DOI article:
Essay VII: The central slab of the Parthenon frieze and the Copenhagen plaque
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.11444#0298
VII.] THE CENTRAL SLAB OF THE PARTHENON FRIEZE. 265
figure as Carrey saw it," and he feels convinced that the original will be found at
Paris1.
At this stage of the investigation, where necessity compels me to pause for the
present, it may be well to sum up the results at which we have arrived so far. These
results may be briefly stated in the form of the two questions which now await
solution:
(1) Are the Roman casts which have certainly been in existence since 1840,
reductions taken by the Collard process from the early casts of Choiseul-Gouffier,
reduced perhaps by Andreoli?
(2) Are the terra-cotta plaques of Rome, Paris, and Copenhagen, which must have-
been in existence in 1855, genuine fragments of an ancient rendering of the frieze, or
forged fragments reproduced from the Roman casts?
I am bound to add the conclusion which I am myself at present inclined to adopt;
As regards the first question the facts brought forward in the preceding paragraphs
point to an answer in the affirmative; and it appears to me highly probable that the
casts taken before the present mutilation of these slabs may have rendered the figures
in the completeness which our representations show, and that the Roman casts are
reductions from these early easts taken before the marbles had left Athens. Their
truthful rendering of the character of the frieze certainly goes far to warrant this con-
clusion, especially when they are compared with Henning's restorations, in which the
parts supplied by the restorer are at once apparent to anyone who has made a special
study of the work of Pheidias.
As to the second question it will be seen that I have been unable to come to any
definite conclusion in my own mind. When engaged upon writing the Essays VI. and
VII., which I have thought it best to leave standing as they were written, I was un-
aware of the existence of the Roman casts, and I had also overlooked the bearing of
those notices relating to the later history of the frieze, which I have now brought
forward from Braun and Michaelis in the last few paragraphs of the present Note. If,
on the one hand, the terra-cotta plaques are genuine antiques, they of course possess
an intrinsic value and interest a thousandfold greater than any which either their
purchasers at the time, or the keepers of the museums in which they are now preserved,
ever thought of attributing to them. If, on the other hand, they are not genuine
antiques, they cannot possibly be mere reproductions like the Roman casts, they must
of necessity be forgeries, such as I have shown above that it is not impossible for a
skilful forger to produce. If, however, this suggestion be accepted, and we look upon
the plaques as knowingly forged to represent a genuine antique rendering of the frieze,
we are brought face to face with the fact that there is no trace of their having ever
been used to impose upon any collector of antiques, seeing that in every case they
have been treated merely as fragments, of some interest perhaps, but certainly not of
any particular value, still less of such value as would necessarily attach to a terra-cotta
professing to be an early rendering of a monument of such interest as the frieze of the
Parthenon. We are thus in a dilemma from which it is hoped that future investiga-
tions may by some fresh discovery release us. I am bound to say that the view, which
to my own mind presents the fewest serious difficulties, is that the plaques are genuine
1 Piu important? b V investigazione di quella donna [Aphrodite] al di cni grclnbo Erittonio [Eros]
s' appoggia. Da una notizia di E. Q. Visconti risulta che Choiscul-Goufiicr ha fatto cavarnc un gesso,
quando ancora si trovo conservata talc quale Carrey la vidde. Ora scmbre che il gesso ridotto col
processo di Collard sia stato cavato da quello menzionato dall' eruditu archeologo romano, ed io sono
persuaso che 1' originale si trovera tuttora a Parigi. Ibid.
figure as Carrey saw it," and he feels convinced that the original will be found at
Paris1.
At this stage of the investigation, where necessity compels me to pause for the
present, it may be well to sum up the results at which we have arrived so far. These
results may be briefly stated in the form of the two questions which now await
solution:
(1) Are the Roman casts which have certainly been in existence since 1840,
reductions taken by the Collard process from the early casts of Choiseul-Gouffier,
reduced perhaps by Andreoli?
(2) Are the terra-cotta plaques of Rome, Paris, and Copenhagen, which must have-
been in existence in 1855, genuine fragments of an ancient rendering of the frieze, or
forged fragments reproduced from the Roman casts?
I am bound to add the conclusion which I am myself at present inclined to adopt;
As regards the first question the facts brought forward in the preceding paragraphs
point to an answer in the affirmative; and it appears to me highly probable that the
casts taken before the present mutilation of these slabs may have rendered the figures
in the completeness which our representations show, and that the Roman casts are
reductions from these early easts taken before the marbles had left Athens. Their
truthful rendering of the character of the frieze certainly goes far to warrant this con-
clusion, especially when they are compared with Henning's restorations, in which the
parts supplied by the restorer are at once apparent to anyone who has made a special
study of the work of Pheidias.
As to the second question it will be seen that I have been unable to come to any
definite conclusion in my own mind. When engaged upon writing the Essays VI. and
VII., which I have thought it best to leave standing as they were written, I was un-
aware of the existence of the Roman casts, and I had also overlooked the bearing of
those notices relating to the later history of the frieze, which I have now brought
forward from Braun and Michaelis in the last few paragraphs of the present Note. If,
on the one hand, the terra-cotta plaques are genuine antiques, they of course possess
an intrinsic value and interest a thousandfold greater than any which either their
purchasers at the time, or the keepers of the museums in which they are now preserved,
ever thought of attributing to them. If, on the other hand, they are not genuine
antiques, they cannot possibly be mere reproductions like the Roman casts, they must
of necessity be forgeries, such as I have shown above that it is not impossible for a
skilful forger to produce. If, however, this suggestion be accepted, and we look upon
the plaques as knowingly forged to represent a genuine antique rendering of the frieze,
we are brought face to face with the fact that there is no trace of their having ever
been used to impose upon any collector of antiques, seeing that in every case they
have been treated merely as fragments, of some interest perhaps, but certainly not of
any particular value, still less of such value as would necessarily attach to a terra-cotta
professing to be an early rendering of a monument of such interest as the frieze of the
Parthenon. We are thus in a dilemma from which it is hoped that future investiga-
tions may by some fresh discovery release us. I am bound to say that the view, which
to my own mind presents the fewest serious difficulties, is that the plaques are genuine
1 Piu important? b V investigazione di quella donna [Aphrodite] al di cni grclnbo Erittonio [Eros]
s' appoggia. Da una notizia di E. Q. Visconti risulta che Choiscul-Goufiicr ha fatto cavarnc un gesso,
quando ancora si trovo conservata talc quale Carrey la vidde. Ora scmbre che il gesso ridotto col
processo di Collard sia stato cavato da quello menzionato dall' eruditu archeologo romano, ed io sono
persuaso che 1' originale si trovera tuttora a Parigi. Ibid.