£0134706

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

THE LEMNIAN ATHENA:
A STUDY IN CLASSICAL GREEK ICONOGRAPHY

presented by

Beatrice Hilton Moulton

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

M.An rhgeehi History of ARt

 

 

\VQopfécs/Jf’ ...___ ~ »\

Major professor

Date May 13, 1988

 

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

 

 

 

)V1531_J ‘ RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
LJBRARJES remove this checkout from
.“ your record. FINES will

 

 

be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

 

 

THE LEMNIAN ATHENA:
A STUDY IN CLASSICAL GREEK ICONOGRAPHY

by

Beatrice Hilton Moulton

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Art
1988

ABSTRACT
THE LEMNIAN ATHENA:
A STUDY IN CLASSICAL GREEK ICONOGRAPHY
by

Beatrice Hilton Moulton

The Lemnian Athena of Pheidias has been a topic of
enduring interest to scholars since Adolf Furtwangler
announced in 1893 that he had discovered a copy of the
original Pheidian statue. Furtwfingler joined a head found
in Bologna to a torso found in Dresden and, after careful
investigation, was convinced he had found a true copy.

This study examines the background of the original
statue, namely, Periclean Athens, the artist Pheidias, and
the cleruchs who commissioned the work. It also suggests
that Furtwfingler's hypothesis, that Athena was holding a
helmet in her right hand, may not be true.

Although only a copy, the Bologna head catches the
magic of Pheidias and adds to our appreciation and

understanding of his complex genius.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks and appreciation to Dr. Susan Madigan and
Dr. Webster Smith for their valuable suggestions and
criticism of this thesis.

To Dr. Paul Deussen I wish to express special thanks.
I am grateful for the opportunity of working with an
inspiring teacher whose patience and helpfulness made
difficulties disappear. His encouragement and support were
unfailing. His warmth and humanity enhanced the whole

learning experience.

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES .

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER I. PERICLES AND PHEIDIAS .
CHAPTER II. THE LEMNIAN CLERUCHS

CHAPTER III. THE FURTWANGLER CONTROVERSY .

CHAPTER IV. ICONOGRAPHY .
CHAPTER V. CONCLUSION
FIGURES .

APPENDIX

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY .

iii

15
27
39
51
58
79
81

FIGURE

10.

ll.

12.

13.

14.

LIST OF FIGURES

Bologna head .

Athena Parthenos, the Varvakeion statuette
Athens, National Museum

Statue of Athena with cast of Bologna head,
Dresden . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Profile of the Bologna head

Athena offering a helmet to a bearded man.
Part of a votive relief. Epidauros Museum,
Athens .

Acropolis 1337, Ca. 430/420. One of a series
of sculptural types of Athena . . . . .

Athena from Attic red figure kylix museo-
civico, Bologna .

Athena on gem (Cades, i, H, 17)
Athena Farnese (Naples)

Reconstruction of Dresden Athena with Palagi
head .

Athena holding an owl Ca. 450. New York,
Metropolitan Museum . . . . . .

Athena with Herakles. Inner surface of Kylix
by Durio. 480/470 .

Herakles and Atlas from a metope of the temple
of Zeus at Olympia, Olympia Museum .

Herakles and the Apples of the Hesperides from
a metope of the temple of Zeus at Olympia

59

6O

61

61

62
62
63

64

65

66

67

68

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued . . .)

 

FIGURE
15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

25.

26.

27.

Kylix 480/470 B.C., Museo Gregoriano,
Etrusco, Vatican City . . . . . .

Herakles and Kerberos 520/510 from an Amphora.
Andokides- Malers, Paris . . . .

Red-figured hydra, Leningrad Painter. Torno
Collection in Milan.

Neck of Amphora. Herakles fights with lion.
Athena, men, centaurs also present . .

Gorgon Painter. Hermes and Athena, Medusa and
one of her Gorgon sisters. 600/590 .

Athena and Hephaistos creating Pandora.
Athenian cup Ca. 460 B.C. .

Athena receiving Erichthoniae. Bowl of
Kodros-Malers .

Hermonax, Stamnos. The Birth of Erichthonius in
the presence of Athena, Hephaistos and Erotes.
Ca. 460 B.C., Munich .

Judgment of Paris. Fifth Century Hydria
British Museum 524 . . . . . .. . . . .

Athena and Herakles. Kylix by Duris.
480/470, Munich . . . . . . . . .

Athenian vase Ca. 460 B.C. Pandora attended
by Zeus, Poseidon, Athena and Ares .

Seated Athena, terra cotta, from the
Acropolis, drawing .

Seated Athena with Hephaistos on Parthenon
frieze . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page

69
69
70
71
71
72

73

74
75
75
76
77

78

INTRODUCTION

From time to time in the history of mankind there
comes a brief respite from war, plague and tyranny, when
philosophers and artists gather and civilization flourishes.
Such a time occurred in Greece in the Fifth century before
Christ, a time of such a flowering of human achievement
that to this day its fame eclipses that of all other such
events. The first city of that civilization was Athens,
whose citizens together with an inspired leader and artists
of formidable talent fashioned a crown for that city on
its highest rocky point, and that crown was called the
Acropolis.

To do honor to their patroness and protectress,
Athena, these people adorned this hill with temples and
statues of marble, bronze, gold and ivory. In this place
the ancient gods were honored with festivals, games,
contests, processions-~two hundred fifty of them each year.
Athens became a place without parallel in history. Long
after its poets and philosophers had died and its temples
had crumbled, pilgrims still came, and continue to come,
from all corners of the earth to stand among the ruins

and summon up the images of its glorious past.

2

Amid the wreckage one can walk the path of count-
less other travelers through the great gateway, the Propylaea,
and see, still standing, though gravely wounded, the remains
of the Parthenon and Erechtheuml 0f the plethora of
statues that once stood there, only some broken pedestals
remain, and it is necessary to turn to early writers to
find descriptions of what was once here.

We know that, besides the statue of Athena, count-
less other images of divinities once stood on the Acropolis.
Famous was the colossal cult statue of Athena made of ivory
and gold, called the Parthenos, and another of bronze, the
Athena Promachos. The loss of both is much lamented, as
they were highly praised in their day. Still another
statue of this goddess, an image known as the Lemnian
Athena received even more praise than those two. Both
Lucian and Pausanias said that this Athena was the moat
beautiful of all.1 According to Pliny, "Pheidias made an
Athena of bronze of such outstanding beauty that she was
called the Beautiful."2 It is believed that he was referring
to the Lemnian Athena (so called for the Athenian settlers
on the island of Lemnos who supplied money for her con-
struction). This statue was believed to have been made of
bronze and to have stood somewhere between the temple of

3 Unlike many statues of Athena,

Athena and the Propylaea.
this one, it is thought, was without a helmet, presenting
her as a pure and beautiful young goddess.4 Surely this

much praised masterpiece is the one work of Pheidias that

3
we would most like to reconstruct. To do that, to reconsider
its iconography, and to suggest an alternative to the usual

concept of the statue's stance is the purpose of this paper.

NOTES

1Lucian, Imagines, 4-6 (a dialogue dealing with the
ideal characteristics to be embodied in Panthea).
Lykinos: 0f the works of Pheidias which one do you praise
most highly? Polystratos: Which if not the Lemnia, on
which he thought it fit to inscribe his name. . . The Lemnia
and Pheidias shall furnish the outline of her (Panthea's)
whole face, the softness of the sides of her face, and the
well proportioned nose.

Pausanias I, 28, 2:. . . the most worth seeing of
the works of Pheidias, the image of Athena which is called
"The Lemnian," after those who dedicated it.

2Pliny, N.H. 34, 54.

3Adolf Furtwangler, Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture
(Chicago: Agronaut Publishers, 1964), pp. B—IO.
Furtwflngler bases his positioning of the Lemnia Athena on
Pausanias' descriptions.

4Hemerius, Orat. 21.4: Pheidias did not always
portray Athena as armed, "but he adorned the maiden by
shedding on her cheek a rosy tinge by which, instead of a
helmet, he meant to veil the beauty of the goddess."

 

CHAPTER I

PERICLES AND PHEIDIAS

The epoch which saw the creation of the beautiful
Lemnian Athena was a most propitious period in history.
It was fortunate that the long and devastating war with
Persia was over, and the enemy had been vanquished.
Athens was enjoying a period of confidence and burgeoning
prosperity. It was fortunate that the leader of Athens,
Pericles,was a man of sufficient wisdom, power, and
ambition to make Athens the greatest city in Greece. And
it was especially fortunate that in Athens at this time
there dwelt artists of great intellectual and artistic
gifts such as Iktinos and Kallikrates, but the foremost
among them was Pheidias. Pericles and Pheidias are the
two names that dominate the events of these years between
the Persian and the Peloponnesian wars.

Pericles was the pivotal force in the development
of Athens into the great power she became in the fifth

century B.C. Without his leadership the great transforma-

tion could not have occurred. His influence began as early

as 460 B.C. and continued until his death in 429. His
single aim ‘was the glorification of Athens as a political

power and as a cultural center, and he devoted all his

6
energies to this end. The Acropolis had been leveled
during the Persian invasion, and it was Pericles's inten-
tion to rebuild it more brilliantly than before. The
completed restoration was to be both a monument to Greece's
victory over the Persians and a visible expression of
Athens' position as first power in Greece. The Acropolis
was rebuilt and became the most famous and beautiful cult
shrine in Greece, but Pericles's ideas of glorification
went further than rebuilding the Acropolis, to include
both the polis and the citizens of Athens as well. Under
his leadership the city was transformed politically and
spiritually.

Pericles was born into an aristocratic family, a
serious intellectual person, interested in science,
philosophy and the arts. But he was also a soldier and
man of affairs. He had a gift for leadership and a gift
for persuasion. He was able to capture the imagination of
his audience and without flattery, but with eloquence and
clarity, move them to his purposes. Thucydides, who must
have heard and seen him when he was a young man, records
his impression of Pericles in his history:

During the whole period of peace time when
Pericles was at the head of affairs, the state
was wisely led and firmly handled, and it was
under him that Athens was at her greatest.
Pericles, because of his position, his intelli-
gence, and his known integrity, could respect
the liberty of the people and at the same time
hold them in check. It was he who led them,
rather than they who led him, and, since he
never sought power from any wrong motive, he

was under no necessity of flattering them:
in fact he was so highly respected that he

7

was able to speak angrily to them and to

contradict them. Certainly when he saw that

they were going too far in a mood of over-

confidence, he would bring them back to a

sense of their dangers; and when they were

discouraged for no good reason, he would

restore their confidence. So in what was

nominally a democracy, power was really in

the hands of the first citizen.l

Thucydides has also preserved for posterity
Pericles's famous funeral oration given in honor of the
Athenian soldiers killed in the early campaigns of the
Peloponnesian War.2 In that speech he sets forth his
aspirations for Athens. He sees a society where justice
applies equally to all, and where social restrictions do
not keep a man from becoming as great in public life as
his talents permit. The community would be governed by
law, but law that each citizen has had a part in forming.
Power and discipline would be balanced by freedom of
intellectual life and a buoyant spirit. These were lofty
and optimistic goals, and for a time Athens was able to
realize them.
Pericles's office in the government was modest.

He held the position of strategos, one of the ten generals
of the Athenian military forces. But no other Creek in
this age had as much power and influence as Pericles.
Perhaps, because democracy was so new, the people were un-
used to assuming power themselves. Or perhaps it was
because Pericles had gained their complete confidence and
trust. He enjoyed and sought power but used it to further

his goals for Athens. He was committed to nationalistic

imperialism in order to make Athens stronger. He

8

appropriated money from the Delian League,3 but used it
to fulfill his vision of Athens as a cultural center.
Bowra sees Pericles's greatest contribution in the trans-
formation of Athens into a democracy and the resulting
liberation of her citizens:

He believed that the Athenian people, freed

from old hindrances and charged with new

responsibilities, was unique and unequally

valuable in the world. . . Because he believed

in Athens, he believed in everything that she

had and was, and above all in the worth of her

private citizens, no matter of what class or

origin. His extraordinary achievement was to

see that if Athens was to be a great city, it

was because all her citizens played their

part for her and must be allowed to do so to

the full scope of their abilities.4

The contribution of Pericles was a more splendid,

powerful Athens and a people inspired with a new spirit.
With democracy came a new pride in citizenship. Personal
honor was extended to encompass honor of city. Every man
saw himself as a champion. Personal prowess in battle
was much esteemed. It was a time of intellectual ferment,
change and achievement. The new spirit attracted intellec-
tual individuals with new bold ideas and artists of
surpassing skill. It was an age of enormous energy dis-
played in all aspects of life. "Democracy was the inspiring
force of Athens in the Fifth century and without it she
would never have done so much as she did. Even her
sculptors and architects would not have shown the full
range of their powers, since the great buildings on the

Acropolis would never have been begun."5

9

The greatest of the Athenian sculptors was Pheidias,
and he too shared the Periclean vision of a renewed Athens.
He seems to have been an artist of heroic talent who left
his mark on his own age and on the years that followed.
Yet there are obstacles that prevent us from seeing him
clearly. Unlike most creative genuises, he did not leave
us a complete body of work so that we could see with our
own eyes and experience with our own sensibilities his
greatness. The words of Pericles are in part preserved
through the recordings of Thucydides. With Pheidias we
only catch a glimpse of him through works that he planned
and directed but did not execute himself. We read of his
excellence in written accounts. We guess of his master-
pieces only through poor copies. We can discern his
influence on artists who followed him. But there is no
object of which we can say with certainty, "Pheidias did
this."

Pheidias was born about 500 and died about 430 B.C.
During his infancy the war between the Greeks and Persians
was accelerating. The victory of Marathon in 490 B.C.,
when he was a young boy, must have inspired his imagination
and thrilled his heart with images of heroism and valor.
He was about twenty years old when the Persians were
finally defeated. It was an exhilarating time for a gifted
young person to be alive.

Once peace had returned to the city, and homes
and commerce had been restored, there remained the great

task of rebuilding the Acropolis. Pericles, as we have

10
seen, made that one of his chief goals and chose his friend
Pheidias to be chief sculptor and coordinator of the immense
project of restoring the temples. Pheidias seems also to
have shared the Periclean vision and was able to transform
into marble and bronze the concept of the dignity of man
and the transcendence of the gods. It was Pheidias'
genius that he was able to deepen and enrich the average
Athenian's View of his country and its destiny.

Pheidias profited from dwelling in an age of great
artistic activity, and he also profited from the artistic
development that had immediately preceded his generation.
During the century before his birth, artists had made great
progress in technical virtuosity. Pheidias had the
opportunity to profit from what had been learned by his pre-
decessors and to advance forward from that place. Although
Pheidias had complete mastery over the technical side of
his art, he never made a display of his dexterity, but used
it to enhance the spiritual side of his work. Charles
waldstein says, "The chief characteristics of works of
Pheidias are never the technical skill or the manipulative
power, but are those of a moral nature, namely grandeur and
breadth, coupled with simplicity."6

It seems strange that an artist who has left almost
nothing for us to see can be described in the above manner.
Statements like waldstein's are based on some tangible
evidence in the form of some extraordinary remains of the
metopes, frieze and pediments of the Parthenon. We know

that Pheidias planned and directed the carvings on this

11

building.7 But we do not know which parts, if any, he
actually did himself. From what remains of the temple, it
is obvious that an original genius was at work here. The
composition of the groups, the rendering of the drapery,
the natural grace of the figures that we find in the
remains, all are new elements in Athenian sculpture.

Besides these external decorations, we know that
Pheidias was responsible for the great cult statue of
Athena placed within the temple. We know a great deal
about this statue because there were descriptions written

of it.8

There were also smaller copies made of it, although
these are not as helpful as the written descriptions. From
the accounts it was a magnificent sight--made of gold and
ivory and of colossal size (about 40 feet high). It seems
to have made a lasting impression on those who saw it. The
statue represented the goddess standing, a figure of victory
in her right hand, her left hand resting on her shield. She
wore a simple Doric chiton with a girdle around her waist
having a snake clasp. On her breast was the head of

Medusa in ivory. Every part of the statue was covered with
decorations. In the middle of her helmet sat a Sphinx

with griffins on either side. Each side of her shield bore
a relief of an epic battle. On the outer surface of the
shield the battle of the Amazons was portrayed. On the
inner side was the battle of the gods and the giants. Even
her sandals were decorated, with the combat of the Lapiths

and Centaurs. From the descriptions she seems to have

radiated nobility and grandeur. She stood in the Parthenon

12

cella facing the east door. Before her was a shallow
reflecting pool. The statue is no longer in existence.
Only its pedestal remains.

Pheidias did a second chryselephantine statue,
and this time it was a representation of Zeus for his temple
in Olympia. This was even more celebrated than the Athena.
Zeus was seven times life size and was seated on a throne
decorated with gold, precious stones, ebony and ivory. The
figure of Zeus was also very elaborate. His sandals and
robe were of gold embellished with figures and flowers.
He was called the embodiment of peace, and it was said that
standing before this statue, you would forget all the mis-
fortunes of this life, so splendid and beautiful it was.
Quintilian tells us that "its beauty can be said to have
added something to traditional religion, so adequate to the

"9 The art of

divine nature is the majesty of his work.
Pheidias seems to have had a special spiritual quality, an
"Olympian" feeling as Pollitt describes it. He says, "it
is probably fair to say that no cult image after the time
of Pheidias was ever without his stamp. The Zeus and
Athena became prototypical of standards for the representa-
tion of divinity, standards which in the opinion of the
later Hellenistic critics, were the products of the
spiritual intuition of a great sage."10
Pheidias was primarily a maker of gods, and he
seems to have been able to capture the spirit of the times

he lived in. He created images that gave meaning and

comfort to the people. As Pericles inspired and impelled

13
them to greater achievement with his oratory, Pheidias was

able to inspire and enrich them with his art.

NOTES

1Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, translated by
Rex Warner (Baltimore, MD: Penguin Books, 1954) 2, 65, 5-10.

 

2Thucydides, 2, 34-46.

3J.J. Pollitt, Art and Experience in Classical
Greece (Cambridge: University Press, 19727. The Delian
Eeague was originally a confederacy of Greek cities in the
islands during the Persian Wars. In 478/477 B.C. the
Athenians took leadership. Members of the confederacy were
obliged to furnish men, ships or money to the common
treasury. Eventually Athens's allies became her subjects,
and the money they paid to Athens was used by Pericles to
glorify Athens.

4C.M. Bowra, Periclean Athens (New York: The Dial
Press, 1971) pp. 87-88.

 

 

5Bowra, p. 283.

6Charles waldstein, Essays on the Art of Pheidias
(Cambridge: University Press,71885ffp. 66.

 

7Pollitt, note 5, p. 71.

8Quintilian, Inst. orat. XII, 10. 9. Pausanias, l,
24, 5-7.

9Gisela M.A. Richter, The Sculpture and Sculptors
of the Greeks (New Haven and London: TYaIE University Press,
p. .

10

 

J.J. Pollitt, p. 99-100.

14

CHAPTER II

THE LEMNIAN CLERUCHS

The Lemnian Athena was so called because it was a
gift of the Athenian settlers, or cleruchs as they were
called, residing on the Island of Lemnos. They presented
it as a votive offering to the goddess when they left
Athens for their new home on a small island in the northern
reaches of the Aegean Sea. It is the purpose of this
chapter to determine who these donors were and what was
their incentive for giving so grand a gift at their leave
taking.

Had these men been the leading citizens of the
city, wealthy merchants or prominent politicians venturing
forth on an important or dangerous mission of state, we
could understand their desire to please the goddess and
impress the citizens of Athens by this magnificent gift.
The cleruchs, however, were neither wealthy nor important.
They were persons selected to go out to establish colonies
around the Aegean, and they were the poor and unemployed
of the city. Their gift entailed greater sacrifice and
more faith in the efficacy of votive offerings to appease

the gods than would a gift from a more affluent citizen.

15

16

The flow of citizens emigrating out in search of
new land in the Aegean Islands had been continuing for
several centuries. The land of Greece was criss-
crossed with mountains and rocky barren areas that could
not be cultivated. Greece was never a rich country, and
the fertile areas were limited. The topographical features
of the land led to the deveIOpment of many small, self
contained groups. The Greek city state emerged from the
isolation and confinement that the natural barriers produced.
Each small group was bound together by its common destiny.
Their smallness determined their character and an intense
patriotism grew up in each territory along with a strong
individualism.

In time no spot of fertile soil remained unculti-
vated, no empty spot uninhabited. The confined areas became
crowded. Most of the population was peasant and shepherd.
Land ran out. The mass of unemployed and poor grew. The
problem.became acute at different times in different places,
but the only solution in each case was to search out new
land. The sea which surrounded the Greek mainland was
liberally interspersed with islands. And so there was a
gradual growth of new settlements stretching farther and
farther from.the mainland. Trade and colonization grew.

The Aegean world became the geographical basis of Greek
life, and according to Victor Ehrenberg, "the individual
Greek state was in general the more alive and important

the more closely it was connected with the Aegean."1

17

The proliferation of colonies gave rise to various
types of settlements. Generally the colony formed a
separate city-state based on the model of the polis from
whence it came. Naturally the colonists took with them the
ethnic patterns, the religion, the dialect, the political
ideas of their origin. There seems to have been a great
variety of relationships between colony and mother city,
but usually there was a closer tie to the mother state
than existed between Greek states in general. Evidence is
sketchy and incomplete as much of the documentation consists
of odd statements referring to one instance, and rarely can
a relationship between a colony and its mother city be
followed over the years. The new colony was usually founded
to be a self sufficient polis with enough land to feed its
population. That it also might become a trading post or an
extension of the original polis was not the primary
motivation for its creation.

When the new colony was founded, certain rituals
were performed to indicate that the foundation of a city
was a sacred act. First the oracle at Delphi was consulted
regarding the site of the new settlement. In addition it
was the custom for the new settlers to take with them the
fire from the sacred hearth (Hestia) of the mother city to

kindle the fires in the new city. "The intention,‘ says

A.J. Graham, "was to make the new community continuous with

2

the old in the most significant way possible." Thucydides

gives us the best description of the way the settler

proceeded when problems arose in their colony and the

l8
importance of religious Observances.

When the people in Epidamnus realized there was
no help forthcoming from Corcyra, they were at a
loss how to deal with the situation. They
therefore sent to Delphi to inquire from the gods
whether they should hand over their city to the
Corinthians, who had founded it, and so get help
from that quarter. The reply from Delphi was
that they should hand over the city and accept
the leadership of Corinth. So in obedience to
the oracle, they sent to Corinth, and made over
the city to the Corinthians. . . The Corinthians
agreed to come to their assistance. They felt
they had a good right to do so, since they
regarded the colony as belonging just as much to
them as to Corcyra; and at the same time they
hated the Corcyraeans because they failed to show
to Corinth the respect due from a colony to the
mother city. Unlike their other colonies, the
Corcyraeans did not give to Corinthians the usual
rights and honors at public festivals and allow
them the correct facilities for making sacrifices.

Early colonies were often supplied with an oikist

as their leader.4

His job was to carry out the general
conditions for the colony such as dividing the land equally
and performing the correct ritual acts. It is known that
he was honored as a hero after his death, which suggests
another religious aspect of founding a new colony.
Gradually the role of the oikist appears to change
as does the function of the colony also. In the fifth
century at both Corinth and Athens, tyrants used colonies
for imperial ends as well as population control. Colonies
began to be placed in strategic locations for garrisons or
other war uses, and treaties were made whereby neighboring
cities would come to the aid of a colony if they were
attacked. Finally, the oikist no longer played any part

at all in the new colony which became increasingly democratic

although dependent on the mother city.

19

In the eighth and seventh century when there was
a great colonizing movement in Greece, Athens was still
able to absorb her growing population. By the fifth
century, however, Athens joined the colonizing movement.
This time period is better documented, and we know, that
many emigrants from Athens were cleruchs. These settlers
were Athenian citizens living abroad. Their political
institutions were the same as those in Athens, and they were
an extension, insofar as possible, of life back home. An
important aspect of the cleruch was the fact that he
retained his Athenian citizenship.5

There was a strong sense of patriotism in these
Greeks and pride and loyalty in their place of birth. Why
did they leave home? The inducements to emigrate were
tempting. Land was scarce or nonexistent in Attica. "By
migrating, the Greek colonist in general not only secured
land of which he may previously have possessed none, or too
little for a livelihood at home; he also enjoyed citizen
rights in a new state, and often more rights than belonged
to him in the metropolis, if the franchise were dependent
on property."6

Lemnos, the colony of our present interest, had
been colonized by Athenians before the Persian War at which
time the non-Greek living there were expelled. It is
probable that their connection with Athens had been des-
troyed by the Persian conquest. With the formation of the

Delian League, they became members in their own right and

began eventually paying tribute. According to the Athenian

20
7

Tribute List of 452/1 the Lemnians paid nine talents. This
payment of tribute suggests that this settlement was consid-
ered an ally and not a cleruchy. Usually allies paid
tribute and a cleruchy did not. In the tribute list of
444/3 the island's tribute is recorded as four and a half
talents--a reduction of fifty percent.8 It is believed
that the reduction was due to the arrival of a large contin-
gent of cleruchs sent out by Pericles during this period.
From.our deductions based on the A.T.L., this
Lemnian cleruchy was probably established around 449. We
do not know the size of the group, but the number of settlers
in a single place was not more than five hundred.9 We can
image that these men left their homeland and took off on
this great adventure with mixed feeling of anticipation and
apprehension. They were leaving a life of poverty and
limited expectations. Life for the average Athenian was
precarious at best. If he had land, as these men did not,
he farmed with difficulty, helpless against crop disease,
drought and disaster. His own existence was precarious,
threatened by hardship and disease. Added to this was the
man-made disaster of war which reoccurred with disheartening
regularity in the Greek world. These men were not escaping
the hardships of their lives, but were adding new uncertain-
ties. They could not be sure of their situation when they
arrived in Lemnos. There was often great resentment towards
10

the new landowner from those who had been displaced.

Athenians settled overseas felt no inclination to deny

21
their birthright, and it is understandable that they might
wish for all the help they could get from divine assistance
at the start of this great new venture.

In commissioning a statue of Athena to be placed
on the Acropolis, the settlers were following an ancient
tradition of giving a handsome gift, a votive statue, to
please the goddess Athena, their special patroness. It
attests to their zeal to make this a splendid gift that
they chose for its creator the foremost sculptor of the city.
The services of Pheidias must have required considerable
remuneration. Since these people came from poverty, we
wonder how Pheidias secured his wages. The arrangements
are not known. Perhaps he relied on a promise of future
recompense once they were settled in their promised land.
The fact that these poor men commissioned such a rich gift
indicates their faith in the efficacy of gifts to the deity.

John Gould in his essay "On Making Sense of Greek

"11 helps to clarify the ancient Creek's view of

Religion
his religion. Gould explains two important aspects of
Greek religious thought. 0n the one hand they believed
that divine powers could be understood in much the same way
we understand other human beings. On the other hand, there
was an "other" and inexplicable side of the gods that was
mysterious and incomprehensible to men.

The aspect of the goddess that our Lemnos colonists

were appealing to was that which might be called her

rational and human side. In giving gifts they hoped to

22

establish a bond with Athena that would secure her favor
and help in future trials and dangers. According to
Gould, a central assumption in ancient Greek culture, is
that an act of kindness or a favor to one requires a
corresponding favor back. "The assumption is that any
action will be met by a matching and balancing reaction
(good for good, evil for evil, and, therefore, the implica-
tion that divinity will respond in kind and reciprocate
human action, for good or ill, is one that locates the
divine power squarely within the conceptual framework by
means of which ancient Greeks understood the ordering of
their world."12

writers on Greek religion seem to agree that for
the Creek the emphasis was on action more than commitment
in their dealing with the gods. While the Christian
emphasizes faith as the key to a meaningful relationship
with God, the Greek emphasis was more on merely acknowledg-
ing the gods, praying to them, sacrificing and building
temples to them. Although the Greek religion lacks some
of the aspects that the modern mind sees as basic,
religion permeated their everyday world much more completely
than it permeates our twentieth century world. "The Greek
household had its shrine to Hestia or to Zeus Ktesios,
either of whom could give special protection to hearth and
home, and the head of the house normally took his duties
at the shrine seriously. At a meal the libation or drink-

offering to the gods was an automatic custom, and it would

23

have been very odd to eat and drink without offering the
gods a small share of what was being consumed. The great
landmarks of human life--birth, coming of age, marriage and
death-~were all marked by rituals with religious significance.
Above the level of the individual family, each deme, phratry,
and tribe had its own cult and each city-state its divine
guardian. The maintenance of these city-cults was essential
for success and no great enterprise was undertaken without

"13 Thus we see the whole way

proper prayers and offerings.
of life for the Greek was permeated by an enormous variety
of religious rituals and beliefs, and while they recognized
that the gods could be capricious and envious, vindictive
and unpredictable, the effort to please and appease them
was thought to be worth the effort. The Lemnos emigrants
concurred with the popular wisdom that no great enterprise
should be undertaken without first soliciting the favor and
goodwill of the goddess.

Athena, their cult goddess and protectress, was a
goddess of war who fought for righteous causes. She was
both a wise and skillful warrior. She did not fight for
the love of warfare, but rather to restore peace. In her
temple on the Parthenon, she stood with helmet, lance and
shield, a majestic symbol of a powerful force in the trans-
cendent world. But Athena had another side, equally
significant. She was the restorer of order. She upheld
the law and promoted the arts, was patroness of agriculture,

14

of healing and music.. It was this goddess, I believe,

that the Lemnian cleruchs appealed to in their final gesture

24
at departing from their homeland. If they were to find
success in their island home, they must have peace, not
war. It was from the constant warfare in their land that
many of the peasants were displaced from their original
land. Now they hoped to establish safe homes and harvest
successful crops in their new territory. For this reason
the image of the goddess that they commissioned from
Pheidias was a goddess without helmet, lance or shield of
war, but rather the bareheaded, serene and beautiful
goddess of peace, wisdom and prosperity. It was the yearn-
ing of these displaced wanderers, searching for their
utopia, that prompted Pheidias to create the beautiful

image known as the Lemnian Athena.

NOTES

1Victor Ehrenberg, "Early Athenian Colonies,"
Aspects of the Ancient World, Essays and Reviews (New
York: WiIliam_SaIIOCh, 1946) pp. 116-142.

2A.J. Graham, Colony and MOther Citygin Ancient
Greece (New York: Barnes and Nbble, Inc., 19647 p. 25.

 

 

3Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War, translated by
Rex Warner, (Baltimore,—Md: Penguin Books, 1954) I, 2, 24.

 

4A.J. Graham, Colony and Mother City in Ancient
Greece (New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc.,I1964) pp. 29-39.

 

5Graham, pp. 166-196.

6P.A. Brunt, "Athenian Settlements Abroad in the
Fifth Century B.C." Ancient Society and InstitUtions,
Studies presented to Victor Ehrenberg on his 75th
birthday (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1966) p. 74.

 

7ATL II, list 3, I. 2.

8ATL II, 113: 11, v. 30, 31.

9C.M. Bowra, Periclean Athens (New York: The
Dial Press, 1971) p. 65.

10

 

Bowra, p. 64.

11John Gould, "On Making Sense of Greek Religion,"
Greek Religion and Society, edited by P.E. Easterling and
J.V. Muir (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985)
p. 15.

 

lzIbid., p. 7.

13J.V. Nuir, "Religion and the New Education,"
Greek Religion and SOCiety (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1985) pp. 194-5.

 

25

26

14Walter F. Otto, The Homeric Gods, translated by
Moses Hadas (New York: PantheonFBooks, 1954) pp. 56-57.

 

CHAPTER III

THE FURTWANGLER CONTROVERSY

"The most worth seeing of the works of Pheidias,
the image of Athena which is called "the Lemnian", after
those who dedicated it," so wrote Pausanius in the second
century A.D. after a visit to Athens.1 These words and
others attesting to the loveliness of this statue stir
the imagination and fire the desire to know more about
this work. The statue was made of bronze and stood on a
high point on the Acropolis not far from the temple of
Athena. Unlike many statues of Athena, this one, it is
thought, was without a helmet, presenting her as a pure and
beautiful young goddess.

For centuries the belief was that this work, along
with the other works of Pheidias, was irretrievably lost.

Then in 1893 Adolf Furtwangler in his book, Meisterwerke

 

der Griechischen Plastik posited the theory that we do

 

have a fine copy of the Lemnian Athena in Dresden, and that
a marble head in Bologna fits it (Fig. l), and together
they are a good copy of the original statue (Fig. 3).

Since that time art historians have been divided on their
acceptance of his conclusions, but many seem to find them

plausible.
27

28

It was in 1891 that Furtwfingler first discovered
two statues in the Dresden Museum which, after considerable
study he became convinced, were faithful copies of a bronze
work by Pheidias. One had an erroneous head attached to
it, while the other had a poorly restored head. After
much work he realized that one of the heads, the poorly
restored one, was actually the correct one, and that there
was an even finer copy of that same head in the Bologna
Museum. He observed several features of the two parts that
convinced him of the correctness of his judgment. Comparing
the Bologna head and the poorly restored one in Dresden, he
found the necks and shape of the chests to be exactly alike.
Secondly, the Bologna head and torsos in Dresden were of the
same marble. Finally, when the head was placed upon the
torso, the two fitted together perfectly in the core of the
neck, although not in front where the edges were broken off.

The arms are missing in these two copies, but their
position in the original can be construed from what is left
of the shoulder. The upper left arm must have been raised
horizontally, probably grasping a lance whose end rested on
the ground. The right arm probably extended down and

forward.3

It is Furtwangler's idea that this hand held
Athena's helmet, and he bases his supposition on an engraved
gem of that period which shows a bareheaded Athena with
short hair, encircled by a fillet, wearing a transverse

aegis as on the life-size Dreseen statues. The gem only

shows the head and shoulders of Athena and no arms, but on

29
the left edge of the gem a helmet appears suspended (Fig. 8).
Furtwangler believed that the gem cutter was using the
Lemnian Athena as his model and was indicating that the
goddess held a helmet in her right hand.

He is confident of his identification of this
statue as a copy of the Lemnian Athena for several reasons.
First, he compared the Lemnia and the Parthenos using the
Varvakion statuette as one of the best copies we have of
the Parthenos (Figs. 2 & 3). The Lemnia, as the slightly
older work, follows somewhat the fashion of the archaic
period. The snake-border of the aegis is scalloped, end-
ing in the upper part of the snake. In the Parthenos the
motif is further developed, and whole snakes form the
scallops.

He believed the position of the leg showed another
progression from an earlier to a later date. In the Lemnia,
although the weight is on the right leg, the left leg is
still in the old severe position with the left foot flat
on the ground. In the Parthenos the free leg is much more
emphasized, and the drapery clings, showing the shape of
the leg. In the Lemnia the garment is heavier revealing
less of the body, a survival of an older manner. The
Parthenos shows a transition towards a lighter, clingier
kind of drapery.

The differences between the two statues,

Furtwangler decided, was due to a slight difference in date
and the different character of the two statues. In most

respects he found the two works corresponded closely.4

30

It is believed that Athena in the original statue
wore no helmet. This belief is based on a statement of
Himerius (OR.xxi.5) that Pheidias did not always portray
Athena as armed, "but he adorned the maiden by shedding
on her cheek a rosy tinge by which, instead of a helmet,
he meant to veil the beauty of the goddess." The Lemnia
was also noted for her great charm. When Furtwfingler
found this helmetless head of unusual beauty, he became
more convinced that it could be the Lemnian Athena. The
fact that the c0pies were made of marble reassured him
that the original had been an important work of classical
antiquity. The Lemnia was believed to be bronze and life
size, and that is the scale of these copies. To judge by
the detailed treatment of hair and the position of the
arms, bronze is the most likely material of the original.

Furtwfingler presents his case convincingly and
with a personal conviction that is persuasive. Many art
historians accept his theory as probably the correct one.
Ernest Gardner of Yale wrote "Where the external evidence
is so scanty, the ultimate appeal must be to the evidence
of style. There can be no doubt that the Bologna head is
derived from a bronze original, and the Lemnian Athena was
probably of bronze."5 He went on to say that the head does
not resemble those we find in the Parthenon sculptures.
It shows a more personal and individual presentation of
the goddess, but "when we consider the marvelous advance
that Pheidias made beyond his predecessors in other respects,

we certainly cannot assert with any confidence that he may

31
not, in this statue, have also anticipated something of
what was best and most interesting in the rendering of
the gods by those who follow him."6

Gisela Richter is more cautious in her acceptance
of the idea that this is a copy of the original Lemnian
Athena. She says,

There are indeed few heads preserved to us from
antiquity of such pure and noble loveliness as
the head in Bologna (Roman copy though it is).

If only it were certain that by this beautiful
helmetless Athena, Himerius had meant the Lemnian,
or even that Pliny's 'bronze' Athena is the
Lemnian, the case would be strong indeed. But
neither of them actually says so. And so we
cannot regard the identification as absolutely
certain.

There are also those who take a position definitely
opposed to Furtwangler's. To begin with, they cite the
possibility that the original was not bronze after all, but
marble or acrolithic. Furtwangler was convinced it was
bronze as that was the preferred material in the Fifth
century B.C. The detailed treatment of the hair on the
marble head again suggests that the original was bronze.
Those who think nevertheless that it was of some other
material base their opinion on the quotation from.Himerius,
who indicates there was a rosy tinge on her cheek. Actually
he does not mention the Lemnia by name, but it is assumed
by most that he meant this particular work. On the basis

of this quotation some historians, such as Th. Schreiber8

and W. Amelung9

, think it likely that the Lemnia was not
bronze, as there could be no rosy blush on a bronze face.

There is also a later reference in the text of Ailios

32
Aristeides which refers to the three Athenian Athenas as
the ivory, the bronze and the Lemnia. (Overbeck, SQ 639).
It would be possible to argue from this reference that the
Lemnia was indeed not bronze, or else that Aristeides puts
her in a separate category because she is different
stylistically from the traditional presentation of the
goddess.

The most recent denunciation of Furtwangler's
hypothesis was made by Kim J. Hartswick, who proposes a
sweeping reappraisal, taking exception to most of Furtwangler's
theory.10 Hartswick questions Furtwangler's use of the gem
or gems as evidence of the statue's stance, with helmet in
her right hand. In the gems Athena is armless with a
"hovering" helmet on her right side. Hartswick thinks the
gems were designed this way mainly to make a pleasing
composition in the oval shape of the gem, and, more import-
antly, believes the gems are of eighteenth century origin
rather than ancient.11

Hartswick then analyzes the Bologna (also called
the Palagi) head, which in 1976 was removed from the body
and is now displayed alone. He asserts unequivocally that
it does not fit the body as Furtwangler claimed. Neither,
he thinks, does the Dresden head the one that had been much
damaged but was then restored fit properly onto the body.

A plaster band hides the neck break now, and therefore
analysis is difficult. He notes much damage along the

break line of the neck, and although he admits it may have

33

happened when the head was broken from the body, he suggests
another possibility: that the neck could have been damaged
when a head that did not fit was forcibly united with the
neck. He does not believe this head belongs to this statue.12

He further disagrees with Furtwangler on the
stylistic comparisons to other fifth-century B.C. works.
The Lemnia was made around 450 B.C., and Hartswick finds
no model in that period for the transverse aegis which
appears on the two Dresden statues. He thinks this feature
could have been added by a Roman copyist. If this were
true, the Dresden Athena could not be a faithful copy of
the Athena Lemnia. Furthermore, he asserts the Palagi head
in the Bologna Museum does not have typical fifth-century
features. According to Hartswick the general shape of a
fifth-century head is massive with a wide forehead and
fleshy cheeks. The lower part of the face is typically
"U-shaped", and the eyes are large with prominent upper and
lower lids; the nose, long and straight. The profile
reveals an almost straight line from.forehead to tip of
nose and the mouth is small with fleshy lips. He points
out that the Palagi head differs from these typical fifth-
century features (Figs. 1 and 4). Her chin is rounded
and thin giving a "V" shape to the face. Her cheeks are
smooth and gently curved. The eyes are medium—sized and
only the upper lid is sharply carved. Hartswick concludes
that the Palagi head is sufficiently different from the

fifth-century type to be disqualified as a Pheidian work,

34
and that the Bologna head is in all probability a classiciz-
ing Roman creation.
Mr. Hartswick has made a bold attempt to destroy
Furtwangler's hypothesis, point by point, but I believe
that in his zeal he has overreached himself. Olga Palagia
verifies that at least one of the gems Furtwangler cited is

genuine.13

In further support of his opinion, she points
to two original sculptures of the classical period, a late
fifth-century statuette from the Athenian Acropolis and a
fourth-century relief from Epidauros of Athena holding her
helmet (Figs. 5 & 6).

The Athena on the Epidauros relief and the small
scale copy of figure 6 seem to derive from a similar type
of Athena in Attic peplos common in the last decades of the
Fifth century. Ms. Palagia notes the high quality of the
workmanship and the fine detail which suggest to her a
fifth-century original. She believes the relief and the
statuette are minor reflections of a large-scale prototype
that may have stood on the Acropolis. She believes the
body type could have felt the influence of Furtwflngler's
Lemnia, as such retrospective tendencies are not uncommon
in the later part of the fifth century.14

From this brief summary of some of the diverse
opinions on the subject, it becomes apparent that a number
of conclusions are possible in view of the scarcity of real

facts available. There seems to be two primary questions

involved in making a judgment as to the authenticity of

35
Furtwfingler's Athena. The first concerns the likelihood
of the Bologna head fitting perfectly on the Dresden body.
Furtwflngler claims that when the head was placed upon the
torso, "the two fitted together fracture for fracture, of
course, not in the front where the edges are broken off,

15

but in the core of the neck." Hartswick says, on the

other hand, "The Palagi head unequivocally does not fit

within the Dresden body."16

This leaves us with a dilemma
that can only be resolved by a personal inspection of the
two pieces.

The other major question is whether the style is
compatible with what could have been done by Pheidias in the
mid-fifth century or is it more likely a classicizing Roman
creation. This is a question which relies on personal
judgment and varies with each expert. Brunilde Ridgway's
opinion supports Hartswick in finding the tapering chin,
delicate cheeks and realistic hair incompatible with the
heavy face of Pheidias' Athena Parthenos or any Parthenonian
head. She concludes, "The refined oval of the Bologna head
must therefore be out of context within the Fifth century.
The piece is probably a Classicizing creation of surpassing
beauty."l}

Margaret Bieber doubts that this statue could be
Pheidian because she finds the mood it conveys more joyful
and less thoughtful, reticent, and noble than a typical

18 Some scholars find the head to be

19

Pheidian.work.

closer to a Polykleitan work. Opinions indeed vary

36
considerably. That the beautiful head does not fit exactly
the Fifth century mold has been a stumbling block for some
scholars. One of Hartswick's major objections was the
atypical shape of the face with its rounded chin, gently
curving planes of the cheeks, the nose set at an angle to
the forehead which he found at variance with the expected
Pheidian style. But the very features that Hartswick cannot
accept as Pheidian, seem to be the very ones that Lucian is
describing in his dialogue (Images #6). When it is
proposed that he fashion a perfect image of feminine beauty
by selecting features from famous statues, from the Lemnia
he takes "the outline of the whole face, and the tenderness
of the cheeks and the shapely nose."

The historians who support Furtwangler usually
concede that the head is different from the other
Parthenonian sculptures, but that with an artist of
Pheidias' genius it would have been possible for him to have

created something beyond the common style of his time.

NOTES

lPausanias I, 28, 2.

2Adolf Furtwangler, Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture
(Chicago: Argonaut Publishers, 196477pp. 5-7.

 

3Furtwangler, p. 6.
AFurtwlingler, pp. 10-12.

5Ernest A. Gardner, Six Greek Sculptors (New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1910) p. 112.

6

 

Gardner, p. 113.

7Gisela M.A. Richter, The Sculpture and Sculptors of
the Greeks (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929) p. 228.

 

 

8Th. Schreiber, "Review of Sludniezka's
Vermutungen Zur Griechischen Kunslgeschichte (Vienna 1884)"
BPW (1885) 1559.

 

9W. Amelung, "Athena des Phedias," th 11 (1908) 208.

10Kim J. Hartswick, "The Athena Lemnia Reconsidered,"
American Journal of Archaeology 3 (July, 1983): pp. 335-346.

 

11Hartswick, p. 336.

12Hartswick, p. 339.

13Olga Palagia, "In Defense of Furtwflngler's Athena
Lemnia," American Journal of ArchaeolOgy 1 (January, 1987)
pp. 81-84.

14

 

Palagia, p. 84.

15Furtwfingler, p. 5.

37

38

16Hartswick, p. 339.

l7Brunilde S. Ridgway, Fifth Century Styles in
Greek Sculpture (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University
Press) p. 171.

 

 

18Margarete Bieber, Die Antiken Skulpturen und

Bronzen des KBni 1. Museum Fridericianum in Cassel
(Marburg, 1915).

19P. Jamot, "L'Athena Lemnia de Phidias: Response
a M. Furtwaengler," RA 27 (1895) 27; and G. Becatli,
Probleme Fidiaci (Milan, 1951) 173.

 

 

CHAPTER IV

ICONOGRAPHY

Furtwangler wished to reconstruct the Athena Lemnia
to as close an approximation of the original as possible.
The statue in Dresden had no arms and, using the position
suggested by what remained of the shoulder, he worked out a
logical solution. Basing his conclusions on a number of
extant vase paintings showing Athena holding her helmet in
her right hand, he believed this could be true of the Lemnia
(Fig. 7). He adduces further evidence in a first-century
B.C. gem reproducing the bust of the Athena, showing no
arms but a helmet hovering on the edge as if held in the
goddess's right hand (Fig. 8). Furtwangler was convinced
that the gem carver was basing his representation on the
Lemnia of Pheidias. No literary source had ever given any
indication of the position of the helmet or even if there
was a helmet included. In his way of speaking of the statue,
Himerius nevertheless made it possible for one to imagine
it as bareheaded. Furtwfingler's idea that she was holding
her helmet rests strongly on the evidence of the gem, but
this is tenuous evidence. A gem carver working in the
confines of the small oval, might wish (since the aegis

must be very tiny in this small space) to emphasize the

39

 

Le

40

identity of his image by including one of her symbols. It
does not necessarily follow that he was copying the Lemnia
or any other existing model. Based on the evidence we have,
I suggest that it is more likely that this Athena probably
did not hold a helmet in her hand, but instead stood with
hand extended in a benign gesture of greeting to match the
tender expression of her face. The gesture of the Athena
Farnese (Fig. 9) would be an appropriate pose for the
Athena Lemnia also, and since the former is reputed to have
been done by a pupil of Pheidias, it is possible the Lemnia
was an influence on him. In support of this suggestion I
would cite as evidence the situation of the Lemnian cleruchs
who commissioned the work, the nature of the goddess herself,
and the intuitive powers of the artist Pheidias.

First, let us consider Furtwangler's reconstruction
(see Fig. 10), with the head tipped slightly forward and to
the right. If we follow the line of sight, Athena seems to
be contemplating her helmet. The expression on her face is
one of thoughtful tenderness. WOuld she expend this sort of
concern on her helmet? The incongruity of this attitude
seems to have struck others who have made a study of this
work, and some scholars have questioned its plausibility.

Erika Simon in her book Die GBtter der Griechen has
another suggested solution to this problem. She, too,
finds it strange that the goddess should just be standing
there looking at her helmet. Simon thinks the colonists of

Lemnos might have chosen a different attribute for the

41
goddess of their votive offering--perhaps, "the most Attic
of them all, namely a little owl."l There are bronze
statuettes and vase paintings showing Athena with her
sacred bird (see Figs. 11 & 12). Simon postulates that
with the aegis turned to one side and the bird in her hand,
this might have been thought of as a good omen by the
cleruchs.

Margarete Bieber is another scholar who finds the
helmet in hand an awkward solution. She has studied in
great detail a third copy of the Dresden torso which is in
the Museum Fridericianum in Cassel. The statue at Cassel
has been reconstructed with a bowl in her right hand. This
appeared preferable to the helmet in Miss Bieber's opinion,
although she does not exclude the possibility of the helmet.2
She merely judges it the less likely possibility. A bowl
for libations is better symbolically than a helmet, but I
believe there is another preferable solution.

Perhaps a more satisfying resolution of the puzzle
could be arrived at by considering what the cleruchs might
have wished for in their offering, and how Pheidias might
have responded to the challenge. The gift was for Athena,
a complex, many-sided deity. In Attic art she is portrayed
in a number of guises--sometimes arrayed threateningly in
battle garb and sometimes tranquilly with shawl and

3 In the Fifth century the warrior maiden type

spindle.
predominated, as her primary commitment was to defend the

polis, and Pheidias' first Athena for the Acropolis was

42
Athena Promachos--protectress and helper in battle,
instructor in the art of war.4 This bronze image was
placed on a high place on the Acropolis where it could be
seen from ships approaching Athens by sea.5 His second
Athena for the Acropolis would be different.

Seeking to learn more about this goddess, we find
there are many myths and many versions of every myth, each
giving another view of her. She too, has her dark side--
a vengeful and passionate side. It was Athena who gave
Medusa her hideous face, enraged with the latter's cavort-
ings with Poseidon in Athena's own sactuary. She struck
Tiresias blind when he accidently saw her bathing.
Cecrops's daughters went mad and killed themselves after
they disobeyed her command not to peek into the infant
Erichthonios' basket. Athena caused Telamonian Ajax to
go mad to save Odysseus from his wrath when, during the
Trojan War, the armor of Achilles was awarded to Odysseus
instead of him.6

In the twenty-eighth Homeric Hymn there is a descrip-
tion of Athena's birth.

From his awful head wise Zeus himself bore her
arrayed in warlike arms of flashing gold, and awe
seized all the gods as they gazes. But Athena
sprang quickly from the immortal head and stood
before Zeus who holds the aegis, shaking a sharp
spear: great Olympus began to reel horribly at
the might of the owl-eyed goddess, and earth
round about cried fearfully, and the sea was
moved and tossed with dark waves, while foam
burse forth suddenly.

From her ancient past, the owl and the serpent have

been associated with this goddess, as well as the life giving

43
olive tree. These symbols suggest the ambivalence inherent
in her character. We often see her accompanied by a snake
and a scaly aegis on her breast. Even Pheidias was to
portray her thus at a later time. The owl, too, although
sometimes the symbol of wisdom brings to mind as well dark
associations. It is a bird of prey, a night bird,
associated with death and darkness. Could the owl be a
lucky symbol, a good omen for the colonists? I do not think
this is the symbol they would have chosen to speed them on
their way into the unknown.

Rather, I think, their minds would turn to a more
positive aspect of the goddess. There are many stories of
Athena befriending the great Greek heroes in their many
trials and tribulations. .We see Athena carved on the temple
of Olympia, serene and unarmed accompanying and giving
support to Herakles (see Figs. 13 & 14). Many vase paint-
ings show how Athena stood by her friends in many a tight
situation (Figs. 15 & 16). She gave courage and confirmation
when most needed. Although she did not actively participate,
she instilled boldness and a will to victory. As pointed
out by walter Otto, in her care of Herakles, as the one who
always appeared to him when most needed, she represented.
"the nearness of the divine at the moment of severest
trial."7 Another of her proteges was Odysseus. She stood
by him all the long years of the Trojan War. She came to
him in many guises, encouraging and restraining him. She

wanted Odysseus to retain his integrity, his optimism, his

44

balance. Athena's love, not being possessive, also extended
to his wife Penelope. She not only endowed Penelope with
her skill in weaving, but also with understanding and
cleverness to cope with her trials. Athena was a formid-
able ally, and if she could be enticed to aid your cause,
success would surely be yours. These might well have been
thoughts of a band of emigres as they left their homeland.

With the help of their goddess the Athenians had
been victorious in the war against the mighty Persian army.
But now peace had come and it was important to the colonists
that peace endure, that their island be free from invasions,
that their harvest be plentiful, that their homes be safe.
For these blessings it was again to Athena that they must
turn, for although she was often portrayed as a warrior
goddess, she did not fight for the love of strife. Her
activities in war were to restore order, and thus she was
in fact a goddess of peace. She upheld law and order and
encouraged the arts. She was the inventor of many aids to
humankind such as the plough and the loom, and the potters
claimed her for their patroness. We can see her likeness
on a Fifth century pot (Fig. 17) bestowing honors on the
potters at work. Although Athena was a friend to exceptional
men, she also gave gifts to the multitudes who needed skill
to master mundane tasks. To this goddess in her benign
aspect the settlers of Lemnos must surely have directed
their votive gift.

Pheidias for his part, was well chosen for the task.

Now, at mid-Fifth century, he was a mature artist with at

45

least two great Athenas to his credit--the Athena Plateau8
and the Athena Promachos.9 Already he had shown his
talent for combining nobility of character with a feeling
for the divine. As a citizen of Athens, he had always
known of the goddess Athena. The life of his city
revolved around her festivals. Her stories were as familiar
to him as the faces of his friends. Pheidias, always an
intuitive artist, would easily have comprehended the kind
of image of Athena that the cleruchs were seeking. To the
heroic Athena, larger than life, symbol of a victorious
polis, he would return later with the great cult statue

of the Parthenon. NOw, liberated from the religious
restrictions imposed by a cult statue, Pheidias was free to
create a different kind of image.

It is said that he worked as a painter in his youth,
and he would have been well aware of the painters' tradi-
tions that preceded him. Archaic, sixth-century, black
figure portrayals of Athena, such as appear on the pots in
Figures 18 & 19, were probably known to him. In these
earlier images of Athena we find her without attributes.

At most she carries a spear. A somewhat later black figure
kylix depicts Athena and Hephaistos creating Pandora (Fig.
20). Here Athena can be identified by the suggestion of
curly snakes bordering her aegis, but there is no helmet on
her head or spear in her hand. Here she is engaged with
Hephaistos in creating the beautiful Pandora. Hephaistos,
the craftsman has fashioned her. It was Athena, legend

says, who breathed life into her. This is an image of

46
Athena as creator and life-giver that Pheidias would
certainly know. He would also know the benign image of
Athena as portrayed on many pots (see Figures 21 & 22)
telling the story of the birth of Erichthonius. Again she
is the beautiful goddess, the nurturer, receiving the
child tenderly in her arms. There is no stern war goddess
here.

In the decades preceding the creation of the Lemnia,
we see Athena on vases in various situations with her
helmet off and armed only with a lance, as in the charming
judgment of Paris scene of Figure 23. Here we see her
between Hera and Aphrodite. She looks quite feminine and
appealing without her war-like accoutrements. Duris has
decorated a cup with a beautiful scene of a bareheaded
Athena pouring wine into Herakles' cup (Figure 24). Athena
is sometimes shown holding a wreath. Figure 25 shows her in
a festive scene adorning Pandora with a wreath. In the vase
painting medium we find Athena frequently in a role other
than the warrior maiden.

Besides vase painting, Pheidias would have been
familiar with the various festivals of Athena, in addition
to the Panathenaia,10 celebrated in Athens. There were
numerous festivals; some were celebrated in their own right,
and some contained preparatory rites for the Panathenaia.
Two months before the great festival was a celebration
called the Plynteria, the feast of the bath. On that day

the cult-statue of Athena Polias was taken to the sea to be

47
bathed.ll This statue represented a royal goddess who
wore not a helmet but a high crown of gold. It is said
she was carved of olive wood and wore real clothes and

jewelry.12

Copies in terra cotta were found on the Acropolis
as well as inscriptions on black figure vases, and these
give us an idea what she looked like (Fig. 26).

So we can see that images abounded showing Athena
as other than the warrior goddess, and Pheidias was surely
familiar with many of them. Later there would appear on
the Parthenon frieze, which Pheidias helped plan, an Athena
seated with the other gods of Olympus as a goddess with no
attributes at all (Fig. 27). Pheidias was not bound by
artistic or religious traditions in this work. He could
create for the departing cleruchs whatever was most
significant for them and what also satisfied his own concept
of the nature of this goddess. The cleruchs leaving this
city of their birth, reluctant to cut old ties, proud of
their citizenship, steeped in the traditions of their
religion, convinced of the power of votive gifts, perhaps
thinking of the time when they might return, could set off
with lighter hearts because of this powerful and tangible
link they had left behind.

For these men Pheidias created a statue that was to
become renowned in the ancient world. She was bareheaded
and serenely beautiful. I do not believe she held a helmet
or a bowl nor an owl. She was placed, Furtwangler
believed, near the gate "on the way from the Promachos and

the quadriga to the Propylaia; close to it were placed

48

other monuments set up by the departing cleruchies, and here
also stood the portrait of Perikles. It is quite evident
how appropriately all these works were placed together, for
the cleruchies, so often a godsend to the poorer citizens,
were the work of this citizen."13

Rather than standing contemplating her helmet, I
believe the Athena Lemnia was placed so that her glance
followed the departing cleruchs, and her hand was extended
in a gracious gesture of protection and greeting. Her aegis
was turned to one side to minimize its threatening aspect.
The aegis and the lance that she held in her left hand
sufficiently identified her. Her head was most likely bare

and her helmet most likely discarded, to symbolize her com-

passion and concern for her people.

NOTES

1Erika Simon, Die thten der Griechen (Munich:
Hirmer, 1980) p. 207.

 

2Margarete Bieber, Die Antiken Skulpturen und
Bronzen des K8nigl. Museum Fridericianum in Cassel
(Marburg, 1915) "Da Bronzestatuetten der Athena, die 1.
die Lanze aufstUtzen, wahrend sie eine Schale hatten,
Uberaus haufig sind, so ist eine Erganzung der r. Hand mit
Schale, besonders bei der umgearbeiteten Casseler Replik,
nicht ausgeschlossen, wenn auch weniger wahrscheinlich
als die mit Helm," p. 7.

3Walter F. Otto, The Homeric Gods (New York:
Pantheon Books, 1954) p. 56.

4Jane Ellen Harrison, M tholo (New York:
Longman's, Green and Co., 1924 p. .

5

 

 

 

Pausanias I, 28, 2.

6Catherine B. Avery, ed., The New Century Classical
Handbook (New York, Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 196217
188.

p.

 

7Otto, p. 47.

8Pausanias IX, 4, l: "The Plataeans have a sanctu-
ary of Athena surnamed Areia: it was built from the spoils
Which the Athenians apportioned out to them from Marathon.
The image is overlaid with gold ecept for the face, the
hands and feet which are of Pentelic marble. In size it
is only a little smaller than the bronze (the Athena
Promomachos) on the Acropolis. . . and here, too, it was
Pheidias who made the image for the Plataeans."

9Pausanias I, 28, 2 (on the Acropolis in Athens):
[among the monuments on the Acropolis] is a bronze image of
Athena [made from] a tithe [from the spoils] taken from the
Persians who landed at Marathon--a work of Pheidias.

49

50

10H. W. Parke, Festivals of the Athenians (Ithaca,
N.Y.: Cornell University Press,i1977) pp. 29-50.

llErika Simon, Festivals of Attica (Madison:
The University of Wisconsin Press, 1983) p. 46.

12

 

 

Simon, p. 47.

13Adolf Furtwangler, MasterpieCes of Greek Sculpture

 

(Chicago: Argonaut Publishers, 1964) p. 10.

WI

16
At

1'16”

80c

CHAPTER V

CONCLUSION

As we uncover and piece together the fragments of
this great epoch and of this great artist, we are led to
a new appreciation of the variety and vitality of Athens
of the Fifth century. The name Pheidias conjures up an
aura of excellence. We have only glimpses of this great
artist and spokesman of his century and wish for assurance
that we have come upon a tangible and authentic Pheidian
work. If we can be confident that the Lemnia is actually
Pheidias' concept of Athena in her gentler, more approach-
able incarnations, then we have expanded our understanding
of the artist and the Athenian dream.

It was said of Pheidias that he was a maker of gods
and his colossal chryselephantine statues of Zeus and Athena
were wonders of the ancient world. He took for his sub-
jects figures larger than life, and his gods and heroes
lead us into the ideal world of his vision. For the
Athenians these heroes were their ancestors whom they
aspired to emulate, and these gods were their gods and were
never far away.

Athens made a cult of power and glory, and the

goddess of this cult was Athena. The Athenian Parthenon

51

52
was decorated by Pheidias to show forth to all the
Greek world the power and grandeur of the Periclean vision
and the Athenian ideal.

From early times the Greeks embraced a concept of
manhood that valued personal bravery above all else. A
man's honor was to be defended no matter the cost. The
brave man sought fame as the highest reward of life. He
did not fear death and to die in battle was a glorious
end. The Greek states were at war frequently, so there
was ample opportunity to die gloriously.

With the development of city states the concept
changed: highest good was now to not defend one's own
honor, but to fight for one's polis. In Athens it was
assumed that anyone of the citizens could behave heroic-
ally and win honor for Athens and for himself at the same
time. Pericles paid tribute to the heroes of Athens who
had died in battle. "In the fighting they thought it
more honorable to stand their ground and suffer death than
to give in and save their lives. So they fled from the
reproaches of men, abiding with life and limb the brunt
of battle; and in a small amount of time, the climax of
their lives, a culmination of glory, not of fear, were

1 NOW the heroic ideal was attached

swept away from us."
to the city and the city paid honor to these champions
who had died bravely in battle for Athens.

The central focus for the Athenians, what gave

meaning to all their activity, glory to their city,

victory in their battles was the goddess Athena whom

53
they revered as their special champion. She had important
cults in other places, but Athens was her special home.
After 449 B.C. Pericles began making plans to rebuild
the temples ruined by the Persians, and he commissioned
Pheidias to create a majestic statue of Athena that would
embody this heroic ideal and would proclaim the glory of
Athens to the rest of the world.

Pericles wished people to think of Athena as the
presiding goddess of Athens. She would embody power,
victory and creative intelligence. In honoring this
goddess, they were affirming the values they held most dear.
This huge and impressive statue that Pheidias created for
the Parthenon was an enduring symbol for the city and the
people of Athens. It reflected the essential element of
Athenian thought and belief. This was the great expression
of the spirit of Fifth century Athens.

When we turn from this image of power and victory
to the Lemnian Athena, we find a gentler more serene
goddess. Where the Parthenos was highly ornamented in
festal attire, the Lemnia appears simple and unadorned.

The Parthenos stands majestically, ready to receive the
homage of her people within her temple. The Lemnia is
wearing her everyday robe, standing in the open air to
greet her people on their own level. She looks natural,
fresher, younger. The Parthenos set the standard for cult
statues for some years to come, but the Lemnia is a unique

creation and there were no others just like her.

54

In her face we see compassion and gentleness. In
this statue Pheidias is glorifying the spiritual side of
Athena. We are more aware of her clear-eyed intelligence
than of her physical power. Although an aura of dignity
envelops her, she is accessible to her people. In her
gesture of reaching out, which I believe is the true one,
Pheidias makes manifest the union which exists between
gods and men. The gesture confirms her friendship, her
”ever-nearness".

The Athena Parthenos is the most representative
image of the Athenian personality, but although the active
heroic ideal was dominant in the Athenian personality, it
was not the whole picture. The myth of the goddess was
rich and complex enough to explain and give forms to al-
most everything in their lives. The cleruchs were the poor
of Athens. For them life had been the same struggle as
for the poor everywhere. They might aspire to greatness
under the spell of Pericles' rhetoric, who proclaimed the
heroic possibility for all citizens, but the reality of
their life was harsh--much less comfortable and less
secure in Lemnos than at home. For them this gentle god-
dess must have been a solace.

At this time also in Athens there were great
creative personalities at work. The plays of Aeschylus,
Sophocles and Euripides added to the great outpouring of
visual art assure us that Athena, the goddess of creativity,
dwelt in this place. "The Athenian democracy was largely

self-educated, but it had a good drilling in music and

55
poetry. . . and the sensibility cultivated by the old-

3 The

fashioned well-to-do spread to a much wider public."
Athenians were not exclusively men of action. There were
at least a few among them who gave serious consideration
to what their actions meant. The dramatists provided "a
counterpoise to some of the stronger tendencies of the age.
They displayed on an unexpected scale the courage of women
and the worth of slaves."4 The citizen of sensibility and
awareness was also present in Athens of the Fifth
century; he would understand what the Athena Lemnia stood
for.

Pheidias was one of the great spokesmen of his
time and reflected in his work the spirit of his age as
in the great Athena Parthenos. And perhaps it could be
said that in the Athena Lemnia he imprinted on his age his
own spirit. The Athenians saw and were inspired by the
power and majesty of their goddess. Pheidias looked beyond
that and captured the grace and harmony of a greater goddess.
When he did the Parthenos, his feet were firmly planted on
his own native soil in his own age, and he created a great
symbol embodying the thoughts and feelings of that time
and place. When he created the Lemnia, I believe he was
reaching above the clouds for a higher ideal than the
victorious Athena. Perhaps this goddess would only be
understood by a few Who looked beyond the myths for the
truth lodged there.

We can never know with certainty if the recon-

structured Bologna statue is a faithful replica of the

56
original Pheidian Athena, but insofar as it captures the
ephemeral quality of beauty, tenderness, and nobility of

the Pheidian concept, it adds to our appreciation and

understanding of the Athenian soul.

NOTES

1Thucydides II, 40.1. Translated by Rex Warner.

2Thucydides I, 70.9.

3C.M. Bowra, Periclean Athens (New York: The Deal
Press, 1971) p. 144.

4Bowra, p. 175.

57

.__.,‘.

u."

FIGURE 1.

Bologna head.

 

59

 

 

 

 

 

 

S mm.
0
nne
EOhe
wimp
e
rk M
aae
Pwtl
ta
aaen
nVuo
e ti
heat
Ithlca
AtsN

FIGURE 2.

Statue of Athena
Bologna head, Dresden.

with cast of

FIGURE 3.

60

 

Profile of the Bologna head.

FIGURE 4.

 

 

FIGURE 5. Athena offering a helmet
to a bearded man. Part
of a votive relief.

, Epidauros Museum, Athens .

w

 

FIGURE 6. Acropolis 1337, Ca. 430/420.
One of a series of sculptural
types of Athena.

62

 

FIGURE 7. Athena from Attic red figure kylix museo-civico,
Bologna.

 

FIGURE 8. Athena on gem
(Cades, i, H, 17),

63

 

 

 

FIGURE 9. Athena Farnese (Naples).

64

 

 

 

 

 

in.

FIGURE 10. Reconstruction of Dresden Athena with Palagi
head.

65

.i L.

. .. ‘
.. ~V. I; «U
. 96 u.

3.
(an

 

New York

Athena holding an owl.Ca. 450.

Metropolitan Museum.

FIGURE 11.

66

 

FIGURE 12. Athena with Herakles. Inner surface of Kylix
by Durio. 480/470.

 

 

 

67

 

 

 

 

Herakles and Atlas from a metope of the temple

of Zeus at Olympia, Olympia Museum.

FIGURE 13.

68

r:

1

he.

as.

r
r

a.

a; sine-s

#:

47‘; s «a a

L

 

Herakles and the Apples of the Hesperides from
a metope of the temple of Zeus at Olympia.

FIGURE 14.

 

.’ 9"!) 3))i\ }

Kylix 480/470 B.C., Museo Gregoriano, Etrusco,

Vatican City.

FIGURE 15.

 

 

 

Herakles and Kerberos 520/510 from an Amphora.

Andokides-Malers, Paris.

FIGURE 16.

70

I ’ l"
xxx"
‘7

- “ 3. .4

.é;*"’””w“ _.—-,

 

FIGURE 17. Red-figured hydra, Leningrad Painter. Torno
Collection in Milan.

  
  
     

 

FIGURE 18. Neck of Amphora. Herakles fights with lion.
Athena, men, centaurs also present.

 
         

'9. t
. .v ~r ‘f”. ,.
m .up» a>t£a; .g‘VUi; nem's
1:5... new: @395 “lo 512?} ,4,’
« * a; :‘ 22.-«sea» 1 --~
.‘3‘4‘? " ~ ~__ -“” ~'-‘- ..

FIGURE 19. Gorgon Painter. Hermes and Athena, Medusa and one
of her Gorgon sisters. 600/590.

72

 

FIGURE 20. Athena and Hephaistos creating Pandora.
Athenian cup Ca. 460 B.C.

73

 

FIGURE 21. Athena receiving Erichthoniae. Bowl of
Kodros-Malers.

74

        
    
 

. . 4
it
~_\\\\““'

’ .

Em

FIGURE 22. Hermonax, Stamnos. The Birth of Erichthonius in
the presence of Athena, Hephaistos and Erotes.
Ca. 460 B.C., Munich.

.UUJUGUUUUUJLWUUUULUL'LU i1..ll.illullilllllllllihllll HHUTHUUUULUUUUULIN TUU " ... '
V. /\ '~ " "“2 2) ’3’" 2.".

(“i
., tual?" «2
1’ h‘j/fiflififikfi ‘

a

I
. u ,I ‘-
c

- 1’! WW “k
- > Will
"i 2 1 M11 _

We U‘krfdlBlgfl 2 : arist-

 

Fifth Century Hydria

FIGURE 23. Judgment of Paris.
British Museum 524.

%
., M}
1i" ¢7‘
/

epalieytfizy,

/

\
v .

 

FIGURE 24. Athena and Herakles. Kylix by Duris.
480/470, Munich.

76

,\ -‘ yr?

3 NihMM MIN

:7"

 

FIGURE 25. Athenian vase Ca. 460 B.C. Pandora attended by
Zeus, Poseidon, Athena and Ares.

77

PW. -....-

 

(.Q

7mg: ......6.... .c... .M...s..... “.356.

It”? ‘Jw‘3uvfi6. :6sgvnouuml

 

IJ.

.me ...... _
«4:.

~—

: :
\prwllo/wlw. . . ‘\ .6 .6..ufl.- .
’6 6.6.4.63 6. ..u. Ill.
46..."... .. .z....._...._._..... .... . path...
a . 6.. 6. ...3...r .. WW..-.LW.:
., 0 ‘0 “my 6 66 WW
. 4V. . ...
l 6 6%
u
. .~3¢.6 9w m.
. ”we
”“0... ’3 6

 

from the

terra cotta,

Seated Athena,
Acropolis, drawing

FIGURE 26.

. .... .05....‘iflvridmuli‘i‘

 

 

E

:1.
.6
'A‘ .

.

 

FIGURE 27. Seated Athena with Hepharstos on Parthenon frieze.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX

REFERENCES TO THE LEMNIAN ATHENA
BY ANCIENT WRITERS

There are three writers of the second century A.D.

who had seen the Lemnian Athena and mention her by name:

Pausanias I, 28, 2:. . . the most worth seeing of the works
of Pheidias, the image of Athena which is called "the

Lemnian,‘ after those who dedicated it.

Lucian, Imagines,4-6 (a dialogue dealing with the ideal

 

characteristics to be embodied in Panthea). Lykinos: Of
the works of Pheidias which one do you praise most highly?
Polystratos: Which if not the Lemnia, on which he thought
it fit to inscribe his name . . . The Lemnia and Pheidias
shall furnish the outline of her (Panthea's) whole face,
the softness of the sides of her face, and the well

proportioned nose.

Aristeides, Orat. 50: A statue signed by Pheidias stood on

 

the Athenian Akropolis. It was admired for its beauty and
was called "Lemnia" after those who dedicated it.
There are, in addition, two more ancient sources

which mention Athena's made by Pheidias. In neither case

79

80

is the name Athena Lemnia used. Therefore, it is not certain

that the reference is to that Athena.

Pliny (N.H. 34.54) It is thought he referred to the Lemnian
Athena when he said that Pheidias made a bronze Athena of
such surpassing beauty that the statue took its surname from

its beauty.

Hemerius (fourth century A.D.) Orat. 21.4: Pheidias did
always portray Athena as armed, "but he adorned the maiden by
shedding on her cheek a rosy tinge by which, instead of a

helmet, he meant to veil the beauty of the goddess."

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Avery, Catherine 3., ed., The New Century Classical Handbook.
New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1962.

 

Bieber, Margarete. Die Antiken Skulpturen and Bronzen des
KBnigl. Museum Fridericianum in CasseIZ RMafburg,

 

 

Boardman, John. Athenian Black Figure Vases. London:
Thames & Hudson, 1974.

 

Boardman, John. The Parthenon and Its Soulptures. Photo-
graphs by David Finn. Austin: University of Texas
Press, 1985.

 

Bowra, C.M. Periclean Athens. New York: The Dial Press,
1971.

 

Bowra, C.M. The Greek Experience. Cleveland and New York:
The WOrld Publishing Co., 1957.

 

Brunt, P.A. "Athenian Settlements Abroad in the Fifth
Century B.C." Ancient Society and InStitutiOns.
Studies presentéd to Victor Ehrenberg on his 75th
birthday. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1966.

Bury, J.B. 'A History of Greece (To the Death of Alexander
the Great. London: MacMiIlan & Co. Ltd., 1963.

 

 

 

Ehrenberg, Victor. "Early Athenian Colonies." Aspects of
the Ancient world. New York: wm. Salloch, I946.
pp. 116-142.

Ehrenberg, Victor. ‘Sophocles and Pericles. Oxford:
Basil Blackwell, 1954.

Furtwangler, Adolf. ‘MaSterpieces of Greek Sculpture.
Chicago: Argonaut Publishers, 1964.

Gardner, Ernest A. Six Greek Sculptors. New York:
Charles Scribners & Sons, 1910.

 

Gould, John. "0n Making Sense of Greek Religion." Greek
Religion and Society, edited by P.E. Easterling and
JIV. Muir. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1985.

 

81

82

Graham, A.J. Colony and Mother City in Ancient Greece.
New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 1964.

 

Harrison, Jane Ellen. Mythology. New York: Longmans,
Green and Co.,

Hartswick, Kim.J. "The Athena Lemnia Reconsidered."
American Journal of Archaeology. VOl. 87, No. 3,
July 1983, pp. 335-346.

 

Laistner, M.L.W. A History of the Greek WOrld from 479-
323 B.C. London: Metfiuen & co. Ltd., 1936.

 

Otto, Walter F. The Homeric Gods, translated by Moses
Hadas. New YOrk: Pantheon Books, Inc., 1954.

 

Parke, H.W. Festivals of the Athenians. Ithaca, New York:
Cornell University Press,71977.

 

Meritt, Benjamin Dean, H.T. Wade-Gray, Malcolm Francis
McGregor. The Athenian Tribute Lists. Princeton,
New Jersey: The American School of Classical
Studies at Athens, 1949.

 

Pausanias, Description of Greece. Translated by J.G.
Frazer, New York: BiElo & Tanner, 1945.

 

Pausanias. Description of Greece, ed. J.G. Frazer. New
York: iBiblo & Tanner, 1965.

 

Pollitt, J.J. Art and Experience in Classical Greece.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

 

Pollitt, J.J. The Art of Greece - SourCes and D0cuments.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.,
1965.

Palagia, Olga. "In Defense of Furtwangler's Athena Lemnia."
American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 91, No. 1,
Jan. 1987, pp. 81¥84.

 

Richter, Gisela. The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks.
New Haven 8 London: Yale University Press, 1929.

Ridgway, Brunilde S. Fifth Century Styles in Greek
Sculpture. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press, 1981.

 

Robertson, Martin. "Greek Art and Religion." Greek Religion
and SOCiet , edited by P.E. Easterling and J.V. Muir.
pp. 155-195.

Simon, Erika. Die Gdtter der Griechen. Munich: Hirmer, 1980.

83

Simon, Erika, Festivals of Attica. An Archaeological Comment-
ary Madison, Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press,

1983.

 

Thucydides. Historyfiof the Peloponnesian War translated by
Rex Warner. Baltimore, Md.: Penguifi Book, 1954.

 

Waldstein, Charles. Essays on the Art of Pheidias.
Cambridge: Cambridge'University Press, 1885.