Tài liệu CORINTH RESULTS OF EXCAVATIONS ppt

C O R IN T H

RESULTS OF EXCAVATIONS

CONDUCTED BY

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

VOLUME IX

SCULPTURE

1896-1923

13BY

FRANKLIN P. JOHNSON

PUBLISHED FOR

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

1931

COPYRIGHT, 1931

BY THE TRUSTEES OF THE AMERICAN SCHOOL

OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

PRINTED AT THE HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS

CAMBRIDGE, MASS., U.S. A.

THIS publication of the results of the excavations carried on at Corinth

by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens is in charge of

the Publication Committee of the School. The general editor is Professor

Harold North Fowler. Opinions expressed are those of the individual

contributors.

GEORGE H. CHASE

HAROLD N. FOWLER

DAVID M. ROBINSON

Publication Committee

PREFACE

WHILE a member of the American School in 1922 and 1923, I made a catalogue of the

sculptures in the museum at Old Corinth. In November, 1924, Professor Fowler asked me

to prepare, on the basis of that catalogue, the volume dealing with sculpture in the general

publication of the excavations at Corinth. He observed that the material could not well be

published until the excavation should be at an end, since I was expected to include the

sculptures found in the later campaigns as well as those that I had catalogued. In Feb￾ruary, 1927, he asked me to proceed with the publication of the sculptures found before

1923, the rest to be dealt with otherwise. In August, 1926, I had sent to the School a

request for photographs, and after various developments the first and principal batch

arrived in the autumn of 1928. With the aid of these photographs, the revised and expanded

version was prepared in the summer of 1929, and has undergone little alteration since then.

Through the kindness of Professor Leroy Waterman of the University of Michigan, I had

an unexpected opportunity for a very brief visit to Greece in the latter part of that sum￾mer, and spent about twenty-four hours at Corinth.

The original catalogue embraced many sculptures that were not found in the excava￾tions. Of course they have no proper place here, but a few of them have been retained for

one reason or another. It was sometimes impossible to ascertain whether sculptures that

were not in the inventory had come from the excavated area or not. Presumably none of

them was found in the regular course of a campaign, but new fragments are likely to become

visible in the trenches after any rain.

The inventory number is placed in parentheses after each title. Where no such num￾ber appears, the piece had not been entered in the inventory before 1923. In the text,

"No. 100" means the sculpture so numbered in this volume; "100" means the sculpture

numbered 100 in the inventory; but where any confusion seemed possible, the inventory

numbers are preceded by "Inv."

In the original catalogue there was usually no indication of the places in which the

sculptures were found. It would be a difficult task to find such indications in the note￾books and to state them in terms which would be clear as applying to the excavated area

as it is at present. In the official publication, however, the lack of information on this

point is a grave defect. I have had no opportunity to mend it except during my day at

Corinth in the summer of 1929. At that time I copied from the inventory the notes to be

found there in regard to the places of discovery of the more important pieces. These notes

now appear almost word for word as in the inventory. In some instances it has been possi￾ble to reproduce statements that appeared in previous publications. A "Martyr" is of

course a column of earth left standing to show the original surface of the ground. " Simadi"

has the same meaning.

Some of the photographs were printed from plates made years ago as the sculptures

were found, but the great majority are newly made. The heavy task of finding the

sculptures and supervising the photography was performed by Dr. F. J. DeWaele. Ade￾quate illustrations are the really essential part of such a publication as this; and since

viii PREFACE

Dr. DeWaele's name does not appear on the title-page, I wish to make it clear that he

deserves credit for a great portion of the work. It is regrettable that additional views of

some of the more important statues could not be presented. Some of them are so placed in

the museum that they can be photographed from only one angle.

In two sections of the excavated area, the theatre and the "Julian Basilica," the frag￾ments belong to a relatively small number of figures, joins are found frequently, and future

excavations will unquestionably go far to complete many sculptures that now are frag￾mentary. In most of the area, however, fragments that belong together - even fragments

that can possibly belong together - are comparatively few.

It is planned that all the sculptures found at any time in the theatre will be published

eventually by Edward Capps, Jr. In general, however, those that were included in my cata￾logue are included here also; but two series of reliefs, a Gigantomachia and an Amazono￾machia, have been omitted. Both have been greatly increased by the recent campaigns,

and it seemed useless to publish a study based on only a part of the known material.

Pausanias found in Corinth few works of art belonging to the period before Mummius,

and the excavators have not been more fortunate. Not a single piece of sculpture in any

sort of preservation remains from the great Greek period. There are, however, valuable

copies from several noteworthy originals: Nos. 4-11, 13, 53, 96, 83 (the last a tantalizingly

small fragment which, we may hope, will be completed by continued work in the theatre).

The portraits from the "Julian Basilica" present interesting problems in iconography, but

others, as Nos. 168, 169, and 182, have greater intrinsic value. The "Miscellaneous Re￾liefs" include a number of puzzles that I have not solved.

The great majority of the sculptures belong to the first three centuries after Christ, with

a sprinkling of fragments from the classical Greek period; but the really remarkable things

are earlier or later. The Mycenaean face, No. 2, whose character was discerned by Blegen,

is a unique monument. The magnificent portrait of the fourth century after Christ, No. 321,

is very poorly illustrated, but will not be forgotten by anyone who has seen it. In figure

sculpture of the fifth and sixth centuries after Christ, the little building at Old Corinth has

an assured place among the world's great museums.

In conclusion I wish to express my gratitude to the General Editor and to the other

members of the Publication Committee. They have chosen the illustrations to be included

and determined the size of the cuts. Furthermore they have all read the proofs and made

many suggestions of great value. I cannot evade responsibility, however, for anything

in the text except the spelling of proper names and similar formal details.

FRANKLIN P. JOHNSON

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO,

January 22, 1931

CONTENTS

SCULPTURE

SCULPTURES EARLIER THAN THE CLASSICAL PERIOD, NOS. 1-3 .......3

THE CLASSICAL PERIOD, Nos. 4-320

Sculptures Other than Portraits, Nos. 4-133 ...... 7

Portraits from the "Julian Basilica," Nos. 134-158 .. .. 70

Other Portraits, Nos. 159-202 . . . . . 85

Animals, Attributes, etc., Nos. 203-216 . . . . . 98

Sculptures from the Stoa of the Colossal Figures, Nos. 217-226 . . 101

Other Decorative Sculptures, in the Round and in High Relief, Nos. 227-237 . 107

Sarcophagi, Nos. 238-244 . . . . . . . . .111

Grave Stelae, Nos. 245-262 . . 120

Votive Reliefs, Nos. 263-274 . . . . . 126

Miscellaneous Reliefs, Nos. 275-320 . . ... . 131

FOURTH CENTURY AFTER CHRIST AND LATER, NOS. 321-332 ...... . 148

TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 157

INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 159

ABBREVIATIONS

A. J. A ........................... American Journal of Archaeology.

Amelung, Fuhrer durch Florenz ...... Amelung, Walther: Fuhrer durch die Antiken in Florenz.

Munich, 1897.

Amelung, Skulpt. d. Vat. Mus ....... Amelung, Walther: Die Skulpturen des Vaticanischen

Museums. Berlin, 1903-1908.

Ann. Scuol. It. At. ............... Annuario della Regia Scuola Archeologica di Atene.

Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung .... Antike Plastik: Walther Amelung zum sechzigsten Geburts￾tag. Berlin and Leipzig, 1928.

'Apx. AEr7 ........ ................. 'ApXatoXo'yLKov AEXTrov.

'Apx. 'E . ......................... 'ApXaLoXoytLK 'E %4 epLs.

Arndt-Bruckmann ................ Griechische und rcmische Portrats, nach Auswahl und Anord￾nung von Heinrich Brunn und Paul Arndt. Munich,

1891-.

Art Bull. ......................... Art Bulletin.

Ath. Mitt. ........................ Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts, Athen￾ische Abteilung.

B. C. H ........................... Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique.

B. Corn. Rom. ..................... Bulletino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di

Roma.

Boll. Arte ......................... Bollettino d'Arte.

Brunn-Bruckmann ................. Denkmaler der griechischen und romischen Skulptur, heraus￾gegeben von H. Brunn, fortgesetzt von P. Arndt. Munich,

1888-.

B. S. A .......................... Annual of the British School at Athens.

Carpenter, Guide .................. Carpenter, Rhys: Ancient Corinth: A Guide to the Excava￾tions and Museum. 1928.

C. I. L. .......................... Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum.

Cumont, Musees Royaux ............ Cumont, Franz: Musees Royaux: Catalogue des sculptures

et inscriptions antiques. Brussels, 1913.

Daremberg-Saglio ................. Daremberg, Saglio, Pottier: Dictionnaire des antiquites

grecques et romaines. Paris, 1877-1918.

Diitschke ......................... Dutschke, H.: Antike Bildwerke in Oberitalien. Leipzig,

1874-1882.

Einzelaufnahmen .................. Arndt, Paul, and Amelung, Walther: Photographische Ein￾zelaufnahmen antiker Skulpturen. Munich, 1893-.

Esperandieu, Recueil General ........ Esperandieu: Recueil general des bas-reliefs, statues et

bustes de la Gaule romaine. Paris, 1907-1929.

xii ABBREVIATIONS

Hekler, Romische weibliche Gewand- This is contained in: Minchener archdologische Studien

statuen dem Andenken Adolf Furtwdnglers gewidmet. Munich,

1909.

Helbig, Fuhrer .................... Helbig, Wolfgang: Fuhrer durch die offentlichen Samm￾lungen klassischer Altertumer in Rom. 3rd edition,

Leipzig, 1912-1913.

Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner ........ Imhoof-Blumer, F., and Gardner, P.: Numismatic Com￾mentary on Pausanias. Reprinted from J. H. S. VI￾VIII. London, 1885-1887.

Jb. Arch. I ....................... Jahrbuch des kaiserlich deuttschen archaeologischen Instituts.

Jh. Oest. Arch. I. ................. Jahreshefte des oesterreichischen archaeologischen Institutes

in Wien.

J. H. S . .......................... Journal of Hellenic Studies.

J. Int. Arch. Num. ................ Journal international d'archeologie numismatique.

Lippold, Antike Skulpturen ......... Lippold, Georg: Antike Skulpturen der Glyptothek Ny

Carlsberg. Leipzig, 1924.

Lippold, Kopien ................... Lippold, Georg: Kopien und Umbildungen griechischer

Statuen. Munich, 1923.

Marbres Antiques .................. Catalogue sommaire des marbres antiques (in the Louvre).

Paris, 1918.

Michaelis, Ancient Marbles ......... Michaelis, Adolph: Ancient Marbles in Great Britain.

Cambridge, 1882.

Mon. Ant. ....................... Monumenti Antichi publicati per cura della Reale Accademia

dei Lincei.

Not. Scav ......................... Notizie degli Scavi di Antichitd comunicate alla Reale

Accademia dei Lincei.

Pauly-Wissowa ................... Pauly's Real-Encyclopadie der klassischen Altertumswis￾senschaft. Neue Bearbeitung. Unter Mitwirkung zahl￾reicher Fachgenossen herausgegeben von Georg Wissowa

und Wilhelm Kroll. Stuttgart, 1894-.

Poulsen, Portratstudien ............ Poulsen, Frederik: Portratstudien in Norditalienischen Pro￾vinzmuseen. (Historisk-Filologiske Meddelelser udgivne

af det Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, XV, 4).

Copenhagen, 1928.

R. Arch . .......................... Revue archeologique.

Reinach, Recueil ................... Reinach, Salomon: Recueil de tetes antiques ideales ou

idealisees. Paris, 1903.

Reinach, Repertoire ................ Reinach, Salomon: Repertoire de la statuaire grecque et

romaine. Paris, 1897-1924.

R. Et. Anc ......................... Revue des etudes anciennes.

Rev. de 1'hist. des religions ........... Revue de l'histoire des religions.

Robert .......................... Robert, Carl: Die antiken Sarcophagreliefs. Berlin, 1890-

1904.

ABBREVIATIONS xiii

Rom. Mitt ........................ Mitteilungen des deutschen archaeologischen Instituts, Rom￾ische Abteilung.

Roscher, Lexikon ................. Roscher, W. H.: Ausfilhrliches Lexikon der griechischen und

romischen Mythologie. Leipzig, 1884-.

Ruesch, Guida .................... Guida Illustrata del Museo Nazionale di Napoli, compilata

per cura di A. Ruesch. 2nd edition. Naples, no date.

Springer-Wolters .................. Springer, Anton: Die Kunst des Altertums. 12th edition,

revised by Paul Wolters. Leipzig, 1923.

Statuenkopien ..................... Furtwangler, Adolf: Ueber Statuenkopien im Alterthum

(Abhandlungen der bayerischen Akademie der Wissen￾schaften zu Miinchen, XX, 1896).

Tod and Wace, Catalogue ...... Tod..... Tod M.

, N.,, and Wace, Wace, A. J. B.: A Catalogue of the Sparta

Musetnum. Oxford, 1906.

SCULPTURE

SCULPTURES EARLIER THAN THE

CLASSICAL PERIOD

1. Female figurine (786).

Found 1 m. southwest of Martyr VI, 0.40 m. above virgin soil; May 1, 1907.

Height, 0.121 m.; width, 0.055 m. The arm is represented by a rounded projection; the

foot is not represented at all, though the flat bottom of the left leg is original. Grooves in￾dicate the knee and ankle. A huge scratched triangle represents the pudenda. The breasts

and buttocks are shown in approximately their natural proportions; otherwise the figure is

virtually unmodelled. The head, the stump of the left arm, and most of the right leg are

lost. The material is a white stone not marble; the surface is slightly polished.

Close parallels are not known to me; a certain similarity, however, to Thessalian fig￾urines of the third period is discernible. A figure found at Sesklo (Tsundas, AL lIpoiaroptKatl

'AKpoTro6XEiS AL/?tloV Kal oe-KXoV, pl. 34, 3; cf. Wace-Thompson, Prehistoric Thessaly, p. 69)

shows arm-stumps similar to those of our figure, the breasts in approximately natural pro￾portions, and a great triangle for the pudenda; on the other hand it is markedly steatopy￾gous and ends in a round, flaring base. In a figurine from Dimini (Tsundas, op. cit., pl. 35,

8; Wace-Thompson, op. cit., p. 83) the hips are treated more as in our figure, and the lower

part is lost. Tsundas, op. cit., pl. 36, 7 is a pair of legs ending much as in our figure; cf. for

this feature also Wace-Thompson, p. 147, fig. 91b, though in other respects that figure, of

the second Thessalian period, shows little likeness to ours. Numerous other figurines which

resemble this in their roughly normal proportions and in the arm-stumps may be found in

the two works cited; but in no case is the resemblance so close as in the figurines mentioned.

All of these figures are of terracotta: the contemporary stone figures are different and more

primitive in form (Tsundas, op. cit., pls. 37-38).

Among finds from other regions, the only one known to me that suggests a comparison

with our figure was found at Tchukurkend in southwestern Asia Minor (Ormerod in B. S. A.

XIX, 1912-13, pp. 48 ff., and fig. la; Reinach, Repertoire, V, 173, 10). Here the legs end in

surfaces flat or nearly so, the knees are indicated by grooves, and the pudenda by a large

triangle. The proportions also, as seen from the side, are quite suggestive of our figure. On

the other hand, the hips are very broad across the front and the arms are shown, though

very rudely, crossing the chest; while the breasts apparently are not shown at all. This

figurine does not fit into any known class, and its relations are not determined. Ormerod

1. c. mentions " a figurine of almost similar form except that it is not steatopygous, and shows

differences of the head " in the Liverpool Public Museum. This figure, which was bought in

4 CORINTH

Athens, should be closer to ours than the one from Tchukurkend; but still by no means of

identical type.

Pottery related to Thessalian ware of the second period has been found at Corinth,

where it is accompanied and succeeded by Early Helladic wares. Pottery of the third

Thessalian period is not found in the Corinthia. Thessalian figurines of the second period

are, in general, different from those of the third period and from our figure, and Early

Helladic figurines are equally dissimilar. I am told that no pottery was found in close asso￾ciation with the figurine, and it is difficult to assign to it a place in the prehistoric period.

:'!:? x ~ ..............' .. . .................................................................................... ...

No. 1

But unless it is an importation from outside Greece, it seems best to regard it as a product

of Thessalian culture with influence from some other quarter. This influence might come

from the Cyclades; the use of stone for such figures was usual in the islands and not in

Thessaly, though in general the Cycladic figurines are of wholly different type.

A figurine resembling this to some extent is said to have been found by Miss Walker

(now Mrs. Kosmopoulou) in her excavation on the temple hill; I have not seen it.

2. Mycenaean face (343).

Apparently found in 1901.

Soft brown stone. Height of fragment, 0.30m.; width, 0.28m.; thickness, 0.03m.;

height of face, 0.23 m.; relief height, 0.04 m. Back roughly shaped. The top edge is original,

the edge at the spectator's left is broken; the other two are doubtful because of the rough￾ness of the work. The end of the nose is broken, and the mouth, chin, and lower part of the

left cheek are lost.

SCULPTURE 5

Two arched grooves, containing traces of black pigment, represent the eyebrows. Small

holes indicate the pupils of the eyes, and dark circles for the irises around them are per￾ceptible. There was also a mustache represented by grooves containing dark color; such

a groove remains at the right end of the mustache and below the left side of the nose, but is

broken away elsewhere. All the grooves are partly filled with a white substance in the nature

of plaster, which also covers much of the surface of the face and presumably covered it all

originally. Where this plaster remains in the grooves it conceals the black pigment. Since

lg} .} t -. .8. * . ... - .. .......

... ..

.

No. 2

time over the original painted surface. Probably the new white surface was painted also,

a few traces of red color,buttheseareappat.ea..., origin.. .

The character of this piece was ..It pointed out to me by Mr. Blegen, who wrote: is

exactly thews sort stone mould on which gold masks, like those from Mycenae, were shaped.

But it is more than a mould; it was intended as a piece of sculpture for exhibition..... I do

not hesitate at all to ascribe it to early Mycenaean date (L. H. I or so):: Pernier considered

it Mycenaean - a mould."

Large sculpture of the Mycenaean period is rare. The obvious analogy is offered by the

familiar head in painted plaster which Tsundas found at Mycenae. Compare also a terra￾cotta head, about six inches high, found at Asine (Ill. London News, Sept. 25, 1926, p. 548).

"'~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~&:

No.. 2::- th~_B_i3iJe':

time over the original also,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2S..:..' painted surface. Probably painted was the nw surface white

a f e w t r a c e s of red clor u externa heeaeapaetyo oign Th caace o hi ieewa oitd lee, whowrot' u t e yMr " I t i

notheitae t al o acrbe t o erl Myenea da-te (L,.H. Ioo..Prircniee

6 CORINTH

Both of these heads are painted but not incised. Incision would be familiar from work in

metal and ivory; it is used for details in the stelae from the grave-circle at Mycenae and in

the gold masks. In four of the masks the brows are marked by rows of parallel incisions,

and in the two that have mustaches these are similarly treated. In our head there is a single

groove, approximately horizontal, for each eyebrow, and apparently a similar one for each

side of the mustache. The treatment is analogous in the fifth mask from Mycenae (No. 253

in the museum), which is poorer than the others and possibly somewhat earlier, although

two of the other masks were found in the same grave. A painted stele found at Mycenae

affords a parallel for the redecoration of the head: the stele was at first ornamented with

engraved designs, then these were covered by a layer of lime on which new decorations

were painted (Stais, Collection Mycenienne, p. 187, No. 3256; 'E+. 'ApX. 1896, pls. I-II).

_ _ .

.- iE

Ne. 3

3. Head (342).

Apparently found in 1901.

Brown stone, but not exactly the same as in No. 2. Height, 0.20 m. The nose and mouth

are indicated by incisions. Although the surface is battered, it seems improbable that the

eyes were ever represented. The back is rounded. I have thought it as well to keep this

piece together with No. 2, though there is little reason for assigning it to one period rather

than to another. In so far as it is sculpture at all, it is in the round, and that is evidence

against a Mycenaean origin. Probably it was not seriously intended as sculpture.

THE CLASSICAL PERIOD

SCULPTURES OTHER THAN PORTRAITS

4. Head of youth (425).

Found May 20, 1902, in the Theatre.

Almost all the neck is preserved. Height, 0.27 m.; width, 0.18 m.; depth, 0.22 m. The

nose is mostly lost, also a little above the right eye; otherwise the preservation is excellent.

Howard and Amelung recognized in a statue in Cleveland a copy from the same original.

The statue (Bull. Cleveland Museum of Art, Nov., 1924; Jb. Arch. I. XLI, 1926, pls. VI-VII)

is almost perfectly preserved, lacking only the right hand. Its position is nearly that of the

"Apollo on the Omphalos": the weight rests on the right leg, so that the right hip projects

somewhat, but not so much as in Polyclitan statues; the left foot is equally advanced and

the head is turned to the right; but the left arm hangs and the right forearm is raised and

extended to the front, while in the Apollo this is reversed. In this point our type agrees with

the Polyclitan bronze in the Louvre (Furtwangler, Masterpieces, pl. XIII; Hyde, Olympic

Victor Monuments, p. 139) and related works (see Anti, in Mon. Ant. XXVI, 1920, pp.

561 ff.); the Idolino also is similar, though freer. Another copy, considerably better in

quality but not so well preserved, was identified by Amelung: it is a statue formerly

owned by the sculptor Monteverde and now in the Museo Nazionale in Rome (Boll.

Arte, III, 1923-24, p. 549, good illustration; Einzelaufnahmen, Nos. 135-137; Jb. Arch.

I. XLI, 1926, figs. 20-26 on pp. 263-265; cast of statue in Rome with Corinth head, ibid.,

figs. 34-35 on p. 271). The copy to which our head belonged was much the best of the three.

Amelung has pointed out the resemblance in posture, proportion, and the rendering of

bodily structure between our type and the "Apollo on the Omphalos." There are, however,

differences of some significance: the torso is more strongly modelled, the structure made

more conspicuous, in the Monteverde statue than in the Apollo, and there is a much clearer

horizontal groove at the level of the navel. In these points the Monteverde statue suggests

the Conservatori charioteer (Jones, Palazzo dei Conservatori, p. 211, No. 4, pl. LXXX;

Beazley has called attention to the virtually nude charioteer on the Euphronius cylix,

Hoppin, Red-Figured Vases, I, p. 389, and to the completely nude figure mounting a chariot,

J. H. S. XLVII, 1927, pl. XIII; here, however, the real charioteer is evidently the man

wearing the long chiton). This statue has always been recognized as closely related to the

Apollo, but is earlier, suggesting comparison even with such works as the torso in the Louvre

from Miletus (Bulle, Der schone Mensch,2 pl. CIII; Brunn-Bruckmann, text to pls. 601-604,

fig. 15), while the Monteverde statue is evidently later than the Apollo. If the sculptor of

the Apollo was Calamis, a nd others following Furtwangler think probable, it is

not likely that he had a style original with or peculiar to himself in the treatment of the