Image access restricted
Daochos Monument, Agelaos, upper torso and head, from slightly left

Image access restricted
Daochos Monument, Agelaos, legs, frontal view (right thigh and foot restor...

Image access restricted
Daochos Monument, Agelaos, upper torso and head, from right

Image access restricted
Daochos Monument, Agelaos, frontal view

Image access restricted
Daochos Monument, Agelaos, three-quarter view from right

Image access restricted
Daochos Monument, Agelaos, upper torso and head, from right

Collection: Delphi Archaeological Museum
Title: Agelaos
Context: From Delphi
Findspot: Excavated at Delphi
Summary: Standing nude male
Object Function: Votive
Material: Marble
Sculpture Type: Multi-figure group
Category: Statuary group
Style: Late Classical
Original or Copy: Original
Date: ca. 336 BC - ca. 332 BC

Restored H 1.84 m

Scale: Life-size
Region: Phocis
Period: Late Classical
In Group: Delphi, Daochos Monument

Subject Description:

Agelaos stands to the left of Telemachos, nude as befits his identity as an athlete. He stands with his weight firmly on his right leg. Only the knee and calf of that leg are preserved, but the stance is clear from the thrust of the right hip and the relaxed position of the left leg, which is much better preserved. Although the lowest part of the left leg, ankle and foot are missing, it is certain that only the toes and ball of the foot rested on the ground. Thus the pose is quite different from that of Agias. Above the hips, the torso is much more vertical. This is especially apparent in the line of the spine. (For a back view, see Dohrn 1968, pl. 21.)

The original position of the arms has generated controversy. Both are lost, and although a portion of the shoulder muscle is visible, the pose has been debated. Some scholars would restore both arms raised, possibly tying a crown on his head like Polykleitos' Diadoumenos. It has been suggested that the reference to crowns in the epigram is an allusion to the pose. Others would restore at least one arm down. The head and neck are completely preserved, albeit in a battered state. The head is tilted to the proper right, in the direction of the supporting leg. The facial features are similar to those of Agias: a low forehead marked with a furrow, deeply set eyes, small ears close to the head and a small, slightly open mouth. The expression is serious; the gaze unfocused. The hair is cropped in short, curly locks. The line of a fillet arond the head is visible.

Form & Style:

The figure is often discussed with reference to its Polykleitan characteristics, particularly with respect to the pose. The lankiness of the figure, as well as the smaller scale (in comparison with the other figures in the group, except for the equally small Sisyphos II), can perhaps be explained by the young age of the subject. The epigram suggests that Agelaos was younger than Agias and Telemachos, though they were of the same generation. Against this lankiness the head does not appear as small as it does in the statue of Agias. Nonetheless the proportions of the figure are exceedingly long and lean, much more in character with the 4th century than with the stockier figures of Polykleitos. There is no direct evidence to link the statue of Agelaos with Lysippos. However, it is more likely than in the cases of the draped figures that this Agelaos is a copy of a statue originally designed in bronze.

Condition: Fragmentary

Condition Description:

Missing: both arms, right thigh, feet, and plinth. Torso weathered. Head battered, particularly the nose, mouth, and chin. Legs broken in several fragments but the surface is generally well preserved.

Material Description:

Parian marble


On the front face of the base, below the statue:


"Those men on the one hand possessed equal prize-bearing strength, but I, Agelaos, am the relative of both of them; and I am victorious at the boys' race at the Pythian games at the same time as these men; and we alone of mortals possess these crowns." (FdDelph 3.4, no. 460)

Sources Used: GuideDelphMu 1991, 91ff.; Stewart 1990, 187; Themelis 1979, 507ff.; FdDelph 3.4, no. 460 (Pouilloux, 1976); Tsirivakos 1972, 70ff.; Dohrn 1968; Adam 1966, 97ff.; FdDelph 2.10, 67 ff.; Will 1938