DOI chapter:
Divison D: The Acropolis, from the Propylaea to the statue of Athene Lemnia
DOI chapter:Section XIX
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.61302#0648
474
MYTHOLOGY AND MONUMENTS
DIV. D
As regards Deinomenes there must have been an elder and a
younger sculptor of this name. Pliny says that Deinomenes
flourished in the 95th Olympiad (z.e., circ. 396 B.C.); on the
other hand, a basis has been found on the Acropolis with the
signature of Deinomenes114 in letters characteristic of the
second or first century B. c. It is impossible to determine by
which Deinomenes the statues seen by Pausanias were made,
nor is it known how they were conceived. As Pausanias thinks
it necessary to explain that the two ill-fated heroines were changed
respectively into a cow and a bear, presumably they were repre-
sented in human shape. Greek art at the best times shrank from
animal as well as hybrid impersonations of human beings.
Pausanias states distinctly that the groups sent by Attalos
were on the south wall; from a passage in Plutarch’s Life of
Antony it is further certain that they must have been set up
immediately over the Dionysiac theatre. Plutarch relates that
during a terrible storm which occurred when Antony was at
Patrae, at Athens the figure of Dionysos was torn off from the
Gigantomachia and carried down into the theatre; this, Plut-
arch 115 goes on to say, upset Antony very much, as he affected
to be a follower of Dionysos and was called the younger Dionysos.
Even in a really heavy storm a statue could scarcely be carried
very far, so we may reasonably suppose the groups were just above
the theatre. From this passage also it is almost certain that the
originals were of bronze. Hollow bronze statues could with
comparative ease be torn off from their pedestals and carried
down over the cliff, whereas, if the statue was of stone on a stone
pedestal, it is difficult to conceive of such a thing happening.
It is well known116 that there are, scattered about in the
museums of Europe, a number of small statues which can scarcely
be otherwise than copies of this votive offering. Ten are already
known—three in Venice, four in Naples, one in the Vatican, one
in the Louvre, one at Aix ; probably many more remain to be
discovered, now the clue is once given. The unity of motive and
style that runs through the series was first noted in the case of the
statues at Naples and those at Venice by Professor Brunn. The
reasons for connecting them together and with the votive groups
of Attalos are briefly as follows :—
1. They are all made of a fine-grained marble known to come
from Asia Minor.
2. Their peculiar size, about 3 feet, suggests the two cubits of
Pausanias.
MYTHOLOGY AND MONUMENTS
DIV. D
As regards Deinomenes there must have been an elder and a
younger sculptor of this name. Pliny says that Deinomenes
flourished in the 95th Olympiad (z.e., circ. 396 B.C.); on the
other hand, a basis has been found on the Acropolis with the
signature of Deinomenes114 in letters characteristic of the
second or first century B. c. It is impossible to determine by
which Deinomenes the statues seen by Pausanias were made,
nor is it known how they were conceived. As Pausanias thinks
it necessary to explain that the two ill-fated heroines were changed
respectively into a cow and a bear, presumably they were repre-
sented in human shape. Greek art at the best times shrank from
animal as well as hybrid impersonations of human beings.
Pausanias states distinctly that the groups sent by Attalos
were on the south wall; from a passage in Plutarch’s Life of
Antony it is further certain that they must have been set up
immediately over the Dionysiac theatre. Plutarch relates that
during a terrible storm which occurred when Antony was at
Patrae, at Athens the figure of Dionysos was torn off from the
Gigantomachia and carried down into the theatre; this, Plut-
arch 115 goes on to say, upset Antony very much, as he affected
to be a follower of Dionysos and was called the younger Dionysos.
Even in a really heavy storm a statue could scarcely be carried
very far, so we may reasonably suppose the groups were just above
the theatre. From this passage also it is almost certain that the
originals were of bronze. Hollow bronze statues could with
comparative ease be torn off from their pedestals and carried
down over the cliff, whereas, if the statue was of stone on a stone
pedestal, it is difficult to conceive of such a thing happening.
It is well known116 that there are, scattered about in the
museums of Europe, a number of small statues which can scarcely
be otherwise than copies of this votive offering. Ten are already
known—three in Venice, four in Naples, one in the Vatican, one
in the Louvre, one at Aix ; probably many more remain to be
discovered, now the clue is once given. The unity of motive and
style that runs through the series was first noted in the case of the
statues at Naples and those at Venice by Professor Brunn. The
reasons for connecting them together and with the votive groups
of Attalos are briefly as follows :—
1. They are all made of a fine-grained marble known to come
from Asia Minor.
2. Their peculiar size, about 3 feet, suggests the two cubits of
Pausanias.