354 POSITIONS OF VICTOR STATUES IN THE ALTIS. 
of Kapros, victor in tayxpa7vov and 7aAy in Ol. 142 (=212 B. C.);! and 
of Akestorides, victor t@Awy &pywate sometime between Ols. 142 and 144 
(=212 and 204 B.C.).2 Still later statues of victors named by Pau- 
sanias, whose dates can not be exactly determined, are those of 
Sodamas, who won taléwy oTad.tovy some time between Ols. 142 and 
145 (=212 and 200 B. C.);? of Amyntas, victor in taiéwy mayKpartvov in 
Ol. (?) 146 (=196 B. C.);4 of Timon, victor in révtaédov in Ols. 146 or 
147 (=196 or 192 B.C.);° and of Lysippos, victor in tatéwy ran some 
time between Ols. 149 and 157 (=184 and 152 B.C.).° Of the first 
century A.D., Pausanias mentions three victors without statues: 
Artemidoros, who won taykpatuov in Ol. 212 (=69 A. D.);7 Polites, 
victor in oTadvov, dtavdos and ddArxos in Ol. 212; and Hermogenes, victor 
In oTadLov twice, dlavAos once, and as omAirys thrice, in Ols. 215, 216, 
217 (=81-89 A. D.).° The words of Pliny, Olympzae, ubt omnium qui 
vicissent statuas dicart mos erat'® refer, of course, as we have already 
pointed out, only to the privilege and not to the actual fact, for many 
victors would have no statues, as it was necessary for them or their 
relatives or city-states to meet the expenses of their erection.’ No 
more is the rest of his statement to be taken literally, 7. ¢., that those 
victors who were victorious three times had the right to erect portrait 
statues in their honor; for we have, as has already been shown, at 
least one exception.” Besides we know that portrait statues were 
practically unknown before the fourth century B.C. Most of the 
victor statues were mere types—those of Hermes and Herakles being 
common—without individualized features, simply representing the 
various coritests by position or some characteristic, ¢. g., the helmet 
and shield for “hoplite’” victors." 
Five of these inscriptions have been referred to the sixth and fifth 
centuries B.C.14 Of these the inscribed base of Pantares was found near 
1Hyde, 150; Foerster, 474, 475; P., VI, 15. 10 (two statues). 
*Hyde, 119 and pp. 49-50; Foerster, 501; P., VI, 13. 7, and Inschr. v. Ol., 184. 
3Hyde, 42; Foerster, 800; P., VI, 4. 9. 4Hyde, 40; Foerster, 494; P., VI, 4. 5. 
5Hyde, 152; Foerster, 391; P., VI, 16. 2. SHyde, 162; Foerster, 515; P., VI, 6.7. 
7Hyde, 125a; Foerster, 651; P., VI, 14. 2. 8Hyde, 111b; Foerster, 648-650; P., VI, 13.3. 
*Hyde, 1lla; Foerster, 654-6, 659, 660, 662-664; P., VI, 13. 3. 
10H, N.,. XXXIV, 16. See supra, pp. 27 and 54. 
Cf. Inschr.v. Ol., p. 235. P., VI, 1.1, distinctly states that not all victors had statues, adding 
that some of the most distinguished had none. 
Thus the epigram on the base of a monument of Xenombrotos (133; cf. P., VI, 14. 12) states 
that it was a portrait of the victor: Inschr. v. Ol., 170. We have, howevee aside from this 
Inscription, no record that he was a victor more oe once. See supra, pp. 54-5. On the basis 
of three or more victories, several victors should have had portrait statues: e. g., Foerster, 60, 86, 
144, 351, 358, 495, 603, 741, 815. 
Discussed supra, Ch. II, p. 58. 
“For dates, places of finding, and contests, references are constantly made by number to Dit- 
tenberger, Inschr. v. Ol.; the number of each victor is given also from Foerster’s lists, which, though 
incomplete, are the best that have yet appeared. Where the exact dates are known they are 
cited from Foerster; otherwise, the probable dating of the inscription as given by Dittenberger is 
followed. See Plans A and B. 
