148 VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED AT RES 
reflected in sculpture. At this date we do not find the divergence of 
style which we saw in our review of the “Apollo” type of the sixth 
century. Vase-paintings show the change better than sculpture. On 
black-figured vases of the sixth century B.C., we see a good deal of 
variety in groups of boxers and wrestlers, while on red-figured vases of 
the early fifth century the number of types is far less. In sculpture, 
however, differences in physical type did exist in the various schools at 
the beginning of the fifth century. We have, for example, the heavy, 
square-shouldered type in the Apollo Chotseul-Gouffier (Pl. 7A), which 
we have classed as a victor statue, and the tal!, rawboned type in the 
Tyrannicides by Kritios and Nesiotes (Fig. 32, Harmodios).1 We have, 
on the other hand,.a very different physical type in the short, stocky 
Aeginetan pedimental figures (Figs. 20 and 21). Between such ex- 
tremes there are, of course, many gradations. We might instance 
the archaic bronze statuette of a diskobolos in the Metropolitan Mu- 
seum (Fig. 46).2. However, notwithstanding the diversity in type, 
it is often difficult to distinguish runners from wrestlers, boxers from 
pentathletes. Thus few early fifth-century statues show the type of 
runner as well as the Apollo of Tenea (Pl. 8A), or that of a boxer 
as well as the “ 4pollo”’ from Delphi (Pl. 8B). The reason for this is 
the ideal element, which entered into all these statues and which 
was a reflection of the uniform development of athletics long before 
specialization had set in. Out of this uniformity grew the canon of 
Polykleitos, developed from that of Hagelaidas. 
The sculptor of the sixth century B.C. was incapable of differentiat- 
ing between god and mortal. ‘This was especially the case, as we have 
seen, with Apollo, as the ““Apollo’’ type was a model of manly vigor. 
In the early fifth century the sculptor had largely overcome this dif- 
feulty, but still showed little diversity of type in treating statues of 
different kinds of athletes. A method of differentiation which was 
essential to athlete sculptors of the sixth century was found conven- 
ient of retention by those of the fifth—1. ¢., characterizing the statue 
of the victor by some attribute, in order, on the one hand, to differen- 
tiate it from the nude god or hero, and on the other to distinguish 
between different types of victors. 
PRIMARY ATTRIBUTES OF VICTOR STATUES: 
THE Vicror FIL et. 
In the first place, the sculptor would characterize the victor statue 
as such. ‘The easiest way to do this would be to represent it with a 
fillet or chaplet (raivia)*? bound round the head, as we saw was the 

1Erected about 477 B. C.; Bulle, 84 (Aristogeiton) and 85 (Harmodios); ete. 
Discussed infra, Ch. IV, pp. 220-1 and n. 5 on p. 220. 
’See Stephanos, Lex., 5. v7. rawta, rawid.v, trawdw. This victor fillet is mentioned by 
Lucian in reference to the Diadoumenos of Polykleitos: Philops., 18. 
