Greek Art: Metopes

Name of Temple & Metope

Temple C at Selinus: Herakles and the Kerkopes

Herakles and the Kerkopes: Date & Period

600-550 BCE (6th Century Archaic)

Herakles and the Kerkopes: Notes

Narrative

The kerkopes are forest spirits that tried to steal Herakles’ weapons — he suspended them upside down as punishment but they amused him and so he freed them eventually.

Use of Space

• Little blank background space and figures at full height

• Spacing of figures fill gaps e.g. suspended limbs of kerkopes fill gap at Herakles’ waist: creates a somewhat geometric pattern

Lines

• Pervasive vertical lines create a snapshotted still moment, rather than a scene of action

• There is a small amount of diagonal in Herakles’ legs, which conveys a still moment within a moving scene

Miscellaneous

• Figures are differentiated through their emotion: Herakles remains passive while the kerkopes smirk

• Herakles is depicted with exaggerated musculature, evident in the thighs

• Poses effectively construct the narrative however Herakles’ torso is twisted impossible

• Egyptian influence — braided hair

Temple of Zeus at Olympia metopes: Date & Period

466-456 BCE (5th Century Early Classical)

Name of Temple & Metope

Temple of Zeus at Olympia: Herakles and the Cretan Bull

Herakles and the Cretan Bull: Notes

• Diagonal, mirrored poses and tense eye contact establishes a dynamic scene of conflict

• Crossed diagonals would have filled all four corners of the pediment

• Herakles displays heroic nudity: Iliac crest, Curiass Aesthetique, and severe look encapsulates a strong and ideal Greek hero

• Herakles stands in front of the bull to display the musculature but also as symbolic of his victory

• Herakles’ stretched torso and poised arm elevates him as a threatening opposition. The abdominals are dramatic but smoothed

  • Pertains to heroic idealism of the Early Classical period

Name of Temple & Metope

Temple of Zeus at Olympia: Herakles and the Apples of Hesperides

Herakles and the Apples of Hesperides Metope: Notes

Athene:

• Drapery falls loosely and naturally under raised arms, and layer around the torso: allows artist to display greater depth of skill (contrasts the rest of the figures’ nudity)

• Lacks normal war gear: less violent scene

• One arm raised behind and in support of Herakles’: minimal effort, as she is divine

• Herakles’ limbs unstrained but he uses two arms, and his head is weighted under the heavens: shows he is strong, but not as strong as Athene

• Vertical lines = still, less frantic scene: Herakles uses mental skill rather than physical labour

• Figures subtly stand in different perspectives: front, side, and side-tilted to still reveal the male torso of Atlas

• The spacing of the figures and Atlas’ outstretched arms fill the space of the metope

Name of Temple & Metope

Temple of Zeus at Olympia: Cleaning of Augean Stables

Cleaning of Augean Stables Metope: Notes

• Herakles creates cross diagonals which fills space and juxtaposes Athene standing vertically with only one arm outstretched diagonally: frantic and mortal versus stable and divine

• Both figures look towards the action, drawing the eye to it

• Dynamic equilibrium in balanced X-pose of Herakles

• Athene’s drapery alludes to one leg and creates columnar and catenary folding

How are the Temple of Zeus at Olympia metopes innovative?

Both Herakles and Athene age alongside the labours (shown through the beard and transformation from maiden to warrior) — however, there is little advancement to the depiction of females, and Herakles is still idealised.

Name of Temple & Metope

Parthenon South: Metope 26

Name of Temple & Metope

Parthenon South: Metope 27

Name of Temple & Metope

Parthenon South: Metope 28

Parthenon Metope Themes

South: Centauromachy

North: Fall of Troy

West: Amazonomachy

East: Gigantomachy

Parthenon Metopes: Date & Period

447-442 BCE (5th Century High Classical)

Parthenon Metope 26: Notes

• Musculature is shallowly etched & anatomy is unusual — centaur has no neck, short legs, and an elongated torso (probably edited to fit the space)

• Drapery awkwardly falls from behind the lapith — does not effectively fill space nor create drama

• Prevailing verticals is oxymoronic as an action scene

• Lapith stands in an impossible pose: weight shifted incorrectly. The figures also make awkward contact.

• Probably a freestanding sculptor as the anatomy is acceptable, but the composition is notably poor.

Parthenon Metope 27: Notes

• Dramatic catenary folding of drapery draws the eye to the victorious lapith and fills space, showing both sculptural and compositional skill

• Exaggerated musculature is evident and the lapith beholds heroic nudity infront of the centaur to display victory and strength

• Parting diagonals in opposite directions fills space and creates high tension, conflict, and drama. The two also overlap which adds depth to the composition

  • The centaur appears rather short and stout, which again alludes to minor compositional struggle

Parthenon Metope 28: Notes

• Very unique insight into the narrative, showing a prevailing centaur rather than lapith

• The centaur leaping upwards with outstretched limbs creates foreboding power and fills space, while the lapith beneath fills space beneath said figure

• Lolling head of lapith and curved torso is accentuated by the curved draper — antagonising. expression however is not seen as it was removed by Christians

• The hide held by the centaur acts as an emblem of exoticism, adding to the prevailing depiction of centaurs as ostracised ‘others’.