2 VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED AT REST. 
the uplifted arms of this statue, in which most scholars saw the Greek 
attitude of prayer, are restorations which were probably made in the 
time of Louis XIV, when the statue was in France. Of the original 
motive we only can say that the action of the shoulders shows that both 
arms were raised, but we do not know how far, or the position of the 
hands. Monumental evidence shows that the hands in prayer should 
have the palms turned away from the face instead of upwards, as in 
the present statue, since the Greek position was the outgrowth of an 
old apotropaic gesture, 7. ¢., one directed against an evil spirit. Mau’s 
idea! that the figure represented a player catching a ball is certainly 
inconsistent with the calm attitude of the statue. Furtwaengler 
rejected it,? and he has restored the arms and hands on the basis of a 
Berlin gem* and an ex voto relief found by the French excavators at 
Nemea in 1884.4 On this relief a youth crowned with a woolen filet 
is represented. On both relief and gem the figures are in the same 
attitude, the arms raised over the head manibus supinis, which con- 
firms the restoration of the Berlin statue. Many other monuments 
ceive the more usual attitude of prayer, not as in the relief and gem dis- 
cussed, but with only one hand extended as high as the breast. Older 
writers thought that such monuments did not represent the gesture of 
adoration, but one of adlocutio,> an opinion disproved by Pausanias’ 
statement about the bronze statues of the Akragantines at Olympia, 
already mentioned. We may cite a relief from Kleitor, now in Berlin,® 
and a fine one of the fourth century B.C. from Lamia (?),’ as well as a 
red-figured Etruscan stamnos in Vienna representing, probably, Ajax 
praying before committing suicide. We shall mention also two little 
statuettes in New York which represent youths in the praying atti- 
tude. The first, dating from the second half of the fifth century B.C., 
1R. M., XVH, 1902, pp. 101 f. 
®Muenchner Allg. Ztg., 1902, Nov. 29, Beilage, no. 297; cf., for his restoration of the arms, 
ibid., 1903, Beilage, no. 277, p. 445 (quoted by von Mach and Bulle, respectively). 
3]b., I, 1886, fig. on p.. 217; reproduced in 4. A4., 1904, p. 75 (Conze); also on coins, 
Jb., III, 1888, pp. 286 f. and Pl. LX (Imhoof-Blumer). 
4Rev. arch., Ser. IV, II, 1903, pp. 205-10, 411-12 (Lechat), and Pl. XV; reproduced in 4. Z4., 
l.c. Babelon, C. R. Acad. Inscr., 1904, p. 203, thought that the stele represented a seer in 
liturgic attitude as on certain coins of Sikyon; he argued, therefore, that the Berlin statue 
did not represent an athlete. 
5B. g., Levezow, de juvenis adorantis Signo, Berlin, 1808, p. 12; and Welcker, Das akad. Mus. 
zu Bonn, p. 42 (quoted by Gurlitt, op. cit. in the next note, p. 157); cf. Scherer, pp. 32-3. 
84. M., V1, 4881, pp. 154 f. (Gurlitt), and Pl. V (from cast in Berlin): it is 2.18 meters high 
and 1.11 meters broad. 
7In the National Museum, Athens; discussed by Kekulé, Die antiken Bildwerke im Theseion 
zu Athen, 1869, no. 151; illustrated in Exped. scientifique de Morée, III, 1838, Pl. XLI (=from 
Aegina). 
See O. Jahnin Annali, XX, 1848, pp. 213 f. and Pl. K a (=Orestes); 4. Z., XXX, 1872, p. 60, 
Pl. 46 (Heydemann); Gurlitt, op. cit., p. 156; cf. Sophokles, dias, 815 f., to explain the scene. 
See Richter, Gk., Etrusc., and Rom. Bronz. in the Metropolitan Museum, 1918, no. 89 (7 inches 
high) and fig. on p. 59; Cat. Class. Coll., p. 115, fig. 73; published by Furtwaengler, Sitzd. 
Muen. Akad., 1905, II, p. 264, fig. 1 and Pl. IV (who considered it Etruscan and not Greek); 
Reinach, Rép., III, 24,3. Richter, op. cit., no. 79 (1134 inches high), and figs. on p. 53 
(two views); Cat. Class. Coll., p. 91, fig. 54; Burlington Fine Arts Club, Cat. Anc. Gk. Art, 
1904, p. 46, no. 36, and Pl. LIII; Reinach, Rép., IV, 370, 6. 
