previous next


Lysippos and Lysistratos, Sons of Lys[ippos?] of Sikyon

Lysippos

Lysistratos

Lysippos is among the most richly documented of all Greek sculptors; for besides the guide-book writers and rhetoricians, Pliny preserves a precious testimonial apparently from his own follower, Xenokrates (T 124), the Alexander historians studied his portrait bronzes (T 121, 131-32), and both poets and prose writers chose several of his acknowledged masterpieces for extended essays in description (T 127, 129-30); in addition, numerous inscriptions both confirm and supplement the texts.

According to T 1 Lysippos "flourished" in 328-325, but his career certainly began about four decades before this date (nos. 32, made after 372/368, and 22, datable ca. 363/62), and continued at least until 316, when Kassander commissioned him to design a distinctive amphora-shape for newly-founded Kassandreia (Athenaeus 11.784); he was thus born around 390, and as T 124 relates, began work as a common bronze-smith. His recorded works, all bronzes, are:

    Divinities
    • Sixty-foot high Zeus at Taranto (T 126
    • Zeus at Sikyon
    • Zeus Nemeios at Argos, taken from Nemea?
    • Zeus and the Muses, Megara
    • Poseidon at Corinth
    • Dionysos on Mt. Helikon
    • Helios in his chariot at Rhodes, later taken to Rome (T 124
    • Eros in Thespiae
    • Kairos at Sikyon, later in the Lauseion at Constantinople (cf. no. 47; T 127-8
    Heroes
    • Seated Herakles at Taranto, later taken to Rome, then to Constantinople (T 129
    • Herakles at Sikyon
    • Herakles conquered by Eros
    • Herakles Epitrapezios, later in Rome (T 130)
    • Herakles' Labors, at Alyzia (N.W. Greece), later in Rome
    Portraits
    • Aesop and the Seven Sages
    • Alexander portraits 'from boyhood' (T 124
    • Alexander(s) with the lance (T 131-32
    • Alexander on horseback, later in Rome (converted to Caesar)
    • Alexander and the companions fallen by the Granikos, at Dion in Macedonia, later in Rome (T 121, 124)
    • Alexander and Krateros hunting lions, dedicated by Krateros at Delphi (with Leochares) (T 123, 124)
    • Hephaisteion (T 124
    • Pelopidas, dedicated by the Thessalians at Delphi
    • Praxilla, later in Rome (T 136
    • Pythes of Abdera, at Olympia
    • Seleukos, later in Rome
    • Sokrates, in the Pompeion at Athens
    Victor-statues
    • The boxer Agias, at Pharsalos
    • The boxer Cheilon of Patras, at Olympia (T 122
    • The boy-boxer Kallikrates of Magnesia, at Olympia
    • The boy pankratiast Korveidas of Thebes, at Thebes
    • The pankratiast Poulydamas of Skotoussa, at Olympia
    • The charioteer Troilos of Elis, at Olympia
    • The pankratiast Philandridas of Stratos, at Olympia
    • An Apoxyomenos, later in Rome (T 124
    Various
    • A dedication (nude male) at Corinth
    • Another dedication at Corinth
    • A dedication at Lindos
    • A statue dedicated by Theramenes at Megara
    • A statue at Thermon, later converted to one of Paidias of Herakleia
    • A drunken flute girl (T 124
    • A satyr at Athens (T 124
    • A fallen lion at Lampsakos, later in Rome
    • A high-stepping horse
    • Chariot groups (T 124
    Dubious and misattributed works
    • Timoxenos son of Timoxenos, in the Asklepieion at Kos. By Lysippos II?
    • An ox, later at Rome. Also given to Pheidias
    • The Samian Hera, later in the Lauseion at Constantinople with (9). Supposedly in collaboration with Boupalos of Chios (T 18!) but more likely the attribution refers to an Eros from Myndos there (T 128
    • Myrrilini (Myrrhina?), later in Rome. Dubious
    • A copy of the Farnese Herakles in the Palazzo Pitti, Florence. Forged signature
    • A statue with a dolphin (Aphrodite or Poseidon?) discovered at Siena between 1334 and 1348, and reburied in 1357. Fanciful attribution by Ghiberti after a Lorenzetti drawing
After the two early statues (32, 22) at Delphi and Olympia, dated works are not to be had till the 340s. (27) must pre-date the marble version set up at Delphi in 336-332 (Delphi 369; Stewart 1990, figs. 551-53), and (30), displayed with a statue by Polykleitos (II) was almost certainly restored after Kassander refounded Thebes in 316, so should pre-date the sack of 335: since the first boys' pankration at the Pythian games, in 346, was won by another, Korveidas triumphed in either 342 or 338. The association with Alexander (16)-(20), who was born in 356, must have begun by 340 (T 124), though of all his Macedonian commissions only the Granikos group (19), erected after 334, is exactly dated, thanks to the historians:

“Metellus Macedonicus . . . brought from Macedonia the group of equestrian statues which stand facing the temples [in the Porticus Octaviae] and which today are the chief ornament of the place. As to the origin of the group, they say that Alexander the Great prevailed upon Lysippus, a sculptor unequaled for works of this sort, to make realistic portraits of his cavalry Companions who had fallen at the river Granicus [334], and to place his own likeness among them.

Velleius Paterculus 1.11.3-4
As to his last years, two epigrams offer some clues. The first, for Cheilon (28) is discussed by Pausanias:

“Cheilon, an Achaean from Patras, won two victories for men wrestlers at Olympia, one at Delphi, four at the Isthmos, and three at Nemea. He was buried at public expense by the Achaeans, and it was his fate to lose his life in battle. My statement is corroborated by the inscription at Olympia: “In wrestling I alone conquered twice at Olympia and Pytho,
Thrice at Nemea, and four times at the Isthmos near the sea;
Cheilon son of Cheilon of Patras, whom the Achaean race
Buried for my valor when I fell in war.

This much the inscription reveals. But the date of Lysippos, who made the statue, leads me to infer about the war in which Cheilon fell, that he either marched to Chaironeia with all the Achaeans [338], or else his personal valor and daring led him, alone of the Achaeans, to fight against the Macedonians under Antipater at the battle of Lamia in Thessaly [323-322].

Today, most prefer the later date. As for the second, the Krateros group (20) has already been mentioned in connection with Leochares (T 109-111, above), and with Plutarch, Alexander 40 the inscribed epigram reveals that it was finished after the Macedonian's death in 320.

“Alexander's son, Krateros, offered these to Apollo,
A man exalted, honored, and far-famed.
But he who placed them here was Krateros his orphaned child,
Fulfilling every promise for his sire,
To bring him glory, sweet and everlasting, O stranger,
As hunter of that bull-devouring lion.
Along with Alexander, Asia's much-praised monarch,
Companion to his king in victory,
He destroyed it as it rushed upon them, killed it thus
At sheep-rearing Syria's furthest bounds.

Fouilles de Delphes 3.4.2 no. 137
Moreno 1974, 33-41 attempts to lower this work to ca. 305, and thus to prolong Lysippos' career to the century's end; but though Anth. Pal 16.336 indeed declares (16) to have been a product of his old age, it seems more likely that the inscription for (45), cut around 300 but now damaged at the critical point, read "Lysippos neos " (junior) rather than "geron " (old man). There is still no evidence that he worked much, if at all, beyond 316, when he would have been around 75 years old.

So much for chronology: clearly, to attempt to distinguish an "Asian period" (with Alexander) or a "Tarentine period" (1, 10) is futile without further evidence. More likely, his career was far more complicated, a mixture of crisscrossing travels and work made to order at Sikyon. Preserved originals and attributed copies help little here: in the former category, the Delphi Agias (Delphi Museum 369; Stewart 1990, figs. 551-53; cf. 27) allows us only a second-hand glimpse of his mature style, and the Poulydamas base (31; Moreno 1987, figs. 8-10) is too badly damaged to do more than suggest a date in the century's second half. The Getty bronze (Malibu 77.AB.30; Stewart 1990, figs. 618, 620), the so-called 'Philandridas' head (of marble!) from Olympia (cf. 33) and the San Marco horses (cf. 7) are all post-Lysippic, the last perhaps by six hundred years.

Replica hunters have universally begun with Pliny. Culled almost equally from Douris' biographies and the connoisseurship of Lysippos' own follower Xenokrates (cf. T 145; both were active ca. 300), his synthesis was probably the work of Antigonos of Karystos late in the third century; Varro then paraphrased it into Latin, leaving Pliny himself to spice it with a liberal admixture of contemporary anecdotes:

“(61) Duris says that Lysippus of Sicyon was nobody's pupil; originally a bronze-smith, he joined the discipline after hearing a response from the painter Eupompus. When asked which of his predecessors he followed, Eupompus pointed to a crowd of people and said that it was Nature herself, not another artist, whom one should imitate.

(62) He was a most prolific artist, and made more statues than any other sculptor, among them a Man Scraping Himself with a Strigil, which M. Agrippa dedicated in front of his baths, and which the emperor Tiberius was astonishingly fond of. Although at the beginning of his principate he kept control of himself, he was unable to do so in this case, and had the statue removed to his bedroom, substituting another in its place. But the Roman people became so indignant at this that they raised an outcry at the theater, shouting, "Give us back our Apoxyomenos!" So despite his admiration for it, the emperor returned it.

(63) Lysippus is famed for his drunken flute-girl, his hounds and huntsmen, and particularly for his chariot of the Sun at Rhodes. He also made many studies of Alexander the Great, beginning with one in his boyhood which so entranced the emperor Nero that he ordered it to be gilded, but this addition to its monetary value so diminished its artistic appeal that the gold was later removed, and in that condition it was considered more valuable even though it retained the scars from the work done on it and the incisions for fastening the gold.

(64) He also made an Hephaestion, Alexander's friend, which some ascribe to Polyclitus, though he lived a century earlier, an Alexander's Hunt dedicated at Delphi, a satyr now at Athens, and Alexander's Squadron, in which he rendered the portraits of his friends with the highest degree of likeness possible in every case; Metellus removed this to Rome after the conquest of Macedonia [148]. He also made chariot groups of various kinds.

(65) Lysippus is said to have contributed much to the art of sculpture, by rendering the hair in more detail, by making the heads of his figures smaller than the old sculptors used to do, and the bodies slenderer and leaner, to give his statues the appearance of greater height. Latin has no word for the symmetria which he most scrupulously preserved by a new and hitherto untried system that modified the foursquare figures of the ancients; and he used to say publicly that while they had made men as they were, he made them as they appeared to be. A distinguishing characteristic of his is seen to be the scrupulous attention to detail maintained in even the smallest particulars.

Eupompos was a contemporary of Zeuxis (N.H. 35.64, 75), who floruit ca. 400 (N.H. 35.61), but though the dates fit, the anecdote may be a fiction to cover Douris' ignorance of Lysippos' true teacher, engineered to fit the supposed realism of his style (T 3, and further below).

By-passing the attributions for the moment, the manifold problems of the final, Xenokratic section have provoked considerable discussion. Here the art that allegedly began with Pheidias in N.H. 34.54 and continued through Polykleitos, Myron, and Pythagoras (T 62, 43, 40), now climaxes with Lysippos himself. Xenokrates clearly included the remark that "he made men as they appeared to be" to distance his master from this supposedly increasing trend towards realism, culminating in Pythagoras (T 40). In fact, Lysippos may have meant it more generally: compare T 3 and the strikingly similar passage from Plato's Sophist of ca. 460:

Stranger
Those who model or paint certain large-scale works of art do not [attempt exact mimesis]. For if they rendered the actual commensurable proportioning [symmetria] of beautiful forms, you would think that the upper parts were smaller than necessary and the lower were larger, because the former are seen far away, the latter at close-hand.

Theaetetus
Correct.

Stranger
So artists simply wave good-bye to Truth, and now render not real commensurate proportions but only those which appear to be beautiful.

From this point of view, Polykleitos' severely objective attempt to uncover the true median proportions of the human body (T 68) would indeed bring his "foursquare" canon (T 62, cf. T 124), no matter how ideal it appears to us, within the scope of Lysippos' criticism.

As to the works themselves, the most convenient and best-illustrated compendium is Moreno 1987, though not all his attributions have been accepted (or are acceptable). For the most complete (presumed) copy of the Apoxyomenos (34) see Stewart 1990, fig. 554, with Schauenburg 1963b, 78-9, pls. 60-62; Lauter 1967; and Moreno 1987, figs. 69-79 (more copies); the rest are perhaps best discussed in the order of the complete list above.

Pliny describes (1) as follows:

“In the case of the colossus of Tarentum by Lysippus, which is 40 cubits [60 feet] high, the astonishing thing is that though it can be moved by hand (so they say), its system of weight-distribution is such that no storm can dislodge it. The artist himself is said to have provided against this by erecting a column a short distance from it on the side where it was most necessary to break the force of the wind. Accordingly, because of its size and the difficulty of moving it, Fabius Verrucosus left it alone when he transferred the Hercules from there to the Capitol [209].

Pliny N.H. 34.40
Moreno 1971 has identified it, complete with column, on a terracotta mold from nearby Policoro (Herakleia); cf. Moreno 1987, figs. 142-43; (2)-(4) are regularly recognized on coins of their respective cities, with which several fine series of bronze statuettes are often associated: see Volk 1984, though the type she studies is more likely to reproduce Leochares' Zeus Brontaios (T 110). (5) may be the 'Lateran' Poseidon type, perhaps originally displayed at the Corinthian port of Kenchreai (cf. Paus. 2.2.3; Walde 1978; Moreno 1987, figs. 94-95). Dörig 1973 sees (6) in a head in Venice related to the Apoxyomenos, while (7) appears on Rhodian amphora-stamps (Moreno 1987, fig. 61) and was perhaps imitated on the Pergamon altar. Attempts to connect the (surely Roman) horses taken from Constantinople to the Piazza San Marco with it or a presumed duplicate at Delphi are now generally discounted. An influential Eros type shown stringing or unstringing his bow has long been associated with (8): cf. T 101, with Dohl 1968; Moreno figs. 14-23), and several reliefs (Relief of Kairos by Lysippos, Turin Museum D317; Moreno 1987, figs. 66-68; Stewart 1990, fig. 555) and gems evidently reproduce (9), which caught the imagination of poets and rhetoricians from the Alexandrian age to the Byzantine:

“Questioner: Who and whence your sculptor? Statue: From Sikyon. Q: And his name? S: Lysippos. Q: And who are you? S: Kairos that subdues all. Q: Why do you go on tiptoe? S: I'm always running. Q: And why a pair of wings on your feet? S: I fly with the wind. Q: And why do you hold a razor in your right hand? S: As a sign to men, that I am sharper than the sharpest edge. Q: Your hair, why is it over your eyes? S: For anyone I meet to take me by the forelock. Q: And Heavens, why are you bald behind? S: Because once I've raced by someone with winged feet, he'll never grab me from behind no matter how strong his desire. Q: Why did the artist fashion you? S: For your sake, stranger, and set me up on the porch as a lesson.

Anth. Pal. 16.275 (Poseidippos)
Save for Kallistratos, Descriptions 6, who remarks tellingly that Kairos was "the only creator of beauty", later writers add little to this; for an interpretation of the statue as a critique of Polykleitos see Stewart 1978a. Reinterpreted in later antiquity as Time and set on a globe (so, already, Kallistratos), it was taken to Constantinople only to perish with other famous masterpieces in the catastrophic Lauseion fire of A.D. 476:

“[In the Lauseion] there stood the image of Lindian Athena, four cubits [6 feet] high and made of smaragdos , a work of the sculptors Skyllis and Dipoinos, which Seostris, ruler of Egypt, once sent as a gift to Kleoboulos tyrant of Lindos; the Knidian Aphrodite of white marble, nude, covering only her private parts with her hand, the work of Praxiteles of Knidos; the Samian Hera, a work of Lysippos and Boupalos of Chios; the winged Eros with a bow, coming from Myndos; the ivory Zeus of Pheidias, which Perikles dedicated in the temple at Olympia; and the statue representing Time, the work of Lysippos, bald behind and long-haired in front.

Kedrenos, Historiarum Compendium 322
Yet it was for statues of men that Lysippos was most renowned (T 115). His studies of Herakles, for instance, apparently outdid even Praxiteles (T 103) in exploring violent oscillations of mood (pathe):

“The mighty Herakles, conceived over three nights, sat mightily cast down, upon a basket whereon his lionskin is strewn. There he sat with no quiver hung about him, carrying no bow in his hand, brandishing no club, but extending his right leg and hand as far as he could, bending his left leg at the knee to support the elbow of his left arm, stretching up the forearm and gently resting his head, full of despondency, upon his opened palm. His chest was broad, his shoulders wide, his hair thick, his buttocks ample, his arms brawny, and his height such (I think) that Lysimachos [sic ] might have thought the original Herakles to reach when he cast this in the bronze, the choicest jewel of his art, first and last, so big that a string fastened around its thumb would serve as a man's belt, and the shin of its leg was as tall as a man.

Niketas Choniates, De Signis Constantinopolitanis 5 (ed. Bekker)
These and other accounts have enabled (10) and (13) to be securely identified in replica, the first in a series of bronze statuettes (Moreno 1987, figs. 144-56), the second in a host of replicas ranging from tiny to colossal (Visscher 1962; Moreno 1987, figs. 30-34) — though its alleged pedigree is surely fictitious. Indeed, was Vindex' statuette the original or a (contemporary?) version of a big bronze, like the colossus from Alba Fucens published by de Visscher? For the latter showed Herakles correctly at the table — i.e. feasting in Olympos — while the statuette punned upon the epi (literally "at" or "on") of his cult-title to make him a table ornament. As for the others, many associate the 'Farnese'-type Herakles (Louvre Br 652; Moreno 1987, figs. 96-113; Stewart 1990, fig. 566) with (11), while (14) may be reflected in a powerful marble in the Capitoline Museum, a small bronze group in Palermo, and on Roman sarcophagi: see most recently, Moreno 1987, figs. 124-41. Finally, the Boston-Copenhagen Herakles type is often attributed to him too, on general stylistic grounds.

His portraits were evidently equally varied. For the Alexanders one must turn from Pliny (T 124) to Plutarch:

“When Lysippos had finished his first Alexander with his face looking up towards the heavens (just as Alexander himself was accustomed to look, slightly inclining his neck to one side), someone not inappropriately inscribed the following epigram: “This statue seems to look at Zeus and say:
Take thou Olympos; me let earth obey!

For this Alexander ordered that Lysippos alone should make his portraits. For only he, it seemed, brought out his real character in the bronze and gave form to his essential excellence (arete). The others, in their eagerness to imitate his crooked neck and melting, limpid eyes, failed to preserve his virile and leonine demeanor.

Plutarch, Moralia 335A-B
The decree is a Hellenistic fiction, and the Plutarch also seems to conflate the earlier and later Alexander types ("Fouquet" Alexander: Louvre 370, "Nelidow" Alexander: Harvard 1956.20; Stewart 1990, figs. 564-65); elsewhere, though, he again stresses the heroic character of Lysippos's Alexanders as against the quasi-divine iconography favored by Apelles:

“Lysippos the sculptor did well to find fault with Apelles the painter for painting Alexander with a thunderbolt in his hand; he himself represented Alexander with a spear, an attribute true and proper to him, which time would never rob of its glory.

Plutarch, Moralia 360D
For possible copies of (17), perhaps produced in multiple versions, see ; Moreno 1987, figs. 44-45; Stewart 1990, figs. 561-62, 564-65: "Schwarzenberg" Alexander; "Azara" Alexander (Louvre MA 436); "Fouquet" Alexander (Louvre 370); "Nelidow" Alexander (Harvard 1956.20). A statuette in Naples has been connected with the Alexander of (19): Calcani 1989 investigates this and many more possible echoes, some more plausible than others. A Messenian relief in Paris probably echoes (20): cf. Moreno 1987, fig. 55; Stewart 1993. Of the other portraits, see Stewart 1990, fig. 557-58 for (26): head of Sokrates (Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano (Terme) 1236); statuette of Sokrates (London 1925). As for the victor-statues, (27), (31), and (34) were discussed above, and Schauenburg 1963b proposes to add several anonymous copies to the list; cf. Moreno 1987, figs. 4, 11-12. Finally, a series of headless marbles have regularly been connected with (40); an attractive bronze statuette in Santa Barbara (Santa Barbara Museum of Art 1981.64.4; Stewart 1990, fig. 556) now gives the complete composition.

As for dates, most of these seem to fall in the second half of the century. Arnold 1969, 210 and 236-37 proposes the following sequence, based largely upon an increasing freedom of movement and space-enclosing poise of the arms: Copenhagen Herakles, ca. 350; Eros, ca. 340; Kairos, 330s; Herakles and the Hind, ca. 330; Apoxyomenos, ca. 320; Farnese Herakles, ca. 315.

Lysippos's versatility places him in the forefront of the fourth-century virtuosi; his achievement was, as Pliny tells us in T 124, to perfect a phenomenal idealism that adapted the legacy of the past (such as the ancient principle of symmetria ) to the demands of subject and setting. Nowhere is this clearer than in his portraiture, where his aim was to create idealized images whose meticulous attention to detail nevertheless made them absolutely compelling as likenesses (T 131).

In this he may have been helped by his brother Lysistratos, who floruit with him in 328-325 (T 1), and whose known work in portraiture (Tatian, Contra Graecos 54.117) is complemented by a precious description of his method:

“The first man to mould a likeness in plaster from the face itself, and to institute the method of making corrections upon a casting produced by pouring wax into this plaster mould was Lysistratus of Sicyon, brother of Lysippus, of whom we have already spoken. He introduced the practice of making likenesses, for before him they used to try to make portraits as beautiful as possible. He also invented the technique of taking casts from statues, and this practice increased to such an extent that no figures or statues were made without using clay.

Pliny, N.H. 35.153
This method is completely congruent with Lysippos's work as described in T 124 and 131, and seems to have been highly congenial to Roman neo-classic taste, which also valued "likeness" or similitudo highly (T 121), but wanted it tempered with more than a dash of idealization (T 3; cf. Pollitt 1974, 430-44). Yet even despite their admiration for Lysippos, neo-classic critics like Quintilian evidently found no difficulty at all in assessing his standing vis-a-vis the giants of the fifth century: for (T 3) since Pheidian agalmatopoia had already penetrated the essence of the gods (T 53 and 61), and Polykleitan andriantopoia that of men (cf. T 65 and 70), their successors could only turn to representing external appearance (cf. Pollitt 1974, 131-38 on the meaning of veritas in T 3). And of those engaged in this lesser enterprise, Praxiteles and Lysippos struck the best balance between Truth and Beauty, while the vulgar realism of Demetrios (cf. T 91) banished him irrevocably below the salt.


Select bibliography: (A) General: F.P. Johnson 1927; RE 14: 46-63, 66-67 (Lippold, 1928); ThB 23: 496-99, 500 (Bieber, 1929); Lippold 1950, 276-86; EWA 9: 357-62 (Sjquist, 1958); EAA 4: 654-60 (Giuliano, Ferri, 1961); Bieber 1961b, 30-39, 44-50; Picard 1935-1971 (vol. 4): (Picard/Manuel) 423-753; Boardman 1967, 444-50; Arnold 1969, 210, 234-45; Richter 1970d, 224-31; Moreno 1974, 1-41; M. Robertson 1975, 463-76, 513; Pollitt 1986, 20-22, 38, 41-43, 47-54; Moreno 1987; Ridgway 1990a, 73-82; Stewart 1990, 186-91, 289-94, and index, s.v. 'Lysippos'.

(B) Sources: Overbeck 1868/1959, nos. 1443-1515; Löwy 1885/1976 nos. 93-94, 476-77, 487, 506, 534; Stuart-Jones 1895/1966, 193-206; Jex-Blake 1896, xvi-xix, xxvi-vii, xlvii-viii, lxii-iii; Schweitzer 1932/1963; Marcadé 1953, 66-76; Pollitt 1974, passim; Coarelli 1971-2: 99-106; Moreno 1973, 1974; Gallet de Santerre 1983, 49-54, 56-57, 60, 72-73, 230-36; Pollitt 1990, 98-104, 223.

(C) Individual works:

(i) Alexanders: Bieber 1964, 32-38, 45-46; Richter 1965, 255; Schwarzenberg 1967; Hölscher 1971; Schwarzenberg 1975a; Stewart 1982b, 61-63; Pollitt 1986, 20-22, 38, 41-43; Calcani 1989 (Granikos); Ridgway 1990a, 115-16, 119-21, 123; Stewart 1993.

(ii) Alyzia group: Salis 1956; S. Lattimore 1972a; Moreno 1984.

(iii) Apoxyomenos and athletes: Schauenburg 1963b; Lauter 1967; Dohrn 1968 (Daochos group: cf. FD 2.10: 67-80 for the setting); Borbein 1973, 147; Stewart 1978a; Frel 1982; Ridgway 1990a, 74-75, 76-79.

(iv) Dionysos: Dörig 1973.

(v) Eros: Döhl 1968; LIMC 3: 880 no. 352 (Hermary, 1986); Ridgway 1990a, 75-76.

(vi) Herakles types: Visscher 1962; C.C. Vermeule 1975; Haskell 1981, 229-32; Stewart 1982b, 57-61; Moreno 1982.

(vii) Kairos: Stewart 1978a.

(viii) Krateros: Borbein 1973, 91-97; Stewart 1993, Chapter 9.3

(ix) Poseidon: Walde 1978.

(x) Sokrates: Richter 1965, 109-19; Gauer 1968a, 124-28; Vierneisel-Schlörb 1979 no. 30; Ridgway 1990a, 79-80.

(xi) Zeus: Moreno 1971; Volk 1984.

(xii) Various: Arnold 1969, 210, 234-45; Carpenter 1971, 162-65, 168-69; 232-36; Moreno 1974, 1-41; Lauter 1977.

(xiii) Coins: Imhoof-Blumer 1887/1964, 5, 29-30, 36; Lacroix 1949, 322-24; S. Lattimore 1972a.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: