DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4377#0168
498 LION TOMB.
attitude expressive of angry defiance; while the
attitude of the Cnidian lion, being one of natural
repose, seems rather the symbol of a victory.
If we admit that the evident difference in the
motive of these two works may be thus explained,
the criticism itself is an additional argument in
favour of my supposition that the Cnidian monu-
ment commemorates the victory of Conon.
I would here draw attention to the fact that
one of the colossal lions brought from Athens to
Venice by Morosini, and now in the arsenal there,
is, in design, style, and scale, almost an exact
counterpart of the one discovered by me at Cnidus.
This lion has lost the head, Avhich has been re-
placed by a clumsy Cinque Cento restoration; but
is otherwise perfect, and shows the action of the
fore paws, which, is wanting in the Cnidian lion.
Observing that these two lions corresponded so
nearly in style and scale, I obtained from Venice a
cast of one fore paw of Morosini's lion, and on ad-
justing this to the arm of the Cnidian lion, found
that it Avas about half an inch larger.11 The differ-
n Inter csetera vero duo spectabilis magniUulinis Lconts ac
Lesenre simulacra, ex marmore constructa, extrerno in Httore
reperta.—Mauroeeni Gesta script. J. Gratian. Patav. 1G98, p. 338.
Compare the inscription placed on these lions by the Venetian
senate, 1687. According to H. W. Ulrichs, Topography of the
Harbours at Athens, Engl, transl. London, 1847, p. 18, this lion
is alluded to by Plutarch under the name "AAia/noc in the expression
-o Kara ruu "AXm/iov axpurfipiov. Plut. Themist. 32.
At the eastern foot of Hymettus, Dodwell saw a colossal lion,
which he describes as being of Pentelic marble, in the purest style,
and well preserved except the legs, which are wanting. The lower
jaw of this lion is preserved. This lion is three-quarters of an
attitude expressive of angry defiance; while the
attitude of the Cnidian lion, being one of natural
repose, seems rather the symbol of a victory.
If we admit that the evident difference in the
motive of these two works may be thus explained,
the criticism itself is an additional argument in
favour of my supposition that the Cnidian monu-
ment commemorates the victory of Conon.
I would here draw attention to the fact that
one of the colossal lions brought from Athens to
Venice by Morosini, and now in the arsenal there,
is, in design, style, and scale, almost an exact
counterpart of the one discovered by me at Cnidus.
This lion has lost the head, Avhich has been re-
placed by a clumsy Cinque Cento restoration; but
is otherwise perfect, and shows the action of the
fore paws, which, is wanting in the Cnidian lion.
Observing that these two lions corresponded so
nearly in style and scale, I obtained from Venice a
cast of one fore paw of Morosini's lion, and on ad-
justing this to the arm of the Cnidian lion, found
that it Avas about half an inch larger.11 The differ-
n Inter csetera vero duo spectabilis magniUulinis Lconts ac
Lesenre simulacra, ex marmore constructa, extrerno in Httore
reperta.—Mauroeeni Gesta script. J. Gratian. Patav. 1G98, p. 338.
Compare the inscription placed on these lions by the Venetian
senate, 1687. According to H. W. Ulrichs, Topography of the
Harbours at Athens, Engl, transl. London, 1847, p. 18, this lion
is alluded to by Plutarch under the name "AAia/noc in the expression
-o Kara ruu "AXm/iov axpurfipiov. Plut. Themist. 32.
At the eastern foot of Hymettus, Dodwell saw a colossal lion,
which he describes as being of Pentelic marble, in the purest style,
and well preserved except the legs, which are wanting. The lower
jaw of this lion is preserved. This lion is three-quarters of an