152 VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED AT REsTd, 
The Diadoumenos of Polykleitos was little less famous than his Dory- 
phoros, if we may judge by the number of copies which have survived 
and from literary notices of it.!_ In all the copies of this work we see 
the well-known Polykleitan characteristics—powerful build, heavy pro- 
portions, and fidelity to nature; but none of the ideal tendency promi- 
nent in the works of Pheidias and his school, nor of the violent energy 
characteristic of Myron’s art. In all of them the pose of the earlier 
Doryphoros is retained, except that the arms are differently employed 
and the build of the body is more slender. Pliny, despite his state- 
ment—which is probably taken from some Greek authority—that 
monotony was the characteristic of Polykleitos’ works (paene ad unum 
exemplum),” emphasizes this slenderness by calling the Doryphoros 
viriliter puer—Lessing’s Juengling wie ein Mann—and the. Diadou- 
menos molliter juvenis—a youth of gentle form. This judgment of 
Pliny was difficult to understand so long as we had only the Vaison 
copy of the Diadoumenos to study. The Delian copy showed that 
supple grace was characteristic of the original, even if modified to suit 
the taste of three centuries later. Although the body forms and the 
attitudes of the Doryphoros and the Diadoumenos are very similar, 
the head of the latter, usually assigned to Polykleitos, is of a different 
type from that of the Doryphoros. While the head of the Doryphoros is 
square in profile, flat on top, and long from front to back, that of the 
Diadoumenos is rounder and softer and can best be explained on the 
assumption that Polykleitos later in life came under Attic influence. 
The copies of this work are many and varied.* For a long time the 
marble copy in the British Museum found in 1862, at Vaison, France,* 
was, despite its poor workmanship, considered our best copy (Fig. 28). 
It was made perhaps five hundred years after the original, at a time 
when sculpture was in its decline, and consequently can give us merely 
a suggestion of the character of Polykleitos’ statue. As it is a direct 
marble translation of the bronze, the muscular treatment appears ex- 
aggerated. Another marble copy was found in 1894 by the French 
excavators on the island of Delos, and is now in Athens (PI. 18).° The 
1Pliny, H. N., XXXIV, 55, praises it equally with the Doryphoros, and says that 100 talents 
were paid for it; in another passage he says that a like sum was paid by King Attalos for a 
picture of Dionysos by the Theban painter Aristeides: zbid., VII, 126; cf. XXXV, 24 and 100. 
A painting by Timomachos of Byzantium brought 80 talents: 7bid.. XX XV, 136. 
°H. N., XXXIV, 56; here he quotes Varro, who was drawing aie kt from Xenokrates of 
Sikyon: see Jex-Blake, pp. xvi f. 
sListed by Furtwaengler, /p., pp. 239 f.; the torsos, by Petersen, B. com. Rom., 1890, pp. 185 f. 
4B. M. Sculpt., I, no. 500; Marbles and Heeaes PITY; B, B:,' 272; von Maen, 114; F. W., 508; 
Mon.d.I., X, 1874-78, Pl. XLIX (3 views); Rayet, I, Pl. 30; @airave I, p. 479, fig. 253; Mutray, 
BE a Pa Cont Rép., UW, 2, 547, 5. Michaelis, by a comparison with the Doryphoros, rst showed 
thara it was a copy of the Diddsuonenne Annali, L, 1878, pp. 10 f. It is 6 ft. 1 in. tall (Smith). 
*Kabbadias, no. 1826; Bulle, 50; Gardner, Sculpt., Pl. 35; von Mach, 115; Mon. Piot, III, 
1896, pp. 137 f. (Couven and Pls. XIV and XV; Stais, Marbres et Bronzes, pp. 84-85 and fig.; 
B.C. H., XIX, 1895, pp. 460 f. (account of the Delian excavations by L. Couve) and PI. VIII (the 
statue in its surroundings at the excavations); Springer-Michaelis, p. 277, fig. 498; Reinach, 
Rép., HU, 2, 547, 9. It is 1.86 meters high without the base (Couve). 
