DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.14144#0166
130 EXTANT MONUMENTS OF FIFTH CENTURY B.C.
by comparing thedying Hero'(fig. 53, on page 129 1) behind Heracles in
the eastern pediment with the corresponding figure in the western. In
the former there is hardly any trace of the leanness and stiff angularity
which characterise the latter, and indeed almost all the figures of the
western pediment. The conventional yEginetan rigidity is partially
broken through in the treatment of the dying hero, the whole system
of veins is expressed, and there is even some attempt to imitate the
skin on the right shoulder and the stomach near the navel. As we
look at this beautiful figure, the fact that it is only removed in time
by about fifty years from the pedimental groups of the Parthenon
does not seem to us very strange, great as we must acknowledge the
difference to be between them.
But it is not, as Brunn points out, a uniform superiority of execu-
tion in the eastern group which strikes us so much as indications of
greater independence and higher aims, and a certain inequality of
style which speaks of transition. In mere correctness the western
group has decidedly the advantage over the eastern ; but while it
shows fewer faults, it has also fewer beauties. In the former we see
that the artist is perfect master of his work, that his hand can exe-
cute all that his mind conceives; while the latter betrays a striving
after a higher perfection which is not always successful. It is from
these and similar observations that Professor Brunn is disposed to
think that they are by different hands, and to regard the western
group as the work of an older artist grown grey in his school—perhaps
Callon himself—and the eastern by a more independent, more am-
bitious, but technically less skilful master—perhaps Onatas.2
These remarkable productions of early plastic art have excited
the highest admiration of both the anatomist and the sculptor. The
intimate knowledge of the human form and the technical mastery
they display are truly wonderful. Notwithstanding the great variety
of attitudes into which the figures are thrown, they need no artificial
support; and the shields more especially, which are chiselled to a
thickness of not more than two inches, are masterpieces of clever
workmanship.
' 55 of the original group.
2 Pausan. v. 25. 8 ; and supra, 84.
by comparing thedying Hero'(fig. 53, on page 129 1) behind Heracles in
the eastern pediment with the corresponding figure in the western. In
the former there is hardly any trace of the leanness and stiff angularity
which characterise the latter, and indeed almost all the figures of the
western pediment. The conventional yEginetan rigidity is partially
broken through in the treatment of the dying hero, the whole system
of veins is expressed, and there is even some attempt to imitate the
skin on the right shoulder and the stomach near the navel. As we
look at this beautiful figure, the fact that it is only removed in time
by about fifty years from the pedimental groups of the Parthenon
does not seem to us very strange, great as we must acknowledge the
difference to be between them.
But it is not, as Brunn points out, a uniform superiority of execu-
tion in the eastern group which strikes us so much as indications of
greater independence and higher aims, and a certain inequality of
style which speaks of transition. In mere correctness the western
group has decidedly the advantage over the eastern ; but while it
shows fewer faults, it has also fewer beauties. In the former we see
that the artist is perfect master of his work, that his hand can exe-
cute all that his mind conceives; while the latter betrays a striving
after a higher perfection which is not always successful. It is from
these and similar observations that Professor Brunn is disposed to
think that they are by different hands, and to regard the western
group as the work of an older artist grown grey in his school—perhaps
Callon himself—and the eastern by a more independent, more am-
bitious, but technically less skilful master—perhaps Onatas.2
These remarkable productions of early plastic art have excited
the highest admiration of both the anatomist and the sculptor. The
intimate knowledge of the human form and the technical mastery
they display are truly wonderful. Notwithstanding the great variety
of attitudes into which the figures are thrown, they need no artificial
support; and the shields more especially, which are chiselled to a
thickness of not more than two inches, are masterpieces of clever
workmanship.
' 55 of the original group.
2 Pausan. v. 25. 8 ; and supra, 84.