Free-Standing Sculpture Scholarship

Woodford on the Delphic Charioteer

His pose is full of easy asymmetries, and the reflective expression is very different to the exuberant kouroi.

Neer on the Delphic Charioteer

The pose is stiff and old-fashioned, so attention focuses on the impassive face, whose detailing is characteristic of the Early Classical style. The sculptor has elongated the legs and been very inconsistent in rendering the chiton.

Barringer on the Delphic Charioteer

His facial features are typical of the Early Classical period. His outstretched arms and turned head make him seem alert and attentive, and the superb detailing quality on the hair, drapery, and fillet suggest costly commission.

Boardman on the Delphic Charioteer

It is far from the best of the early 5th century bronzes. Whilst it appears in isolation to be a cult statue, we must remember that it was part of a group composition.

Woodford on the Artemision Zeus

The artist has successfully produced a vivid and convincing figure by varying the positions of the limbs. This has created a novel sense of movement. However, the torso has not reacted to the action limbs, and the statue is not very effective from a side view, whilst incredible from the front and back.

Barringer on the Artemision Zeus

The careful rendering of the anatomy bring the god’s concentrated face to life. The long, braided hair, which is tied up, allows the sculptor to show his prowess in chasing. The size, nudity, and action pose all suggest divinity.

Neer on the Artemision Zeus

The elongated left arm is somewhat simian, but this simply makes the sculpture project forcefully into the viewer’s space.

Boardman on the Artemision Zeus

The nudity and realistic stance are awe-inspiring, and the perfect balance is both threatening and static. The hair is arranged in thick, sometimes overlapping, strands.

Harris & Zucker on the Artemision Zeus

The figure conveys divinity through its superhuman focus and impressive pose, as well as the fact that it would have been gleaming and radiant. This is in line with Plato’s view of the gods as perfect manifestations of humanity. There are three distinct views: front, back, and side.

Woodford on Diskobolos

The choice of pose is genius, conveying imminent movement. The composition is a complex one of curves and zig-zags

Boardman on Diskobolos

The sculpture stands on the threshold of realism, in spite of the jarring lack of emotion. However, despite the free pose, the figure is definitely designed for a single viewpoint.

Harris & Zucker on Doryphoros

He is an idealised human form, with the contrapposto creating both harmony and contrast. This said, he is realistic, seeming to “exist in my world”. The marble copies include supports which would not have been present in the original, and have a variety of variations.

Pedley on Doryphoros

He could be either walking or standing still, though motion forward is implied by the balanced figure. Doryphoros is an exploration of the reaction of the body to the contrapposto pose.

Barringer on Doryphoros

Standing in contrapposto, he is not an essay in stop-action motion, like the Artemision Zeus, but instead a study of contrasts, attempting to depict the human form in a less dramatic, but natural, movement. This is indicative of the progress to High Classical.

Neer on Doryphoros

There are both basic and deeper asymmetries, in the left and right sides, and in the contrast between flexed and unflexed. It is a pairing of opposites: moving and still, transient and eternal.

Spivey on Doryphoros

The Doryphoros is distinctly “four-square”. The stance sets up an equilibrium of opposing moments, as if a series of rods has passed through the body, each causing a shift in the pose which must be countered.

Mitropolous & Snook on Doryphoros

The figure’s head is more youthful than its body, and the face is so idealised that it is missing a lifelike expression. This is evidence of Polykleitos’ focus on the body.

Mitropolous & Snook on Aphrodite of the Agora

Employing the wet drapery technique with the tightly wound himation and clinging chiton emphasises Aphrodite’s sexuality. Both the contrapposto and positioning of the himation draw further attention to her hips.

Woodford on Aphrodite of the Agora

Line was everything; mass counted for little. The motionless figure of Aphrodite is swallowed by vigorous drapery, designed to show off virtuosic skill in rendering cloth.

New York Kouros Harris & Zucker

the unrealistic features are stylised and create a deliberate tension between reality and symbolism

New York Kouros Woodford

the unrealistic elements are deliberately included to appeal to the ancient Greek eye

New York Kouros Boardman

the sculpture has not shrugged free of the rectangular block of stone from which it was hewn

New York Kouros Metropolitan Museum

the sculptor attempted realism, but ultimately lacked the requisite skills to achieve this

Kleobis and Biton Woodford

the sculptor pursued robustness over patterns, using many rounded planes to this end

Kleobis and Biton Boardman

in spite of certain primitive features, they convey dedication and strength nonetheless, although these are not portraits but representations of masculine virtue

Berlin Standing Goddess Mitropolous and Snook

her thick drapery and jewellery connote wealth and propriety, as befitting an important lady

Berlin Standing Goddess Neer

the pomegranate connotes fertility, and her femininity is largely obscured by drapery

Berlin Standing Goddess Woodford

the artist has added interest using the action arms and showed his talent through patterns in the drapery, such as catenary and fluting

Anavysos Kouros Mitropolous and Snook

rounded planes and gentle modelling lines show the move to naturalism, whilst the archaic smile is added to make it more lifelike

Anavysos Kouros Woodford

the rounded planes evoke soft flesh rather than hard stone, and there is a radiant expression

Anavysos Kouros Harris & Zucker

the rounded planes and softened musculature, combined with a reduction in groove lines, make for an integrated flow of bodyparts

Peplos Kore Woodford

her simple drapery, with slight asymmetries, accentuates her radiant face

Peplos Kore Spivey

she has such clear evidence of polychromy that she may have been repainted several times; her clothes are a riot of colour

Peplos Kore Neer

she does not wear a peplos, but a dress and a cape, and she is not a kore but instead a cult statue of Artemis

Aristodikos Kouros Woodford

“unnaturally stiff”

Aristodikos Kouros Boardman

“embarrassingly inert”

Mitropolous & Snook on Eirene and Ploutos

The infant Ploutos, in three-quarter view, reaches his right hand to her face. According to an illustration on the Panathenaic amphora, he held a keras.

Pedley on Eirene and Ploutos

The gentle intimacy between the figures is characteristic of the Late Classical. This is shown by the inclination of the mother’s head and the infant’s upward glance. The allegorical nature is new, but the personification of abstract ideas is not.

Boardman on Eirene and Ploutos

Eirene is massive, and a slightly old fashioned peplosphoros. Her maternal concern is indicated only in her poise, not her expression, and the child’s head is too small.

Woodford on Aphrodite of Knidos’ pose

It demonstrates that, using contrapposto, sensuousness and equilibrium can be applied to the female form. The formal arrangement originally devised for a male athlete has been modified to reveal the charm of the feminine form. The inert drapery and hydria contrast with the living form of the goddess, as well as providing structural support.

Woodford on Aphrodite of Knidos’ narrative

Bathing is an everyday ritual, and whilst the goddess appears very human, Aphrodite bathing was an important religious moment. Blending anthropomorphism with allusions to superhumanity is characteristic of Praxiteles.

Neer on Aphrodite of Knidos

Scholars argue over whether the garment is being dropped or grabbed, and this ambiguity is intentional. This voyeuristic teasing can be seen in the hand almost covering the groin. The Praxitelean formula is evident in the s-curve, blurred features, and soft flesh. Praxiteles realised that sex and scandal sell.

Pedley on Aphrodite of Knidos

Aphrodite stands naked, in an intuitive defensive gesture, but it is a fleeting pose. She has long legs and a small head, with the right hip pushed out and a slowly rising s-curve.

Mitropolous & Snook on Aphrodite of Knidos

The marble accentuates her softness and vulnerability. Gilding was probably used for hair, jewellery, and the hydria, but the drapery was likely painted.

Woodford on Antikytheran Youth

He is “athletic and robust”, and “muscular and sturdy”. The figure suggests suppressed vigour, and muscles ripple beneath the tight skin. Polykleitian contrapposto is enlivened by the outstretched arm. This breaks the frontal plane and creates a more intimate dynamic with the viewer. The musculature shows significant progression from the 5th century.

Harris & Zucker on Antikytheran Youth

You can imagine the bronze gleaming. The eyes are very lifelike and the figure stride into the viewer’s space; it is incredibly dramatic.

Neer on Antikytheran Youth

The identity is a mystery, but he held a spherical object. Physique and pose are once again burly, like Doryphoros, but the extended arm shows new spatial dynamism. Anatomy is distorted for effect; the limbs are longer on the right side, and the head is shrunken. This is almost Lysippian, but the profile is more Praxitelean to some scholars.

Woodford on Hermes and Dionysus

Hermes is tall and slender, with a smaller head than in the 5th century. He stands lazily and off-balance, with the weight on the right leg meaning the figure is dominated by curve and counter-curve. The tree trunk is important both structurally and visually.

Pedley on Hermes and Dionysus

The new s-curve, with awkward positioning of hips and torso, the slender proportions, and small head, are all new. The swinging curve is characteristic of Praxiteles. Soft modelling blurs transitions. The confidence in carving and finishing, and the slimmer proportions give the figure delicacy.

Mitropolous & Snook on Hermes and Dionysus

Hermes’ weight-bearing arm requires support due to marble’s low tensile strength, but Praxiteles hides this with drapery. This drapery also highlights Hermes’ nudity and divine form. Praxiteles exploits the limitations of marble to reinforce his narrative.

Boardman on Apoxyomenos

Lysippos has revised Polykleitos’ Canon, and he specialises in athletes. Apoxyomenos demonstrates the newer canon, with slimmer figures and smaller heads, and breaking away from frontal compositions. The figure invites in-the-round viewing.

Barringer on Apoxyomenos

The outstretched arm breaks the frontal plane and intrudes into the viewer’s space. His legs are extended laterally, unlike Doryphoros, for example, and places the weight on the right leg, with the left off to the side. The Apoxyomenos twists at the waist, producing a spiral effect which encourages in-the-round viewing.

Harris & Zucker on Apoxyomenos

Lysippos has added a full head’s worth of height to the Polykleitian ideal. Because of this, it gives us a sense of looking up at the figure, and that he is even taller than he is. The figure’s arm, reaching into space, breaks the frontal plane, which makes a viewer want to look at it in-the-round.

Woodford on Apoxyomenos

There is no single, satisfying point of view; it is instead exciting from a variety of viewpoints, and invites the viewer to walk around it. The freedom of the figure within the space, the easy positioning of the limbs, and the realistic anatomy are all Lysippian innovations.