The Corinth Amazon: Formation of a Roman Classical Sculpture ...

The Corinth Amazon: Formation of a Roman Classical Sculpture 

Author(s): Mary C. Sturgeon 

Source: American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Jul., 1995), pp. 483-505 

Published by: Archaeological Institute of America 

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/506946 . 

Accessed: 16/01/2011 17:16 

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . 

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless 

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you 

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. 

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . 

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aia. . 

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed 

page of such transmission. 

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of 

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms 

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. 

http://www.jstor.org 

Archaeological Institute of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to 

American Journal of Archaeology.

The Corinth Amazon: 

Formation of a Roman Classical Sculpture 

Abstract 

A statue found in the Corinth Theater represents a 

woman wearing a chitoniskos, cross-strap, belt, and high 

boots. Although the sculpture was first identified as 

Artemis, its identification is problematic because no 

other sculpture of the same type is known. Examination 

of its attributes suggests, rather, that it depicts an 

Amazon. The statue was also at first believed to be a 

copy of a Greek bronze of the second half of the fifth 

century, but close scrutiny of its stance, proportions, 

and style indicate that it is more likely to be a Roman 

Classical creation than a variant of a Greek original. 

Much about the piece is Roman in conception. A date 

in the first half of the second century A.D. and a location 

in the peristyle court adjoining the Corinth Theater 

are argued* 

* Study of this sculpture was supported by grants from 

the Research Council of the University of North Carolina 

at Chapel Hill. I particularly wish to thank Charles K. 

Williams, II, Director of the Corinth Excavations, for per- 

mission to study the Corinth Theater sculptures and for 

his general assistance, and also Nancy Bookidis, Assistant 

Director. In addition, I am grateful to the Greek Ministry 

of Culture, in particular the Ephor of Antiquities of the 

Argolid and Corinthia, P. Pachyianni, and the American 

School of Classical Studies at Athens, under whose aus- 

pices this work was carried out; to Brunilde S. Ridgway, 

Nancy Bookidis, and Gerhard Koeppel for careful reading 

of drafts of this paper; to Evelyn Harrison, Olga Palagia, 

and Alan Shapiro for helpful comments; to Giorgios 

Despinis for inspiration on several points; to Susan Rutter 

for bibliographic checking; to AJA's anonymous readers 

for their insightful comments; and to numerous students 

who have responded kindly to having this subject impressed 

upon them. All misconceptions are my own. The recent 

Corinth photographs (figs. 1-4, 6) are by I. Ioannidou and 

L. Bartzioti. 

The following abbreviations are used: 

MARY C. STURGEON 

Bieber 1961 

Bieber 1977 

M. Bieber, History of the Greek and Roman 

Theater2 (Princeton 1961). 

M. Bieber, Ancient Copies (New York 

1977). 

Boardman 

Felletti Maj 

Harrison 

J. Boardman, Athenian Red Figure Vases. 

The Classical Period (London 1989). 

B. Maria Felletti Maj, Museo Nazionale 

Romano. I ritratti (Rome 1953). 

E.B. Harrison, "Two Pheidian Heads: 

Nike and Amazon," in D. Kurtz and 

B. Sparkes eds., The Eye of Greece, 

Studies in the Art of Athens (Cambridge 

1982) 53-88. 

American Journal of Archaeology 99 (1995) 483-505 

483 

During the course of the 1929 excavations in the 

Corinth Theater conducted by T. Leslie Shear, an 

over-life-size statue of a woman, complete except for 

the head and arms, emerged in a remarkably good 

state of preservation (figs. 1-6).' This statue, which 

represents a young woman dressed in a chitoniskos, 

would have formed part of the decoration of the 

Corinth Theater and related courts in the second 

century A.D. Since its presentation in Shear's pre- 

liminary excavation report in AJA and a subsequent 

notice in Gnomon by De Waele, the sculpture has 

gone largely unnoticed, despite its good condition, 

its continuous display in the Corinth Archaeologi- 

cal Museum, and its high artistic quality.2 The 

Johnson FP. Johnson, Corinth IX, Pt. 1: Sculpture 

1890-1923 (Cambridge, Mass. 1931). 

Lippold 

G. Lippold, HdA VI.3.1: Die Skulptur 

(Munich 1950). 

Morrow K.D. Morrow, Greek Footwear and the Dating 

of Sculpture (Madison 1985). 

Ridgway 1974 B.S. Ridgway, "A Story of Five Amazons," 

AJA 78 (1974) 1-17. 

Ridgway 1981a B.S. Ridgway, Fifth-century Styles in Greek 

Sculpture (Princeton 1981). 

Ridgway 1981b B.S. Ridgway, "Sculpture from Corinth," 

Hesperia 50 (1981) 422-48. 

Ridgway 1984 B.S. Ridgway, Roman Copies of Greek Sculpture. 

The Problem of the Originals (Ann 

Arbor 1984). 

Stephanidou- T. StephanidouTiveriou, NeoarrKcd. 01 

Tiveriou avdy)Avqoil rivaKcq anro to )~ipadvt ro 

Ieipaid (Athens 1979). 

1 Corinth inv. no. S 3723, discovered 27 March 1929. 

Pres. H. from top left shoulder 1.605 m, H. from base of 

clavicle to plinth 1.535 m, H. neck to belt 0.345 m, H. belt 

to bottom skirt 0.41 m, H. bottom skirt to plinth 0.838 m, 

Pres. W. shoulders 0.39 m, W. waist 0.445 m, Th. waist 0.265 

m, W hips 0.428 m, Restored H. 1.894 m, Estimated H. head 

0.254 m (based on comparison with Corinth S 1065). Pentelic 

marble. The torso is nearly intact, missing segments 

from the upper back that will have broken when the arm 

attachments were dislodged from their sockets. There is 

no trace of an object on the back. 

2 T.L. Shear, "Excavations in the Theatre District and 

Tombs of Corinth in 1929," AJA 33 (1929) 515-46, esp. 

534-36, pl. IX. De Waele, "Die korinthischen 

E.J. Ausgrabungen 

1928-1929," Gnomon 6 (1930) 54. The statue is not 

included in LIMC I.1, 586-653, s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, 

A. Kauffmann-Samaras), or LIMCII.1, 618-753, s.v. Artemis 

(L. Kahil), or II.1, 792-849, s.v. Artemis/Diana (E. Simon).

484 MARY C. STURGEON [AJA 99 

Fig. 1. Amazon. Corinth, Archaeological Museum S 3723, 

front. (Courtesy American School of Classical Studies at 

Athens) 

Fig. 2. Corinth Amazon, detail of torso. (Courtesy Ameri- 

can School of Classical Studies at Athens) 

present study results from renewed interest in the 

Corinth Theater and will form part of the volume 

on freestanding sculptures from the Theater, now 

in preparation.3 

The figure depicts a young woman standing in a 

frontal pose, the weight on the right leg, the left 

pulled back to rest on its toes. The subject wears a 

short chiton fastened over both shoulders and secured 

over the chest by a crossed strap and at the 

waist by a belt. On her feet are high, laced boots with 

undecorated flaps. The angle of the cavity for the 

head insert and a slight turn of the lower torso suggest 

the head would have faced three-quarters right, 

in the direction of the supporting leg. Similarly, the 

angle of the cuttings and dowels designed to secure 

the arm inserts give some indication of their original 

positions. The right arm, attached to a vertical 

3 See the reports in Hesperia by C.K. Williams, II, and 

O.H. Zervos: Hesperia 52 (1983) 1-47; 53 (1984) 83-122; 54 

(1985) 55-96; 55 (1986) 129-75; 56 (1987) 1-46; 57 (1988) 

95-146; and 58 (1989) 1-50.

1995] THE CORINTH AMAZON 485 

Fig. 3. Corinth Amazon, right profile. (Courtesy American 

School of Classical Studies at Athens) 

plane by a dowel at a slight angle to the horizontal, 

would probably have hung straight at the side. The 

left, set higher up and at more of an angle and se- 

cured by a dowel at a greater angle to the horizontal, 

would probably have been flexed, thereby having a 

higher concentration of weight and requiring differ- 

ent support. In addition, the left hand may have 

Fig. 4. Corinth Amazon, three-quarter left view. (Courtesy 

American School of Classical Studies at Athens) 

carried an object, requiring an alternate form of 

balance. The stance, therefore, recalls that of the 

Doryphoros by Polykleitos and creates the impres- 

sion that the figure is related to Greek sculpture of 

the High Classical period. 

This piece presents several interesting problems. 

The first is iconographical. Should it be identified


Fig. 5. Corinth Amazon, left profile. (Courtesy American 


as Artemis, as an Amazon, or as another related type? 

The second is chronological. Should the statue be 

understood as a copy or close replica of a Greek 

or as a new Roman creation intended to 

prototype, 

give the impression of a Classical piece? If the latter, 

what adjustments were made to the Classical idea, 

and how is the Roman contribution to be assessed? 

And finally, what was its meaning for its Roman 

creator and second-century A.D. audience? 

Fig. 6. Corinth Amazon, rear view. (Courtesy American 


Analysis of this statue presents issues that have 

received much discussion regarding, in particular, 

definition of terms such as "copy:' "reflection,' "imitation;' 

"variant;' and "new creation:' the methodology 

appropriate to understanding a work of art 

with stylistic and iconographic traits of mixed chronological 

heritage, and the ability to arrive at a conclusion 

when such a piece is unique and cannot be 

tested against a similar copylvariant or a possible


model.4 What this sculpture contributes to the discussion 

is a heightened awareness of 1) the degree of 

chronological "layering" of Greek iconographic and 

stylistic features that may occur in a Roman Classical 

sculpture; 2) the nature of Roman Classical sculpture 

of the second century A.D.; and 3) the Roman contribution 

to the Classical tradition in Western art. 

The term Classical in regard to Roman sculpture 

is employed to refer to the category of idealizing 

sculpture, as distinct from portraits, and not to a 

chronological period. Classical almost seems preferable 

to Classicizing in this context because, after 

scrutinizing the various components of this statue, 

what seems most evident is that it presents a new 

Classical style, one that is formed as a result of combining 

various elements taken selectively from distinct 

segments of the Greek Classical period in order 

to form a new figure in a somewhat different, yet 

Classical style. This style seems far from "ideal;' in 

the sense of the English word, or in the sense in which 

it might be applied to fifth-century Greek art, since 

it reveals awareness of subsequent developments with 

regard to realism and since it appears less remote 

in a number of ways. There is much about Roman 

Classical sculpture that is real (a warrior's need for 

boots, for instance). So, the term Ideal, which might 

have seemed preferable as an English cognate for 

the German "Idealplastik' seems inappropriate. This 

style is, of course, Classical in the sense that it is 

modeled on a fully developed Classical style formed 

in an earlier period, but it is not mindlessly nor ex- 

clusively imitative. Rather, it seeks to form a new ar- 

tistic language, one in which interest is expressed 

in a variety of Classical Greek features that are treated 

in different ways to achieve new solutions.5 What 

has resulted with the statue under consideration is 

not a mannered or emotional form of Classicism, 

such as might be expected from a work of the first 

4 See, e.g., H. Lauter, Zur Chronologie r6mischer Kopien nach 

Originalen des 

V.Jahrh. (Erlangen 1969); R. Wiinsche, "Der 

Jiingling vom Magdalensberg: Studie zur r6mischen Idealplastik," 

Festschriftfiir Luitpold Dussler (Munich 1972) 45-80; 

W. Trillmich, "Bemerkungen zur Erforschung der r6mischen 

Idealplastik,"Jd188 (1973) 247-82; P. Zanker, Klassizistische 

Statuen. Studien zur Veranderung des Kunstgeschmacks in der 

r6mischen Kaiserzeit (Mainz 1974) XV-XX; Bieber 1977; Ridgway 

1984, 82-86; P. Zanker, The Power of Images in the Age 

ofAugustus (Ann Arbor 1988); L.J. Roccos, "Apollo Palatinus: 

The Augustan Apollo on the Sorrento Base," AJA 93 (1989) 

571-88; and C. Landwehr, "Die Sitzstatue eines birtigen 

Gottes in Cherchel. Zur Originalitdit r6mischer Vatergottdarstellungen," 

Phyromachos-Probleme (RM-EH 31, Mainz 

1990) 101-22, to mention only a few. 

5 Cf., e.g., the recent discussion of Roman Archaizing 

century A.D., but an enriched, articulate Classicism 

appropriate to the heterogeneous world of Greece 

in the second century A.D., concerned as much with 

"eclectic" Platonism and the second sophistic as with 

mime, pantomime, and bawdy scenes in the theater. 

COMPOSITION 

Analysis of the composition shows that the figure 

was designed to be seen from the front, since both 

side and rear views possess different compositional 

bases and sketchier treatment. In front view (fig. 1) 

a Polykleitan pose is implied by the placement of 

the weight and free legs, the raised left shoulder, and 

the presumed position of the arms.6 This implica- 

tion, however, is contradicted by the horizontal waist, 

which denotes the absence of a weight shift, an as- 

pect seemingly negated by a greater curve in the right 

hip than the left. The horizontal waist could result 

from a simplification of the basically Polykleitan pose 

in order to emphasize the belt as well as to draw at- 

tention to the crossed band, both specific to this 

statue (fig. 2). In fact, the X-pattern of the crossed 

band may be intended to call attention to the chiastic 

pose. Furthermore, the belt may be firmly horizon- 

tal rather than diagonal because this is more appro- 

priate for the wide belt as well as the crossed strap. 

In composition, the belt performs a stabilizing and 

centralizing function emphasized by the oval. The 

Roman preference for stabilizing poses derived from 

Greek types is notable in other second-century 

figures, as in the statue of Sabina as Venus from Os- 

tia, of Trajanic date.7 Because of their position, both 

belt and cross-strap appear to play a role in the 

statue's meaning. 

Consideration of the right profile view (fig. 3) 

makes it even clearer that the weight shift is not 

carried through to the waist.8 Most striking about 

this side view are the hefty proportions of the but- 

sculpture by M.D. Fullerton, The Archaistic Style in Roman 

Statuary (Mnemosyne Suppl., Leiden 1990). 

6 Cf. the front view of the Doryphoros: P.E. Arias, 

Policleto (Florence 1964) pl. 30; see also H. Beck and P.C. 

Bol eds., Polyklet: Der Bildhauer der griechischen Klassik (Mainz 

1990); D. Kreikenbom, Bildwerke nach Polyklet: Kopienkritische 

Untersuchungen zu den mdnnlichen statuarischen Typen nach 

polykletischen Vorbildern (Berlin 1990) 59-94; the forthcoming 

publication of the Polykleitos Symposium, Madison, October 

1989, with views of the Minneapolis statue; E. Berger, 

B. Muller-Huber, and L. Thommen, Der Entwurfdes Kiinstlers 

Bildhauerkanon in der Antike und Neuzeit (Basel 1992). 

7Bieber 1977, 46, figs. 147-48. 

8 Cf. right side of the Doryphoros: Arias (supra n. 6) 

pl. 47.


tocks, which seem inconsistent with the slender build 

visible in frontal view. The depth of the buttocks may 

result from the forward position of the hips and from 

the concern to fill out the back in order to stabilize 

the weight and prevent breakage (apparently with 

success); hence the merging of skirt-back and right 

leg into the tree-trunk support. Also evident in side 

view is the fact that the shoulders are thrust backward, 

the hips forward, creating a ponderation not 

found in statues of Polykleitan type or date. A preference 

in Roman statuary for a different sense of 

balance from that of Greek statuary or for a different 

integration of bodily segments has been noted 

in other contexts.9 The complete lack of definition 

of the body through the drapery on the sides and 

back helps create the heavier effect in these areas. 

Drapery that would not have been seen might simply 

have been less detailed, but the drapery's sketchy 

treatment contrasts with the careful finish on the 

backs of the legs and boots. 

A second primary viewing angle may be intended 

from the three-quarter left side (fig. 4), as has recently 

been suggested for some other ancient statues.10 

This viewpoint presents the figure in a more flattering 

aspect in which the proportions seem more elongated. 

In left profile view (fig. 5) the statue displays 

more movement because of the free leg's position, 

but the breadth of the buttock and length of the legs 

are still evident."1 Notable from this side is the lack 

of undercutting in the skirt. The rear underside of 

the skirt is not visible in frontal view, but it would 

have been seen if viewed from some distance below 

the statue. The statue's original setting, therefore, 

was probably not significantly elevated above ground 

level. Such a location would also be suitable for the 

somewhat shortened proportions of the upper torso. 

From the rear view (fig. 6), a number of peculiarities 

may be noted. Most striking are the proportions, 

which seem different from those of the front. The 

legs look shorter, since they angle forward, but per- 

haps also because they are in shadow. In addition, 

in contrast to the Doryphoros's rear view, the lower 

torso lacks the sideways swing that normally results 

from the leg position.'2 Moreover, although the 

torso is straight in front view, in rear view the upper 

9Ridgway 1984, 83 and n. 14. 

I0 H. Meyer, "Der Berg Athos als Alexander. Zu den 

realen Grundlagen der Vision des Deinokrates," RdA 10 

(1986) 22-30, esp. p. 26 on Aischines; K. Fittschen, "Zur 

Rekonstruktion griechischer Dichterstatuen,"AM 106 (1991) 

243-79, esp. p. 273. 

11 Cf. Arias (supra n. 6) pl. 31, left view of the Naples 

Doryphoros. 

torso turns somewhat to the right. This turn, how- 

ever slight, might indicate that the statue was posi- 

tioned at a slight angle to the front plane of the 

plinth. The figure was found in the peristyle court 

north of the scaenae frons, standing directly on 

the colonnade pavement, having lost its base, but 

facing the wall rather than the open courtyard. There 

is no indication how far the piece was moved, but 

it would not have fallen from a great height, since 

it is nearly intact. 

ICONOGRAPHY 

In 1929 Shear identified this statue as Artemis, 

calling it a copy of a fifth-century bronze.3 At the 

outset, however, it would seem that either Artemis 

(Diana) or an Amazon would form possible identifications, 

since both can be shown wearing the short 

chiton, high boots, and quiver: Artemis when she 

is characterized as a huntress, and the Amazons when 

they are not wearing more Oriental costumes. The 

clearest indicators of subject would be provided by 

narrative context- in the case of Artemis, for instance, 

by the proximity of Apollo in the frieze from 

his temple at Bassai;'4 by findspot, as with figures 

found in Artemis's sanctuary at Brauron; by attri- 

bute, such as the quiver, deer, or dog; or by confor- 

mity to an established statuary type. Similarly, representations 

of the Amazonomachy provide positive 

evidence for the Amazon costume, so the presence 

of common attributes-pelta shield, ax, Oriental 

dress, horse - or adherence to recognizable statuary 

types frequently makes their identity clear. Narrative 

context and helpful findspot are lacking for the 

Corinth statue, but initially it might seem that a case 

could be made for either identification, based on 

costume and attributes. The lack of an obvious statuary 

type, however, as well as the similarity of the iconography 

of Artemis and the Amazons complicates 

the problem, as the following discussion will show. 

An investigation of the subject should consider 

the following traits. The figure is a young, teenage 

girl. She wears a short chitoniskos. This is not the 

usual chitoniskos, shortened by an overfold or by 

pulling the material up over a second belt, but a 

shorter garment that reaches to mid-thigh. The figure 

12 For a rear view of a cast of the Naples Doryphoros, 

see A.H. Borbein, "Die griechische Statue des 4. Jahr- 

hunderts v. Chr.: Formanalytische Untersuchungen zur 

Kunst der Nachklassik,"JdI 88 (1973) 144, fig. 66. 

13 Shear (supra n. 2). 

14 Bassai: LIMC 11.1, 726 no. 1345, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil) 

= LIMC II.1, 293 no. 915, s.v. Apollon (W. Lambrinudakis), 

with illustration and bibliography.


wears a crossed strap (fig. 2). This is not two single 

straps, as for a quiver and bow, but a wide version of 

the "shoulder cord."15 The chiton and straps once 

bore painted decoration similar to the carved design 

on the belt. Traces of running spirals painted in yel- 

low on the skirt and cross-band can be observed, re- 

calling the saffron garments connected with Brau- 

ron.16 The subject also wears tall, laced boots with 

leather flaps, the embades rather than the shorter en- 

dromides, and she sports a distinctive belt with sharp, 

outward facing points. 

The subject of our sculpture is a puzzle because 

many of its features have parallels in various contexts. 

For example, young girls in short chitons may 

be dancers with trainers, as on the Phiale Painter's 

oinochoe of ca. 430.17 Girls dancing or running in 

short chitons appear on Brauronian krateriskoi, 

in religious contexts. These girls are presumably the 

"she-bears" in the Arkteia for Artemis.'s Atalanta 

as huntress also wears a short chiton and tall boots, as 

on the Barclay Painter's bell krater in Basel.19 Further, 

persons wearing highly decorated garments in- 

clude officials in religious rites, such as the figure 

identified by some as Eumolpos on the Eleusinian 

pelike in Leningrad.20 Besides the "ependytes" this 

figure wears Thracian boots, perhaps emphasizing 

northern origins, but his garment is notably of 

heavier cloth than the Corinth garment. 

Other instances of highly decorated costumes are 

connected with the theater. For example, Andromeda 

is dressed as an Oriental on an Apulian fragment 

in Taranto where the costume characterizes her as 

foreigner and traveler.21 Scholars have tried to connect 

such Orientalizing garments with theatral or 

religious uses, but their usage cannot be tied to a 

single function, since they appear in various contexts. 

The frequency of Orientalizing garments results, 

rather, from their extreme popularity in the later 

fifth century.22 

Therefore; three elements of costume featured 

here- the short chiton, quantity of decoration, and 

15 See infra n. 45. 

16 Ar. Lys. 641-47. See C. Sourvinou-Inwood, Studies in 

Girls' Transitions (Athens 1988), esp. 121 and n. 25. 

17J.H. Oakley, The Phiale Painter (Mainz 1990) 96-98, no. 

120bis, pl. 149b, New York market, Atlantis 1118V. Cf. also 

the squat lekythos in Paris in the manner of the Meidias 

Painter, L. Burn, The Meidias Painter (Oxford 1987) 85, MM 

108, fig. 51c; Louvre CA 1890, ARV2 1326.68. 

18 L. Kahil, "Le 'craterisque' d'Artemis et le Brauronion 

de l'Acropole," Hesperia 50 (1981) 253-63, pl. 62.9, second 

quarter of fifth century, Agora P 27342; L. Kahil, "Autour 

de l'Artemis attique," AntK 8 (1965) 20-33, pls. 7-10; or 

see E. Simon, Festivals of Attica: An Archaeological Commen- 

Fig. 7. Artemis Bendis. Dresden, Skulpturensammlung AB 

695. (Courtesy Dresden Staatliche Kunstsammlungen) 

tary (Madison 1983) fig. 10b, Basel. Cf. also, e.g., M.B. 

Walbank, "Artemis Bear-leader," CQ 31 (1981) 276-81; S.G. 

Cole, "The Social Function of Rituals of Maturation: The 

Koureion and the Arkteia," ZPE 55 (1984) 233-44 and the 

references therein. 

19 Boardman, fig. 216; Paralipomena 447, 2bis. 

20 Simon (supra n. 18) 27 fig. 3b; Leningrad pelike St. 

1792, from Kerch, ARV2 1476.1. 

21 K.M. Phillips, Jr., "Perseus and Andromeda," AJA 72 

(1968) 1-23, pl. 9.22. 

22 See, e.g., M.C. Miller, "The Ependytes in Classical 

Athens," Hesperia 58 (1989) 313-29; M.C. Miller, "The Para- 

sol: An Oriental Status-Symbol,"JHS 112 (1992) 91-105.


high boots - are not individual-specific, but are related 

to the categories of foreigner, traveler, or hunter. 

Artemis 

The two most popular figures depicted with these 

features are the Amazons and Artemis. Here too the 

case is not clear-cut. For instance, Artemis shooting 

wears a decorated ependytes over a chiton on a 

Brauronian scene in Basel.23 The goddess wears 

a double-belted chiton in some fourth-century statu- 

ary types, e.g., a Roman statue with a portrait head 

from Ostia.24 As Artemis Bendis, she adds a skin 

and chlamys, as on the statue from Salamis in 

Dresden (fig. 7; the boots are restored).25 Marble 

statuettes of Bendis (?) at Corinth may show that this 

aspect of Artemis is also represented there.26 

Another Thracian deity, Kotytto, becomes assimilated 

to Artemis. Kotytto seems unaccepted in Athens 

because of lewd rites, but she is associated by Eupolis 

in The Dippers with Corinth, according to Hesychios, 

where torch races were held in her honor.27 I have 

found no evidence regarding her appearance, but 

nothing about the Theater statue promotes a lewd 

association. 

Freestanding statues of Artemis known from the 

fifth century are uncommon in comparison with the 

substantial number from the fourth.28 More important, 

the chiton arrangement exhibited by the Corinth 

statue is employed infrequently in sculpture for 

23 L. Kahil, "L'Artemis de Brauron: Rites et mystbre," 

AntK 20 (1977) 86-98, pls. 18, 20; Simon (supra n. 18) 87. 

24 Rome, Museo Nazionale: Felletti Maj, no. 119. 

25 T. Dohrn, Attische Plastik vom Tode des Phidias bis zum 

Wirken der grossen Meister des IVJahrhunderts v. Chr. (Krefeld 

1957) 58, pl. 2b; BrBr 759. K. Knoll et al., Die Antiken im 

Albertinum (Mainz 1993) no. 7. On Bendis, see, e.g., D. Popov, 

"The Cult of Bendis in Athens," Bulgarian Historical Review 

3 (1975) 53-64; R. Hartwig, Bendis. Eine archdologische 

Untersuchung (Leipzig 1897); LIMC III.1, 95-97, s.v. Bendis 

(Z. GoEeva and D. Popov). 

26 Corinth inv. S 312; Johnson, no. 34. Other statuary 

types of Artemis are represented at Corinth, though none 

of the "Ephesian" Amazons. 

27 On Kotytto (Kotys) see R.R. Simms, Foreign Religious 

Cults in Athens in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C. (Diss. Univ. 

of Virginia 1985); S. Srebrny, "Kult der thrakischen Goettin 

Kotyto in Korinth und Sicilien," Milanges Cumont I (Brussels 

1936) 423-27; S. Herbert, "The Torch-Race at Corinth," 

Corinthiaca. Studies in Honor of Darrell A. Amyx (Columbia 

1986) 29-35, where the possibility of torch races at Corinth 

for Dionysos, Artemis Bendis, Kotytto, and Artemis Eukleia 

is discussed; the figures holding torches on Corinthian vases 

are notably male. Cf. also I.Jucker, "Frauenfest in Korinth," 

AntK 6 (1963) 47-61, pls. 17-23. 

28 On Artemis types see, e.g., LIMC II: Colonna = 

no. 163, Dresden = no. 137, Gabii = no. 190, Larnaka = 

Artemis, although it is found in some depictions 

of Artemis Bendis. The fifth-century Stackelberg 

Artemis in Dresden (fig. 7), for instance, is similar, 

but its skirt reaches to the knee and, unlike the 

Corinth statue, it wears the chlamys, which connects 

it with Artemis Bendis.29 A similar arrangement on 

a terracotta statuette in Paris of ca. 400-350 B.C. also 

has the added cloak.30 

In Classical sculpture Artemis is regularly shown 

with a long, belted overfold, whether she wears the 

chitoniskos or long chiton, even when she is run- 

ning, as huntress.31 Freestanding examples are few, 

but a number of representations can be cited in reliefs.32 

Although sculptural parallels are limited 

and inexact, Artemis, like the Amazons, wears the 

chitoniskos arranged like that of the Corinth statue 

on fourth-century South Italian vases where context 

establishes the identity, but these are too far removed 

geographically and chronologically to be of help.33 

In the Corinth statue a strap is shown crisscrossed 

over the chest, as if representing a figure-eight loop 

or strap, probably anchored at the sides via loops 

on the belt. This is perhaps intended to give a greater 

appearance of stability to the statue or added support 

to a bow or quiver, which could have been tied 

onto the back. The crisscross strap configuration is 

less common than a single quiver strap, but both 

Amazons and Artemis wear such a loop crossed in 

front on occasion. The crossed strap is worn by Ama- 

no. 406, Versailles = no. 250 (L. Kahil); and Bieber 1977, 

pls. 43-50, 56-61, with adaptations. 

29 Dohrn (supra n. 25) 58, pl. 2.2; L. Beschi, "Statue di 

culto e statuette votive classiche," Acta of the XIIInternational 

Congress of Classical Archaeology, 1983 IV (Athens 1988) 243, 

pl. 87.1. 

30 Paris, Louvre CA 1137: LIMC II.1, 691, no. 919, s.v. Artemis 

(L. Kahil). A second-century A.D. marble relief in 

Rome that follows this pattern may represent Artemis, although 

Atalanta might also be a possibility: Museo Capitolino 

621: LIMC II, 655 no. 416, s.v. Artemis; Helbig4 II, 

no. 1378. 

31 On Artemis, see also L.J. Roccos, The Shoulder-pinned 

Back Mantle in Greek and Roman Sculpture (Diss. New York 

Univ. 1986) 365-98. 

32 Cf., e.g., Bassai: supra n. 14; the late fifth-century reliefs 

from Brauron, LIMC II, 668 no. 621, s.v. Artemis 

(L. Kahil), in long peplos, slender proportions; from Krannon 

in London, British Museum no. 816, LIMC II, 687 no. 

882, in long dress, cross-strap, with overfold and double 

belt, shoulder-pinned back mantle; from Phaleron, Athens, 

National Museum no. 1783, LIMC II, 700 no. 1028, short 

chiton to knee, barefoot, slender proportions. 

3 Cf., e.g., an Apulian hydria in Bari by the Baltimore 

Painter of ca. 320 B.C. and a Campanian lekanis cover in 

Lugano of the last quarter of the fourth century, LIMC 

II.1, 722 nos. 1287-88, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil).


Fig. 8. Delphi, Tholos, Metope. Delphi, Archaeological Mu- 

seum. (Courtesy Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Athens, 

neg. Delphi 119) 

zons on metopes from the Tholos in the Sanctuary of 

Athena Pronaia at Delphi and in the west pediment 

of the Temple of Asklepios at Epidauros (figs. 8-9),34 

and Artemis is dressed this way on the Bassai temple 

frieze, on a statue from Brauron, and on a terracotta 

figurine from Corinth.35 Many other figures also 

wear a crossed loop: those who need the garment 

held in place because of speed (charioteers, Nikai, 

Persians, dancers); to support a heavy burden on the 

back, such as wings or weapons (Nikai, Furies, Ikaros, 

Amazons); to secure the garment because it is too 

large (young girls); and perhaps, as with Artemis 

Kindyas, to hold the arms crossed on the breast.36 

Hence, the crossed loop here cannot be considered 

a diagnostic element of the iconography. 

The strict frontality of the Theater statue might 

34 Delphi: LIMC 1.1, 593 no. 100, s.v. Amazones (P. Devam- 

bez), dated ca. 400;J. Marcade, "Les sculptures decoratives 

de la Tholos de Marmaria i Delphes: Etat actuel du dossier," 

in H. Kyrieleis ed., Archaische und klassische griechische Plas- 

tik II (Mainz 1986) 169-73 (not illustrated), placed ca. 380. 

Epidauros: Athens, NM no. 136; LIMC 1.1, 613-14 no. 421 

(a), s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras); 

N. Yalouris, Die Skulpturen des Asklepiostempels in Epidauros 

(AntP 21, Munich 1992) cat. no. 34, pls. 40-41, 42c, 82-84 

on date. 

35 Bassai (supra n. 14); here the double cross-band se- 

cures the long chiton of Artemis as charioteer. Brauron: 

Brauron, Archaeological Museum 1178; LIMC II.1, 651 no. 

361, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil), a running figure wearing an 

Fig. 9. Epidauros, Temple of Asklepios, figure from west 

pediment. Athens, National Museum 136. (Courtesy 

Deutsches Archiiologisches Institut, Athens, neg. 74/1173) 

be used to argue that it is a copy of a "lost" cult statue, 

and hence, Artemis. If so, this would be a youthful 

Artemis, ready to receive offerings from winners of 

girls' races held in her honor, much as illustrated 

on fourth-century votive reliefs, like an offering to 

animal skin. Corinth: O. Broneer, Corinth IV, Pt. 2: Terracotta 

Lamps (Cambridge, Mass. 1930) 101, fig. 45.2. Cf. also a limestone 

statue in Paris, Louvre MA 2759, from Cyprus, second 

quarter of fifth century, in long chiton with quiver and 

bow, a terracotta in Capua, late fourth century, in long 

chiton, and Apulian krater, Naples 81667: LIMC II.1, 664, 

667, 712, nos. 560, 614, 1179, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil). Diana 

on the Sorrento base wears a cross-band, but with long overfold: 

Roccos (supra n. 4) fig. 1. Also related is the Artemis 

from the Hierapolis theater, which features double crossband 

and double belt, combined with mantle on one 

shoulder: G. Bejor, Hierapolis III: Le statue (Rome 1991) no. 4. 

36 The number of figures with this motif is considerable. 

I have not tried to collect them here.


Artemis Bendis from Piraeus, the offering of a torchrelay 

running team.37 This explanation, however, is 

impossible to verify, given the absence of recognizable 

large- or small-scale imitations. Pausanias mentions 

a number of Artemis statues in Corinth itself 

as well as nearby. In Corinth, for instance, the traveler 

records an Artemis hunting, set up by the Baths 

of Eurykles (2.3.5), and an Ephesian Artemis was located 

in the "agora" (2.2.6). In addition, running 

and standing representations of Artemis wearing the 

chiton with long overfold, accompanied by a dog, 

are seen on Roman lamps from Corinth, and similar 

depictions appear on coins, sometimes with a 

stag."8 On at least one terracotta figurine from 

Corinth, Artemis wears the crossed band, but in combination 

with an overfold.39 Thus, although at least 

two statuary types of Artemis are represented on 

small objects from Corinth, none is similar to the 

Theater statue. 

In the absence of Classical works in Corinth, due 

to the city's devastation by Mummius in 146 B.C. and 

the removal of its treasures, especially its bronzes, 

it might be expected that the Corinthians would look 

to nearby artistic centers like Sikyon and Argos for 

Classical models.40 In both cities statues of Artemis 

are noted by Pausanias, although in most cases little 

evidence can be adduced for their appearance.41 

The sculptors of Corinth would therefore have had 

numerous models in adjacent territories, but for most 

the sculptural type, date, and artist are unknown. 

37LIMC III.1, 96 no. 3, s.v. Bendis (Z. Goc'eva, D. Popov), 

in London, BM 2155, ca. 330 B.C. 

" Lamps: Broneer (supra n. 35) type XXVII, no. 584, 

fig. 46; no. 585, pl. 26. Coins: cf., e.g., EW. Imhoof-Blumer 

and P. Gardner, Ancient Coins Illustrating Lost Masterpieces 

of Greek Art: A Numismatic Commentary on Pausanias2 (Chi- 

cago 1964) 18, pl. D, nos. 66-68. 

9 Cf. also, e.g., G.R. Davidson, Corinth XII: The Minor Ob- 

jects (Princeton 1952) 42, nos. 228-35, pl. 19; A.N. Stillwell 

and J.L. Benson, Corinth XV, Pt. 2: The Potters' Quarter: The 

Terracottas (Princeton 1952) 124, no. XVII, 17, pl. 25. 

40 On the remains of bronze statuary and evidence for 

bronze casting at Corinth, see Davidson (supra n. 39) 

64-67, pls. 47-49, 144a; C.C. Mattusch, "Corinthian Metal- 

working: The Forum Area," Hesperia 46 (1977) 380-89; 

Mattusch, Greek Bronze Statuary: From the Beginnings through 

the Fifth Century B.C. (Ithaca 1988) 221-22, 228-30, 232, 235, 

240; Mattusch, "Corinthian Metalworking: The Gymnasium 

Bronze Foundry," Hesperia 60 (1991) 383-95. 

41 For instance, at Sikyon stood an Artemis Patroa, 

which Pausanias did not find impressive (2.9.6, obv tx'vi 

necotlr~pva ooEt1Q), a gilded Artemis in the agora (2.9.6), 

a standing Artemis in the Asklepieion (2.10.2), and a xoanon 

in the sanctuary of Artemis Pheraea (2.10.7). A temple of 

Artemis with xoanon is recorded on the road from the 

Isthmus to Kenchreai (2.2.3), and on the citadel above Phlius 

stood a bronze statue of Artemis, which seemed ancient 

(&pXcaiov, 

2.13.5). 

It might be argued that the importance of Artemis 

in the northern Peloponnese as well as at Corinth 

would make her presence in the Theater almost ex- 

pected, but the iconography should make it clearly 

recognizable. 

The absence of an identifiable prototype and of 

other replicas of the same type, in fact, might lead 

to the conjecture that the original version was not 

set up in a major city such as Athens or Ephesos and 

that it did not have continuous viewing throughout 

the Roman period. Rather, it may have stood in an 

area from which fewer Roman copies derived, per- 

haps for lack of local workshops.42 If so, however, the 

absence of the hypothetical model's reflection in 

large- or small-scale art would be surprising. More 

important, if Artemis were the intended subject, it 

would be essential that she be recognizable as such 

from established artistic tradition. This would be 

true particularly if the statue were a vehicle for a 

portrait, but even for an idealized statue the recog- 

nition factor is fundamental and militates against 

Artemis as the subject. 

Amazons 

Except for the belt, many elements of costume find 

parallels among representations of Amazons. For example, 

Amazons are frequently depicted with ornamented 

short chiton and tall boots, as seen in the 

Polygnotan bell krater from Spina.43 Some Amazons 

in arming scenes wear short chitons, as do those on 

In Argos are mentioned a statue of Artemis Parthenos 

(Paus. 2.19.7), a sanctuary of Artemis Peithos (2.21.1), and 

a cult of Artemis Pheraia (2.23.5). On Mount Lykone stood 

a marble statue of Artemis Orthia with Leto and Apollo 

by Polykleitos (which one is unspecified, possibly the 

Younger, 2.24.5). Sanctuaries of Artemis are located above 

Oinoe, on Mt. Artemisios (2.25.3), and at Orneai (2.25.6), 

while at Epidauros a temple of Artemis is located in the 

sanctuary of Asklepios (2.27.5), and another temple in the 

town of Epidauros with an image of the goddess hunting 

(2.28.8). In addition, coins of Patras may reproduce a statue 

of Artemis Laphria by Menaichmos and Soidas of Naupaktos: 

Paus. 4.31.7; 7.18.10; LIMC II.1, 641 no. 191, s.v. Artemis 

(L. Kahil), and see n. 14 supra; and a coin of Sparta illustrates 

an Artemis Astrateia (?), LIMC II.1, 662 no. 531, s.v. 

Artemis (L. Kahil). 

42 For a discussion of the large number of Roman 

copies and Greek prototypes found in Athens in contrast 

with the much smaller amount from sanctuaries elsewhere, 

see, e.g., Ridgway 1984, chs. 4-6. 

43 Boardman, fig. 132, Ferrara T.411, ARV2 1029.21. See 

also the New York lekythos by the Eretria Painter of ca. 

420, A. Lezzi-Hafter, Der Eretria-Maler: Werke und Weggefiihrten 

(Mainz 1988) pl. 154a, ARV2 1252.50; Amazons in high 

boots on a kantharos in the manner of the Alexander 

Painter, Lezzi-Hafter, Der Schuwalow-Maler (Mainz 1976) pl. 

145b, d; no. Al 4, Athens 1236, ARV2 1213.


the Naples kylix by the Eretria Painter.44 And on the 

Berlin lekythos the figure at left is seen wearing the 

"cross-your-heart bra," often worn in antiquity, as now, 

for athletic activities.45 

The chiton arrangement of the Corinth statue - 

short chiton belted at waist without kolpos or over- 

fall - occurs in a number of sculptures from the fifth 

to early fourth centuries: in copies of the shield of 

Athena Parthenos, on the Bassai temple frieze of ca. 

405-390 B.C., and on the Delphi metope (ca. 380) 

and Epidauros west pediment (ca. 375-370) figures 

(figs. 8-9).46 In addition, on vases Amazonian cos- 

tumes frequently have the chiton arrangement under 

discussion, the shorter garment seeming appropriate 

since it does not need to be pulled up to allow 

the figure to be active.47 Further, Amazons, as horseback 

riders, may have worn a garment that reached 

to mid-thigh in order to allow a better grip on the 

horse.48 

The crossed strap, as has already been seen, is 

possible, though not diagnostic, for Amazons. The 

boots worn by the Corinth statue are high, rising 

to the knee, and presumably are intended to represent 

the embades worn by horseback riders (and, more 

generally, peoples of northern origin, like the Thracians), 

rather than the calf-high endromides appropriate 

to runners.49 The Amazon rider from Epidauros 

(fig. 8) as well as her Boston counterpart sport the 

taller boot, as do some Amazons after the shield of 

Athena Parthenos (fig. 10), Amazons on the Bassai 

frieze and Kallithea monument, and numerous Amazons 

on vases.50 

44 Lezzi-Hafter 1988 (supra n. 43) pl. 43b, cat. 41 inv. 

2613. 

45 Unattributed squat lekythos in Berlin, late fifth century: 

E. Loewy, Polygnot (Vienna 1929) fig. 74; K.A. Schwab, 

The Parthenon Metopes and Greek Vase Painting: A Study of Comparison 

and Influences (Diss. New York Univ. 1988) 203, pl. 

154.2. In fact, the broad crossed strap appears worn in the 

same way as the "shoulder-cord," crossed either in back 

or front, as on a marble statuette of Artemis in Delos, 

Museum inv. A 5181, LIMC II.1, 685 no. 853, s.v. Artemis 

(L. Kahil). See E.B. Harrison, "The Shoulder-Cord of 

Themis," Festschriftfiir Frank Brommer (Mainz 1977) 155-61, 

esp. 155-56, and M. Robertson, "A Muffled Dancer and 

Others," in A. Cambitoglou ed., Studies in Honour of Arthur 

Dale Trendall (Sydney 1979) 129-34, esp. n. 12. For a description 

of this very practical method of restraining a garment, 

still traditional in parts of North Africa, see E Mernissi, 

Dreams of Trespass: Tales of a Harem Girlhood (Reading, 

Mass. 1994) 68. I owe this reference to Evelyn Harrison. 

46 Shield: LIMC 1.1, 602-603 no. 246, s.v. Amazones (P. 

Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras); Stephanidou-Tiveriou, 

pls. 7, 9, one figure, in rear view. Bassai: E.B. Harrison, "Style 

Phases in Greek Sculpture from 450 to 370 B.C.," in Acta 

(supra n. 29) 99-105, 105 on date of Bassai frieze, 405-390 

Fig. 10. Piraeus relief, after shield of Athena Parthenos. 

Piraeus, Archaeological Museum 2206. (Courtesy Deutsches 

Archiiologisches Institut, Athens, neg. 222) 

B.C. Delphi and Epidauros: supra n. 34. 

47 Cf., e.g., D. von Bothmer, Amazons in Greek Art (Oxford 

1957) pls. 74-85; LIMC 1.1, 592-93 no. 90, s.v. Amazones, 

Ruvo, Jatta J1096, ca. 410 B.C. 

48 Anderson has noted this as a general practice of 

Greek horsemen: J.K. Anderson, Ancient Greek Horsemanship 

(Berkeley 1961) 86. 

49 See Morrow 65-69, 87-89, 137, 178 (embades); 171-73 

and 178 (endromides), a warning on the variability of footwear 

in some copies. Cf. comments by M. Pfrommer, "The 

Emperor's Shoes: Hellenistic Footwear in Roman Times," 

Bulletin of The Cleveland Museum of Art 74:3 (1987) 124-29 

and Pfrommer, "Leochares? Die hellenistischen Schuhe 

der Artemis Versailles," IstMitt 34 (1984) 171-82, pls. 29-33; 

H.R. Goette, "Mulleus-Embas-Calceus. Ikonographische 

Studien zu r6mischem Schuhwerk,"JdI 103 (1988) 401-64, 

on Amazons 438-40. 

50 For Epidauros, see supra n. 34. Boston: LIMC 1.1, 613 

no. 418, s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras); 

M. Comstock and C.C. Vermeule, Sculpture in Stone (Boston 

1976) no. 42, dated 410-375 B.C.; Yalouris (supra n. 34) 38, 

figs. 9-10. The boots of the Doria-Pamphili Amazon are 

restored, but this statue is, in any case, considered a variation 

or a later creation: Ridgway 1974, 3-4, a Classicistic


Fig. 11. Attic red-figure kylix by the Eretria Painter. Naples, Museo Nazionale H2613, inv. 81324. (Courtesy A. 

Lezzi-Hafter) 

Artemis, on the other hand, usually wears the calf- 

high boot in fifth-century representations, although 

some later examples present her shod in the taller 

boot.51 Later depictions of Artemis may be less particular 

(or less knowledgeable) in this regard, as 

a statue dated to the Hellenistic-Roman period 

from a Geneva sale and a second-third century A.D. 

relief in the Athenian Agora may indicate.52 Notably, 

Dionysos on the bema reliefs in the Theater 

of Dionysos in Athens of the second century A.D. 

also wears the higher boot.53 Therefore, although 

the taller boot is more commonly worn by Amazons, 

a few later examples prevent it from being a determining 

factor. 

Among fifth-century originals, carved laces on high 

boots are rare in any context. A number of riders 

on the Parthenon frieze wear tall boots, but on most 

creation: M. Weber, "Die Amazonen von Ephesos,"JdI 91 

(1976) 28-96, no. 11, 37-39; Harrison 81 n. 154: possibly 

a Roman creation. LIMC 1.1, 603 no. 246d, s.v. Amazones 

(P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras), (copy of Parthenos 

shield) = Stephanidou-Tiveriou pl. 12; Stephanidou- 

Tiveriou, pl. 17b (fragment from Salamis); Bassai frieze, 

LIMC 1.1, 593 no. 101, s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, A. 

Kauffmann-Samaras). Kallithea: E.K. Tsirivakos, "EiU8&io~tq 

icK Ka,t0caqg," AAA 1 (1968) 108-109, fig. 3. Vases: cf., e.g., 

supra n. 43; von Bothmer (supra n. 47) pl. 82.1 (kantharos, 

Athens 1236, ARV2 1213, LIMC 1.1, 608 no. 327, s.v. Amazones 

[P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras]), pl. 83.7 (bell 

krater, Ferrara T.411, ARV2 1029, LIMC 1.1, 631 no. 724, s.v. 

Amazones [P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras]). 

51 See, e.g., LIMC II.1, 652, 655, 722, 731 nos. 369, 414, 

1287, 1391, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil). See also the new Artemis 

from Messene, of Laphria type, Ergon 1989, 31, fig. 30. 

52 Geneva: LIMC II.1, 652 no. 369, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil). 

Agora: S 2361, LIMC II.1, 655 no. 414, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil). 

the front openings and laces were added in paint; 

only two with carved laces have been detected.54 A 

few Amazons after the Parthenos shield wear the 

taller boot with incised straps. These do not act 

as front lacings, however, but wrap around the calf.55 

The Bassai frieze provides an early example of 

sculpted Amazons wearing high boots with long tabs; 

here also most such details are uncarved.56 Paint 

continues to be the preferred method of rendering 

laces and front openings in the fourth century.57 On 

the other hand, representations in vase painting 

confirm the impression established by sculpture that 

chiton-wearing Amazons are usually barefooted in 

the fifth century: witness the Naples cup by the 

Eretria Painter dated ca. 425-420 (fig. 11).58 In fact, 

the closest parallel for the wide, carved laces and 

undecorated flaps on a tall boot is provided by a 

53 Bema reliefs: M.C. Sturgeon, "The Reliefs on the 

Theater of Dionysos in Athens," AJA 81 (1977) 31-53, slab 

II, fig. 3. The Dionysos of Hope type wears high sandals, 

but they do not reach the knee: Hope Dionysos in New 

York, MMABulletin 41:2 (1991) 10-11, dated late first century 

A.D.; LIMC III.1, 436-37 no. 128b, Copenhagen, s.v. 

Dionysos (C. Gasparri); and Argos, J. Marcade and E. 

Raftopoulou, "Sculptures argiennes (II)," BCH 87 (1963) 

89-97, figs. 39-41. Cf. also, e.g., the fourth-century B.C. relief 

in Athens, N.M. no. 1489, from the Theater of Dionysos: 

LIMC III.1, 494-95 no. 853, s.v. Dionysos (C. Gasparri). 

54 Morrow 65, pls. 43-46, 50. 

55 Stephanidou-Tiveriou, pls. 12 (fig. 10 here), 17b. 

56 Morrow 67. 

57 Morrow 87, 89, pls. 65-66. 

58 Naples, Mus. Naz. H 2613, inv. 81324: Lezzi-Hafter 

1988 (supra n. 43) cat. 41, pls. 42-43; LIMC 1.1, 602 no. 240, 

s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann-Samaras); ARV2 

1252.50.


male statue in the Vatican Museums identified as 

a possible portrait of Marcus Aurelius as military 

general or as hunter, which, in either case, empha- 

sizes the variable use of the boot.59 

Female Athletes 

Other possibilities from the sculptural tradition 

should be considered. A number of female athletes 

are clad in a short chiton, for example, runners, as 

in a bronze statuette from Dodona of ca. 550.60 Uncertainty 

surrounds other possible runners. For the 

Vatican Runner both subject and date are problematic, 

as it has been considered a work of ca. 460 or 

a Roman eclectic creation.61 The statue in Berlin 

has been called a runner or a dancer, because it seems 

to pirouette on its toes, but its identity is also unprovable.62 

In fact, Amazons are sometimes referred 

to as dancing for Artemis and are illustrated dancing 

on some Apulian vases.63 

These possible runners recall women's races. 

Atalanta runs a famous race against her suitors, and 

races are associated with Artemis Brauronia and 

Artemis Bendis and with athletic contests for girls. 

In addition to Sparta, where girls as well as boys 

were trained as athletes,64 Athenaeus (13.566) records 

girls in races at Cyrene and Chios. The Heraea 

at Olympia include the 500-foot race for girls of 

different ages. Here Pausanias (5.16) notes that girls 

ran wearing long hair, a chiton to above the knee, 

and the right shoulder bare. It sounds as if he is describing 

a sixth-century bronze statuette in London.65 

More suggestive is his statement that girls 

had the right to set up their images as victors. Moreover, 

runners are known for their long legs, which 

form an impressive aspect of the Corinth statue. 

Could we have a victor's statue from a girl's race? 

5, Bieber 1977, 220, fig. 865, n. 287, with alien head of 

Commodus, identified as Marcus Aurelius; Helbig4 I, no. 

408 (left lower leg restored). 

1o In Athens, E. Langlotz, Friihgriechische Bildhauerschulen 

(Nuremberg 1927) pl. 48b; N. Serwint, "The Female Athletic 

Costume at the Heraia and Prenuptial Initiation Rites," 

AJA 97 (1993) 410, fig. 4, ca. 560 B.C. 

63 Lippold 134, pl. 47.4. E.N. Gardiner, Athletics of the Ancient 

World (Oxford 1930) fig. 13, cast in Ashmolean Museum 

without restored arms. Serwint (supra n. 60) 408-11, 

fig. 2. 

"2 C. Picard, Manuel d'archeologie grecque. La sculpture II.2 

(Paris 1939) 661, fig. 263, 664 cites a second version found 

in Benevento and a third on the Palatine in Rome (see AA 

1935, 545-46, 547-48, fig. 6; and H. von Steuben, "Die Madchenstatue 

Berlin-Rom-Benevent," AntP 15 [1975] 23-29). 

13- Callim. Hymn III, 237-49; W.O.E. Oesterley, The Sacred 

Dance (Cambridge 1923) 66-67; G. Schneider-Herrmann, 

"The Dance of the Amazons," in Cambitoglou (supra n. 

45) 171-75. 

'64 Gardiner (supra n. 61) 41-42. Cf. C. Berard, 

A statue for a victor in a horserace might also seem 

possible, or even a depiction of a figure with a "horsy" 

name, like Hippodameia. Let us see if the size can 

support that interpretation. Our statue has a pre- 

served height of 1.655 m, yielding a restored height 

of about 1.90 m. Her putative companions are sig- 

nificantly shorter. The Ostia girl as Artemis measures 

1.49 m, the Vatican Runner is 1.54 m tall, and the 

Berlin girl has a restored height of 1.60 m (Pres. H. 

0.973).66 Statues of private individuals are generally 

much shorter than the 1.90 m of our statue, so a 

victor's statue may be ruled out. A portrait might 

be possible, however, if the subject came from an im- 

portant family. 

The Belt 

While other elements of costume occur frequently, 

the belt stands out as the Corinth statue's most in- 

dividual feature and seems designed to promote a 

specific meaning. This belt shape, as far as I can de- 

termine, does not appear on sculptural depictions 

of Artemis or the Amazons in the Classical period. 

The belt worn by Artemis in Greek sculpture is often 

a simple continuous band, but a few wider examples 

exist.67 Artemis's belt has central emphasis in the 

Laphria type from which a ram's head projects.68 

Amazons' belts, on the other hand, are usually simple 

bands of even width. 

A horse's rein has been recognized by Boardman 

as forming the Lansdowne Amazon's belt, a singular 

feature among sculptured Amazons and an inven- 

tive addition to the theme of the wounded female 

warrior-horserider, importantly, tied to the story.69 

If an Augustan date is accepted for the Lansdowne 

Amazon, the belt would be considered a creation 

of the Roman sculptor. 

"Limpossible femme athlete," AION 8 (1986) 195-202. 

65 BM 208, Serwint (supra n. 60) 406-407, fig. 1. 

66 See supra ns. 24, 61, 62. The Copenhagen (Sciarra) 

Amazon, which is preserved to its full height, stands at 

1.94 m, E Poulsen, Catalogue of Ancient Sculpture in the Ny 

Carlsberg Glyptotek (Copenhagen 1951) no. 54. 

67 Artemis's belt: cf., e.g., LIMC II.1, 636, 640 nos. 129 

(fourth century, Beirut-Venice type), 182 (second century 

B.C., Cyrene), sv. Artemis (L. Kahil). 

6 LIMC II.1, 641 no. 191, s.v. Artemis (L. Kahil); Rome, 

Palatine Antiquarium: LIMC II.1, 803 no. 22b, s.v. Artemis/ 

Diana (E. Simon); Conservatori: LIMC II.1, 803 no. 22c, s.v. 

Artemis/Diana (E. Simon) = LIMC II.1, 641 no. 197, s.v. 

Artemis (L. Kahil). 

"J. Boardman, "The Amazon's Belt," AJA 84 (1980) 

181-82; cf. M. Weber, "Die Amazonen von Ephesos II,"JdI 

99 (1984) 85-86; B.S. Ridgway, "The Amazon's Belt: An Ad- 

dendum to a Story of Five Amazons," AJA 80 (1976) 82. 

D. Stupka, Der Giirtel in der griechische Kunst (Diss. Univ. of 

Vienna 1972) type 12: M 1, 215.


Fig. 12. Weiller horse, detail. Weiller Collection, Paris. (Courtesy J. Bergemann) 

By analogy, it seems possible that the Corinth belt, 

likewise of specific but unusual form, represents a 

type of horse trapping employed as a belt, that is, 

the horse collar or breast strap, balteus, which in some 

examples possesses two central points. Undecorated 

horse collars with this shape appear as early as the 

second half of the sixth century B.C., on horses of 

the Siphnian Treasury frieze and the east pediment 

of the Apollo temple at Delphi.70 Later examples acquire 

decoration, as Hera's winged horse on the Pergamon 

Altar frieze and the bronze horse of "Nero 

Caesar" from Cartoceto illustrate.71 The less well 

preserved Cartoceto horse even exhibits circular 

central decoration, termed a shield.72 The horse 

collar of the Weiller equestrian statue, from the 

mid-first century B.C., is also of similar shape, displaying, 

in addition, relief rinceaux flanking a central 

oval with gorgon's head (fig. 12).7" Horse collars 

were sometimes hung with discs or phalerae around 

the sides, but an emblem or gem seems more likely 

for the Corinth statue.74 

As for the belt's material, the sharp points recall 

metalwork found in the art of northern, migratory 

peoples, like the gold bridle frontlet found in 

Ukraine's Melitopol region north of the Azov Sea. 

70 Delphi: Siphnian Treasury, south frieze, C. Picard and 

P. de la Coste-Messieliere, La sculpture grecque a Delphes (Paris 

1927) pls. 9-10, Apollo temple, pl. 35. 

71 Pergamon: LIMC IV.1, 702-703 no. 371, s.v. Hera (A. 

Kossatz-Deissmann); this belt also has raised borders and 

wavy decoration. E Nicosia, G. Maetzke, and L. Vlad Borelli, 

Bronzi dorati da Cartoceto. Un restauro (Florence 1987) pl. 4. 

See now J. Pollini, "The Cartoceto Bronzes: Portraits of 

a Roman Aristocratic Family of the Late First Century B.C.," 

AJA 97 (1993) 423-46. For a different interpretation and 

a discussion of the balteus, cf. E.R. Knauer, "The Date of 

the Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius," RM 97 (1990) 

277-306, esp. 289-99, 304. 

72 Nicosia et al. (supra n. 71) pl. 15. 

73 Paris, Weiller Collection. J. Bergemann, R6mische 

Reiterstatuen. Ehrendenkmdler im offentlichen Bereich (Mainz 

1990) cat. P 44, pls. 4, 74, 75b, dated mid-first century B.C., 

In fact, some actual bronze baltei with double points 

survive, like the second-century A.D. example from 

Aosta sporting a battle scene.75 Moreover, the points 

would make this a most uncomfortable belt for a 

person to wear, most likely causing pain or bruises 

from bending, which strengthens the argument that 

it is here a horse trapping adapted to human use 

as an attribute. The Corinth belt, therefore, confirms 

the identification. It reproduces a belt type associated 

with horse trappings as one way, in addition 

to the long thighs and high boots, of characterizing 

the Corinth figure as a horsewoman, and thereby, 

an Amazon. 

This belt may also have a military connotation, 

since a few Roman figures that wear it also bear 

helmet and shield. The wide belt with central points 

is worn by two frontal, high-relief figures from the 

first century A.D., although these are not exactly like 

the Corinth example. The figure once identified as 

Minerva in situ over the frieze course in Nerva's 

Forum in Rome (fig. 13) wears an undecorated belt 

that widens in the center, though it lacks the sharp 

points of the Corinth statue, as if it represents a 

leather object rather than one of metal. Further, the 

province of the Piroustae from the Sebasteion at 

probably erected in Sentinum;J. Marcade, "Cheval antique 

en marbre de la Collection Paul-Louis Weiller," BCH 100 

(1976) 379-99, figs. 1-4, 9-11, 14. Not all depictions of horses 

include horse collars: cf. H. von Roques de Maumont, Antike 

Reiterstandbilder (Berlin 1958). 

74 Anderson (supra n. 48) 85. Cf. also I. Jenkins, "A 

Group of Silvered-Bronze Horse-Trappings from Xanten 

(Castra Vetera)," Britannia 16 (1985) 141-64, pls. 5-11; M.C. 

Bishop, "Cavalry Equipment of the Roman Army in the 

First Century A.D.," inJ.C. Coulston ed., Military Equipment 

and the Identity of Roman Soldiers (BAR-IS 394, Oxford 1988) 

67-195. 

75 Hermitage, Dn 1868, 118, fourth century B.C., From the 

Lands of the Scythians: Ancient Treasures from the Museums of 

the US.S.R., 3000 B.C.-100 B.C. (New York n.d.) no. 69, col. 

pl. 11. C. Carducci, "Un balteus da Aosta," ArchCl 11 (1959) 

36-49, pls. 21-27; see also examples in Brescia and Vienna.


Fig. 13. High-relief figure ("Minerva"). Rome, Forum of 

Nerva. (Courtesy Deutsches Archaologisches Institut, Rome, 

neg. 36.512) 

76 Nerva's Forum: P.H. von Blanckenhagen, Flavische 

Architektur und ihre Dekoration (Berlin 1940) 116-17, pl. 38, 

fig. 103; Stephanidou-Tiveriou, pl. 49b; E. D'Ambra, Private 

Lives, Imperial Virtues: The Frieze of the Forum Transitorium 

in Rome (Princeton 1993) 125-26, figs. 82-83; on this figure 

the belt widens at top and bottom, but the outward curve 

is more gradual. This figure very likely represents a province 

or gens and formed part of a series of such figures 

set above the frieze. Aphrodisias: R.R.R. Smith, "Simulacra 

Gentium: The Ethne from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias," 

JRS 78 (1988) 59-62 no. 1, pl. 1 and fig. 3. For other wide 

belts with upper and lower edges set off, cf., e.g., the seated 

Dionysos on the Early Antonine reliefs from the Piraeus, 

Stephanidou-Tiveriou, no. 48, pl. 35 and the tragic hero 

on the funeral relief of Flavius Valerianus in the garden 

of the Villa Doria Pamphili in Rome, early third century 

A.D., Bieber 1961, fig. 788. 

77 C. Robert, ASR III.1, no. 34, pls. 8-9; R. Calza, Antichita& 

di Villa Doria Pamphilj (Rome 1977) no. 178, pl. illa; G. Koch 

and H. Sichtermann, Romische Sarkophage (HdA, Munich 

1982) 143, pl. 153. 

78 Ruvo, Jatta 1501, ARV2 1338.1; Boardman, fig. 324. 

79 See, e.g., two actors from mime on pulpitum reliefs 

of the Sabratha theater and the grave relief of dwarf fluteplayer 

Myropnous, Bieber 1961, figs. 785, 782. Kornelios 

Aphrodisias wears a similar belt, but with only one 

central point.76 Since the Corinth belt specifically 

reproduces a metal form, it may also convey the original 

connotation as a horse collar, rather than the 

modified shape that sees military use by humans. 

The Argive king Proitos on the Bellerophon sarcophagus 

in the Villa Doria Pamphili provides an 

additional example of a broad belt with point, a drawing 

confirming the lower pointed end, which is now 

missing.77 Drapery obscures the upper edge, so it 

is uncertain if this would also have been pointed. 

Since there were two Euripidean plays on this subject, 

the Stheneboia and the Bellerophon, the king's belt 

may reflect theatrical costume. The broad belt's association 

with theatrical costume is further illustrated 

by Medea's costume on the Talos Painter's name 

vase of ca. 410 B.C.78 In addition, wide belts are characteristic 

of actors, musicians, and muses in the 

Roman period, figures belonging to the theatrical 

sphere of which the Corinth statue formed a part.79 

Furthermore, broad belts frequently form part of 

barbarians' costume in the Roman period, though 

notably without the central points.80 None of these 

examples, however, reproduces the specific shape il- 

lustrated here. The possibility of a military context 

might be raised, such as that of female Pyrrhic 

dancers, but they are generally represented in little 

clothing, as on the Lykaon Painter's bell krater in 

Naples.81 In conclusion, the belt seems ornamental 

and of restricted use, and it is possible that it represents 

a special prize or gift. 

on the Isthmia relief wears a more elaborate costume, P. 

Clement, "L. Kornelios Korinthos of Corinth," in Phoros, 

Tribute to Benjamin Dean Meritt (Locust Valley, N.Y. 1974) 

36-39, pls. 2-4: S. Lattimore, Sculpturesfrom Isthmia II, forthcoming, 

no. 87. Apollo Kitharoidos: LIMC II.1, 203 no. 135, 

s.v. Apollon (W. Lambrinudakis) = LIMC II.1, 385-86 no. 

65, s.v. Apollon/Apollo (E. Simon); Bieber 1961, fig. 781; 

Helbig4 I, no. 82; cf. Roccos (supra n. 31). Muses: M. Fuchs, 

Untersuchungen zur Ausstattung romischer Theater in Italien und 

den Westprovinzen des Imperium Romanum (Mainz 1987) from 

Ferentium, pls. 35:3-6 (Euterpe), 36:1 (Melpomene), 36:4 

(Erato); Fuchs, "Eine Musengruppe aus dem Pompeius- 

Theater," RM 89 (1982) 69-80, pls. 21-23, Apollo; 27:1, Erato; 

27:2, Euterpe. Herakles in theatral costume on Arezzo matrices: 

M.T. Marabini Moevs, "Le muse di Ambracia," BdA 

12 (1981) 1-58, figs. 11, 20-23. For recent bibliography, cf. 

B.S. Ridgway, "Musings on the Muses," Festschrift fir Niko- 

laus Himmelmann (BJb-BH 47, Mainz 1989) 265-72, pls. 44-45; 

B.S. Ridgway, Hellenistic Sculpture I. The Styles of ca. 331-200 

B.C. (Madison 1990) 246-74. 

80 R.M. Schneider, Bunte Barbaren. Orientalenstatuen aus 

farbigem Marmor in der r6mischen Repriisentationskunst (Worms 

1986). 

81 Boardman, fig. 153, Naples Santangelo 281, ARV2 

1045.9.


The running wave pattern on the Corinth belt 

represents a simplified form of running spiral or 

rinceau, a pattern that can adorn various accessories: 

diadems, crowns, and boots, as well as sword straps 

and helmet visors.82 The rinceau ends in a leaf pat- 

tern on either side of the central oval. The latter 

is recessed, as if an insert, such as a precious stone 

or symbol, was intended. Neither holes nor a rough- 

ened surface exists to facilitate an attachment. Be- 

cause the surface is somewhat discolored, it is 

possible that it was painted to simulate inlaid glass, 

stone, or enamel.83 

Even though the Corinth statue should now be 

considered an Amazon, it cannot be connected with 

the so-called group of wounded Amazons once 

thought to have been set up in the Artemis sanctuary 

at Ephesos ca. 440-430 B.C.84 The creation of 

these figures as a contemporary group has been chal- 

lenged successfully, leaving only general agreement 

that one statue originated in the fifth century: the 

Capitoline-Sosikles type, attributed by some scholars 

to Polykleitos.85 

A number of factors make association of the 

Corinth sculpture with this "group" doubtful. In the 

first place, the Corinth statue does not have a discernible 

wound. The wound's absence does not, by 

itself, preclude association with the "Ephesian" Ama- 

zons, however, since most copies of the Mattei type 

appear unwounded. Notably, the Tivoli version of 

82 For rinceaux on diadems: of Aphrodite from Taranto, 

LIMC II.1, 106 no. 1050, s.v. Aphrodite (A. Delivorrias); of 

figure from Pergamon, AvP VII.I, no. 87. On crowns: Diogenes 

from Aphrodisias,J. Inan and E. Alfoldi-Rosenbaum, 

R6mische und friihbyzantinische Portrdtplastik aus der Turkei. 

Neue Funde (Mainz 1979) no. 186. On boots, see Morrow 

124, pl. 12. On sword straps, cf. the Dresden bust of Ares 

Borghese type, LIMC II.1, 512-13 no. 21a, s.v. Ares/Mars (E. 

Simon), Antonine; K.J. Hartswick, "The Ares Borghese Reconsidered," 

RA 1990, 227-83; bust in Rome of the young 

Caracalla, Felletti Maj, no. 254. On helmet visors, as in replicas 

of the Athena Parthenos: relief in Corinth, S 821,Johnson, 

no. 278; Ridgway 1981b, 438, pl. 94b; medallion from 

Kerch in Leningrad,J. Boardman, Greek Sculpture: The Classical 

Period (London 1985) fig. 102. This common Pergamene 

motif appears elsewhere at Corinth, e.g., on boots 

of dancers, S 193, Johnson, no. 275, and as a border pattern 

around the coffers from the Captives' Facade, S 195, 

Johnson, no. 226. 

81 The area has been examined using ultraviolet light 

as well as raking daylight, but no meaningful shadow or 

stain could be discerned. 

4 See, e.g., Pliny, HN 34.53; Lucian, Imag. 4. Lippold 

171-72, pl. 61; Ridgway 1974; T. Dohrn, "Altes und Neues 

uber die ephesischen Amazonen,"Jd194 (1979) 125-26 with 

bibliography; Harrison 81-85, 88; Weber (supra n. 69) 

75-126; Weber (supra n. 50) figs. 1-2 (Sciarra-Lansdowne), 

the Mattei type seems to raise the thigh and drapery 

in order to display the wound.86 Although it might 

be argued that a wound could have been depicted 

on the Corinthian sculpture with paint, this seems 

unlikely in the absence of an adjustment of the 

drapery to reveal it. Furthermore, there is nothing 

about the Corinth figure that appears pitiable, nor 

does she shift her weight onto a spear or pedestal 

on the side of the free leg, as do the "Ephesian" 

Amazons, so an association with this "group" appears 

unsupportable on iconographical grounds. On the 

contrary, the Corinth statue stands in a confident 

pose with weight evenly balanced. Moreover, in regard 

to pertinent elements of costume, the fifthcentury 

"Ephesian" Amazons differ from the Corinthian 

in important respects: they have one breast 

exposed, the strap crossed once, simpler belts, 

double-belted chitoniskoi, and they are barefooted. 

Although the size appears comparable, the Corinth 

statue does not come close enough to any of the 

"Ephesian" types to be diagnosed as a variant, much 

less a copy. 

Shortly after its discovery De Waele asserted that 

the Theater sculpture was a copy of a bronze statue 

by Strongylion who was famous for his Amazon 

EiKvilbtov and for the Artemis Soteira in Megara.87 

Unfortunately, there exists no evidence for the appearance 

of either of these statues. In any case, the 

floruit of Strongylion, ca. 415-385 B.C.,88 would ap- 

13-14 (Sosikles-Capitoline), 21-22 (Mattei); M. Robertson, 

A History of Greek Art (Cambridge 1975) 334-35; LIMC I.1, 625 

nos. 602-605, s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, A. Kauffmann- 

Samaras); C. Landwehr, Die antiken Gipsabgiisse aus Baiae 

(Berlin 1985) 72-76; K.J. Hartswick, "The So-Called'Ephesos 

Amazon': A New Identification,"JdI 101 (1986) 127-36; 

M. Weber, "Klassische Amazonen als Gemmenbilder," in 

Kanon, Festschrift Ernst Berger (AntK-BH 15, Basel 1988) 

134-39, pls. 39-40; P. Scherrer, "Augustus, die Mission des 

Vedius Pollio und die Artemis Ephesia," OJh 60 (1990) 

87-101 (Augustan date for Amazon relief from Artemiseion 

altar); R. Bol, "Die Amazone des Polyklet," in Beck and Bol 

(supra n. 6) 213-39. Not all agree with the revisionism, however; 

see, e.g., W. Gauer, "Die ephesischen Amazonen, das 

Bildnis des Artemon und der samische Krieg des Perikles," 

Kotinos: Festschriftfiir Erika Simon (Mainz 1992) 188-98. 

85 Even the Mattei type has been lowered, by Ridgway 

1974, 4-6, to the fourth century, by Harrison 73-76 to the 

same period as the Epidauros sculptures, although more 

advanced. On the attribution to Polykleitos, see, e.g., T. 

Lorenz, Polyklet (Wiesbaden 1972) 31-34. Weber (supra n. 69) 

134-39, however, assigns the Capitoline type to Pheidias. 

86J. Raeder, Die statuarische Ausstattung der Villa Hadriana 

bei Tivoli (Frankfurt 1983) cat. I 90, pl. 18. 

87 

Supra n. 2. 

88 

Lippold 189-90; G.M.A. Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors 

of the Greeks4 (New Haven 1970) 188-89.


pear too late to suit the prototype of the Theater 

statue, as will be discussed below. Since connection 

with the "Ephesian" Amazons has been rejected, the 

statue cannot represent the "lost" Amazon of Phradmon, 

which tradition has also associated with the 

"contest."'89 

It is possible that the left arm of the Corinth statue 

held a long metal spear for balance. If so, the tip 

would have been inserted into the rectangular base, 

beside the socle, since no trace remains on the socle 

itself."o The statue might then be envisioned as the 

Amazon queen Hippolyta, wearing her famous belt, 

in preparation for the encounter in which she loses 

the belt to Herakles. Related Amazons, standing unwounded, 

can be seen on a cup in Naples attributed 

to the Eretria Painter (fig. 11).91 One of the figures 

in this arming scene, in fact, is close in stance to the 

Corinthian statue, though wearing a different costume."9 

The painted figure additionally carries a 

mantle over the left arm, a possibility that seems unlikely 

for the sculpture, since there is no trace of it 

on the socle. 

As this review of the evidence shows, the icono- 

graphic features and scale do not lead unequivocably 

in a single direction, so we should ask which item 

deserves the greatest weight. The belt is the only fea- 

ture with exact parallel in a single, specific context- 

the horse collar--and the Roman audience would 

have recognized it as such. Here it is adapted for 

wear as a belt, which together with short dress, long 

thighs, and high boots, seems to signify a horserider. 

The most preeminent of these are the Amazons, 

89 Phradmon of Argos: Lippold 169-70, 172; RE 20 

(1941) 739-40, sv. Phradmon (G. Lippold); P.C. Sestieri, "Alla 

ricerca di Phradmon," ArchCl 3 (1951) 13-32; EAA VI, 139, 

s.v. Phradmon (L. Guerrini). On the base at Ostia, G.M.A. 

Richter, "New Signatures of Greek Sculptors," AJA 75 (1971) 

434-35; E Zevi, "Tre iscrizioni con firme di artisti greci," 

RendPontAcc 42 (1969-1970) 95-116. On the other hand, 

some would not consider Phradmon's Amazon "lost," but 

would associate it with a surviving type: see Ridgway 1974, 9. 

90 Cf. the positions of feet in relation to spearpoints and 

supports in W. Gauer, "Die Gruppe der ephesischen Ama- 

zonen, ein Denkmal des Perserfriedens," Tainia, Roland 

Hampe (Mainz 1980) 204, fig. 1. 

91 Naples 2613, cup; von Bothmer (supra n. 47) 203, pl. 

85, no. 161; ARV2 1252.50; Lezzi-Hafter 1988 (supra n. 43) 

no. 41, pl. 43a, ca. 425-420 B.C., the name Andromache 

was once read on this side. 

92 von Bothmer (supra n. 47) pl. 85f, left; this Amazon 

wears a leather corslet, but no boots. 

9` On the use of visual "quotations" and the need for 

them to be clearly recognizable, see Ridgway 1984, 84. 

94 On recurrent interest in the Amazons, see, in addi- 

tion to studies cited above, e.g., FJ. Bennett, Religious Cults 

Associated with the Amazons (New York 1912, reprinted 1967); 

whose popularity in the mid-second century A.D. is 

evident from the abundance of sarcophagi with that 

theme, a theme that occurs at Corinth both on sar- 

cophagi and in one set of reliefs from the Theater 

facade. If Artemis had been the intended subject, 

it would be important that the goddess be easily iden- 

tified, and that is clearly not the case here.93 

Moreover, at Aphrodisias at least, a wide belt with 

central point is employed in the personification of 

a foreign people, the Piroustae, which leads to the 

question whether the subject is the proud Amazon 

as foreign female warrior, or the personification of 

a people who excelled in war on horseback. An Ama- 

zon queen, as a figure famous through legend and 

drama, would form an appropriate dedication in 

a Roman theater.94 Moreover, Roman gladiatorial 

games were sometimes fought against warriors wear- 

ing Amazon masks, so for this reason also an Ama- 

zon would be suitable for a theater, which in Greece 

frequently takes the place of an amphitheater.95 

CHRONOLOGY 

Because of the detailed treatment, it could be as- 

serted that the Corinth Amazon is a fairly close copy 

of a specific prototype, which is presumed to be of 

bronze because of the tree-trunk support, obvious 

strut, and sharp details. Although an initial view 

might suggest that the statue is intended to give the 

impression of an early bronze by Polykleitos or a 

contemporary Peloponnesian artist, our previous dis- 

cussion of the composition has indicated that that 

P. Devambez, "Les amazones et 'orient," RA 1976, 265-80; 

J. Boardman, "Herakles, Theseus and Amazons," in D. Kurtz 

and B. Sparkes eds., The Eye of Greece. Studies in the Art of 

Athens (Cambridge 1982) 1-28; P. duBois, Centaurs andAmazons 

(Ann Arbor 1982); H.A. Shapiro, "'Amazons, Thracians, 

and Scythians," GRBS 24 (1983) 105-14; W.B. Tyrell, Amazons: 

A Study in Athenian Myth Making (Baltimore 1984); M.Y. 

Goldberg, "The Amazon Myth and Gender Studies," AJA 

98 (1994) 334-35 (abstract). 

95 For theaters in Greece and Asia Minor used both for 

musical spectacles and for hunts, cf. L. Robert, Les gladiateurs 

dans l'orient grec (Paris 1940) 34-35. The same is true 

for parts of Britain and Belgic Gaul: A. Boethius andJ.B. 

Ward-Perkins, Etruscan and Roman Architecture (London 1970) 

377. On surviving bronze helmets with female masks, see 

H.R. Robinson, The Armour oflmperial Rome (New York 1975) 

108, 124-25. Although Corinth had an amphitheater (H.N. 

Fowler and R. Stillwell, Corinth I [Cambridge, Mass. 1932] 

89-91, figs. 54-56), its theater was also transformed into 

an arena, though not until the early third century: R. Stillwell, 

Corinth II: The Theatre (Princeton 1952) 84-98. Interest 

in amphitheaters thrives; see, e.g., K. Welch, "Roman 

Amphitheatres Revived,"JRA 4 (1991) 272-81.


is not the case.96 The hypothetical model, if it existed, 

seems not to have other recognizable descendants. 

The number of female statues assigned to Polykleitos 

by the ancient sources, in fact, is relatively 

small and attributions are uncertain.97 The Amazon 

associated with the "Ephesians" is the only Amazon 

by Polykleitos noted. 

If a specific prototype is assumed, two interpretations 

could be considered. First, the drapery style 

and vertical pose make the figure appear earlier than 

the Capitol ine-Sosikles Amazon type of ca. 440-430. 

The absence of a weight shift at the waist also makes 

it appear earlier than the Doryphoros of ca. 440. 

Further, it could be argued that the horizontal waist 

results from the copyist's regularization of the pose 

and that the stance assumes knowledge of Polykleitos's 

canon. On the other hand, significant chron- 

ological inconsistencies, as opposed to elements 

definable as later additions, and the absence of other 

replicas may point to a new creation. Closer examination 

of drapery and proportions may lead to 

a solution. 

Style 

The drapery style shows a mixture of elements 

from the third and fourth quarters of the fifth century. 

The skirt shows density and movement related 

to some chitons on the Parthenon metopes and on 

the Athena Parthenos shield, suggesting a prototype 

of ca. 450-440 B.C.98 On Parthenon frieze slab West 

XII, the figure beside the horse exhibits a similar 

stance and lack of transparency or motion in his drapery, 

but most garments on the frieze show a much 

looser rendering outlining the body, as in the figure 

moving right on South XXV."9 

?'- Lippold 162-69, esp. 167; RE 21.2 (1952) 1707-18, s.v. 

Polykleitos (G. Lippold). On other artists working in the 

Peloponnese in this period, cf. Lippold 162-75; P.C. Bol, 

"Zur argivischen Kunst vor Polyklet," in Beck and Bol (supra 

n. 6) 42-47; on the school of Polykleitos, cf. D. Arnold, Die 

Polykletnachfolge (JdI-EH 25, Berlin 1969) 6-8 and n. 33; A. 

Linfert, "Die Schule des Polyklet," in Beck and Bol (supra 

n. 6) 240-97. See also the detailed discussions by A.H. 

Borbein, review ofT. Lorenz, Polyklet (Wiesbaden 1972) in 

GGA 234 (1982) 184-241; Ridgway 1981a, 201-206; B.S. Ridgway, 

"Paene ad exemplum: Polykleitos' Other Works," in Symposium 

(supra n. 6) forthcoming. 

97 E.g., Paus. 2.17.4 and Plut. Vit. Per. 2 cite a Hera at 

Argos and the former a Hekate for Argos (2.22.7), Leto 

and Artemis on Mount Lykone (2.24.5), and an Aphrodite 

at Amyklai (3.18.7), while Cic. Verr. 4.3.5 refers to two kanephoroi. 

See also the forthcoming article by A. Delivorrias, 

in Symposium (supra n. 6). 

9 Cf., e.g., E Brommer, Die Metopen des Parthenon (Mainz 

1967) South 29, pls. 224-25. Shield: Piraeus reliefs, 

StephanidouTiveriou pls. 2, 3, 12; Aphrodisias sarcophagus, 

E.B. Harrison, "Motifs of the City-Siege on the Shield 

of Athena Parthenos," AJA 85 (1981) 281-317, pl. 48. 

In our statue the use of modeling lines is minimal 

and comparable to their use on the Parthenon 

metopes and shield, as recently discussed by Harrison.100 

Some lines define the breasts' contours, 

especially the left, although other lines crossing the 

breasts are straight, creating a flattening effect. In 

the skirt the gradual inward curves of a few key fold 

lines emphasize the vertical contours of the thighs 

with, at proper left, a very slight suggestion of the 

lower abdominal curve.'0' Somewhat deeper carving 

at left creates a richer play of light and shadow. Furthermore, 

the way in which the material forms a 

kolpos only at the sides without curving down over 

the abdomen is also appropriate for this period.'02 

Other aspects of the drapery, however, seem unusual 

for a figure in the style of ca. 450-440 B.C. Especially 

notable in this regard is the area over the 

breasts (fig. 2), where, at right, ridged folds and long 

scratches obscure the underlying form. At left, the 

folds are flatter and more transparent, while above 

and toward the center, twisted ribbon folds are carved 

in low relief. The combination of fold styles suggests 

that the artist was inattentive to chronological distinctions 

in fifth-century drapery styles.'03 Although 

scratches occur tentatively on one figure on the 

Parthenos shield, as known through a Roman marble 

copy, scratches similar to those seen here on the 

upper torso are found in Greek marble originals such 

as the Nemesis of Agorakritos, which Despinis dates 

to ca. 430 B.C., the Nike temple parapet of ca. 415 

B.C., and later, while ribbon folds appear in figure 

C of the Parthenon west pediment, ca. 438-432, and 

the Nike parapet.'14 Both features, therefore, are 

fashionable later than the period suggested by the 

99 E Brommer, Der Parthenonfries (Mainz 1977) pls. 37, 

144, 145.1. 

10) Harrison (supra n. 46) 101. Cf. South metope 29; 

South 19 and North 32 have less modeling than here, Brommer 

(supra n. 98) pls. 135, 207. 

1o1 From the shield, cf. Stephanidou-Tiveriou, nos. 1, 2, 

pls. 1-3, esp. for the lines running down the abdomen, for 

linear definition of flat-edged folds, and for the use of some 

scratched folds. 

102 Note, however, the contrast between the hanging 

kolpos, which implies rounded forms, and the flattening 

effects of the straight belt, unraised hip, and straight drapery 

folds over hips and lower abdomen. 

10( Cf., e.g., the discussion of fifth-century styles by Ridgway 

1981a, 111-14, 222-24. 

104 Shield: Stephanidou-Tiveriou, nos. 1-2, pl. 3; G. Despinis, 

Z 4p3oA ourjl rov 

AuEjgry gpyou rov AyopaKpirov (Athens 

1971) 26-27; parapet: see, e.g., R. Carpenter, The Sculpture 

of the Nike Temple Parapet (Cambridge, Mass. 1929) pls. 

IV, VI.1-2, XV, XVIII.2, XXII.1, XXIX.1; Harrison (supra 

n. 46) 103-105. Parthenon, west pediment C: E Brommer, 

Die Skulpturen der Parthenon-Giebel (Mainz 1963) pl. 86; parapet: 

Carpenter (supra) pl. XX.1.


pose, lack of transparency, and degree of motion in 

the Corinth Amazon's skirt. 

Underneath the crossed straps the material is 

pressed back against the torso forming small kolpoi 

above the straps and eye folds or elongated S-shaped 

folds below. These folds seem designed to create an 

impression of richness, but the effect is not achieved 

consistently throughout, the smoothed area above 

the center of the belt contrasting oddly with the rest. 

The small kolpoi and the way the crinkly folds are 

pressed back against the upper torso create a busy, 

almost fussy effect that seems inconsistent with the 

clear, structurally related function of drapery lines 

in statues of the second half of the fifth century.'15 

The difference in conception and effect becomes 

quickly apparent when these "hyperactive" folds are 

contrasted with the drapery of true Classical figures 

wearing cross-bands, like Nikai from the Nike temple 

parapet or Amazons from the Delphi metopes or 

Epidauros pediment (figs. 8-9).106 

Comparable fussiness in Classical drapery is ex- 

emplified by the ribbon style, but in exponents of 

this style, as in certain Greek marble originals- the 

Parthenon pedimental statues, the Acropolis figure 

of Barberini Suppliant type, or some Nikai from the 

Nike temple parapet- the ribbons run continuously 

down the garment, not in small segments, as here.107 

In the Corinth Amazon the interest of the sculptor 

lies more in surface decoration, patterning, and 

effects of richness, than in a structural relationship 

of drapery to body. Particularly close, in fact, are the 

broken, twisted folds over the breasts of the Nike 

carrying a quiver from the Nike temple parapet by 

Master A, dated pre-413 B.C. by Harrison.1'8 

Analogous "irregularities" are notable in the skirt. 

The short rise of the hemline in the center is un- 

explained by bunching at the waist, in contrast to 

similar hemlines on the Parthenon frieze, as if the 

meaning of the motif was lost.190 Here, too, drapery 

lines do little to indicate the contour or position of 

the underlying body. The interest in fussy, moving 

1", Ridgway 1984, 86 points out the "mannered small 

kolpoi" over the belt of the Electra in Naples, pl. 36. 

06 Nikai: Ridgway 1981a, 97-98, fig. 68; Carpenter 

(supra n. 104) pls. VIII, XI, XVII. Delphi and Epidauros, 

supra n. 34. 

17 Parthenon metope, South 29, Brommer (supra n. 98) 

pls. 224-25. Barberini Suppliant: G. Despinis, "H tKu`crt8a 

Barberini," in Acta (supra n. 29) 65-69, identified as Io; Ridgway 

1981a, 112-14, fig. 86 (Louvre). Nikai, Acropolis 1003, 

1013, Ridgway 1981a, 98, figs. 73, 81. 

10' Carpenter (supra n. 104) no. 5, pls. IV, VI.1. Harrison 

(supra n. 46) 104. 

10" Parthenon frieze: West 12, South 25, Brommer (supra 

n. 99) pls. 36-37 (W 12), 144 (S 25). 

11" Rome, Museo Nazionale, inv. 108518; Felletti Maj, no. 

folds, however, is displayed primarily over the up- 

per torso. Similar effects of richness are notable in 

a Flavian portrait of a young girl from Ostia wearing 

a chitoniskos."10 Marble copies of the Mattei Ama- 

zon show many variations in the drapery, as com- 

pared with the Baiae casts taken from the bronze 

original."' More animated texturing with greater 

similarity to the Corinth statue is evidenced in a 

marble copy of a bronze statue from Cyrene."2 As 

in the Corinth statue, the areas between the major 

fold lines are more broken up. 

As previously noted, the material above the belt 

does not form a continuous downward curve over 

the abdomen in the manner of fifth-century statu- 

ary. Rather, the bunching of material is retained at 

the sides, where it forms three layers at left and 

modeled ripples at right, adding to the heaviness 

of the central torso. Heavy kolpoi are, in fact, pop- 

ular features in Roman Classicizing sculpture and 

frequently occur together with central knots or 

bunches of drapery.3" The knot is absent here, but 

the strangely smooth area above the central belt al- 

most looks as if a knot had once been intended. 

Stance and Proportions 

The statue has the solid proportions of a male 

figure, with the breasts added almost as an after- 

thought. Comparison with Aphrodite and her com- 

panions from the Parthenon east pediment high- 

lights the small size of the breasts, implying they were 

meant to suggest the high, pointed breasts of a young 

girl. The lack of sculpted nipples also supports this 

idea. The legs, by contrast, are of more substantial 

size. What has been considered excessive elongation 

of the legs has also been noted for the "Ephesian" 

Amazons as well as some Amazons on the Parthenos 

shield."4 On the contrary, it is the skirt that is 

shorter rather than the legs that are longer, but in 

any case the emphasis on long legs seems a means 

of characterizing the figure as an athlete or horse- 

woman. The slender proportions together with small 

119. Helbig4 III, no. 2195 (von Steuben); Museo Nazionale 

Romano. Le sculture 1.1 (Rome 1979) no. 24; H. Wrede, Consecratio 

in Formam Deorum. Vergiittliche Privatpersonen in der 

romischen Kaiserzeit (Mainz 1981) cat. 83, A.D. 79-90; LIMC 

II.1, 802 no. 18, s.v. Artemis/Diana (E. Simon) (Flavian), but 

Landwehr (supra n. 84) 72 maintains the Julio-Claudian 

date. 

111 Landwehr (supra n. 84) 64-66, 72-76, pls. 32-35. 

112 S. Kane, "'The Kore Who Looks After the Grain': A 

Copy of the Torlonia-Hierapytna Type in Cyrene," AJA 89 

(1985) 455-63, pl. 48. 

113 On side kolpoi and knots, see Roccos (supra n. 4) 

580-82. 

114 Ridgway 1974, 12 and n. 66. For the shield, see supra 

n. 46.


breasts and short skirt also convey the youthfulness 

of the subject. 

Close comparison with the Minneapolis and 

Naples replicas of the Doryphoros confirms the impression 

that the Corinthian's upper torso is somewhat 

shorter and the waist-to-knee length consider- 

ably longer than in the Polykleitan figures."5 In the 

Amazon's lower torso, the length from waist to top 

of thighs is about the same, but the distance from 

top of thighs to lower edge of the skirt has been 

lengthened. The overall ratio of maximum width to 

height, however, is about the same in the Corinth 

statue and copies of the Doryphoros. 

Greater similarity is found with certain Roman 

creations of the second century A.D. The statue of 

Zeus Aigiochos from Cyrene, for instance, dated ca. 

A.D. 138, bears a striking resemblance to the Corinth 

statue in stance and proportions."6 Mansuelli had 

called the Zeus an eclectic work, and now Christa 

Landwehr has clearly established it as a Roman 

creation.117 In her study of representations of fathergod 

figures, Landwehr calls attention to the phenomenon 

of traditional sculptural concepts in Roman 

art, a concept that seems particularly appropriate 

to the Corinth statue. Further, comparison with the 

Cyrene Zeus reinforces the impression that the Corinth 

figure would have held an upright spear in her 

left hand. In addition, two other features compare 

closely with the Corinth statue: the deeply drilled 

channel separating tree trunk from leg and the shape 

of the upper part of the support."s 

In summary, the Corinth Amazon should be understood 

as a new creation, constructed generally with 

the proportions and stance established by Polykleitos 

and in the style of the 440s, but with a conflation 

of stylistic elements from the 430s and later in combination 

with later iconographic elements. The production 

of such Roman Classical creations cannot 

be said to be more abundant in Greece than in Italy, 

but the nature of such works in Greece may differ, 

which makes their interpretation more problematic. 

They may appear, at least at first, more conscientiously 

Classical, because they are produced in an 

area that adheres more closely to the Classical tra- 

11 Kreikenbom (supra n. 6) III 1, 2. 

116 Landwehr (supra n. 4) 105, 116-22, pl. 56. 

117 G.A. Mansuelli, Roma e il mondo romano 2 (Turin 1981) 

183. 

11 E. Muthmann, Statuenstutzen und dekoratives Beiwerk an 

griechischen und r6mischen Bildwerken (Heidelberg 1951) 55, 

138; H. 2.18 m. 

11" Raeder (supra n. 86) cat. I 83, I 90, pl. 18, and see 

his discussion 225-26. 

dition, regardless of whether or not the result is to 

be a "new creation" or a "close copy" of a particular 

type. There is, however, no confirmation that the 

Corinth sculpture is following a specific model. Until 

there is evidence to the contrary, therefore, the 

Amazon from the Corinth Theater should be viewed 

as a good example of Roman neoclassical sculpture. 

ROMAN DATE AND MEANING 

The actual date of carving is probably the early 

Antonine period, ca. A.D. 138-160. The detailed, 

broken-up surface of the chiton, the animated movement 

and shifting directions of the folds, and the 

contrast of light and shadow find some similarities 

in the Amazons from the Canopus of Hadrian's Villa 

at Tivoli.L" The Corinth figure possesses less fluidity 

in overall conception, however, and the long drill 

channels near the sides on the front of the skirt are 

straighter and more abruptly cut into the stone. The 

kolpoi bear some similarity to the loose material over 

the Tivoli Amazons' thighs, although the vertical 

creases here are interrupted occasionally by deep 

channels. Greater affinity can perhaps be seenwith 

regard to the busy, broken surface of the chiton 

and the ridged folds pressed against the upper 

torso - with the bust of Faustina the Younger in the 

Museo Capitolino, dated A.D. 147-148.120 Additional 

evidence is provided by one of the Piraeus reliefs 

after the shield of Athena Parthenos, dated to the 

early Antonine period. Here similar deep, nearly 

straight channels also cut through a chitoniskos with 

some movement.121 Furthermore, the long, pointed, 

knife-like folds over the left shoulder are similar in 

shape to those on chitons of the middle Antonine 

period, as illustrated by a female portrait in the 

Palazzo dei Conservatori.122 By contrast, the greater 

variety and plasticity of the Corinthian rendering 

suggest that the Theater statue is somewhat earlier 

and anticipates this later development. The form of 

the rinceau on the balteus is quite simple in comparison 

with that of the Weiller horse and less easily 

datable.123 Sarcophagus figures wearing related costumes 

are not particularly helpful either, but comparison 

with the Seven against Thebes sarcophagus 

120 Museo Capitolino, Stanza degli Imperatori 32, inv. 

449, Fittschen-Zanker III, no. 19, of first portrait type. 

121 Stephanidou-Tiveriou, no. 20, pl. 16, for the date see 

63. 

122Museo Nuovo Capitolino, Sala X34, inv. 203. 

Fittschen-Zanker III, no. 105. 

123On Late Hellenistic/Early Imperial rinceaux, cf. 

H. von Hesberg, "Eine Marmorbasis mit dionysischen und 

bukolischen Szenen," RM 87 (1980) 255-82, esp. n. 21.


at Corinth, dated ca. A.D. 180, indicates that the 

Theater statue is distinctly earlier, because of sig- 

nificant differences in proportions, drapery styles, 

and technique.124 

The style of rendering folds in the skirt with flat 

outer surfaces, vertical rasping, and ridged, turned 

edges is paralleled in two sculptures from the Temple 

of Poseidon at Isthmia: the chiton sleeve of the cult 

statue of Amphitrite, and Atalanta's skirt on the re- 

lief associated with the base of that statue, both dated 

to the early Antonine period.125 Such mannerisms 

may indicate a common (Attic?) workshop or simply 

a preference of the period.126 

The rasped finish of the Amazon's drapery, on the 

other hand, differs distinctly from drapery renderings 

in the Corinth Theater reliefs, in which material 

is carved primarily with the flat chisel, and outer 

fold edges are not flat or ridged.'27 As the Theater 

reliefs were produced at the time of construction 

of the new scaenae frons, the Hadrianic to early 

Antonine period, the Amazon appears to be a somewhat 

later addition to the Theater decoration, although 

the greater importance of over-life-size statuary 

may have demanded a more skilled workshop.'28 

It might be thought that the Theater statue once 

supported a portrait head, like the portrait of a 

young girl from Ostia who is depicted in the guise 

of Artemis/Diana after a fourth-century statuary 

type.129 The Corinthian piece could almost form an 

124 In general, cf., e.g., G. Koch, ASR XII.6; Meleager 

(Berlin 1975) esp. the Attic sarcophagi nos. 160, 166, 168, 

170, 173. Koch and Sichtermann (supra n. 77) 417 on the 

Corinth sarcophagus. 

125 M.C. Sturgeon, Isthmia IV: Sculpture I. 1952-1967 

(Princeton 1987) nos. 17a (Amphitrite), 19b (Atalanta); on 

chronology, 91-92, 98-99. 

126 On diverse practices within a single workshop, see 

V.C. Goodlett, "Rhodian Sculpture Workshops," AJA 95 

(1991) 669-81, esp. 681: "any restrictive definition of a workshop 

is likely to be wrong." 

127 Cf. M.C. Sturgeon, Corinth IX, Pt. 2: Sculpture, The Reliefs 

from the Theater (Princeton 1977) G 11-2 pl. 10, G 30-2 

pl. 24, A 5-1 pl. 48, A 6-1 pl. 49, A 8 pl. 52, A 11-7 pl. 57. 

128 For the dating of the theater and its reliefs, see primarily 

Stillwell (supra n. 95) 136 (Hadrianic coin in aulaeum 

posthole), B. Saria, "Das Theater von Stobi," AA 1938, 81-148, 

reconstruction drawing fig. 32 (cornice profiles). The best 

local parallel for the relief sculpture is provided by the 

comparison between Dionysos in the Gigantomachy, Sturgeon 

(supra n. 127) no. G 5-1, and decoration on a lappet 

from a cuirassed statue of Hadrian from the Odeion; unfortunately, 

this gorgon's head was recently stolen from 

the Corinth Museum, spring 1991: 0. Broneer, in Corinth 

X: The Odeum (Cambridge, Mass. 1932) 125-27, fig. 120; 

E. Capps, Jr., "Pergamene Influence at Corinth," Hesperia 

7 (1938) 546-48, fig. 7; LIMC IV.1, 358 no. 173, s.v. Gorgones 

Amazonian "cousin" to this statue, albeit in fifth- 

century style. The pose, secure and confident, has 

some of the imperiousness of Roman portraits. Other 

over-life-size reflections of Classical statuary types 

at Corinth were also completed with inset heads and, 

like the statues from the Metroon at Olympia, may 

have served as vehicles for imperial portraits.130 Al- 

though some copies of Classical works at Corinth 

are quite specific as to the statuary type they repro- 

duce, others have been interpreted as Classicistic 

creations, so it would appear that the Corinthians 

liked their Greek-style sculptures both as direct quo- 

tations of well-known models and with an admixture 

of Roman elements. Hence, fidelity to a particular 

type cannot, by analogy, be presumed for the Theater 

statue.'31 If this statue carried a portrait, the scale 

would make an imperial subject possible, and the 

age, about 18, would be appropriate for Faustina the 

Younger. The Amazonian subject, however, does not 

make this a likely choice. 

CONCLUSIONS 

In conclusion, in both style and pose the Corinth 

Amazon represents a true fusion of Greek and Ro- 

man elements. A new Roman creation is presented 

in which the artist has selectively adapted various 

Classical Greek ideas rather than reproduced a single 

prototype. The employment of a horse collar as a 

belt is not seen in Greek sculpted Amazons. The earli- 

Romanae (0. Paoletti). 

129 See supra n. 111; and the statue from Rome in East 

Berlin, K 249, of the same type: LIMC II.1, 802 no. 18a, 

s.v. Artemis/Diana (E. Simon). See also D.E.E. Kleiner, 

"Second-Century Mythological Portraiture: Mars and 

Venus," Latomus 40 (1981) 512-44; the pair in Rome, Museo 

Capitolino: Helbig4 II, no. 1394. 

130 Cf., e.g., Corinth: S 67 (Corinth/Conservatori Type), 

Demeter (?),Johnson, no. 5, called Classicistic byJ. Raeder, 

"Eine klassizistische Frauenfigur in Rom," JdI 93 (1978) 

252-76, Ridgway 1981b, 440; S 68, Kore (?), Johnson, no. 

7; S 55, Small Herculanensis type,Johnson, no. 9, Ridgway 

1981b, 436; S 1455, same type, Ridgway 1981b, 436; S 813, 

Johnson, no. 10, Ridgway 1981b, 436 n. 60: a matronly type 

with a "mate" in the Agrippina Minor at Olympia. On the 

Metroon statues, see K. Hitzl, OlForsch XIX: Die kaiserzeit- 

liche Statuenausstattung des Metroon (Berlin 1991). S 1294, 

H. Lauter, "Neues zum Midchen von Antium," AM 86 (1971) 

147-61 (perhaps Trajanic, p. 149, a careful copy). 

131 Cf. the statues listed in n. 130 above. Those that show 

the greatest fidelity to a prototype include the girl related 

to the Antium type (S 1294); the lesser Herculanensis type 

(S 55, S 1455); and the Artemis Rospigliosi type (S 2392: 

LIMC II.1, 646 no. 277, s.v. Artemis [L. Kahil]). This point 

is controversial, however. Those whose Classical origins 

have been questioned are S 68, Kore (?) and S 67, Demeter 

(?); cf. Ridgway 1981b, 439, and Raeder (supra n. 86).


est use of the crossed strap on a sculptured Amazon 

appears in the fourth-century Delphi metopes and 

Epidauros pediment (figs. 8-9). Further, small kolpoi 

over crossed straps and large kolpoi at the sides are 

favored Roman details. The kolpoi cascade down 

the sides as if extra material were pulled up over the 

belt, but no consistency is provided by a corresponding 

rise in side-hem level. The reverse is true in the 

center front where the fifth-century motif of a slight 

rise in hemline does not result from bunching over 

the belt. 

The pose contains analogous inconsistencies. In 

contrast to the implied Polykleitan model, the upper 

torso turns slightly to the right and the waist is 

straightened. In addition, the free leg is turned out 

more from the central axis, and the raised left foot 

is pulled closer to the right, so part of the heel is 

obscured from frontal view. The stance, while basi- 

cally frontal, lacks the internal chiasmos of a Polykleitan 

work. As has already been suggested, this turn 

may indicate that the figure had two important view- 

points. This would suggest a viewing aspect of which 

some sculptors of Corinth's Theater reliefs were also 

aware. 132 

In the Corinth statue the symbols of the Amazon 

are presented in ways that are familiar and readable, 

but the attitude is different. What is particularly striking 

about this sculpture is its demeanor, which seems 

to express confidence and pride. Its disposition is 

very different from the mood expressed by the 

wounded Amazon of Classical Greek art, a noble 

figure that arouses compassion in the viewer. Furthermore, 

the frontality implies a lack of narrative 

context. Together with the resting pose this indicates 

a shift of emphasis from the story of a battle or the 

pathos of the wounded to the Amazon as symbol. 

What did it symbolize for Roman Corinth? One of 

132 

Sturgeon (supra n. 127) 60, esp. Amazon slab 4. 

I:-:- On the date, see Stillwell (supra n. 95) 136, Sturgeon 

(supra n. 127) 4-5, 19, 131, 136-37. On recent interest in 

Roman Corinth, cf., e.g., the excavation reports of C.K. 

Williams, II, in Hesperia 51 (1982) 1-47 and later (supra 

n. 3); Williams, "The Refounding of Corinth: Some Roman 

Religious Attitudes," in S. Macready and EH. Thompson 

eds., Roman Architecture in the Greek World (London 1987) 

26-37;J. Wiseman, The Land of the Ancient Corinthians (G6teborg 

1978);J. Wiseman, "Corinth and Rome I," ANRWII.7.1 

(1979) 438-548; K.S. Wright, "A Tiberian Pottery Deposit," 

Hesperia 49 (1980) 135-77; E. Milleker, "Three Heads of 

Serapis from Corinth," Hesperia 54 (1985) 121-35; M. 

Walbank, Roman Corinth (Diss. Univ. of London 1986); C.M. 

Edwards, "Programmatic Sculpture in Roman Corinth: The 

Lechaion Road Arch," AJA 91 (1987) 485-86 (abstract); 

Edwards, "The Arch over the Lechaion Road at Corinth 

and Its Sculpture," Hesperia 63 (1994) 263-308; D. Engels, 

the proud "foreign" peoples who formed part of the 

Roman empire? 

Roman Use and Meaning 

In the Roman period, context is particularly im- 

portant for establishing the meaning of a work of 

art, so the original setting should be considered. The 

sculpture was found at the east end of the peristyle 

court adjoining the Theater. Its nearly intact con- 

dition differs significantly from marbles discovered 

on or in front of the stage. Moreover, it was found 

standing, facing the wall, as if it had just been inched 

off its base, turned around in the process, and aban- 

doned as too heavy to move. The base was probably 

removed in the later fourth century A.D. for reuse 

in the city's defenses against Alaric. It thus seems 

likely that it was set up in the center of the short 

side facing the open court. 

This statue formed part of the decoration of the 

peristyle court attached to the Corinth Theater, built 

in the first half of the second century A.D.'33 It 

would have supplemented a complex decorative pro- 

gram probably honoring the Roman emperor, while 

promoting Corinth's Greek heritage and allegiance 

to Rome. Sculptural decoration on the facade would 

have included a colossal posthumous portrait of 

Trajan in the niche over the central door, over-life- 

size busts and high relief heads representing Greek 

deities, possibly Helios and Demeter, symbolizing 

the emperor's rule over the heavens and earth, and 

Triton and Amphitrite, alluding to his supremacy 

at sea. 134 

In art of the Roman period a single work may con- 

vey diverse messages, among which historical asso- 

ciations are frequently prominent.35 Amazons seem 

important in Corinth as well as elsewhere in the 

Peloponnese. One of the oldest traditions about Ama- 

Roman Corinth, an Alternative Model for the Classical City 

(Chicago 1990); Edwards, "Tyche at Corinth," Hesperia 59 

(1990) 529-42, pls. 83-88; D.G. Romano, "The Planning of 

Roman Corinth," AJA 96 (1992) 337 (abstract). 

134 "Trajan": S 364, M.C. Sturgeon, "Roman Sculptures 

from Corinth and Isthmia: A Case for a Local Workshop," 

in The Greek Renaissance in the Roman Empire (BICS Suppl. 

55, London 1989) 116-17, pl. 44, figs. 4-5; busts: T 167/ 

168/169; S 3584; relief heads: S 3550/S421, Ridgway 1981b, 

445; S 431, Johnson, no. 228 (unillustrated) where called 

Medusa. These will be presented in the forthcoming 

Corinth volume on the freestanding sculptures from the 

Theater. 

135 On problems in usage of the word "Roman" see, e.g., 

K. Fittschen, "Zur Herkunft und Entstehung des 2. Stils- 

Probleme und Argumente," in P. Zanker ed., Hellenismus 

in Mittelitalien (AbhGitt N.E 3, no. 97, G6ttingen 1976) 542, 

n. 22.


zons involves Corinth, for Bellerophon, who comes 

from Ephyra, generally identified as Corinth, is said 

to have defeated the Amazons during his sojourn 

in Lycia (Hom. II. 6.168-95). Another tradition, cur- 

rent in the second century A.D., records the pres- 

ence of Amazons in the Peloponnese, albeit in 

Lakonia (Paus. 3.25.1-3). 

The possibility should also be considered that this 

statue, which stood in the Corinth Theater court, 

in addition to being understood as an Amazon, a 

Greek subject in Classical style, alluded to one of 

the northeastern peoples included in the Roman Em- 

pire of the second quarter of the second century A.D. 

Although the Corinth Theater does not provide a 

series of personifications of provinces'36 or cities, 

this statue calls to mind single Amazon-like figures 

used as personifications of different Asia Minor 

cities, as represented on the Pozzuoli base and in 

1'6 On provinces, cf., e.g., J.M.C. Toynbee, The Hadrianic 

School (Cambridge 1934) chs. 1-5; A.M. Pais, II "podium" del 

tempio del Divo Adriano a piazza di Pietra in Roma (Rome 1979); 

Smith (supra n. 76); L. Houghtalin, The Representations of 

the Roman Provinces (Diss. Bryn Mawr College 1993). Compare 

also two relief figures over the porta regia of the Hierapolis 

theater in Amazon-like dress: Dea Roma and Andreia 

(courage): E D'Andria and T. Ritti, Hierapolis. Scavi e ricerche 

I: Fonti letterarie ed epigrafiche (Archaeologica 54, Rome 1985) 

pls. 2b, 5a, and the suggestive use of an Amazon on the 

Sword of Tiberius from Mainz, British Museum, 867: LIMC 

1.1, 629 no. 687, s.v. Amazones (P. Devambez, A. Kaufmann- 

Samaras); E. Simon, in "Zur Bedeutung des Greifen in der 

Kunst der Kaiserzeit," Latomus 21 (1962) 776, notes that the 

Amazon on the sword stands for Vindelicia, in the province 

of Raetia, and that Amazons, when acting as personifications, 

probably stand for a northern people. 

coinage.'37 A concept such as andreia might also 

seem appropriate for an Amazon-like figure.'38 

Further, Amazons appear singly or in pairs elsewhere, 

as in the portrait of Commodus as Hercules, where 

Amazons seem employed to promote the virtus of 

the emperor.'39 The confident pose and unwounded 

state, however, signify that the Corinth sculpture has 

nothing to do with the fifth-century sculptural con- 

cept of a wounded or defeated Amazon, and that 

the reference is not to the subjection of a foreigner. 

Rather, the figure may symbolize a people proud 

of their Amazonian heritage and their prowess 

in warfare. 

DEPARTMENT OF ART 

UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL 

CHAPEL HILL, NORTH CAROLINA 27599-3405 

STURGEON@EMAIL.UNC.EDU 

137 C. Vermeule, "The Basis from Puteoli: Cities of Asia 

Minor in Julio-Claudian Italy," in L. Casson and M. Price 

eds., Coins, Culture, and History: Studies in Honor of Bluma 

L. Trell (Detroit 1981) 85-101; E. Diez, "Die Reprfsentatinnen 

der Stadt Ephesos," Lebendige Altertumswissenschaft: Festgabe 

Hermann Vetters (Vienna 1985) 217. 

138 On andreia, see LIMC 1.1, 764 no. 1 (K. Erim), the relief 

figure from Aphrodisias identified by inscription, said 

to represent virtus. 

139 Fittschen-Zanker I, 87, no. 78 (Fittschen). On virtus 

see, e.g., Platner-Ashby 258, s.v. Honos, 258-59, s.v. H. et 

Virtus, and 582, s.v. Virtus; EAA VII, 1185-86 (W. Koehler), 

fig. 1330, coin with virtus depicted as canonical Amazonlike 

figure; I.S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in Roman 

Art (MAAR 22, Rome 1955) 146-47, 161. On other personifications, 

see H. Kunckel, Der romische Genius (RM-EH 20, 

Heidelberg 1974).

The Corinth Amazon: Formation of a Roman Classical Sculpture ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?