This film focuses on two Greek statues from the northern and southern most parts of The Greek Empire, just prior its subjection to the Roman Empire in 146 BC. Samothrace is off the coast of both Greece and Turkey in the Northern Aegean. Its most famous daughter is The Winged Victory, sculpted in the 2nd century BC.
The Winged Victory depicts the Greek goddess Nike (Victory).
The statue consists of several blocks of marble, carved separately and then assembled, measuring over 18 feet in height.
Considered one of the Louvre’s greatest treasures, it is one of the most celebrated sculptures in the world. H.W. Janson, best known for his History of Art of 1962, described it as “the greatest masterpiece of Hellenistic sculpture.”
But how Hellenistic is it?
The Victory’s flowing drapery looks very much like the style of Phidias, sculptor of the Parthenon marbles of about 450-435 BC., 200 - 300 years earlier. This is called Early Classical, sometimes called the Severe Style. Yet, Nike, who was mounted on a stone ship, has a twisting pose full of motion not seen until the Hellenistic period.
Her mid-section turns as the wind blows her drapery back. Yet she strides forward. Nike was placed in a sanctuary on a stone ship facing the sea, where the wind blows strong.
Talk about twisting in the wind! She was found in April of 1863 by a French expedition led by the amateur archaeologist Charles Champoiseau.
Nike, conveys a sense of action and triumph. And look at that leg. She’s not going anywhere.
In 1950, part of her right hand was discovered and joined with a thumb and ring finger that had been discovered by Austrian archaeologists.
We now turn away from Nike and towards another female, Aphrodite, sculpted around the same time but very different in style.
The Venus de Milo (Aphrodite to the Greeks), was created around 100 BC, in the southern Aegean on the island of Milos. The goddess originally wore metal jewelry — bracelet, earrings, and headband — of which only the fixation holes remain.
But how Hellenistic is it?
There is less severity in the drapery. The Venus de Milo revives the classical tradition; the goddess's air of aloofness, the harmony of her face, and her impassivity are reminiscent of the aesthetics of the 5th century BC. The hairstyle and delicate modeling of the flesh evoke the works of 4th century sculptor Praxiteles.
Yet, unlike males, female nudes, even topless, were all but non-existent in the classical period.
Her twisting torso also shows more movement than the serene figures of the classical era.
That's me and my camera rig.
