154 VICTOR STATUES REPRESENTED AT REST. 
bronze, like the Vaison statue. ‘The clear-cut eyelids and wiry hair 
reproduce the original material, and its resemblance to the head of 
the Doryphoros is greater than that of any other copy. 
A later variant of the statue is seen in a small terra-cotta statuette from 
Smyrna in private possessionin London.! Itshows the Polykleitantype 
so completely assimilated to the style 
of Praxiteles that its genuineness 
has been doubted. Perhaps, with 
its Attic softness, it gives us a better 
idea of the beauty of the original 
than many of the other copies. 
Finally, we must mention the 
original bronze head of the fifth cen- 
tury B.C. inthe Ashmolean Museum, 
Oxford, recently published by Percy 
Gardner.” This head, put together 
from nine fragments, and restored as 
that of a boy fillet-binder, and rival- 
ing in delicacy and beauty such 
original bronzes as the Beneventum 
head (Fig. 3) and the Jdolino (PI. 
14), not only gives a the best idea Fic. 29.—Head of the Diadouwmenos, 
of the technical ability attained by “after Polykleitos. Albertinum, 
bronze workers in the middle of the Dresden. 
fifth century.B.C., but also helps us to 
understand the ancient repute of Polykleitos’ athletes. Here the head- 
band and “starfish” arrangement of the hair have their close parallels 
in the Dresden, Kassel, and British Museum heads already discussed, 
which essentially reproduce the head of the Vaison statue (Fig. 28). 
As Gardner points out, it closely agrees with the type of the 
Farnese Diadoumenos (PI. 17) only in one particular, the mode of tying 
the knot. While the Vaison athlete is preparing to tie it, the Farnese 
one has just finished the operation, the boy still holding the ends of the 
fillet in his hands. But only the treatment of the hair, the eye, and the 
ear offers acontrast. Despite these differences Gardner follows the older 
view of Brunn in regarding the Vaison and Farnese types as two variants 
of Polykleitan originals; but the pose, style, and proportions of the 
latter seem to us to be too thoroughly Attic to warrant us in bringing 
it into relation with the work of Polykleitos. "Though the heads of the 
two are not so dissimilar, the pose, as Gardner also points out, is 
quite different. The veoh figure is represented as walking, 1. ¢., 
in the very act of changing the weight of the body from one leg to the 



‘J. H. S., VI, 1885, pp. 243 f. (Murray), and Pl. LXI. 
ee dL aS XXXIX, 1919, pp. 69 f., and Pl. 1 (two views), and p. 232 (with illustration of 
the likens head- spendy 
