DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8577#0282
262 ARCHITECTURAL DECORATION
and-square pattern which we have already seen on a slightly earlier revetment
from Corinth. The flowers of the antefix differ from those of earlier antefixes
in precisely the same way as the flowers on the cornice from those of earlier
cornices. The lions'-head spouts are much damaged, and the restored drawing
in the publication (pi. 119, 5) probably does not do them full justice, but they
were certainly finely modelled. There was no ridge-pole, but the ridge of the
roof was decorated with palmettes which stood on a curious type of double
tile. There were figurative acroteria, but these are lost. The antefixes were
made in one block with the sima and the edge-tile, a technique which, as we
have seen, is characteristically Corinthian.
Finds in other parts of Greece often reproduce these types exactly, or
almost exactly; often they introduce us to variant forms. Taken as a whole,
they show as clearly as we could wish the extraordinary prestige of this system
of decoration in the late archaic period. The relevant provenances have been
enumerated by Koch, and many pieces are described or illustrated by Mrs.
Van Buren. I need not recapitulate them,1 and will mention only a few parti-
cularly fine examples, some of which are well, or adequately, published: the
magnificent simas from Halae2 and Olympia,3 the former reproducing
exactly the Megarian Treasury type; the antefixes from Calydon,4 Halae,
Thebes,5 Olympia and elsewhere; and the fragmentary acroteria in the
form of Nikai and sphinxes from Halae,6 Delphi,7 Athens,8 Olympia,9 and
Corinth.10 These derive directly from the earlier acroteria already discussed
in this chapter, and closely resemble them in technique and in the manner of
painting. They are, however, unmistakably of late archaic style. All are
damaged beyond repair, but even the existing fragments give evidence of an
exquisite technique, comparable to that of the revetments of Megarian
Treasury style.
1 The provenances extend throughout central of the sphinx; it was certainly made at Corinth.
Greece to Gonnos in Thessaly, and include Calydon 7 Many fragments of Nike-acroteria from the
on the west and Aegina on the east. second temple of Athena Pronaia: see F. de D. iv,
2 AJ.A. 1915, 433; Van Buren fig. 97. pis. 30-1 ; Revue de l'art anc. et mod. 1901,361 ff.;
3 Olympia iii, pis. 118-19. Perrot viii, 419 vignette; Koch 105; Van Buren
4 Poulsen-Rhomaios fig. 27. 169-70. Very fine technique: certainly made at
5 Deltion 1917,53 fig. 51; recognized as Corinthian Corinth.
by Keramopoullos, but dated too early (c. 500 B.C.); 8 Van Buren figs. 43-5 and pp. 166-7, where they
this type is certainly later than the Treasury, and are dated too early.
might belong to the second quarter of the fifth 9 Torso of Nike: 01. iii, pi. 8,3 and p. 40, fig. 43;
century. Koch, 100; Van Buren 168 no. 6.
6 Unpublished fragments of a late archaic sphinx, 10 Unpublished, but probably of this class; see
ascribed by Van Buren (p. 168) to the first half of the A.J .A. 1926,447: drapery of an elaborate 'terracotta
sixth century; mentioned in A.J.A., loc. cit.,together statuette,' from near the temple of Athena Chalinitis,
with fragments of other acroteria: a female figure and with patterns and figures on the drapery. Perhaps
'portions of a spirited horse'. I have seen the head part of a Nike-acroterion ?
and-square pattern which we have already seen on a slightly earlier revetment
from Corinth. The flowers of the antefix differ from those of earlier antefixes
in precisely the same way as the flowers on the cornice from those of earlier
cornices. The lions'-head spouts are much damaged, and the restored drawing
in the publication (pi. 119, 5) probably does not do them full justice, but they
were certainly finely modelled. There was no ridge-pole, but the ridge of the
roof was decorated with palmettes which stood on a curious type of double
tile. There were figurative acroteria, but these are lost. The antefixes were
made in one block with the sima and the edge-tile, a technique which, as we
have seen, is characteristically Corinthian.
Finds in other parts of Greece often reproduce these types exactly, or
almost exactly; often they introduce us to variant forms. Taken as a whole,
they show as clearly as we could wish the extraordinary prestige of this system
of decoration in the late archaic period. The relevant provenances have been
enumerated by Koch, and many pieces are described or illustrated by Mrs.
Van Buren. I need not recapitulate them,1 and will mention only a few parti-
cularly fine examples, some of which are well, or adequately, published: the
magnificent simas from Halae2 and Olympia,3 the former reproducing
exactly the Megarian Treasury type; the antefixes from Calydon,4 Halae,
Thebes,5 Olympia and elsewhere; and the fragmentary acroteria in the
form of Nikai and sphinxes from Halae,6 Delphi,7 Athens,8 Olympia,9 and
Corinth.10 These derive directly from the earlier acroteria already discussed
in this chapter, and closely resemble them in technique and in the manner of
painting. They are, however, unmistakably of late archaic style. All are
damaged beyond repair, but even the existing fragments give evidence of an
exquisite technique, comparable to that of the revetments of Megarian
Treasury style.
1 The provenances extend throughout central of the sphinx; it was certainly made at Corinth.
Greece to Gonnos in Thessaly, and include Calydon 7 Many fragments of Nike-acroteria from the
on the west and Aegina on the east. second temple of Athena Pronaia: see F. de D. iv,
2 AJ.A. 1915, 433; Van Buren fig. 97. pis. 30-1 ; Revue de l'art anc. et mod. 1901,361 ff.;
3 Olympia iii, pis. 118-19. Perrot viii, 419 vignette; Koch 105; Van Buren
4 Poulsen-Rhomaios fig. 27. 169-70. Very fine technique: certainly made at
5 Deltion 1917,53 fig. 51; recognized as Corinthian Corinth.
by Keramopoullos, but dated too early (c. 500 B.C.); 8 Van Buren figs. 43-5 and pp. 166-7, where they
this type is certainly later than the Treasury, and are dated too early.
might belong to the second quarter of the fifth 9 Torso of Nike: 01. iii, pi. 8,3 and p. 40, fig. 43;
century. Koch, 100; Van Buren 168 no. 6.
6 Unpublished fragments of a late archaic sphinx, 10 Unpublished, but probably of this class; see
ascribed by Van Buren (p. 168) to the first half of the A.J .A. 1926,447: drapery of an elaborate 'terracotta
sixth century; mentioned in A.J.A., loc. cit.,together statuette,' from near the temple of Athena Chalinitis,
with fragments of other acroteria: a female figure and with patterns and figures on the drapery. Perhaps
'portions of a spirited horse'. I have seen the head part of a Nike-acroterion ?