una estatua de artemisa en el museo de constantinopla.pdf

7/30/2019 UNA ESTATUA DE ARTEMISA EN EL MUSEO DE CONSTANTINOPLA.pdf

1/7

Marble Statue of Artemis in the Museum at ConstantinopleAuthor(s): Salomon ReinachSource: The American Journal of Archaeology and of the History of the Fine Arts, Vol. 1,No. 4 (Oct., 1885), pp. 319-323Published by: Archaeological Institute of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/496414 .

Accessed: 16/04/2013 04:06

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The

American Journal of Archaeology and of the History of the Fine Arts.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.204.192.85 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 04:06:09 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aiahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/496414?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/496414?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia


2/7

AMERICANJOURNAL O F ARCZEOLOGY.

VOL. I. No. 4.MARBLE STATUE OF ARTEMISIN THE MUSEUM AT CONSTANTINOPLE.

[Plate IX.]

The charming figure which is reproduced on our plate No. Ix,from a not quite satisfactory photograph taken at Constantinople, iscertainly one of the most remarkable statues in the Tchinly-KioskMuseum, where it was placed in 1882, after having remained forsome time in the arsenal of Saint Irene. According to the shortand often untrustworthy register kept by the Museum officials, it wasdiscovered some twenty years ago in Mytilene,-whether in theprincipal town or somewhere else in Lesbos we do not know. In1871, an Englishman residing at Constantinople, to whom the careof the yet scanty collection had been entrusted, published a shortFrench catalogue which, printed in Constantinople, has remainedalmost unknown to most archmologists in Europe. Although Mr.Goold's catalogue is far from being satisfactory,and contains manymistakes and misstatements,this gentleman had the merit of under-standing the value of some of the statues he described,and he enrichedhis notice with a few lithographs from the most interesting works inthe collection. Among others, he published a plate representing thestatue from Mytilene,' which, so far as I know, has not been repro-duced in any other book or periodical. In 1882 I mentioned, in

1Goold, Cataloguedu musm des antiquites,1871, p. 7. 319

This content downloaded from 62.204.192.85 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 04:06:09 AMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/7

320 AMERICAN JOURANALOF ARCHEAOLOGY.my turn, the same work of art,2but very briefly, as the catalogue Iissued at that time was meant to be only a provisional synopsis, tobe followed by a more copious description, which, however, has notyet appeared. As Mr. Goold's catalogue is very rarely to be metwith, the statue we are about to describe may be considered inedited.The figure is under life-size (1.07 metre) and fairly well preserved,only the right hand and the left thumb having been brokenoff. Unfortunately, according to a practice too often followed inthe Turkish Museum, the marble has been brutally cleaned andscraped; the patina has thus disappeared,and it may be said that thephototype does credit to the statue, the aspect of which is ratherdispleasing by calling to mind the reckless stupidity of officials,who treat marble statues as they would a dirty stone wall. Theworkmanship is not altogether satisfactory, and certainly belongs tothe Greco-Roman period of art, if not to the first centuries of theRoman Empire. The left hand is very awkward and too large,the right calf and ankle appear swollen. Perhaps the inferior partof the statue was never completely finished, which would account forthe summary treatment of the endromides. When a Greco-Romanstatue is of a very good type, and nevertheless presents someserious defects, it is natural to suppose that it is a copy, executed bysome second-rate artist, from a good original of the Greek period.This, indeed, is the case with most of the statues in our collections,the number of original works which we possess being certainly stillsmaller than is usually believed. The reduced proportions of ourfigure constitute another feature which points to a copy: the authorof' such a graceful type would assuredly not have treated it underlife-size.3

2S. Reinach, Cataloguedu mus&e mperial, 1882, p. 12, No. 38. Printed at Con-stantinople, with the utmost negligence and carelessness, this catalogue was neverput on sale except at the entrance of Tchinly-Kiosk, and is now out of print. I stillpossess a few copies, which I would gladly send, on request, to any public librariesin which the little book may be missing and wanted.3Cf. Friedlander, ArchceologischeZeitung, 1880, p. 184, who makes the sameremark about a marble group of Artemis discovered at Larnaca in Cyprus, whichhad been considered as an original work by its first publisher (Wiener illustrirteZ3itung, 26 September, 1880). The habit of copying celebrated statues on a reducedscale, and of placing them in private dwellings, is well illustrated by the copy ofthe Athena Parthenos lately discovered at Athens.



4/7

MARBLESTATUE OF ARTEMIS. 321It is useless to describe the attitude and dress of the Lesbian

maiden, as all the details are sufficiently apparent in the phototype.I would only call attention to the two armillae or bracelets whichshe wears on both arms, close to the arm-pits. Each of them con-sists of a double spiral imitating the coils of a serpent, the head andtail of which emerge from above and beneath the bracelet. This, ashas been observed, is a very ancient type of ornament, and was socommon in Greek jewelry that the very names of serpents, 0" re and8odxo,r7, came to be used as synonymous with bracelets.4 It is notunnecessary to add, that the maiden bears no quiver on her back; atleast, I cannot remember having discovered any vestige of thatattribute, in the course of the careful study I made of the statuethree years ago.Although characteristic attributes are wanting, our statue may besafely pronounced to represent Artemis. The elegant arrangementof the drapery, the shortness of the chiton,the endromides,and per-haps still more the attitude and expression of the face, clearly recallthe ideal of the virgin-goddess in ancient sculpture. Our statuebelongs to a variety of the Artemis-type which is not often to be metwith, although the representations of Artemis at rest are not un-common.5 I know no other specimen of her image with the lefthand resting on her hip and the right leg crossed over the left one,in an attitude which is usually given to the youthful figures ofApollon, Dionysos and the Satyrs.6 Indeed, if we recollect that themost celebrated type of the resting Satyr is undoubtedly due toPraxiteles, and, moreover, that the same great artist is the author ofno less than six statues of Artemis,' we can easily admit that one ofthe master-pieces of Praxiteles, all unknown to us excepting thestatue in Antikyra,5 may have inspired the Greco-Roman artist who

' Cf. Pollux, v. 99, and Hesychios, s. v. B6bt (rb XPvaobrvepflpaxMLvtov,Menander,p. 184). Other references are given in Daremberg et Saglio, Dictionnaire des Anti-quites,p. 436, where a golden bracelet of the same type discovered at Pompeii hasbeen engraved (fig. 527).5See Clarac, Musee de Sculpture, pl. 573, No. 1227; pl. 575, No. 1232; pl. 576,Nos. 1238, 1241; pl. 580, Nos. 1237 A, 1237 B; pl. 285, No. 1208; Miiller Wieseler,Denkmiiler,pl. xv., Nos. 162, 162a, 164, etc.6Clarac, Mus. de Sculpture,pl. 476 B, D; pl. 679, 687, 691, 703, 704, 705, 708, 710.7Cf. Overbeck, Schriftquellen, . 234; Schreiber, ap. Roscher, LexikonderMythologie,r. p. 601.8Cf. Revue Numismatique,1843, pl. 10, 3 (coins of Antikyra).



5/7

322 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ARCH.,EOLOGY.sculptured our figure at Mytilene. M. Rayet has shown, in hisremarkable article on the Apollon Sauroktonos,9that the crescent-like profile of the body resting on a support was one of the favoritemotives of Praxitelean art, giving to the whole figure an appearanceof placidity which adds to the dreamy and serene expression of thehead. A German archaeologist,M. Studniczka, has lately endeavoredto demonstrate,that the celebrated Diane de Gabies in the Louvre, oneof the most attractive works of ancient art,10is a copy from the Arte-mis sculptured by Praxiteles for the shrine of Artemis Brauronia inAthens.' M. Froehner, describingthis statue in his learnedcatalogueof Greek sculpture in the Louvre (1869),12observedthat the beautifulexpression of the face recalls the enthusiastic praise bestowed by anti-quity on the Artemis-statues of Praxiteles. 3 Now, in the sense that avery good copy may be said to resemble a mediocre one, there exists aclose analogy between the style of the Paris Artemis and that of thestatue from Mytilene. I do not admit, as M. Studniczka does, that theDiane de Gabies is a copy from the Artemis Brauronia; but I thinkhe is quite right in maintaining that the original of the Paris statuebelongs to the epoch of Praxiteles. To assert that the Artemis inConstantinople is a late copy of the Artemis Brauronia,would be ven-turing on an hypothesis which we have no means of testing, as theshort passage in Pausanias relating to that work (1. 23, 7) does notgive us the slightest idea of its attitude and appearance; all we maysay is, that the original of our figure must have been very similar, inconception and in style, to the authentic records we possess of Prax-

9 Monumentsde l'art antique,pt. 2, text to plates 3-5.'10Clarac,Musie de Sculpture, pl. 285, No. 1208; Froehner, Notice de la sculptureantiquedu musie national du Louvre, p. 120." Studniczka, Vermutungenzur GriechischenKunstgeschichte,p. 18 and foll. M.Schreiber, while objecting to M. Studniczka's conclusion, and asserting that theoriginal of the Paris Diane is hot anterior to the Alexandrine epoch, acknowledgesthat a similar motive is to be found in a terra-cotta figure from Tanagra (Kekuld,GriechischeThonfigurenaus Tanagra, pl. 17), which certainly speaks in favor of thedate assigned by M. Studniczka to the original. In Tanagra, as well as in Myrina,the statuettes that are not archaic or pseudo-archaic betray, to a very high degree,the influence of Praxitelean types, just as the beautiful terra-cottas from Smyrna areimitations from the bronzes of Lysippos (cf. my paper in the MIlanges Graux, 1884,p. 143, and Schreiber, ap. Roscher, Lexikon der Mythologie,I. p. 604).12Froehner, Notice de la sculptureantique, etc.,p. 120, No. 97.13Petronius, chap. 126: Frons minima et quae radices capillorumretroflexeratosculumqualePraxiteles habereDianam credidit.



6/7

MARBLE STATUE OF ARTEMIS. 323itelean art. The resemblance we have pointed out between our Arte-mis and such replicas of Praxiteles' Satyr as are to be found in Clarac(pl. 703 and foll.) is indeed so striking that it need not be dwelt upon.A single glance at the engraving of Praxiteles' Satyr, as published inMrs. Mitchell's History of Ancient Sculpture,will do more to justifyour opinion than any display of reasoning and erudition.What Artemis held in her right hand, it is impossible to ascertain.In similar statues, where an arm rests on a column, the hand hasbeen, nearly always, broken off and arbitrarily restored. A Berlinstatue of Artemis'4 holds an arrow in her right hand, but the arm,the arrow and the hand are modern; the left hand, resting ona cippus, as in the statue from Mytilene, holds the middle of abow, which also seems to be a restoration. Judging from the fore-part of the right arm and the position of the wrist which it implies,the goddess cannot in any case have held a bow.Our statue belongs to. the well-known class of Artemis-figureswhich have been strongly influenced by the kindred type of theAmazons. Indeed, the resemblance or confusion has been sometimescarried so far, that the hunting goddess appears with one breast laidbare, like the martial priestesses of the Ephesian Artemis.'5 Thebeautiful type of the Amazon, as represented by Polykleitos andPheidias, brought about a complete change in the archaic type ofArtemis, who, in the better period of Greek art, bears a closeresemblance to the Amazons on one hand, and to her brotherApollonon the other. Greco-Roman sculpture has almost forgotten the long-draped Artemis, and indulges in the repetition of a later type inwhich feminine grace and manly vigor appearcombined. We believethat this type originated at the epoch of Praxiteles, and that thestatue of Tchinly-Kiosk can give us a true, if not adequate, idea ofsome master-pieceof the fourth century which has long ago beenconverted into lime. SALOMON EINACH.

" Clarac, 'Mus"ede Sculpture,pl. 575, No. 1232.1' Compare Clarac, Musee de Sculpture,pl. 576, No. 1241, and plate 567, No. 1208 B,where the attitude is exactly that of an Amazon.



7/7

JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY. VOL. I. FL. IX,

?:ir~?

D *I-

_1

:?;i

I-?i? I+Isk.,:;::~

;;fir a

_:e" ~8? t C z-?

_ilI~

$I..a~?3rc~-

STATUE OF ARTEMISIn the Museum at Constantinople.

This content downloaded from 62.204.192.85 on Tue, 16 Apr 2013 04:06:09 AMAll bj S O d C di i

una estatua de artemisa en el museo de constantinopla.pdf

Documents