OF ARROW-RELEASE. 177 



care in matching the tints of the new pieces as almost to 

 deceive a practiced eye. He was frequently asked by vis- 

 itors to the Atelier which were the restored parts. 'I can- 

 not say,' he would reply laughing ; 'I neglected to mark 

 them, and I no longer remember. Find them out for 

 yourself if you can' " (p. 56). Of these restorations, 

 however, it is possible that Mr. Hansard was not aware, 

 though if he had ever attempted drawing a bow in the 

 manner represented in these figures, he would have seen 

 the absurdity as well as the impossibility of the attitude ; 

 and, furthermore, had he been at all familiar with the 

 Mongolian release he would have seen that there was 

 really no approach to the form as employed by the Man- 

 chu, Korean, Japanese, or Turk. The following figure 

 (Fig. 42) is sketched from the set of casts in the Mu- 

 seum of Fine ArtsJn Boston. An examination of these 



Fig. 42. Thovaldsen's restoration of hand. 



figures will show that the angle made by the shaft-hand in 

 relation to the bow-hand is also inaccurate. A release that 

 might at first sight suggest the Mongolian form is shown in 

 the accompanying figure (Fig. 43) representing an Amazon 

 archer, which is painted on a Greek vase of the 4th cen- 

 tury B.C. The forefinger seems to be holding the end of 

 the thumb, but the thumb is not hooked over the string as 

 it ought to be. If the hand be correctly drawn it repre- 

 sents quite well the tertiary release ; and this supposition 

 is borne out by two sculptures, one from the Temple of 

 Apollo Epicurius at Phigalia (Fig. 44), and another from 



ESSEX IXST. BULLETIN, VOL. XVII 23 



