DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.2532#0044
THE HEAD OF POLYCLEITUS'S HERA
23
become evident when we compare the ornamentation on the arecjxivr] of the coin with
the marble sima1 from the second temple, which once contained this statue, and sev-
eral pieces of which we discovered in our excavations (see Architecture, Fig. 53). For
it will readily be seen that the scroll pattern with honeysuckle is the same in both.
Nay, it is possible that even a marked and individual feature of our sima ornament recurs
in the ornament on the o-Te<f>dv7) of the coin; for in the left-hand upper corner, between
the two honeysuckles, there are individual traces of Avhat I believe to be a bird, perched
on a smaller volute of the scroll pattern, exactly in the place where such a bird appears
in our sima, forming the most distinctive and characteristic feature of this Heraeum
marble-work (see Figures 12 and 53).
It will readily be seen of what great importance this observation of a detail is in its
bearing upon all the sculptures which we discovered in the Heraeum. For if the sculp-
tured decoration of the temple and its stone-carving show such immediate dependence
upon the sculpture in the temple-statue by Polycleitus, Ave have a strong bit of evidence
from the works themselves that the sculptures which ornamented the temple itself stood,
as regards their authorship, in immediate relation to the temple-statue. Such evidence,
arising directly out of the works themselves, has, from the nature of the case, never
before appeared, and it is manifest what light by analogy this may throw upon the great
cpiestion of the relation which Phidias held to the Parthenon sculptures — nay, upon the
whole cpiestion of the authorship of sculptured decorations in Greek temples.
This Argive coin is thus the most authentic illustration extant of the type of Hera as
embodied by Polycleitus in his gold and ivory statue. For many years attempts have
been made to identify extant marble heads with this great work of Greek sculpture.
The famous Juno Ludovisi has had to cede her place to the Hera Farnese; 2 nor could
the bust of Hera from the Egremont collection, now in the British Museum,3 maintain
its claim. The beautiful marble head (Frontispiece) discovered in our first year's
excavation 4 appeared and still appears to me to reflect the style of Polycleitus most
directly, and to have been in so far influenced by the great statue. But I never meant
to maintain or imply that it aimed in any way at being a direct copy or reproduction
of the gold and ivory statue in the temple. On the other hand, I must lay stress upon
the fact that it was in studying the style of this and other heads from the Heraeum
sculptures that I was able to single out a bust in the British Museum (hitherto known
as a head of Apollo, Bacchus, or Dionysus 5) as reproducing the chief characteristics
of this style. This done, a confrontation of the profile of this bust with the Argive
coins led to the identification of a marble reproduction of the Polycleitan Hera which
will, I believe, be universally accepted. This I hope to establish in some other place.0
By the side of the colossal statue of Hera there once stood a gold and ivory statue of
Hebe. This statue, standing beside the seated goddess, is reproduced on coins of Argos
1 One piece of this was first published in my Excava-
tions at the Heraion of Argos, 1892, pi. vii. This sima will
be more fully dealt with by Mr. Tilton in the chapter on
Architecture (pp. 123 f.).
- Lucy M. Mitchell, History of Anc. Sculpture, pp.
390 ft. ; Murray, History of Greek Sculpture, I. pp. 305
ft'. ; Collignon, Histoire de la Sculpt, grecque, I. pp. 511
ffl. ; Overbeck, Gesch. d. Griech. Plast.,4tth ed., I. pp. 509-
511 ; Friederichs-Wolters, Gypsabgdsse, Nos. 500, 501 ;
Baumi'ister, Denkmaler, p. 1352.
3 Archdol. Zed. XXVII. p. 32.
4 See my Excavations, p. 11. Though I do not think
it " quite certain" that this head is that of Hera, it
corresponds more to that divinity than to any other ; and,
in spite of what Furtwiingler says (Meisterwerke, pp. 557
and 570 it'.), I hold the same as regards the Farnese bust.
6 No. 1-40 in the Graeco-Roman Guide to the British
Museum (Newton) ; Museum Marbles, XL pi. 5 ; Ellis,
Townley Gallery, I. p. 322.
6 Since this was written (in 1898), I have established
this identification in the Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol.
XXI. (1901), pp. 31 it, pis. ii., iii.
23
become evident when we compare the ornamentation on the arecjxivr] of the coin with
the marble sima1 from the second temple, which once contained this statue, and sev-
eral pieces of which we discovered in our excavations (see Architecture, Fig. 53). For
it will readily be seen that the scroll pattern with honeysuckle is the same in both.
Nay, it is possible that even a marked and individual feature of our sima ornament recurs
in the ornament on the o-Te<f>dv7) of the coin; for in the left-hand upper corner, between
the two honeysuckles, there are individual traces of Avhat I believe to be a bird, perched
on a smaller volute of the scroll pattern, exactly in the place where such a bird appears
in our sima, forming the most distinctive and characteristic feature of this Heraeum
marble-work (see Figures 12 and 53).
It will readily be seen of what great importance this observation of a detail is in its
bearing upon all the sculptures which we discovered in the Heraeum. For if the sculp-
tured decoration of the temple and its stone-carving show such immediate dependence
upon the sculpture in the temple-statue by Polycleitus, Ave have a strong bit of evidence
from the works themselves that the sculptures which ornamented the temple itself stood,
as regards their authorship, in immediate relation to the temple-statue. Such evidence,
arising directly out of the works themselves, has, from the nature of the case, never
before appeared, and it is manifest what light by analogy this may throw upon the great
cpiestion of the relation which Phidias held to the Parthenon sculptures — nay, upon the
whole cpiestion of the authorship of sculptured decorations in Greek temples.
This Argive coin is thus the most authentic illustration extant of the type of Hera as
embodied by Polycleitus in his gold and ivory statue. For many years attempts have
been made to identify extant marble heads with this great work of Greek sculpture.
The famous Juno Ludovisi has had to cede her place to the Hera Farnese; 2 nor could
the bust of Hera from the Egremont collection, now in the British Museum,3 maintain
its claim. The beautiful marble head (Frontispiece) discovered in our first year's
excavation 4 appeared and still appears to me to reflect the style of Polycleitus most
directly, and to have been in so far influenced by the great statue. But I never meant
to maintain or imply that it aimed in any way at being a direct copy or reproduction
of the gold and ivory statue in the temple. On the other hand, I must lay stress upon
the fact that it was in studying the style of this and other heads from the Heraeum
sculptures that I was able to single out a bust in the British Museum (hitherto known
as a head of Apollo, Bacchus, or Dionysus 5) as reproducing the chief characteristics
of this style. This done, a confrontation of the profile of this bust with the Argive
coins led to the identification of a marble reproduction of the Polycleitan Hera which
will, I believe, be universally accepted. This I hope to establish in some other place.0
By the side of the colossal statue of Hera there once stood a gold and ivory statue of
Hebe. This statue, standing beside the seated goddess, is reproduced on coins of Argos
1 One piece of this was first published in my Excava-
tions at the Heraion of Argos, 1892, pi. vii. This sima will
be more fully dealt with by Mr. Tilton in the chapter on
Architecture (pp. 123 f.).
- Lucy M. Mitchell, History of Anc. Sculpture, pp.
390 ft. ; Murray, History of Greek Sculpture, I. pp. 305
ft'. ; Collignon, Histoire de la Sculpt, grecque, I. pp. 511
ffl. ; Overbeck, Gesch. d. Griech. Plast.,4tth ed., I. pp. 509-
511 ; Friederichs-Wolters, Gypsabgdsse, Nos. 500, 501 ;
Baumi'ister, Denkmaler, p. 1352.
3 Archdol. Zed. XXVII. p. 32.
4 See my Excavations, p. 11. Though I do not think
it " quite certain" that this head is that of Hera, it
corresponds more to that divinity than to any other ; and,
in spite of what Furtwiingler says (Meisterwerke, pp. 557
and 570 it'.), I hold the same as regards the Farnese bust.
6 No. 1-40 in the Graeco-Roman Guide to the British
Museum (Newton) ; Museum Marbles, XL pi. 5 ; Ellis,
Townley Gallery, I. p. 322.
6 Since this was written (in 1898), I have established
this identification in the Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol.
XXI. (1901), pp. 31 it, pis. ii., iii.