A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

PHEIDIAS. PIIEIDIAS. 245
the spoils of Marathon. Nor is it by any means of the period: we refer to the transference of the
improbable that this united sacred treasure may bones of Thesens to Athens, in the year B. c. 468,
have been distinguished as the spoils of Mllarathon, an event which must be taken as marking the date
in commemoration of that one of the great victories of the commencement of the temple of Theseus, one
over the Persians which had been achieved by the of the great works of art of the period under disAthenians alone. There is, indeed, a passage in cussion. In this case there was a special reason
Demosthenes (Parapresb. ~ 272, ed. Ilekk., p. 423) for the period chosen to undertake the work;
in which this is all but directly stated, for he says though the commencement of the general restorathat the statue was made out of the wealth given tion of the sacred monuments would probably be
by the Greeks to the Athenians, and dedicated by the postponed till the completion of the defences of
city as an dpeT'e^ev of the war against the barba- the city, which may be fixed at a. c. 457-456,
s-ians. This can only refer to the division of the when the long walls were completed. Hence, asspoil at the close of the second Persian War, while suming (what must be granted to Thiersch) that
his statement that the Athenians dedicated the Pheidias ought to be placed as early as the circumstatue as an dpLaTe7ov, clearly implies that the stances of the case permit, it would seem probable
Athenians were accustomed, through national pride, that he flourished fiom about the end of the 79th
to speak of these spoils as if they had been gained Olympiad to the end of the 86th, aT. c. 460-432.
in that battle, the glory of which was peculiarly This supposition agrees exactly with all that we
their own, namely Marathon. This observation know of the history of art at that period. It is
would apply also to the Plataeans' share of the quite clear that the transition from the archlaic
spoil; and it seems to furnish a satisfactory reason style of the earlier artists to the ideal style of
for our hearing so much of the votive offerings de- Pheidias did not take place earlier than the close
dicated by the Athenians out of the spoils of Ma- of the first quarter of the fifth centlury a. c. There
rathon, and so little of any similar applicationl of are chronological difficulties in this part of the
the undoubtedly greater wealth which fell to their argument, but there is enough of what is certain.
share after the repulse of Xerxes. But in this Perhaps the most important testimony is that of
case, as in the former, we must of necessity suppose Cicero (Brut. 18), who speaks of the statues of
a considerable delay. The first objects which en- Canachus as " riyidiora quane ut imitentur veritagrossed the attention of the Athenians were the tem," and those of Calamis as " dura quidea, sed
restoration of their dwellings and fortifications, the tanmcn smolliora quam Canachi," in contrast with
firm establishment of their political power, and the the almost perfect works of Myron, and the pertransference to themselves of the supremacy over fect ones of Polycleitus. Quintilian (xii. 10) rethe allied Greeks. In short, the administrations peats the criticism with a slight variation, "Duof Aristeides and Thernistocles, and the early part flora et Tuscanicis proxila CGallon atrque Egesias,
of Cimon's, were fully engaged with sterner neces- janz neinus rigida C(alamnis, mnolliora adleucszpra diciis
sities than even the restoration of the sacred edifices illyronfecit." Here we have the names of Cbnaand statues. At length even the appearance of chus, Callon, and Ilegesias, representing the thodanger from Persia entirely ceased; the Spartans roughly archaic school, and of Cbtlcer is as still
were fully occupied at home; the Athenians archaic, though less decidedly so, and then there is
had converted their nominal supremacy into the at once a transition to Myron and Polycleitus, the
real empire of the Aegean; and the common younger contemporaries of Pheidias. If we inquitre
treasury was transferred from Delos to Athens more particularly into the dates of these artists, we
(B. C. 465); at home Cimon was in the height of find that Canachus and Callon flourished probably
his power and popularity, and Pericles was just between B. c. 520 and 480. Hegesias, or Ilegias,
coming forward into public life; while the most is made by Pausanias a contemporary of Onatas,
essential defences of the city were already com- and of Ageladas (of whom we shall presently have
pleted. The period had undoubtedly come for to speak), and is expressly mentioned by Lucian,
the restoration of the sacred edifices and for the in connection with two other artists, Critios and
commencement of that brilliant era of art, which is Nesiotes, as v7- eraxaL6S EmpyaTlas, while Pliny, in
inseparably connected with the name of Pheidias, his loose way, makes him, and Alcamenes, and
and which found a still more coniplete opportunity Critios and Nesiotes, all rivals of Pheidias in 01.
for its development when,m after thle conclusion of 84, B. c. 444 [IHEGIAS]. Of the artists, whose
the wars which occupied so much of the attention names are thus added to those first mentioned, we
of Cimon and of Pericles during the following know that Critios iand Nesiotes executed works
twenty years, the thirty years' truce was concluded about B. C. 477 [CRITmIOS]; and Onatas, who was
vith the Lacedaemonians, and the power of Pericles contemporary with Polygnoteus, was reckoned as a
was finally established by the ostracism of Thucy- Daedalian artist, and clearly belonged to the
dides (B. c. 445, 444); while the treasury of archaic school, wvrought, with Calanlis, in B. c. 467,
Athens was continually augmented by the contri- and probably flourished as late as B. c. 460. Cabutions levied from the revolted allies. There is, lamis, though contemporary with Onatas, seems to
indeed, no dispute as to the fact that the period have been younger, and his name (as the above
from B. C. 444 to the breaking out of the Pelopon- citations show) marks the introduction of a less
nesian War, B. C. 431, was that during which the rigid style of art [CALAMIS']. Thus we have a
most important works of art were executed, under
the administration of Pericles and under the super- ~ It is, however, far from certain that the statue
initendence of Pheidias. The question really in of Apollo Alexicacos by Calamis, at Athens, furdispute regards only the commencement of the nishes a sufficient ground for bringing down his
period. date to the great plague at Athens, in B. c. 430,
An important event of Cimon's administration 429. Pausanias merely assigns this as a trclitizonal
affPords a strong confirmation to the general con- reason for the surname of the god, whereas we
clusion suggested by the above view of the history know it to have been an epithet very anciently,.:3