The Judgment of Animals in Classical Greece: Animal Sculpture and ...

“the pose, the slender body, the elongated skull, the short hair on the neck resemble those
of a dog rather than a lion; only in the wide-open mouth has the artist successfully
conveyed the impression of a fierce animal of prey.” 146 As this statement suggests, the
combination of incongruous, that is, canine and leonine elements creates an unconvincing
image of a lion, and, thus, one that for its most part does not conform to Richter’s
conception of naturalism as anatomical and behavioral accuracy.
Richter not only points out the inconsistent style of animals in Greek sculpture,
but attempts to explain it as well. Such an attempt is clearly seen, for example, as her
discussion proceeds to fourth-century animal funerary sculpture that originates outside
the Greek world, namely, one of the freestanding lions (ca. 350 B.C.) from the
Mausoleum at Halicarnassus (Fig. 8), a monument whose architecture displays, as has
146 Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks 75, n. 11, figs. 361, 362; also Animals in Greek Sculpture
7, 50, fig. 20. The precise findspot of the statue (MMA 09.221.3) is not known, but for the idea that it was
found in or near Rome, see J. Marshall, “Statue of a Lion,” M.M.A. Bulletin 5 (1910) 212, who also notes
(210) that its style is so close to that of the lions of the Nereid Monument (ca. 390-380 B.C.) that “at first
sight there seems a possibility that the statue might have come originally from the same source….[but]
there is no place in the Nereid monument for more lions than the four of which fragments were found.”
This observation explains why Richter, Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks 75, and Animals in Greek
Sculpture 7, speaks of the lion at the Metropolitan Museum as being “related” to those of the Nereid
Monument. In his reference to the lions of the Nereid Monument, A. H. Smith, A Catalogue of Sculpture
in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities. British Museum II (London, 1900) 41, states that “parts
were found of four lions, of which two are fairly complete” (BM 929 a lioness, BM 930 a lion). He also
notes no knowledge regarding the original placement of these statues on or in association with the
monument; also, regarding their style, he says that “it is very archaic compared with the remainder of the
sculptures—especially the stiff and conventional treatment of the manes,” a phenomenon which forces him
to suggest that the lions “either derived from an older monument or the archaic conventions have been
consciously retained [in them].” For a recent discussion reiterating this view, see Jenkins, Greek
Architecture and Its Sculpture (Cambridge, Mass., 2006) 200, who points out that, in terms of their style,
the statues “appear somewhat archaizing by comparison with the high Classical modeling of the
architectural sculpture [of the monument].” Regarding their find spot, W. A. P. Childs and P. Demargne,
Fouilles de Xanthos VIII. Les monument des Néréides. Le décor sculpté (Paris, 1989) 231-233, pls. 156-
158, state that they were found near the north terrace, are certainly associated with the monument, and their
purpose was, most likely, to serve as guardian figures. Jenkins, Greek Architecture and Its Sculpture 201,
fig. 196, echoes this point, when he says that the statues might have “formed part of a pride deployed
around the north terrace or at its approach.” B. S. Ridgway, Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture
(Madison, 1997) 79, in her description of the Nereid Monument, suggests that “marble lions guarded the
four corners of the podium, probably at ground level”; she also provides the following information (76, n.
6): “W. A. P. Childs kindly tells me that the location of the four (?) lions was never fully resolved, and that
positioning of the roof slope, two on either side, could also be envisioned, on possible analogy with the
(later) arrangement on the Mausolleion.”
104