the son of Telamon
as an iEacida, and as a pupil of Hercules.8
3. What I have above advanced respecting the true type of ancient art in regard to Ajax,
and upon the subject of the four groups of Rome and of Florence, is strongly confirmed
by the great resemblance of the head in the Vatican to that of the hero on No. I. of the
Bronzes of Siris. This resemblance is so striking that it cannot escape the notice of any one,
who will carefully compare the two productions. For those who have not seen the originals,
it may be sufficient to say that the two designs of the heads, of which I here annex the
engravings,9 were executed with great exactness ; the one marked M. V. (marmor vaticanum)
is upon a reduced scale, the head of the bronze No. I. marked JE. S. (Ms Sirisium) upon
an increased scale.
These two heads are, as any one can see, absolutely the same, not only in the general
:) In other respects Visconti very sensibly felt the difficulty of reconciling this subject with his Menelaos (Museo Pio-
Clementino 1. 1. p. 30) " La relazione di questa storia con Menelao non e molto chiara," &c.
4 That is to say, centuries before the avyxymg, or confusion of all national feelings and traditions, took place
among the Greeks. It begun under the Ptolemies, who gradually lost sight of every thing Greek, except the vices
of the nation ; and it was finally consummated by the selfish power of Roman ascendency, which annihilated all but the
resources and the machinery of its own growth.
5 See above, page 9, note 9.
6 See above, page 9, note S.
7 The shield of Achilles might be objected to this position ; but that piece of armour, Hephzestos' own work-
manship, was an individual and miraculous gift, representing upon its broad surface the entire picture of human life;
in the words of Ovid : " clypeus vasti ccelatus imagine mundi." With respect to this work, I am rather disposed to
adopt the ideas of Heyne in his 3d excursus on 1. XVIII. of the Iliad, and particularly those expressed in the Vllth
Vol. of his edition of that poem, p. 589-592, upon the origin and insertion of this beautiful episode.
8 Quintus Paralip. 1. I. v. 502 et seq. (ed. Th. C. Tychsen. Argentorati, 1807, in 8vo.) :—
--------------ov yap toiKE Ai6e /ueyaXoTo ytyawrag
alcrxyvav Traripwv upbv ytvog, o'l pa kcu avroi
Tpdjwv ayXabv arrrv SuirpaSov, a<j>paSiym
to irp\v, a/x' 'HpaicAfj't $ai<j>povi, AaopioovTog'
wairep vvv TtXhcrSai v<j>' )i/i£r£pr)<nv oi'tu
Xcpmv, brtl fxiya Kaprog at^erat afx<pOTipoiaiv.
9 See the Plate VI.