Der Kanon Des Polyklet: Doryphoros Und Amazone, by Hans Von Steuben Brunilde S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Faculty Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Research and Scholarship 1975 Review of Polyklet, by Thuri Lorenz; Der Kanon des Polyklet: Doryphoros und Amazone, by Hans von Steuben Brunilde S. Ridgway Bryn Mawr College, [email protected] R. Tobin Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs Part of the Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, and the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Custom Citation Ridgway, Brunilde S., and Richard Tobin. 1975. Review of Polyklet, by Thuri Lorenz; Der Kanon des Polyklet: Doryphoros und Amazone, by Hans von Steuben. American Journal of Archaeology 79:100-102. This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs/68 For more information, please contact [email protected]. 100 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY [AJA 79 shrewd and independent judgments, and is rich in of interest, particularly among German scholars who original observations and suggestions. have produced several articles and dissertations on the It is presented as a survey on historical lines, with Peloponnesian master and his school. These two books several additional chapters on special topics such as stand out for the excellence of their photographs and shapes, chronology, subject matter, myth, and the like. their wealth of details (only the grainy views of the The text is succinct, yet explicit, and an amazing basalt Uffizi torso form a surprising exception to the number of painters and groups are mentioned and very high quality of the other plates in von Steuben's deftly characterized. It is not simply the masters who publication). Thus the illustrations alone would be are discussed, but the full range of production, hacks worth the price of the books. Still there is much more included. And there are numerous illuminating cross to praise in these two attempts to define the artistry references to the other arts and to the contemporary of Polykleitos. social and political scene, and a sense for the inter- The authors' scopes differ. Lorenz tries to follow relationship of Athens with other parts of the Greek the sculptor's career from beginning to maturity, pro- world, and with the Mediterranean at large. gressing from safe to tentative attributions and assess- The illustrations are abundant, many of them ing contemporary trends and Polykleitan influence on hitherto unpublished or available only in publications other artistic circles. An analysis of the ancient sources not ordinarily accessible to college students. Their closes with critical comments on some replicas of the quality is uneven, the tone often dark and the details Doryphoros. Von Steuben focuses exclusively on the indistinct, but by and large they are serviceable. Some Canon, attempting to reconstruct the measuring sys- sacrifice of quality can be understood in an effort to tem which formed the basis of all Polykleitan crea- hold down the price. Indeed it is a marvel that in tions but was particularly embodied in his Spear-car- these days a text with almost 400 illustrations can be rier. Comments on other statues are incidental, and a sold for as little as $io. study of the Amazon is included solely to settle the The the interests of student have been kept in mind controversy over the attribution and to explore the and throughout, many useful hints are unobtrusively sculptor's solution for dealing with a draped rather inserted, of great value to the beginner and to those than a naked body. more advanced as well. The author's assessments of Although the two scholars cover somewhat the same groups and painters will doubtless be challenged at material, their conclusions are as different as their in- one point and another, but they are not dogmatic terests. Any overlap occurs largely in their discussion and should pronouncements, challenge readers to test of the ancient sources, which must perforce be the them their own against impressions and observations. same though their interpretations vary. Von Steuben error be (One typographical might mentioned, on relies upon them as an aid in finding the metrical where the date for late Middle page 195, Corinthian Canon; Lorenz admits that they echo it, but they do is a too century early.) so in such vague and perhaps misunderstood fashion For many, certainly, the book is bound to raise still as to provide inadequate basis for our research. Inter- another What is be question. to the future direction estingly, von Steuben reads Pliny's quadrata as defin- of studies of Attic vases? Is attribution to remain the ing the block-enclosed poses preferred by Polykleitos, central concern? The reviewer with agrees Boardman which appear at their best in purely frontal or lateral that "we miss a lot in our understanding of antiquity views, while intermediate points weaken or obscure lists and and by letting shapes alleged affinities domi- their meaning. In contrast, the Doryphoros for Lorenz nate Such will study" (p. 13). connoisseurship always is intended for in-the-round viewing; the apparent be of the first but one need importance, only glance frontality of the copies is caused by the Roman desire at the of the of the writings greatest connoisseurs to be to display sculpture as flat fagades in front of archi- aware that the brilliant there beyond stylistic analyses tectural backdrops. The very definition of quadratum, was a vision the always larger illuminating whole of Lorenz argues, could only originate with Varro, at a ancient life. time when a plastic rendering could be described by CEDRIC G. BOULTER means of a two-dimensional image. UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI According to Lorenz, Polykleitos's innovation was to make his figures support their weight entirely on one This with concomitant POLYKLET,by Thuri Lorenz. leg. pose, shifts and motions Pp. 90, pls. 32, figs. 4 within the human was reached Franz Steiner Wies- body, through experi- (line drawings). Verlag, mentation. Thus the Diskophoros and the DM Idolino, baden, 1972. 64. who rest both feet on the ground, represent the mas- ter's early work. After the of the Do- DER KANONDES POLYKLET. DORYPHOROS UND AMA- breakthrough ryphoros comes the Diadoumenos, different not in Hans von Steuben. ZONE,by Pp. 83, pls. 51, figs. terms of years but in conception. The Hermes and the 22 (mostly line drawings). Ernst Wasmuth Ver- Herakles come between the two with respect to their and is lag, Tiibingen, 1973. DM 63.30. motion, Herakles restored with club on the ground near the right foot. Next comes the Amazon Polykleitanstudies have recently enjoyed a revival (the Capitoline type); her pose is no longer "labil" as 1975] BOOK REVIEWS 101 she is wounded and must lean on her spear. The so- mantle) measurebest now in feet, now in cubits. But called Westmacott Athlete (who may not be the he finds that theoretical linking of features within Kyniskos of the Olympia base since foot imprints are face and torso creates patterns of squares-within- insufficient to reveal the stance of the total figure) is squares,thus providing confirmationfor his solution. restored with a fillet hanging down from his raised One prerequisitefor any proposed explanationof right hand, thus adding a vertical accent alongside the the Canon is that it work, but such a criterionis not body comparable to the Amazon's spear. The victor the major one. More basic is that the answer be i) would be in the process of removing the band after truly practical,consistent with what is known or as- the festivities, his stance revealing the efforts of the sumed to be fifth century sculpturalpractice; 2) con- competition. The Dresden Youth is identified with sistent with the ancient sources, or at least not in Pliny's nudum talo incessentem; he is not standing, contradictionto them;3) consistentwith, or not in con- like the Doryphoros, but moving forward for the tradictionto, mid-fifth century mathematicalthought throw of the knucklebones which he holds in his left and practice;and finally 4) consistent,to some extent, hand, his lowered right hand clutching the satchel for with the theoreticalbasis which the ancient sources the dice. The Narkissos and a few other statuettes share attribute,however obscurely,to the Canonicaltreatise with the Dresden Youth the possibility of being works upon which the Doryphoroswas constructed. of the school rather than of the master himself. With regard to i, von Steuben'smethod seems far Obviously not all scholars will agree with this list from practical.It is unlikely that any master would and especially with the grounds upon which individual burden his memory and workshop movements with attributions are made. If we recognize Polykleitan such complicatedtables of measures (no matter how works because of the typical stance, how can we as- empiricallyobtained with a plumb line) that require cribe to him statues that lack it, or rather, retain a endless verificationon the model. The procedureout- balance which continues to be rendered well into the lined by the author would seem much more feasible fourth century? Why is the "early" hair of the Ido- for a copyist pointing off from an original, over-reg- lino more probant than the "advanced" face and torso? ularizing and perhapsrounding off his figures to the Can the Annecy bronze substantiate the claim for nearest approximation,thus creating the surprising a Polykleitan Hermes when its shoulder-rendering correspondencenoted by von Steuben.It is also logical strongly recalls the Hellenistic Herakles in Syracuse? that correspondencewould exist among parts of a Dorothy K. Hill's article on the Hermes is quoted body which nature has created,as it were, in a bilat- (note 21) yet no account is taken of her theory on the erally symmetricalversion, and any number of mean- type.