Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Apoxyomenos by Lysippos
Date: 350- 325 BC
By: Lysippos
Period: 4^th Century
Facts & Figures:
Man scraping himself- athlete scrapping oil off body?
Height: 2.05 m – bigger than life size} convention had been that anything larger than life size had been a god, this is athlete
Marble copy of a bronze original- delicacy of features have been lost in copy- Lysippos was famous for his, however composition and ideas can still be seen through copy
Was a fig leaf ‘preserving dignity’ over penis
Defining Features:
Tall Slender statue, small 4^th century head
‘Statue has no single visually exciting viewpoint… observer is invited to walk around to admire full special complexity’ – Woodford
Body: weight is on left leg but almost as if bent to switch to the right
torso looks as though hip is about to move next and bring weight down
Arms outstretched- dramatically foreshortens them showing the naturalism and realism in composition
Arm cut across body creates a strong horizontal
Multitudes of views: not good from just one side as moving away from Polykletios’s cannon
Stance: Pedley argues the taut-ion introduced into the figure by the out turned foot and knee, along with twist of legs shown by foot, and the shifting horizontal axis through the hips & swinging of arms suggests movement- ‘structured classicality giving way to movement’  

Other info: lysippos usually made gods and heroes, this however is the individualised image of a normal man
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Raging Maenad by Skopas
Date: 350- 325 BC
By: Skopas
Period: 4^th Century
Facts & Figures: Roman Copy
Statue is 18 inches- statuette
Defining Features:
Skopas’s trade mark was being able to show intensity of feeling in statues;
arched back and twisted torso shows passion in movement
Statue is small and lacking in detail, yet still shows the drama of Skopa’s work- known as a master of passion.
Drapery: Catenary folds are thin in the understated drapery; sensuality linking statue to being a Maenad (follower of Dionysus)
Potentialities of facial expression will never be known, however there are deep set yearning eyes, and the lips are dramatically parted.
Sensual dramatic movement is then contrasted against the naturalistic hair.
Other info:
People of Megera were building a Temple to Aphrodite; wanted allegorical figures. They went to Praxiteles for persuasion and consolation (gentle aspects), and Skopas was asked to do desire and yearning (more passionate aspects)
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Hermes & Dionysus by Praxiteles / Hermes of Praxiteles
Date: 340 BC
By: Praxiteles
Period: 4^th Century
Facts & Figures: Made with Parian marble,
thought to be only original work of Praxiteles (son of Kephisodotos)-> however may not be true; bridge between body and trunk is a roman feature in copies, whilst the base is later than 4^th century in style, plus sandal worn by Hermes isn’t fashion of 4^th Century- now regarded as 3^rd century copy
Height: 2.10 m / 7ft 1 inch
Was dedicated to sacred Altis from Eleians and Arcadians to commemorate their peace treaty
Defining Features:
Hermes: sluggish but manly resting on trunk of the tree,
light shadow in lips depict a smile?
Delicate mouth contrasted against strong nose as face continuous symmetry.
Hair in mixed cones in contrast to skin
Use of light and shadow of flesh
Hermes standing ‘indolently off balance…relaxed, languid pose’
-Is an example of self-contained balance produced by Polykleitos & contraposto being abandoned, as Praxiteles develops fathers work;
Idea of trunk being a ‘visual and psychological support’
Head proportionately smaller than usual style of 5^th century.
Hair: patterned but unrealistic
Drapery: heavy drapery on tree trunk adds an additional texture to scene
Anatomy: development of anatomy relating to pose- responsive position of the limbs- arch on right side shows muscle tension.
Tall and slender body, features of Hermes typically Praxitilian.
Have right arm raised and weight on right leg- creates a ‘swinging rhythm of curve’; free leg loosely bent.

Other info:
Pausanias claims his dad did a Hermes and Dionysus also- sons style on fathers idea?
Viewpoints: change as you walk around, idea of statues being from the left sorrowful, right smiling and from the front calming.
Sympathy or mockery of the baby Dionysus – right arm raised probably held up grapes- sign of Dionysus.
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Aphrodite of Knidos by Praxiteles
Date: 350 BC
By: Praxiteles
Period: 4^th Century
Facts & Figures: First large representation of a nude female, first nude representation of a goddess
Height is 6ft 8 inches
Roman copy; a composite cast- took best elements of all copies; body is in Vatican head in the Louvre.  
Story is Aphrodite about to be caught bathing, narrative supported  by her expression;
another example of gods humanised as bathing is human action, as is her reaction.
Defining Features:
Return to contraposto; sloping of shoulders balanced by sloping of knees
Anatomy: light against the marble works as an exposing quality.
Some modesty as hand covers Aphrodite’s regions
Body has narrowness of waist and wide hips, and narrow knees contrasted against width of hips.
Weight on right leg with left knee inverted slightly in- sign of modesty
Panels of abdominals smooth, along with healthy perkiness of breasts support idea of goddess of lust, as sensuality and sexuality of gods is touched upon in this statue.
Drapery: Drapery placed over the pot/vase which is used to support the statue,flowing of drapery is used as a contrast against the solidity of the vase.
Vase also features intricate detail
Head: small head again, tapered effect of the face towards the chin
Other info:
Model of figure was believed to be Praxiteles’s mistress Phryne.
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Eirene & Ploutos by Kephisodotos
Date: 374 BC- made for peace augmentation
By: Kephisodotos
Period: 4^th Century
Facts & Figures: Eirene- peace is holding the child Ploutos- wealth.
Roman copy of a bronze greek original from 370 BC.
Marble
Height: 6ft 6 1.2 inches / 1.99 m
Defining Features:
Not a single figure but a concise group; idea of peace and wealth going hand in hand.
Sculptors returning to humanising the gods, almost like mother and child as a loving tenderness is seen through the statue
Head small in comparison to body- feature of the time
Other info:
Hair: slight element of pattern, but still natural variation in the folds
Line of sight between goddess and child is quite striking and intimate;
the positioning of the baby is natural which means it doesn’t detract from the total image which is linked by the eye gaze.
Eirene: wide hips and a robust figure, shows peace as mother-like supporting the maternal image, also peace is satisfied and not wanting.
Simplicity and naturalism valued again- straight and natural folds of drapery.
Drapery: plain heavy fold of peplops- but still some transparency, Use of u- shape catenary folds.
Left arm did hold sceptre.
-Was made to celebrate cult of peace argumentation: Athens had fallen out of pre-eminent position but by 380’s Athens had re-emerged; had been some military activity but by 375 peace re-emerges with positivity of the future.
-Shows the interest of abstract concepts personified; era of philosophy showing stronger thought behind the topic of statues
Quotes:
‘not gods hero-ised but humanised’
‘the personification of abstractions in sculpture is hardly innovation; but the allegorical nature of the group breaks new ground’- Pedley
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Karyatid from the Erechtheion
Date: 420- 405 BC, was finished by 405 BC because that was first festival with Erechtheion finished
By:
Period: Late Classical
Facts & Figures: 7ft 7 inches tall
Defining Features: ‘finike refinements’-> minute and unnecessary
Illogicality of drapery: wet look drapery used at times when maiden is supposed to be wearing a wool garment, not realistic
Other info: ‘charm delicacy and decorative detail have begun to suppliant nobility, dignity and naturalism’ – Woodford
Drapery: minute folds and introduction of wet look drapery, regular pattern of folds mirror the flutes on Parthenon opposite.
Hair: decoration elaborate at back
Comparisons: Berlin Goddess,

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Nike by Paionios
Date: 420 BC
By: Paionios
Period: Late Classical
Facts & Figures: 6.5 ft along with 9/10 m high pedestal making statue 32ft high approximately
Would be found at Olympia on triangular pedestal in front of east end of temple of Zeus
Defining Features: Strong use of motion lines; allows garment to be shown pressed against her body. Whilst Modeling lines go across the body to show shape
Other info:
Statue shows platic values- plasticity= quality of carving
Statue was offered by the Messenians and Naupactians in gratitude for their victory over Lakedaimonians in 424 BC.
Drapery: the exquisite draping of lower part of the himation counterbalances the two enormous wings that once were there. Grace and feminine refinement in the composition that is full of vitality and majesty with the balanced projection of the landing with the projection of left limbs slightly forward with the slight bending of the head.
Was first time a greek sculpture of the goddess in her winged form has been rendered with such feeling without sacrificing the plastic values or structure of the work.
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Nike by Paionios
Date: 420 BC
By: Paionios
Period: Late Classical
Facts & Figures: 6.5 ft along with 9/10 m high pedestal making statue 32ft high approximately
Would be found at Olympia on triangular pedestal in front of east end of temple of Zeus
Defining Features: Strong use of motion lines; allows garment to be shown pressed against her body. Whilst Modeling lines go across the body to show shape
Other info:
Statue shows platic values- plasticity= quality of carving
Statue was offered by the Messenians and Naupactians in gratitude for their victory over Lakedaimonians in 424 BC.
Drapery: the exquisite draping of lower part of the himation counterbalances the two enormous wings that once were there. Grace and feminine refinement in the composition that is full of vitality and majesty with the balanced projection of the landing with the projection of left limbs slightly forward with the slight bending of the head.
Was first time a greek sculpture of the goddess in her winged form has been rendered with such feeling without sacrificing the plastic values or structure of the work.
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Aphrodite*
Date: 420 BC
By:
Period:
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features: Polykleition in terms of stance- free leg is like the Doryphoros, but body is made secondary to drapery.
‘For this artist line was everything…figure just used by artist to hang exuberant drapery onto…’- Woodford
Whereas
Boredman argues interest is the body under the kiton
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Daidoumenos by Polykleitos
Date: 430 BC
By: Polykleitos
Period: 430 BC
Facts & Figures:
Athlete tying filet around head
Defining Features: Example of Contraposto, as a dynamic equilibrium is met through the slant of shoulders and hip, an ‘s’ shape runs through the figure; balance is created instead of rigid horizontals and verticals
Other info:
Hair: later date as more richer plastic treatment of hair is coming about
Comparisons: like Riache warriors: modified severity of upper part of body so that shoulders incline in response to movement of arms, relaxed leg drawn back making statue appear in action

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Daidoumenos by Polykleitos
Date: 430 BC
By: Polykleitos
Period: 430 BC
Facts & Figures:
Athlete tying filet around head
Defining Features: Example of Contraposto, as a dynamic equilibrium is met through the slant of shoulders and hip, an ‘s’ shape runs through the figure; balance is created instead of rigid horizontals and verticals
Other info:
Hair: later date as more richer plastic treatment of hair is coming about
Comparisons: like Riache warriors: modified severity of upper part of body so that shoulders incline in response to movement of arms, relaxed leg drawn back making statue appear in action

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Doryphoros by Polykleitos (or the spearbearer)
Date: 440 BC
By: Polykleitos
Period: High Classical
Facts & Figures:
Was a bronze original
Supposedly an advance on early classical as torso is responsive to limbs
Defining Features: Full of interest from all angles
Body: Shoulders inline to movement of the arms, this contrasts the incline of the hips-> became known as ‘the canon’: was made to show the principles of textbook proportions:
‘perfect equilibrium’ ‘opposing, contrasting, balancing’.
Free leg is drawn back- making more movement than seen in Riache warriors
Other info:
Sides depicted as lucid as front as back
Tree trunk is used as support- if was away would get a true sense of the clean midst of movement
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Hestia
Date: 475-450 BC
By:
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features: Severe and looking face, over fold of peplops gives clear horizontal, folds plain not an exuberant display of drapery as seen later in century
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Diskobolos by Myron
Date: 475- 450 BC
By: Myron
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures: 1.55 meters tall/ 5ft 1
Defining Features:
‘formal abstraction’; curves against straight, close against open, smooth against rigid.
Strain in bicep through depiction of vein.
Sense of youth in face & hair- have close cropped hairstyle like aristokidos Kourous.
Depicts the split second pause between the back swing- stillness before the action about to occur- can appreciate the potential in movement which ‘permeates’ the statue.
Simplicity of the arch (the throw movement) against the jagged lines (body position)
Criticisms: the torso isn’t correct and doesn’t show strain
Other info:
Arguments; Like Artemision Zeus lacks contours from side, legs therefore appreciated best from side, body appreciated best from front; multi view.
or woodford argues ‘the figure is cut from one plain for a single viewpoint, like high relief without a background’.
Pedley argues statue is ‘mannered’ consciously old fashioned.
Is a Roman copy of a bronze, this is one of best copies because of position of head; however is still a pale imitation as marble has to be supported hence tree stump supporting legs and the arm which sits on leg supporting shoulder.
Quotes:
‘An instant of stillness in a midst of action, a suggestion of action.. the statues seems permiated with energy’- woodford
‘Miron has brought to his new asthetical ideal a new mathematical formular, curved vs straight, smooth vs angular, closed vs open’
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Riace Warriors Warrior A
Date: 475- 450 BC
By: Speculation that they were by Hagelades- Polykleitos’s teacher
Period: transitional
Facts & Figures: height: 6ft 5 inches – tall for a ‘human’
To be restored with a spear and shield, copper on lips and nipples, silver on teeth, eyes were inlaid. Perhaps there was a wreath over the hairband
Defining Features: Prime example of contraposto.
Curls on hair casted separately, both slightly open- creating an inner life?
From back: the curvature of back deeper and lower than possible
Other info:
Argument that after the Kritios boy, art no longer wanted to be realistic, these are therefore ‘lawfully distorted’, like polykleitos they show the ‘physical potential’ of action, as the contraposto- horizontals opposed- complement each other.
They are ‘more human than human…unrealistic and reality exaggerated’ and that’s why they’re overwhelming.
theory: wanted to go beyond naturalism, they are not anatomically possible;
artificially long to match upper body, too deep divide up chest and indent in back, chest muscles are relaxed while the back is tensed, spine is too defined and there is no coccyx bone
Comparisons:
Note how the stance has changed from early The directly frontal rigid, "at attention" pose of the archaic sculpture (Metropolitan Museum Kouros) has been replaced by a composition in which the weight is concentrated on one leg leaving the other bent with a slight rotation in the torso.
Compare with Warrior B

Free Standing Sculpture

Date: 475- 450 BC
By: Speculation that they were by Hagelades- Polykleitos’s teacher
Period: transitional
Facts & Figures: height: 6ft 5 inches – tall for a ‘human’
would have had helmet- been broken off
Ivory and copper stones for eyes
Defining Features: Prime example of contraposto.
Shorter hair than warrior A- more athletic or younger than warrior A?
position like Kritios boy
Other info:
Argument that after the Kritios boy, art no longer wanted to be realistic, these are therefore ‘lawfully distorted’, like polykleitos they show the ‘physical potential’ of action, as the contraposto- horizontals opposed- complement each other.
They are ‘more human than human…unrealistic and reality exaggerated’ and that’s why they’re overwhelming.
theory: wanted to go beyond naturalism, they are not anatomically possible;
artificially long to match upper body, too deep divide up chest and indent in back, chest muscles are relaxed while the back is tensed, spine is too defined and there is no coccyx bone
Boredman argues: statue B shows an uncompromising strength, almost arrogant in stance, creating a sense of theatricality. ‘Stolidity’ of the pose- ‘mature strength and solitidy…though a little tired..may be almost pathos’
Comparisons:
Note how the stance has changed from early The directly frontal rigid, "at attention" pose of the archaic sculpture (Metropolitan Museum Kouros) has been replaced by a composition in which the weight is concentrated on one leg leaving the other bent with a slight rotation in the torso.

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Riace Warriors Warrior A
Date: 475- 450 BC
By: Speculation that they were by Hagelades- Polykleitos’s teacher
Period: transitional
Facts & Figures: height: 6ft 5 inches – tall for a ‘human’
To be restored with a spear and shield, copper on lips and nipples, silver on teeth, eyes were inlaid. Perhaps there was a wreath over the hairband
Defining Features: Prime example of contraposto.
Curls on hair casted separately, both slightly open- creating an inner life?
From back: the curvature of back deeper and lower than possible
Other info:
Argument that after the Kritios boy, art no longer wanted to be realistic, these are therefore ‘lawfully distorted’, like polykleitos they show the ‘physical potential’ of action, as the contraposto- horizontals opposed- complement each other.
They are ‘more human than human…unrealistic and reality exaggerated’ and that’s why they’re overwhelming.
theory: wanted to go beyond naturalism, they are not anatomically possible;
artificially long to match upper body, too deep divide up chest and indent in back, chest muscles are relaxed while the back is tensed, spine is too defined and there is no coccyx bone
Comparisons:
Note how the stance has changed from early The directly frontal rigid, "at attention" pose of the archaic sculpture (Metropolitan Museum Kouros) has been replaced by a composition in which the weight is concentrated on one leg leaving the other bent with a slight rotation in the torso.
Compare with Warrior B

Free Standing Sculpture
Riace Warrior B
Date: 475- 450 BC
By: Speculation that they were by Hagelades- Polykleitos’s teacher
Period: transitional
Facts & Figures: height: 6ft 5 inches – tall for a ‘human’
would have had helmet- been broken off
Ivory and copper stones for eyes
Defining Features: Prime example of contraposto.
Shorter hair than warrior A- more athletic or younger than warrior A?
position like Kritios boy
Other info:
Argument that after the Kritios boy, art no longer wanted to be realistic, these are therefore ‘lawfully distorted’, like polykleitos they show the ‘physical potential’ of action, as the contraposto- horizontals opposed- complement each other.
They are ‘more human than human…unrealistic and reality exaggerated’ and that’s why they’re overwhelming.
theory: wanted to go beyond naturalism, they are not anatomically possible;
artificially long to match upper body, too deep divide up chest and indent in back, chest muscles are relaxed while the back is tensed, spine is too defined and there is no coccyx bone
Boredman argues: statue B shows an uncompromising strength, almost arrogant in stance, creating a sense of theatricality. ‘Stolidity’ of the pose- ‘mature strength and solitidy…though a little tired..may be almost pathos’
Comparisons:
Note how the stance has changed from early The directly frontal rigid, "at attention" pose of the archaic sculpture (Metropolitan Museum Kouros) has been replaced by a composition in which the weight is concentrated on one leg leaving the other bent with a slight rotation in the torso.

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Artemision Zeus
Date: 475-450 BC
By: unknown, found in sea near Cape Atremision, where there had been a war, in sea as possible destruction
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures:
Bronze, height is 6ft 10 ½ inches/ 2.09 meters
Span from fingertip to fingertip is 6ft 10 ¼ inches/ 2.10 meters, meaning he almost follows rule of height = arm span
Defining Features:
‘Vivid and convincing figure’ through cleverly varying the position of the limbs, caught in action, elongation of arms accentuates action, raised arm bent contrast with straight arm, whilst weight baring leg is contrasted with free leg.
Face: middle parting of fringe shows the potential of plastic movement, at back hair splits into two plats which flow around the head and there is also the incision of a headband, creating contrasting patterns on head.
Issues: torso should be dramatically affected by the activity of the limbs, however instead is ‘as still as kritios boy’- sign of how statue is new in pose but still archaic tendencies. Statue can be hard to make sense of from sides, as new active figures require new anatomical explorations.
Other info: Speculation as to whether it was Zeus or Poseidon; now believed to be Zeus as Poseidon had not been represented in this pose, whereas there were small figurines of Zeus like this with his lightning bolt, and a trident would obscure the face so was most likely a lightning bolt, position is that something is to be hurled- a trident is thrust not hurled.
Arguments that it is a votive statue; another argument is that it was as thanks to Poseidon after victory of battle of Salamis- probably false.
Speculation over the viewpoint; Ridgway argues statue is meant to be seen from side, as the composition is a ‘system of open triangles’, emphasising the side view as the most impressive, as from the side the elongation of the arms emphasises the emotional impact of the side view- the moment before a throw. However can also argue the arms are only elongated to reduce foreshortening when viewed at the front.

Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Artemision Zeus
Date: 475-450 BC
By: unknown, found in sea near Cape Atremision, where there had been a war, in sea as possible destruction
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures:
Bronze, height is 6ft 10 ½ inches/ 2.09 meters
Span from fingertip to fingertip is 6ft 10 ¼ inches/ 2.10 meters, meaning he almost follows rule of height = arm span
Defining Features:
‘Vivid and convincing figure’ through cleverly varying the position of the limbs, caught in action, elongation of arms accentuates action, raised arm bent contrast with straight arm, whilst weight baring leg is contrasted with free leg.
Face: middle parting of fringe shows the potential of plastic movement, at back hair splits into two plats which flow around the head and there is also the incision of a headband, creating contrasting patterns on head.
Issues: torso should be dramatically affected by the activity of the limbs, however instead is ‘as still as kritios boy’- sign of how statue is new in pose but still archaic tendencies. Statue can be hard to make sense of from sides, as new active figures require new anatomical explorations.
Other info: Speculation as to whether it was Zeus or Poseidon; now believed to be Zeus as Poseidon had not been represented in this pose, whereas there were small figurines of Zeus like this with his lightning bolt, and a trident would obscure the face so was most likely a lightning bolt, position is that something is to be hurled- a trident is thrust not hurled.
Arguments that it is a votive statue; another argument is that it was as thanks to Poseidon after victory of battle of Salamis- probably false.
Speculation over the viewpoint; Ridgway argues statue is meant to be seen from side, as the composition is a ‘system of open triangles’, emphasising the side view as the most impressive, as from the side the elongation of the arms emphasises the emotional impact of the side view- the moment before a throw. However can also argue the arms are only elongated to reduce foreshortening when viewed at the front.

Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Delphic Charioteer
Date: 480- 470 BC
By: unknown, however was commissioned by Polyealos ruler of Sicilian city of Gala, after winning victory at Pythian games, was a tribute to Apollo
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures: Height: 5ft 11 inches/ 1.8 m, bronze with copper lips and eyelashes, silver headband, onyx used for eyes.
was casted in 8 parts, 2 head 2 torso 4 limbs.
was buried to prevent looters- found in 4 pieces- head, upper torso, lower torso, right arm – left is missing.
Was a group of four- horses chariot and groom missing, these would have been verticals to the statues horizontals creating a more impressive, fuller scene.
Were no plinths- statue was pegged down
Defining Features:
Depicts either moment before or after a race- stillness or anticipation.
Vacant/ introverted expression
In severe style
Tensions shown in pulling the reins through the veins in arm and neck
Arms raised to hold reins
-pose full of easy symmetry but subtle differences due to body slightly twisted to the right
-probably a teenager as wearing xystis straps that cross upper body to stop tunic ballowing out
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Kritios Boy
Date: 500- 475 BC
By: Maybe by Kritios- who made the tyrannicides
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures: 3ft 10 inches tall
Defining Features:
‘transition to transitional’ as this looks ahead to future styles
Seen as an advancement as;
symmetry and frontallity of Kourous have now gone, ‘body set free’
Pedley: ‘In this statue the capacity for movement, inherit in the Kouros, the sense of a functioning anatomy at last broke loose’.
Other info:
Advanced right leg and head turning creates a subtle turning of direction
Headband: was a filit- hairshape can be seen through cap, this was a turning point as you can see the incised shape of hair
eyes were inserted
depiction of baby hair on neck
Body: hips tilted, understated musculature as a sign of youth, weight subtly on back leg raises the hip on weight baring leg.
Comparisons: Compare with memorial to Aristodikos- anatomy the same but Kritios pose has weight on back leg with the head turned slightly in opposite direction} this creates a dramatic effect away from the rigid stance and mechanical smile of the Aristodikos

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Kritios Boy
Date: 500- 475 BC
By: Maybe by Kritios- who made the tyrannicides
Period: Transitional
Facts & Figures: 3ft 10 inches tall
Defining Features:
‘transition to transitional’ as this looks ahead to future styles
Seen as an advancement as;
symmetry and frontallity of Kourous have now gone, ‘body set free’
Pedley: ‘In this statue the capacity for movement, inherit in the Kouros, the sense of a functioning anatomy at last broke loose’.
Other info:
Advanced right leg and head turning creates a subtle turning of direction
Headband: was a filit- hairshape can be seen through cap, this was a turning point as you can see the incised shape of hair
eyes were inserted
depiction of baby hair on neck
Body: hips tilted, understated musculature as a sign of youth, weight subtly on back leg raises the hip on weight baring leg.
Comparisons: Compare with memorial to Aristodikos- anatomy the same but Kritios pose has weight on back leg with the head turned slightly in opposite direction} this creates a dramatic effect away from the rigid stance and mechanical smile of the Aristodikos

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Piraeus Apollo (bronze)
Date: 530 BC
By:
Period: transitional / early classical
Facts & Figures: First Surviving bronze Statue, found in sea in Piraeus.
Over lifesize
Called the Apollo as was found holding arrow in left hand
Had no plinth as statues were becoming more frequently just pegged on whilst they were set.
Defining Features:
colour of bronze more natural/ subtler, sun god bronze skin?
details were added in precious stones
Not such elaborate details on hair because of reflective nature of bronze
Other info: Was so innovative because it looks like normal Kourous from the 500’s BC, however shows first signs of artists experimenting with the new freedoms of bronze;
arms separated from body- an extended unsupported position marble would not allow, feet attached through souls- no need for a plinth.
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Nikandre Kore
Date: 650-625
By: -
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: New York Kouros
Date: 610 BC
By: -
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Sounion Kourous
Date: 610 BC
By: -
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Kleobis and Biton
Date: 590-580 BC
By:
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Berlin Goddess
Date: 570
By:
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Cheramyes Hera
Date: 560 BC
By:
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Peplos Kore
Date: 530-520 BC
By:
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Anavyssos Kouros
Date:
By:
Period:
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Kore 675
Date: 530-520 BC
By:
Period:
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons:

Free Standing Sculpture

Name: Aristodikos Kouros
Date: 510 BC
By:
Period: Archaic
Facts & Figures:
Defining Features:
Other info:
Comparisons: