scholarly journals Numismatic Commentary on Pausanias, I

1885 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 50-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Imhoof-Blumer ◽  
Percy Gardner

The following paper is the first of a series of two or three which will bring into contact the extant coins of Greece and the text of Pausanias, thus furnishing to many passages of the traveller's writings a running numismatic commentary.The main object we have set before us is to collect and set forth the numismatic reproductions of works of art mentioned by Pausanias; but we have not excluded any numismatic types which at all illustrate the cults and the legends mentioned by him as existing in the various cities of Peloponnesus.The importance of the work cannot be doubted when we consider that in the case of many of the statues mentioned by Pausanias the only copies known are those upon coins; we may therefore hope to reconstruct from numismatic evidence, at least the general schemes of many great works of art wholly lost, and thus furnish very important material for recovering the history of Greek art; especially the history of the succession of types of the chief deities of Greece, which is a subject of great and increasing interest to archaeologists.Generally speaking, the coins on which we can place the most reliance as sources of information as to the monuments are those of Hadrian and the Antonines. These coins are also the best in point of execution; and we may add that they are contemporary with the travels of Pausanias.


1983 ◽  
Vol 103 ◽  
pp. 49-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. D. Francis ◽  
Michael Vickers

‘Most things in Greece’, so Pausanias tells us, ‘are subject to dispute.’ Nowadays, however, the chronological development at least of archaic and early classical art is no longer regarded as a matter for controversy. Indeed so little dispute remains that the art of this period is being used with increasing confidence to reconstruct the social, political and economic history of Greece. Before new orthodoxies arise, however, it may be in order to question some of the old ones by re-examining the ‘fixed points’ on which the chronology of Greek art is based. These points of contact between art and history are familiar. They include, for example, the sack of Hama in Syria, Thucydides' dates for the western colonies, the siege of Old Smyrna, the Greek occupation of Tell Defenneh and other Egyptian sites, the construction of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi, the youthful careers of Athenian kaloi (notably those of Leagros, son of Glaukon, and of his son Glaukon), ostraca, the Marathon tumulus and the Persian sack of Athens.In this paper we evaluate the evidence of two well-known buildings which are generally thought to have been constructed in the sixth century BC. We argue that available evidence may not require this chronological conclusion. We begin by attempting to demonstrate that the marble Temple of Apollo Daphnephorus at Eretria with its pedimental Amazonomachy was erected in the aftermath of the Persian Wars, not in the sixth century. We then reconsider in the light of this suggestion the traditional date of the Siphnian Treasury (c. 530–25 BC).



2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Grote
Keyword(s):  


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Grote
Keyword(s):  


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Grote
Keyword(s):  


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Grote
Keyword(s):  


Author(s):  
Connop Thirlwall
Keyword(s):  


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Connop Thirlwall
Keyword(s):  


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Finlay
Keyword(s):  


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Finlay
Keyword(s):  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document