DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.37251#0256
220
SALA DEI MONUMENTI ARCAICI 12
still more. A mark on the 1. knee shows where the r. arm rested, and
this, with the obvious sideways movement of the h arm, shows that both
arms are extended towards the 1. The figure is clad in a short leather
jerkin reaching to the hips, with V-shaped neck opening. The absence
of any edge on the 1. thigh shows that the garment was originally
distinguished by paint. The hair falls on the back in a flat, finely combed
mass, on which is visible a long triangular tail belonging to the Phrygian
cap worn on the head. There is a large square hole on the back
(-10 m. x -10 m.) with a smaller hole in the middle of it (-og m. x -06 m.),
an oblong mortice on the 1. thigh (-I3g m. x -08 m.) with a dowel-hole
in it to secure the object inserted, and a small hole an inch below the
edge of the garment on the r. thigh.
The meaning of the statue is really determined by a small bronze
^zzzzA//<? a little below the projection on the 1. knee. This would have no
function to perform if the figure were supposed to be shooting, as we
might at first interpret the pose. Moreover,_ the Greeks, who only drew
the arrow to their breast, did not shoot standing or kneeling sideways like
English archers (cf. the Heracles in the Aeginetan pediment). The true
interpretation is provided by Petersen with the help of coins of Thebes
(A. A/. Gbz'zzr, CbzzW pi. XII, nos. 2, 3, and g) which show
Heracles stringing a bow. He kneels on his r. knee like our statue and
holds the bow under his raised 1. thigh, oue horn resting on the r. thigh,
the other held in the 1. hand (Coins nos. 2 and 3), r. hand (Coin no. g).
With the other hand he holds the string and pulis the horn down to meet
it. This method of bow-stringing, impossible with English bows, was
used by the Scythians of antiquity (cf. Hzz/zyzzz'/^t <Az rz'zzzzzz^rzDz,
pi. XXXI), and is still practised, according to Petersen, by the Tartars.
The hole in the r. thigh of our figure shows where the lower horn of the
bow rested, the other was held in the outstretched 1. hand, passing under
the raised 1. thigh. The r. hand held the string, and the /wzzA%? on the
1. knee shows where it was fastened on its way.
The hole on the back is thought by Petersen to have served to attach
the statue to a background, in which case we should see in it part of a
pedimenta! group, probably, since the Phrygian cap and jerkin point
clearly to an Amazon, a battle of Greeks and Amazons. The mortice on
the 1. thigh doubtless served for the attachment of a quiver. There seems,
however, to be no ground for Petersen's suggestion of Boupalos and
Athenis as authors of the type, since it is impossible to compare the
statue with any of the figures of Abrzrz' which represent their influence.
The statue is undoubtedly archaic and must belong to the late sixth
century. The hair, the lack of anatomical detail, and the unnatural
treatment of the limbs all point to an early date, but the style suggests an
early Peloponnesian rather than an Ionian school.
It faced three-quarters r. in the pediment or relief to which it
belonged. The presence of a similar male figure in reverse position
(no. 14) suggests a group composition of some kind.
Found in the former Villa Ludovisi.
C.L. Visconti, Z?zz/7. Cc/zz. xvi (18S8), pp. 41^-18; Petersen, ^dzzz. Ttfz'/A iv
(1889), pp. 86-8, with two figs, in text; P0//3 Ti^zzz, p. 142, fig. 106; HelbigS,
980.
SALA DEI MONUMENTI ARCAICI 12
still more. A mark on the 1. knee shows where the r. arm rested, and
this, with the obvious sideways movement of the h arm, shows that both
arms are extended towards the 1. The figure is clad in a short leather
jerkin reaching to the hips, with V-shaped neck opening. The absence
of any edge on the 1. thigh shows that the garment was originally
distinguished by paint. The hair falls on the back in a flat, finely combed
mass, on which is visible a long triangular tail belonging to the Phrygian
cap worn on the head. There is a large square hole on the back
(-10 m. x -10 m.) with a smaller hole in the middle of it (-og m. x -06 m.),
an oblong mortice on the 1. thigh (-I3g m. x -08 m.) with a dowel-hole
in it to secure the object inserted, and a small hole an inch below the
edge of the garment on the r. thigh.
The meaning of the statue is really determined by a small bronze
^zzzzA//<? a little below the projection on the 1. knee. This would have no
function to perform if the figure were supposed to be shooting, as we
might at first interpret the pose. Moreover,_ the Greeks, who only drew
the arrow to their breast, did not shoot standing or kneeling sideways like
English archers (cf. the Heracles in the Aeginetan pediment). The true
interpretation is provided by Petersen with the help of coins of Thebes
(A. A/. Gbz'zzr, CbzzW pi. XII, nos. 2, 3, and g) which show
Heracles stringing a bow. He kneels on his r. knee like our statue and
holds the bow under his raised 1. thigh, oue horn resting on the r. thigh,
the other held in the 1. hand (Coins nos. 2 and 3), r. hand (Coin no. g).
With the other hand he holds the string and pulis the horn down to meet
it. This method of bow-stringing, impossible with English bows, was
used by the Scythians of antiquity (cf. Hzz/zyzzz'/^t <Az rz'zzzzzz^rzDz,
pi. XXXI), and is still practised, according to Petersen, by the Tartars.
The hole in the r. thigh of our figure shows where the lower horn of the
bow rested, the other was held in the outstretched 1. hand, passing under
the raised 1. thigh. The r. hand held the string, and the /wzzA%? on the
1. knee shows where it was fastened on its way.
The hole on the back is thought by Petersen to have served to attach
the statue to a background, in which case we should see in it part of a
pedimenta! group, probably, since the Phrygian cap and jerkin point
clearly to an Amazon, a battle of Greeks and Amazons. The mortice on
the 1. thigh doubtless served for the attachment of a quiver. There seems,
however, to be no ground for Petersen's suggestion of Boupalos and
Athenis as authors of the type, since it is impossible to compare the
statue with any of the figures of Abrzrz' which represent their influence.
The statue is undoubtedly archaic and must belong to the late sixth
century. The hair, the lack of anatomical detail, and the unnatural
treatment of the limbs all point to an early date, but the style suggests an
early Peloponnesian rather than an Ionian school.
It faced three-quarters r. in the pediment or relief to which it
belonged. The presence of a similar male figure in reverse position
(no. 14) suggests a group composition of some kind.
Found in the former Villa Ludovisi.
C.L. Visconti, Z?zz/7. Cc/zz. xvi (18S8), pp. 41^-18; Petersen, ^dzzz. Ttfz'/A iv
(1889), pp. 86-8, with two figs, in text; P0//3 Ti^zzz, p. 142, fig. 106; HelbigS,
980.