302 TWO MARBLE HEADS FROM VICTOR STATUES. 
sors and contemporaries, but developed at the same time new and inde- 
pendent tendencies. ‘Thus the Philandridas must have been—just as 
the lost statue of Troilos—an early work of the master, whereas the 
Agias was the work of his mature genius. ‘The difference between the 
two can thus be explained by the lapse of time between them, and by 
the influences that surrounded the youthful artist; but the similarities 
between them are, at the same time, striking, and there 1s little resem- 
blance in either to the dApoxyomenos. ‘This is. another link in the 
chain of evidence that the latter work could not have been produced 
by the same artist; for artists do not radically change their style after 
many years of work, and Lysippos must have been at least fifty 
vears old when he created the 4gzas. 
The identification of this marble head with that of the victor statue 
of the Akarnanian pancratiast by Lysippos raises two questions which 
we shall briefly examine: whether the statues in the Altis were ever 
made of marble, and whether Lysippos ever worked in that material. 
The first of these questions will be left for the following chapter; the 
second will be discussed in the present connection. 
LYSIPPOS. AS A WORKER IN MARBER SAR 
STATUES DOUBLES: 
To regard a marble statue as an original work of Lysippos, who has 
been looked upon almost universally as a sculptor in bronze exclusively, 
seems at first sight to be baseless. Pliny certainly classed Lysippos 
among the bronze-workers, for in the preface to his account of bronze- 
founders! he 'tells us that this artist produced 1,500 statues, and doubt- 
less we are to infer that the historian regarded them all as being made 
of metal. He further? speaks of Lysippos’ contributions to the (ars) 
statuaria, and it seems clear that this term, as the modern title of Book 
XXXIV, is to be taken in its narrow sense of sculpture in bronze as op- 
posed to sculptura,® that in marble. How firmly the belief is established 
that Lysippos worked only in bronze can be seen from the following 
words of Overbeck: “Zu beginnen ist mit wiederholter Hervorhebung 
der durchaus unzwetfelhaften und wichtigen Tatsache dass Lysippos 
ausschliesslich Erzgiesser war.’* ‘That Lysippos was preéminently a 
bronze-worker, and that his ancient reputation was due chiefly to 
his bronze work, can not be doubted. But to say that he never 
essayed to produce works in marble, as so many other Greek artists 

1H, N., XXXIV, 37. 
*Tbid., 61 f. 
‘The two are contrasted in XXXV, 156: [Varro] laudat et Pasitelen qui plasticen matrem caela- 
turae et statuariae scalpturaeque(= sculpturae) dixit, etc. Cf. infra, Ch. VII, p. 324, n. 4. They are 
also contrasted in XXXVI, 15. Sculptura is the modern title of Bk. XXXVI. 
‘II, p. 150. See also Bulle, p. 137. Amongst recent writers who oppose this view are Koepp, 
Gebers d. Bildnisse Alex. d. Gr., p. 29, and Preuner, op. cit., pp. 46-7. 
