青年雕像

詞源

在古希臘，「kouros」意為年輕的男孩，大多數情況特指貴族階級的男孩。 當一個青春期的男孩成長為一個男人後，作為一個成年的「kouros」，他可以開始加入兄弟會(φρατρία)， Apellaios是舉行這些儀式的月份，阿波羅 (Apellon) 則被稱為」megistos  kouros「，意為偉大的「kourous」。

製造目的

青年雕像的出現對應了幾種相應的功能需求。青年雕像曾被認為只用來代表太陽神阿波羅，正如在懇求者面前的花瓶畫上所描述的一樣。青年雕像和阿波羅的關係被薩摩斯島上，由狄奧多羅斯創作的皮媞亞-阿波羅雕塑上的描述所支持。 正如「埃及風格，雙臂置於兩側，雙腿分開「。然而並不是所有的青年雕像都是神像，很多的青年雕像發現於墓地中，並很有可能是被當作了墓地標誌或墓碑，或者被當作在遊戲中獲勝者的獎勵（像獎盃），青年雕像還曾被當作神的祭品，(保薩尼亞斯將該類雕塑描述為阿奇恩，一種奧林匹克運動，潘克拉辛，作為青年雕像姿勢的一種)， 因為有一些青年雕像是在阿波羅的聖所中被發現的。事實上，一些置於神的聖所的青年雕像上刻的不是神的名字，而是凡人的，比如'德爾斐雙子'，克琉比斯和比同，他們應為他們的虔誠感到榮幸，因為他們的名字得到了相應的青年雕像對應。
關於古埃及雕塑(特別是荷魯斯的雕像)是否對青年雕像有著直接影響是一個已經提出很久的猜想，因為古希臘和古埃及之間的貿易和文化關係被證實從公元7世紀中期起就存在了。在1978年一項由 Eleanor Guralnick 發起的項目將攝影測量法和聚類分析應用於許多古希臘和古埃及雕塑，並發現了關於埃及第二十六王朝的第二加農（Second Canon）和古希臘青年雕像有某種關係，而這種關係廣泛分布在大量雕塑作品中，但並不普遍。

起源與進化

作為古希臘雕像的一部分，青年雕像的發展不可避免的與古希臘雕像整體發展緊密相連。早期的帶達理克（Daedalic）式雕塑有兩個學派，其中一些只能從古代文學中了解到它們的名字，比如 kolossos, bretas, andrias 和 xoanon 等等，在公元6世紀左右成為了自立支撐式雕塑；即是對希臘風格和宗教內部發展所做出的回應， 或是被異地文化影響的產物。其中外部因素對安那托利亞，敘利亞等地文化影響最深遠的當屬埃及。據了解，在七世紀中葉古希臘建立外貿城市諾克拉蒂斯之前，希臘人與埃及已有有長期的貿易關係， 解釋了希臘是從何處學到埃及式雕塑技巧的。
Guralnick的工作成果以及Erik Iversen和Kim Levin先前的研究 大大增加了希臘雕塑家模仿埃及雕塑的討論熱度。埃及第二十六王朝時期雕塑的經典雕塑比例系統是由一個二十一右四分之一個部分（稱之為格子）組成的，其中從腳底到雙眼連線的距離是二十一格。這些格子在雕刻時被應用於協助定位人體的各個內臟，肌肉位置，相當於輔助線的功能。艾佛森（Iversen）表示紐約青年雕像正好符合這個比例。該發現是Guralnick通過對其他青年雕像，尤其是埃及佳能二世的形體數據的聚類分析和標準分數與地中海男子平均形體的比較，從而發現了這一點。後來她又對公元六世紀的兩個少女雕像進行了相似的算法和比較，並發現大多數此類雕像都試圖向理想的人類完美形體發展。

象徵與含義

青年雕像是沒有鬍子，擺出一種死板的前進姿勢，並且大部分都是裸體的雕像。 和埃及雕像對比來看，希臘的青年雕像通常會伸出左腳，表示走路的姿態，但這些雕像看起來要麼只會站在原地，要麼看起來能拔腿就走。一小部分早期青年雕像腰部會戴有腰帶，但這種做法在公元六世紀消失了。這種腰帶在傳統上被認為是一種符號，代表了更為複雜的服飾， 但全身覆蓋服裝的雕塑也出現過，這意味著雕塑家們不是只是為了把複雜的服飾縮減為一個符號，而是腰帶這個符號本身象徵著某種特殊的含義。藝術史學家Brunilde Ridgway在她1977年寫的The Archaic Style in Greek Sculpture中提出，這種腰帶可能代表阿波羅，運動員或者魔法力量的某種象徵，但直至現在這個符號本身的意義仍然模糊。另外，還有一個有爭議的問題是青年雕像的「裸體」是否代表著某種象徵或者屬性。如同之前提到的，裸體可以代表運動員或者英雄的裸體狀態：「他在角力學校現身，使青年不朽」，但人們至今沒有發現任何有關於奧林匹亞或者運動器械的例子。
除了在德爾福的阿波羅聖所，德羅斯和Mt.Ptoion發現的青年雕像外，在薩摩斯島的赫拉神殿，蘇尼翁的雅典娜和波塞冬神殿中也發現了相似的雕像，，因此青年雕像是因為阿波羅相關原因而雕刻這一假說是有問題的。雖說如此，但大多數青年雕像還是在阿波羅聖所內發現，並被確認是獻給阿波羅的，這導致里奇韋（Ridgway）在公元七世紀將早期帶有腰帶式的青年雕像引入並取代更早的直立式雕像以用於代表阿波羅。 隨著時間的推移，雕塑的供奉和喪葬功能開始淡化，其內在屬性也被拋棄，雕塑形式和功能變得更加通用。到公元6世紀末為止，青年雕像已經發展到可以根據不同的環境和地點提供不同功能和意義了。 該「多元論」最初由歷史學家讓·杜卡特（Jean Ducat）提出， 由藝術史學家安德魯·斯圖爾特（Andrew Stewart）整理闡述。斯圖爾特認為青年雕像與貴族分布有著直接關係，因為青年雕像的分布模式和古希臘貴族分布大相逕庭。他認為這種神聖性和紀念性相互交替呈現的雕塑是對不朽貴族美德的認同。

發展史

現存最早的青年雕像例子可能是位於提洛島的艾歐尼克聖殿（Ionic sanctuary）的兩個真人大小大理石雕像， 鑑定為約公元7世紀第後半頁製作的。在古典希臘時期開始前，青年雕像早期有它們的一套雕刻標準，而到古典時期開始時，古希臘雕塑家們對解剖學已經有了很深的理解，並開始有了自然主義的初級形態。 兩種形態的轉變可以在其過渡作品克里提奧斯男孩（公元480年）身上看到。
青年雕像的起源年代不詳，事實上，沒有一類雕塑有著確切的起源時間。此外，當時學院的同質性也很強：當一個學院有了解剖學進展時，這些知識會迅速在各個研討會中討論，並散布至各個學院，以至於「區域差異被轉化成為了共同進步」。 因此，我們現在使用由Gisela Richter所作的相對年代來劃分青年雕像的發展史。她通過一些共同的解剖學特點將其劃分為六個組，特別是比如écorché右邊所示的肌肉群的區別。

蘇尼翁雕像群

公元前615–590年: 這個日期是暫定的，大約在公元前七世紀末，六世紀初，由Richter從之前日期更準確的泰內亞–佛羅滿薩雕像群推斷出發展周期，以此推斷出該組青年雕像的大概發源時間。此外，她還指出了該年代雕像與黑彩陶器的相似之處, 特別是涅索斯雙耳罐 及其奔馬雙耳罐上的人像尤為相似。. 她還認為七世紀後四分之一部分New York-Sounion kouroi和early Corinthian pyxis之間的相似之處。當時值得一提的作品包括紐約青年雕像 (Met 32.11.1), 德米斯和克緹羅斯（Dermys and Kittylos， 雅典國家考古博物館 56號), 德爾斐雙子 (德爾斐博物館 467及1524號),蘇尼翁青年雕像，以及帝洛斯巨人（Delos colossus）。
這個時期雕塑的主要特點是抽象及偏向幾何外形的，它們象徵了類似建築結構的設計理念與凌駕於現實主義之上的表現主義部分的關係。這些雕塑所展現的四個面大體由立方體構成，卻又不缺失細節，這些細節表明了這個時期的雕塑家們對人體解剖學一知半解。他們的試圖將其塑造成和諧而又富有表現力的雕像，以至於其人體形態不合常理。蘇尼翁青年雕像的軀幹主要分為四面，切都表現扁平，其腰部以上的背面部分和脊柱對齊一起形成一條直線。雕塑顱骨的形態顯示其雕塑表現形式並沒有發展成熟：頭顱的背面和頂部經常是扁平的。耳朵直接在平面上挖出來，且非常抽象。Tragus is knob like, either on cheek or lobe. Antitragus is not indicated. The eyes are large and flat, canthus is not marked, lachrymal caruncle is not indicated. The mouth is horizontal, with lips on same plane, and corners of mouth forming triangular depressions. Hair is arranged in parallel beaded tresses, which rarely radiates from the vertex. The Sterno-mastoids, when marked, are indicated by grooves running to the sternal notch. There is no indication of swelling of trapezius on the outline of shoulders. The clavicles are flat ridges along whole course of shoulders. Median line is sometimes marked by a groove from sternal notch to navel. The lower boundary of the thorax has the shape of a pointed arch. Rectus abdominis is formed by three or more transverse divisions above navel. The navel is generally a knob in a circular groove. Serratus magnus is not indicated. The shoulder blades are outlined by grooves on the surface of back. The erector spinae attachment to posterior part of the iliac crest is sometimes indicated by grooves in the lumbar regions. Forearm is supinated, with palm towards the body. Arms often separated from body between armpit and hand. Thumbs are large. Vastus internus descends to about the same level as vastus externus, the shin is vertical, and the malleoli are level. Weight is evenly distributed on both legs and the flanks are level.

奧爾霍邁諾斯–錫拉雕像群

C. 590–570 BC: this period witnesses a lull in Attica with perhaps only two identifiable works from the beginning of the era until the second quarter of century (NAMA 3858 and 4181), this might be due to the Solonic reforms and their restriction on the extravagance of private funerals. Activity is more vigorous in Boeotia, especially those from the Ptoan sanctuary and the Orchomenos kouros (NAMA 9), early work there is probably native. Also Corinth, Actium produces one of the best examples of the period (Louvre MNB 767), detailing still of in the form of grooves and ridges but there is the beginning of modeling in the full roundness of natural form. One of the more accomplished products of the time is the Thera kouros (NAMA 8), softer and less muscular in modeling it is more Ionian than Dorian though Thera was a Dorian colony. We may deduce the chronology of this period only if the dates for the Sounion and Volodmera groups are correct since there is no external evidence for the dates of this style; however, we can usefully compare the heads on vase painting of middle Corinthian 600-575 which share the same stolid expression, flat skull, large eyes and horizontal mouth.
The characteristics of this style are as follows. The ear is still carved in one plane, but less stylised. Eyes are not so large as before and more rounded. Mouth is horizontal but no longer always in one plane. The slight protrusions of flanks are sometimes prolonged into a girdle-like ridge, the sculptor occasionally marks the anterior spine of the crest. Shoulder blades are now separate raised planes. The erector spinae sometimes indicated as raised planes. Arms are generally joined to body. The depression over great trochanter is generally omitted. Shin sometimes curves inwards. Left flank is occasionally placed slightly forward.

泰內亞–佛羅滿薩雕像群

C. 575–550 BC: named after an Attic kouros found at Volomandra (NAMA 1906) and a Corinthian specimen from Tenea (Munich 168) this period marks the flowering of the Middle Archaic, and these kouroi are contemporary with such works as the Berlin Standing Kore, the Moschophoros and the Bluebeard Pediment. There is a tension observable in this group between the solid, architectonic quality of early styles and the expressive possibilities of a vigorous, fluid naturalism . The anatomical novelties of this time are as follows. The ear is carved in more than one plane. A roundness of the eye is indicated henceforth. Lips curve upwards and meet more or less at corners, the upper lip protrudes over lower. Construction of neck is generalized, sterno-mastoids when indicated are marked by slightly modelled shapes. On the median line a groove along sternum is generally replaced by modelled shapes and only the linea alba is marked by only a groove. The lower boundary of thorax assumes the shape of a somewhat rounded arch. There is a slight indication of the external oblique bulging over the iliac crest. Shoulder blades are indicated as modelled shapes. The erector spinae is sometimes modelled. Size of thumb is normal. The vastus internus descends lower than vastus externus. Shins curve inwards. The external malleolus is lower and further back than the internal one. The little toes slant inwards. The metatarsal bones are lightly indicated.
The absolute chronology of this period is provided by the dedication of Rhombos on the Moschophoros, which may belong to the same time as a decree referring to the Panathenaia of 566. The Moschophoros is stylistically similar to early in this group giving us an approximate upper limit of 570.  Additionally the terracotta kneeling boy found in a well in the Agora and dated by its black-figure pottery sherd stratum to circa 550 shares the flat almond eyes, absence of the trapezium and pointed arch of the lower thorax that characterizes the late Tenea-Volomandra, furnishing us with a tentative lower boundary for the style.

米洛斯雕像群

C. 555–540 BC: figures of this period are simpler than before; their muscles are no longer separately accentuated. There is a tendency to flowing contour and a generalization of form. The tragus now sometimes assumes its natural form. The anterior part of the helix, which is directed backwards (crus helicis), is often prominent, and joined with the upper end of tragus. The antitragus is sometimes tentatively indicated, though wrongly placed. The anterior triangle of the neck is now better understood. Navel generally modelled as a depression. Indication of external oblique bulging over iliac crest. The lower boundary of abdomen occasionally forms a deep curve. Forearm and arm sometimes correctly semi-pronated; both directed towards body. Arms sometimes arched towards body below the armpit. Big toe projects a little further or same as second toe. Four smaller toes and toe nails curve gently downwards.
"Astonishingly uniform" the products of this period are found across the Greek world in large quantities. This group is named after the best preserved example of the era (NAMA 1558). The date of this group is conjectured on the basis that one generation would be required for the development of the Melos group style prior to the more securely dated Anavysos-Ptoon style. However Richter argues there may be some relationship to other contemporary Greek art works, namely: the figures on Late Corinthian pottery circa 550 BC. exhibit the same degree of naturalism, and the archaic column sculptures from the Temple of Artemis Ephesos, thought to have been supplied by Croesus of Lydia, share some anatomical features.  Of the important works that come done to us there is the colossal kouros from Megera (NAMA 13), a transitional early piece from Boeotia (Thebes 3) and an early Parian example (Louvre MND 888).

阿納維索斯–皮通12雕像群

C. 540–520 BC: this is the era of the Peisistratos dynasty and marks the assumption of Athens as the centre of artistic activity in Greece. In this period of great development the anatomical proportions become normal, the forms modelled and the spine clearly S-shaped. The head is now spherical and well-developed. The tragus takes on its natural form, the antitragus is also indicated. Hair occasionally descends as far as nape of neck. The sterno-mastoids when marked are indicated by modelled shapes. Their attachment to sternum and clavicles is often not indicated, this results in a continuous hollow groove or run above the clavicle. There is an attempt to indicate the backward curve of clavicle. Groove along linea alba is sometimes continued below the navel. The lower boundary of thorax arch is indicated. In the flanks the swelling of the external part is well developed. Lower boundary of abdomen assumes shape of small semicircle or deep curve. The erector spinae always indicated as modelled shape. Generally hand and forearm is semi-pronated. Hands are no longer attached to body but joined by short supports. The metacarpal bones are sometimes indicated. The bulge of the vastus internus increases. Toes are no longer parallel but do not recede along a continuous curve. Toes and nails point upwards. The articulation of joints is well rendered. Sometimes the flank of the advanced leg is placed forward and higher than receding leg.
The characteristics of this group can be observed on the Siphnian Treasury which is dated on external evidence before 525 BC, therefore allowing time for the maturation of the style we can date the beginning of this group to, roughly, a generation prior. The earliest is perhaps the Munich kouros (Glyptothek 169) judging by the rendering of some of the muscles. Other significant Attic kouroi in this style are the Anavyssos (Base reads: "Stand and mourn Kroisos, first in line of battle and whom Ares [God of War] killed")(NAMA 3851), the akropolis torso (Akropolis 665, 596), and the Rayet head (Carlsberg Glyptothek 418). The island of Keos supplies us with one of the best examples of the time (NAMA 3686), notable for its advanced rendering of the back where the greatest protrusion of the back is level with that of the chest. Keos was likely under the cultural influence of Athens at this time and this kouros is comparable to and chronologically close to the Anavyssos kouros and akropolis head. From the Ptoan sanctuary in Boeotia we have the Ptoon 12 kouros (NAMA), "softer, less sturdy" suggests Richter it is, she asserts, a native Boeotian product and not an Athenian import.

皮通20雕像群

C. 520–485 BC: the last stage in the development of the kouros type is the period in which the Greek sculptor attained a full knowledge of human anatomy and used it to create a harmonious, proportionate whole. The features that now become expressed are as follows. The lachrymal caruncle is sometimes indicated. Lips curved upwards only in early examples, the upper lip protrudes markedly over the lower and lips are well shaped. Hair is generally short or rolled up behind, it radiates from a point near vertex and carved in wavy strands. The structure of neck is now correct. There is an indication of swelling of trapezium on the outline of shoulder, becoming more pronounced over time. Clavicles assume an s-shape and lose themselves in shoulders. The lower boundary of thorax assumes a semicircular arch. The rectus abdominis, now reduced in number to two, with the top one incorporated into lower boundary of thorax. There is a small raised plane caused by projection of xiphoid appendage sometimes observable at lower end of sternum. Navel has fold of skin above in most examples. The lower boundary of abdomen assumes shape of semicircle, and the upper edge of torso with two concave curves becomes regular in form. Forearm and hand correctly pronated. Arms sometimes held free from body. Flanks; occasionally at first later regularly, flank and buttock of supporting leg rise in conformity with action.
This period is framed by the stasis of the Peisistratid era and the beginning of Athenian democracy and the Persian war. The upper limit of this group may be fixed by the sculpture of the temple of Apollo, Delphi. Architecturally earlier than the Hekatompedon of Athens the Delphi temple has a probable date of c.520, thus the kouroi of its pediment which betray the swelling trapezium and semicircular lower boundary of the abdomen can be associated with later examples of the group. Yet these same youths have a grooved, narrow lower boundary to the thorax and their flanks are level, suggesting that they are early specimens of the style. Richter names this group after the kouros Ptoon 20, NAMA 20, which is likely a Boeotian work dedicated by Pythias of Akraiphia and Aischrion to Apollo of the silver bow. This along with the torso form Eutresis (Thebes 7) indicate a vigorous Boeotian school of sculpture which may have existed to serve the Ptoan sanctuary. Attic production is considerable up to c.500 BC after which it seems to peter out. Important late kouroi from Athens include the Aristodikos kouros (Ptoon 20 group, NAMA 3938), an akropolis statuette (NAMA 6445) and the bronze Apollo from Piraeus.