DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.5253#0696
658 SCULPTURE UNDER ROMAN DOMINION.
self with both hands. Associated with her is a dolphin, referring, perhaps, to
her connection with the sea. The dolphin is ridden by a child, who serves to
support her, and may be Venus' son Cupid. But the Cupid is foreign to the
original Greek ideal of the goddess, as may be inferred from her figure on
Cnidian coins ; and his shape is here strangely at variance with the graceful
female form. With all there is of grace and excellence in the well-modelled
members of this very celebrated statue, the coquettishness of this nude figure
is not veiled from us, as it stands before us entirely divorced from all sugges-
tive surroundings. Moreover, the surface of the statue has lost the freshness
which it might have had, had not Ferrata's hand left its mark over the whole.
Almost countless are the repetitions of this subject, which seems to have been
a favorite one with the Romans.
The extent of the reproduction of mythological subjects is borne witness to
by the half-dozen replicas of the crouching Venus, the oft-repeated bearded
Silen tending the babe Dionysos, the five copies of a satyr pouring out wine,
the ten or eleven replicas of Eros pulling a bow, the numerous repetitions of
Ariadne sleeping, and of Pheidias' Athena Parthenos, as well as the three or
four of the Apollo Sauroctonos, besides many more which might be mentioned.
Athletic life was also represented in copies. They were needed to decorate
the wrestling-grounds, and among them are numerous repetitions which seem
traceable to the Doryphoros of Polycleitos. In the days of Winckelmann,
these Roman reproductions were well-nigh the only channel through which the
thoughts and inspirations of the older Greek masters could be reached; but
now, since the recent excavations, we can compare them with unrestored origi-
nals of the Pheidian, Praxitelean, and Hellenistic ages, and our judgment of
these later, often sadly patched-up Roman works becomes more just, as they
sink to their proper level.
The sculptors of the age when Roman influence predominated in the
ancient world may be roughly divided into three groups, a few names finding
no connections. One of these groups is traced to Attica, and forms what is
called the New Attic school; another seems to originate in Asia Minor, the
flourishing seat of Hellenistic sculpture ; and a third, to follow one Pasiteles,
representing an archaistic tendency, perhaps a revulsion against the luxurious
naturalistic art of Asia Minor.
Taking up the Attic masters, the first known to us by name seem to have
been employed by Metellus Macedonicus, for a temple and portico in Rome,
in 146 B.C. Pliny makes the statement, that in Olymp. 156 sculpture lived
again, — a statement doubtless to be explained by the extensive introduction
into Rome of Greek sculptures and sculptors at that time. The names men-
tioned are Antaios, Callistratos, Polycles, the Athenian Callixenos, Pythocles,
Pythias, and Timocles, who, although inferior to those who had gone before,
were nevertheless adjudged capable men.'252 Polycles and Timocles seem to
self with both hands. Associated with her is a dolphin, referring, perhaps, to
her connection with the sea. The dolphin is ridden by a child, who serves to
support her, and may be Venus' son Cupid. But the Cupid is foreign to the
original Greek ideal of the goddess, as may be inferred from her figure on
Cnidian coins ; and his shape is here strangely at variance with the graceful
female form. With all there is of grace and excellence in the well-modelled
members of this very celebrated statue, the coquettishness of this nude figure
is not veiled from us, as it stands before us entirely divorced from all sugges-
tive surroundings. Moreover, the surface of the statue has lost the freshness
which it might have had, had not Ferrata's hand left its mark over the whole.
Almost countless are the repetitions of this subject, which seems to have been
a favorite one with the Romans.
The extent of the reproduction of mythological subjects is borne witness to
by the half-dozen replicas of the crouching Venus, the oft-repeated bearded
Silen tending the babe Dionysos, the five copies of a satyr pouring out wine,
the ten or eleven replicas of Eros pulling a bow, the numerous repetitions of
Ariadne sleeping, and of Pheidias' Athena Parthenos, as well as the three or
four of the Apollo Sauroctonos, besides many more which might be mentioned.
Athletic life was also represented in copies. They were needed to decorate
the wrestling-grounds, and among them are numerous repetitions which seem
traceable to the Doryphoros of Polycleitos. In the days of Winckelmann,
these Roman reproductions were well-nigh the only channel through which the
thoughts and inspirations of the older Greek masters could be reached; but
now, since the recent excavations, we can compare them with unrestored origi-
nals of the Pheidian, Praxitelean, and Hellenistic ages, and our judgment of
these later, often sadly patched-up Roman works becomes more just, as they
sink to their proper level.
The sculptors of the age when Roman influence predominated in the
ancient world may be roughly divided into three groups, a few names finding
no connections. One of these groups is traced to Attica, and forms what is
called the New Attic school; another seems to originate in Asia Minor, the
flourishing seat of Hellenistic sculpture ; and a third, to follow one Pasiteles,
representing an archaistic tendency, perhaps a revulsion against the luxurious
naturalistic art of Asia Minor.
Taking up the Attic masters, the first known to us by name seem to have
been employed by Metellus Macedonicus, for a temple and portico in Rome,
in 146 B.C. Pliny makes the statement, that in Olymp. 156 sculpture lived
again, — a statement doubtless to be explained by the extensive introduction
into Rome of Greek sculptures and sculptors at that time. The names men-
tioned are Antaios, Callistratos, Polycles, the Athenian Callixenos, Pythocles,
Pythias, and Timocles, who, although inferior to those who had gone before,
were nevertheless adjudged capable men.'252 Polycles and Timocles seem to