Cook, Arthur B.: Zeus: a study in ancient religion (Band 2,1): Zeus god of the dark sky (thunder and lightning): Text and notes (Cambridge, 1925)

The Delphic Tripod

*95

serpents for its base (figs. 134 and 135)1. Now the mantic tripod also
appears to have been of the columnar kind—witness a certain
number of sculptured copies. Thus a handsome tripod in Pentelic
marble, found at Ostia and preserved in the Louvre (fig. 136)-, has its

1 The fullest collection of passages, ancient and modern, bearing on this famous monu-
ment is that printed by Roehl Inscr. Gr. ant. no. 70. See also E. Bourguet Lcs mines de
Delphes Paris 1914 pp. 160—162, Frazer Paitsanias v. 299—307, F. Poulsen Delphi trans.
G. C. Richards London 1920 p. 200 ft". Bourguet adopts the view advocated by H. Strack
{Denkschr. d. Akad. Wien 1864 v Abh. p. 43 ft".), F. Wieseler {Jahrb.f. class. Philol. 1864 x.
245 ft"., id. Ueber den delphischen Dreifuss (extr. from the Abh. d. gott. Gesellsch. d. Wiss.
Phil.-hist. Classe xv) Gottingen 1871 p. 91 f. n.), P. Wolters (Friederichs—Wolters Gipsab-
gttsse p. 11 o ft", no. 227), and E. Fabricius ('Das plataische Weihgeschenk in Delphi' in
the Jahrb. d. kais. deutsch. arch. Inst. 1886 i. 176—191
with figs.), viz. that the serpent-base was a central column
supporting the Ubes and enclosed by the legs of the tripod.
Frazer and Poulsen favour the rival view advanced by
P. A. Dethier and A. D. Mordtmann (' Epigraphik von
Byzantion und Constantinopolis' in the Denkschr. d. Akad.
Wien 1864 v Abh. pp. 3—48 with figs, x, y, z and pis. 1—4),
viz. that the feet of the tripod rested on the serpent-heads
projecting from the top of the spiral column. Restorations
on the former hypothesis are given by H. Strack {Denkschr.
d. Akad. Wien 1864 v Abh. pi. 3, 24 c), B. Graef {Jahrb. d.
kais. deutsch. arch. Inst. 1886 i. 189 fig.), and A. Tournaire
(in his panorama of the precinct, Fouilles de Delphes ii. 1
pi. 9) ; restorations on the latter hypothesis, by P. A. Dethier
and A. D. Mordtmann {Denkschr. d. Akad. JVicn 1864
v Abh. pi. 2, 24, cp. pi. 4, 24a, 24$), and by F. Andre
(H. Luckenbach Erlduterungen zur Wandtafel von Delphi
Miinchen und Berlin 1904 pp. 22—25 fig. 22). I follow
Strack, Wieseler, etc. rather than Dethier, Mordtmann, etc.
because {a) the extant serpent-head shows no trace of a
tripod-foot attached to its upper surface {Denkschr. d. Akad.
Wien 1864 v Abh. p. 12 n. 1), and (b) the monument as
reconstructed by Dethier, Mordtmann, etc. would have
been std generis, whereas the monument as reconstructed
by Strack, Wieseler, etc. fits into a whole series of recog-
nised types. The sketch that I give (fig. 134) is a fresh
restoration, which takes into account (1) the plinth still in
situ at Delphoi (Rhomaides phot. Delphoi no. 17) ; (2) the
twenty-nine coils now in the Hippodrome {Almeidan) at
Constantinople {Jahrb. d. kais. dentsch. arch. Inst. 1886 i Fig. 13;.

pi. opposite to p. 176), (3) the serpent-heads figured in a

Turkish miniature of 1530—1540 a.d. representing a festival in the Ahneidan under
Sultan Soliman {Denkschr. d. Akad. Wien 1864 v Abh. pp. 9, 30 pi. 1, 141:, d, e), (4) the
serpent-heads seen and drawn by Wheler in 1675 a.d. (G. Wheler A journey into Greece
London 1682 p. 185 fig.), and (5) the upper part of one of the heads, found by Fossati
in 1848 a.d. and preserved in the Museum of St Ejrene at Constantinople {Denkschr.
d. Akad. Wien 1864 v Abh. p. 8 pi. 1, 17a, b, c, d).

- Clarac Mus. de Sculpt, ii. 258—269 pi. 121 fig. 50 ( = my fig. 136), Frohner Sculpt, du
Louvre i. ii4f. no. 90, Baumeister Doikm. i. 462 fig. 510, Reinach Htfp.Stat. i. 20 no. 3.
Height n6m. The parts restored are the plinth, the griffin-feet, and all the lower portion
of the monument including the hoop, the three uprights excepting one bucranium and the
upper portion of another, the foliage-lyres, and the quiver-strap.