« PreviousContinue »
in a quite general manner--not much more carefully, in fact, than the back of the figure, and in striking contrast with the marvellous beauty of the nearer side. Beautiful as is the structure of the bones of the right knee, which is farther away, it cannot compare with the charms of precise delineation in the bones of the left knee. Or if we measure from the collar-bone to an extreme point on each shoulder, we find a difference considerably greater than is possible in nature. It has been said, “The soul of Greece is her veracity." No one disputes that, but the position in which a statue was intended to be seen must have always qualified the degree of truth which it was advisable to bestow in the interests of the spectator. A figure which can only present one side to the spectator, and must be seen from below, was precisely in that case. Much has been said and written in praise of the backs of these pediment statues -justly enough in one sense, but very unjustly in comparison with the fronts. The back of this figure is certainly a grand conception. The immense strength of his shoulder bones is shown by the great ridge of flesh which has been driven up by the pulling back of his left arm. From this the eye travels downwards to the finer articulation of the small of the back. Everywhere we see the truth of nature applied to a being of heroic mould. Yet the details are not worked out with anything like the finish of the left side of the statue.
Before leaving this figure—the familiar Theseus—we must state our present opinion that he is more likely to be Cephalos, the ideal Attic huntsman, beloved of Eos, awakening from his slumber on Mount Hymettos when it is Aushed with the rosy light of dawn, as we have seen it, and when a murmur of the birth of Athenè had just reached him, still in semi-consciousness.
The figures next him, E, F, G, form a group of three at present. The whole centre of the pediment being lost, we cannot assert positively that these three figures were originally a detached group; but we can surmise thus much from the west pediment, where we had a corresponding triad in the daughters of Cecrops, the more so since one of the daughters of Cecrops, nearest the centre, answers in her movement to the so-called Iris, G, in the group now in question. These two figures serve in each pediment to separate the great central
from the angles. For this reason we may fairly claim the three women, E, F, G, as having been a triad in the original composition.
The two seated women, E, F, have been identified as the goddesses Demeter and Persephonè, on the assumption that the whole scene of the birth of Athene had been enacted in Olympos, or as the Seasons (Horae), who in the Iliad (v. 749) keep watch at the gates of heaven, roll away the closed doors of cloud, and shut them again. Pausanias (v. 11, 7) was thinking of that when describing the throne of Zeus at Olympia : "On the highest part of the throne above the head of the statue Pheidias placed the Graces on the one hand and the Seasons on the other, three of each.” Then he quotes from Homer to the effect that the Horae or Seasons were like "guardians of a king's hall.” This same writer (ix. 35, 1), speaking of the Horae in Attica, says that one of them, Thallo, was there honoured jointly with Pandrosos, one of the three daughters of
THE ATTIC HORAE
Cecrops. The three Attic Horae were Thallo, Auxo, and Carpo. We propose to identify them with the figures E, F, G. The Horae were present at the birth of Aphroditè also, as she rose from the sea. So we are told in the Homeric Hymn (v. 5), and so we see them sculptured on the Ludovisi throne. But while on this throne there
an artistic necessity for the presence of only two Horae, the only possible reason in the Parthenon pediment for separating the third figure (G) from the two others is the difference of her attitude and action. That, however, is no greater than the difference between the third daughter of Cecrops and her two sisters in the west pediment. We therefore adhere to the triad of Horae. They were peculiarly Attic personifications, and as guardians of the sky were appropriately placed in the left wing near Helios and Cephalos. Here we should add that the backs of these two figures are rendered with unusual care, and are in fact very beautiful.
The third Hora, G, was at one time called Iris because of her rapid motion as of one running in from a distance with news to the two seated figures, E, F; but her action no more implies distance than does that of the third daughter of Cecrops, as we have just said. It is merely the action of sudden alarm, which she, being a little nearer the centre of events, has felt first. The hurried step she is taking may be almost the first, as it obviously is the last.
Roem. Mittheilungen, vii. pl. 2, were present at births in ordinary p. 32; Brunn, Bildwerke des Parthe- life may be seen in an epigram in non, in the Berichte of the bayer. Akad. the Anth. Gr. App. II. 637 (Didot), d. Wissen. 1874; and Furtwaengler, Matpos ár' wdivwv ús éis páos ñyayov Meisterwerke, p. 248. That the Horae “Ωραι.
It is true that the girlishness of her form, when looked at full in front and compared with the two seated women, may suggest a doubt as to the sisterly relation of all three. But there was the space of the pediment to be considered, and besides, we must remember that it was the left side of this figure which came most into view when the spectator stood midway beneath the pediment, looking up. In that aspect her left side is strikingly bold in its contrasts of nude form and large, simple masses of drapery. She has sprung to her feet, seizing her mantle with both hands in astonishment; that was a formula among Greek artists of the time. As regards the two seated figures, the extent of their surprise is greater than is usually supposed. The one, E, throws out her right knee with a great strain on her dress, which brings out clearly the form of the leg. Her left arm is not resting idly on the shoulder of F, but has been thrown on it in a hurried as well as affectionate manner. The figure F has swung herself round and raised her arms energetically, as if in terror. We cannot say now how far the action of the heads of these two figures may have accentuated this expression of movement; but we must add this, that the thick drapery of all three figures must have played an important part in the artistic composition of the pediment. The striking contrast it presents to the brilliantly nude Cephalos on the left must have been balanced by another nude figure on the right belonging to the great central group of deities.
. In the right wing of the pediment we approach again a group of three draped women. Usually it is assumed that
these also were originally a separate triad, though in fact the absence of the central group of the pediment precludes absolute certainty on this point. We can, however, argue from the analogy of the west pediment, and in that light we accept these three figures, K, L, M, as a triad. No triad of women, each of about the same age and all fairly clad, was better known than the Fates, and none more appropriately present at a birth.
On the Madrid puteal (Pl. IX., Fig. 1), which represents the birth of Athenė, they are present with their shears and thread in their hands. It is true they are there standing in a group as the exigencies of a band of relief required. But they are there all the same. On these grounds it is not surprising that the three figures in the pediment have become popularly known as the Fates.
On the other hand, we learn from a fragment of Euripides (Nauck, 623) that the Fates were divine beings who "sat nearest to the throne of Zeus,” and obviously on an occasion like the birth of Athenè they would have been intent on their natural occupation, not surprised and startled as are the three women in the remote angle of the pediment. They would thus have been the "Foolish Fates," as they are called in Midsummer Night's Dream. Further, the Fates had no special connection with Attica. But let us examine the group as it stands.
At first sight, and from a superficial point of view of the pediment as a whole, there is not much of artistic balance in the two angle groups. We recognise that the two figures K, L on the right respond fairly well to E, F on the left. But as a response to the nude Cephalos on the left we have a draped woman, M, on the right. Yet