DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42779#0218
156 BRONZEWORK
Kanachos, of which a version made of cedar wood by the
same artist stood in the Temple of Ismenian Apollo at
Thebes. That they were identical figures seems clear from
the remark of Pausanias that Siacpepoucn 5e ToaovSe- 6 pev yap
ev BpayyiSais xa^K°^> ° ’lapfivios ectti KsSpou. In other
words their only difference was one of material. From this it
seems likely that Kanachos disposed of the model for his
Apollo to the minor temple at Thebes, while the more ex-
pensive bronze was sent to Miletus. Wooden original models
would in any case be sought for and so have a market value.
Kluge suggests that Theodoros learned the method of
casting from a wooden model in Egypt, where it was possible
to see the process used for the casting of doors,1 which was
the nearest the Egyptians got to employing a casting process
at all for works of art on a large scale. But the casting of doors
was relatively simple and the casting of large-scale statues
implied an inventiveness and enterprise far more character-
istic of Greeks.
Kluge’s theory necessitates a drastic revision of all those
aesthetic judgements which are made on the assumption that
all bronzes must be from clay originals or from waxen sur-
faces. The word ‘plastic’, which is so freely thrown about
whenever a bronze is under discussion, must now be aban-
doned if Kluge’s views on sixth-century bronzes are
acceptable. For such bronzes are hardly ‘plastic’ at all.
They are reproductions of carved originals in which all the
qualities of wood-carving are visible. I must confess that it
would be impossible to say at a glance whether the surfaces
of the Piombino youth or the Acropolis bronze head 2 would
preclude them from being cast from wooden models. On the
other hand, I cannot accept Kluge’s proof for the wooden
model of the Acropolis head. He identifies the gouge-cuts
on the scalp on the left side of the head as cuts made on the
wooden model which have been reproduced in the casting.
1 As in the Rekhmere pictures. See P. E. Newberry, Life of Rekhmara,
p. 37 and PI. xviii. 2 De Ridder, Bronzes de I’Acropole, p. 291.
Kanachos, of which a version made of cedar wood by the
same artist stood in the Temple of Ismenian Apollo at
Thebes. That they were identical figures seems clear from
the remark of Pausanias that Siacpepoucn 5e ToaovSe- 6 pev yap
ev BpayyiSais xa^K°^> ° ’lapfivios ectti KsSpou. In other
words their only difference was one of material. From this it
seems likely that Kanachos disposed of the model for his
Apollo to the minor temple at Thebes, while the more ex-
pensive bronze was sent to Miletus. Wooden original models
would in any case be sought for and so have a market value.
Kluge suggests that Theodoros learned the method of
casting from a wooden model in Egypt, where it was possible
to see the process used for the casting of doors,1 which was
the nearest the Egyptians got to employing a casting process
at all for works of art on a large scale. But the casting of doors
was relatively simple and the casting of large-scale statues
implied an inventiveness and enterprise far more character-
istic of Greeks.
Kluge’s theory necessitates a drastic revision of all those
aesthetic judgements which are made on the assumption that
all bronzes must be from clay originals or from waxen sur-
faces. The word ‘plastic’, which is so freely thrown about
whenever a bronze is under discussion, must now be aban-
doned if Kluge’s views on sixth-century bronzes are
acceptable. For such bronzes are hardly ‘plastic’ at all.
They are reproductions of carved originals in which all the
qualities of wood-carving are visible. I must confess that it
would be impossible to say at a glance whether the surfaces
of the Piombino youth or the Acropolis bronze head 2 would
preclude them from being cast from wooden models. On the
other hand, I cannot accept Kluge’s proof for the wooden
model of the Acropolis head. He identifies the gouge-cuts
on the scalp on the left side of the head as cuts made on the
wooden model which have been reproduced in the casting.
1 As in the Rekhmere pictures. See P. E. Newberry, Life of Rekhmara,
p. 37 and PI. xviii. 2 De Ridder, Bronzes de I’Acropole, p. 291.