The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-10-21

WAhOI AO oAyb khnb Nbo AhAhhCPoAA7f
defeated some Samian ~colonists in Crete
in a naval battle, dedicated the prows OF
their ships sin the temple of Athena in
Kgina.' As long ago IA 1858 Hermann
Schulz advanced the opinion that the text
OF HerodotUs was corrupt here. and that
the name Of Athena should be changed to
Aphea, making the temple that referred
to by Pausanias. The fact that the victory
was won over people in Crete was not with
out significance in this connection, as we
shall see presently. F~urtwangler natu-
rally adopts Schulz's emendation and notes
that wen at that time Schulz thought the
temple was the one We arc discussing, in
spite Of the general opinion to the contrary.
He therefore proclaims Schulz the real
discoverer of the temple OF Aphea.
Who was this obscure goddess who has
thus suddenly been brought into promi-
hence and endowed with one Of the most
important Doric temples which chance
has left us? II you look in Smiths Die
tionary Of Biography and Mythology you
will find under Aphea simply @lBrito-
martisl ;" and even Roscher's big lexicon
gives her only five lines, showing that she
was identified with the Cretan Britomartis
and Dictynna, the goddess Of the nets"
Yet under her own name she was sufficiently
important to have received the homage
Of an ode from Pindar, Of which unfor-
t~unately nothing remains, unless some
Oxyrhyncus shall hereafter reveal IL, Piec-
ing together her story under her several
names and from various late legends,
she appears to have been a Cretan nymph,
a companion Of Artemis, whom she re-
sembled in her love Of the woods and her
avoidance Of men. II was through Artemis
that she became a goddess. She was be
loved and pursued by Minos and to escape
him she leaped into the SEA, where she
was caught among the nets Of the fisher
men, one Of whom rescued her and carried
her in his boat to Egina. He also having
fallen in love with her, she fed from him
on landing and plunged into the woods,
where she became invisible. Furtwangler
suggests -Aphaia-arhanes"-that is, the in
visible goddess.) The place at which this
occurred became sacred to her, and thus
was explained, at least in later times, both
the site Of the temple and the close asso-
citation between the Eginetan goddess
and the island Of Crete, an association which
has been confirmed by Inc discovery Of
numerous prehistoric Cretan objects in
these excavations.
Let us ccme now to the sculptures. OF
these quantities OF fragments we're found
in the recent excavations, nearly all Of
which are associated with the statues in
Munich, at least to the extent that they
are OF the same material, school and period.
and belonged to statues OF practically the
same size. The reason for not saying at
once that they all belong to the pedimental
groups will appear later. 1t is both a curl
ous and an unfortunate circumstance
that among these fragments there ia nc
torso. They are all either heads-of which
nine were discovered-or parts Of arms
and legs, including hands and feet. Con-
seouently no new figure has been added
10 those formerly brought to light. and
from the artistic point Of view the result
Of the excavations has been correspond
ingly disappointing. ArchRologically, also,
the addition OF a torso or two TO the be-
wildering mass of fragments OF arms and
legs which now exist would have been Of
great value in determining beyond per-
adventure the attitudes OF certain figures
which are now left to conjecture, and would
possibly have furnished the key to the
| whole dinsculty. As it is, however, the
material bearing upon the restoration Of
| the two groups has been richly increased
though whether this increase has simpliied
or complicated the problem will probably
prove an open question. Let us see how
Fu~rtwangler has treated it.
In working out the arrangement for the
two compositions, which he believes com
plete and final, he has been guided bythree
classes OF evidence: first, the data of the
figures and fragments themselves. that is,
the attitude and condition Of each, and the
| exact spot at which it was discovered
where this is determinable; second. the
notebooks and sketches Of Cockerell and
Halter, which still survive and have been
found to contain much information not
hitherto made Use Of; the third, the testi-
mony Of the blocks Of the horizontal cor
nice or foor Of each pediment. He found
a number Of these still lying on the ground
below the twofronts. identified beyond ques-
ton by the mutules on the under surface.
On the upper surface arc the grooves or
holes in which the plinths Of the pediment
figures had been inserted. These furnish
important clues to the relative position Of
certain Of them, as we'll as a hint Of their
attitudes, since n standing figure would
presumably have had a shorter plinth
than one that vas walking or striding
the latter a shorter plinth thar a figure
that was lying down, and the holes for the
plinths would naturally have been longer
or shorter in proportion, II is by this
third class Of evidence that he has proved
the old restoration Of the western pediment
to be radically wrong. One Of the. blocks,
which he believes with reason to be from
the middle of the c~ornice, shows that three
figures we're here grouped closely together.
From the character and positions Of the
holes, il appears that the middle one
was in a standing position and in front OF
the other two, which were striding and
quite close together. This middle figure il
clearly Athena, the only standing figure in
the pediment; but the T~horwaldsen ar
rangement Of the other members of the
middle group does not correspond at all "a
the evidence of these holes, as his figures
are widely separated and il would not be
possible to move them up so a. TO make
them correspond. il they retained the SAINT
4 rolativa arran Uamant that ha Oava than