apy MATERIALS OF OLYMPIC VICTOR MONUMENTS. 
might have been used up to their date. In the next place, the exca- 
vated bases, which have been identified as those of victor monuments, 
show footprints of bronze statues. ‘Thirdly, actual bronze fragments, 
indubitably belonging to victor statues (of which two are attested by 
inscriptions), were found during the excavations of the Altis. These 
consist of the following: 
(a) An inscribed convex piece of bronze of imperial times, “an- 
scheinend vom Schenkel einer Bronzestatue herruehrend.”? 
(b) A similar inscribed fragment of the same period.? 
(c) The remarkable life-size portrait head of a boxer or pancratiast, 
which we have already discussed and reproduced (Fig. 61 A and B).’ 
(d) A foot of masterly workmanship (Fig. 62) ascribed by Furt- 
waenglert to the end of the third century B.C. Its position shows 
that the statue of which it was a part was represented in motion, and 
consequently it has been assigned to a victor statue. 
(e) A beautifully modeled right arm, somewhat under life-size, sup- 
posedly from the statue of a boy victor.° 
(f) A right lower leg of excellent workmanship, assigned by Furt- 
waengler to the same period as fragment ¢.° 
Still other bronze fragments of statues found at Olympia may 
have belonged to statues of victors, especially to those of boys.’ 
The small number of such fragments recovered—Scherer wrongly 
thought there was none—is explained by assuming that all of these 
statues were of bronze, and consequently were destroyed by the bar- 
barians in their inroads into Greece during the early Middle Ages, 
when this metal was much prized. Another argument for believing 
that these statues were of bronze is the silence of Pausanias con- 
cerning the materials employed in them; for, in his enumeration of 
192 such monuments, he mentions the material of only two statues, 
those of the boxer Praxidamas of Aegina® and of the Opuntian pan- 
cratiast Rhexibios,!? and he mentions these because of their great 
antiquity, peculiar position in the Altis apart from the others (near 
‘The inscription gives a fragmentary enumeration of various victories: Jnschr. v. Ol., 234, p. 346; 
see infra, Ch. VIII, p. 360 and n. 3. 
*Inschr. v. Ol., 235, pp. 346-347; see infra, Ch. VIII, p. 360 and n. 4. 
3Ch. IV, pp. 254-5; Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 10-11; Tafelbd., Pl. II, 2, 2a; F. W., 322; etc. 
*Bronz. v. Ol., pp. 11-12; Tafelbd., Pl. III, 3, 3a; F. W., 324. See supra, p. 255. 
’Bronsz. v. Ol., p. 12; Tafelbd., Pl. IV, 5, 5a. Furtwaengler assigned it to a statue “freien 
RY Spee eat OF EN DAE why 
°Bronz. v. Ol., p. 22; Tafelbd., Pl. VI, no. 63. Even the veins are here indicated. 
"Brons. v. Ol., pp. 12-13; Tafelbd., Pl. IV, nos. 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, etc., and see text on p. 16. In 
this connection we have omitted bronze fragments in modern museums known to have once 
stood in the Altis, ¢. g., the head from Beneventum (Fig. 3) in the Louvre: B. B., 324; von 
Mach, 481. These have been already discussed in Ch. II, pp. 62 f. 
°F. Curtius, Peloponnesos, 1851-2, I, p. 85; II, pp. 16 and 96, n. 14; F. Dahn, Die Germanenin 
Griechenland, in 4. Z., XL, 1882, pp. 128 f. Of course, long before the barbarians entered Greece 
many of the best of these statues had been removed to Italy by Roman generals and emperors, 
especially Nero, and others were destroyed in various ways. 
*He won in Ol. 59 (=544 B. C.): P., VI, 18.7; Hyde, 187; Foerster, 113. 
He won in Ol. 61 (=536 B. C.): P., l. c.; Hyde, 188; Foerster, 120. 
