1. Dying Gaul

H. (with plinth) 0.93 m., length of plinth 1.865 m., breadth 0.89 m. Greek marble, small-grained, yellowish. Restored: tip of nose, r. arm (thumb a later restoration) with plinth attached; l. thumb; toes of r. foot (part of ankle broken off but belonging); pieces on l. knee and shin; toes of l. foot. All the left part of the base from front to back, carrying sword-belt and part of horn (this in Luna marble). Also part of the other end of horn, two pieces of shield near r. leg, and under r. foot. Head broken off and replaced; l. shin twice broken, and refitted with patches. Locks of hair also damaged. The breakages of the plinth start from a point behind r. foot. The marble of the r. arm closely resembles that of the statue, but the surface is more polished and the proportions are not quite the same as those of the l. arm. It is by a baseless tradition attributed to Michelangelo; but there is no sufficient reason for doubting its antiquity. By the foot there is cut in the plinth a geometric pattern of concentric circles. Such a device is often found on marbles accessible in Rome to boys of the street, and was evidently used for a game with counters. In this case it proves that the statue was at one time set up at so low an elevation as to be accessible to all.

The character of the marble has been disputed. It is of the same quality as that used for other works of the Pergamene School, such as the Ludovisi group of a Gaul and his wife. Sigel, an excellent authority, as cited by G. Kinkel (Mosaik zur Kunstgeschichte, p. 80), says that it comes from Phurni, an island near Samos. He cites in confirmation the cloudy marks on the left thigh, which are characteristic of the marble of Phurni, and that of Thasos and Thrace. Michaelis (Arch. Zeit., 1876, p. 153) supports Sigel’s view. Von Duhn (Ath. Mitth., p. 134) maintains that the marble comes from Mount Sipylus. See Bienkowski, loc. cit., p. 2.

Gaul, naked, reclining on shield in a dying state, though he tries still to support himself by his r. arm, which rests on the ground, and his l., which rests on the r. thigh; r. leg drawn up, head sinking. He wears a torques of rope-pattern round his neck. Under the r. breast is a wound from which blood flows. On the basis are a Gaulish (oval) shield, a trumpet, and a sword (restored).

p.339 The figure as set up is not well ponderated; it is falling on its back. Possibly the artist purposely showed as much as he could of the body. The type of body, with strong bony frame, and hard inelastic skin, does not correspond to the Greek athletic ideal.

The type of head, with hair in bristling locks and moustache, is familiar to us from many works in which Gauls are represented. The torques also is Gaulish.

The character of physical frame, hair, and beard is exactly that attributed to the Gallic nobles by Diodorus (V. 28). He says: “their bodies are tall, their flesh moist and white; their yellow hair they stiffen with clay into a sort of mane, which they throw backwards: they shave the cheek, but allow a long moustache to grow.”

The attitude has given rise to much controversy. The bending of the r. arm seems motived by a desire not to stretch the wound. This latter, being on the right side, should not be immediately mortal. Hence a dispute whether it is inflicted by an enemy or self-caused. The weapon with which it was made is said to have been a spear, with which a man could scarcely slay himself; nor would a soldier be likely to try to commit suicide by piercing the r. side. At the same time such arguments as these must not be pressed so far as they are by Belger (Jahrb., 1888, p. 150), since the artistic problem is distinct from that of actual life. Greek art does not photograph fact, but aims at producing an impression; and in this case the impression produced is that of suicide in despair, as may be seen by comparing a figure on the Ammendola sarcophagus Stanze Terrene a destra, II. 5, where a Gaul, in closely similar attitude, is plunging a sword into his r. side.

The statue has long been regarded as a fine Greek original of the Pergamene School, or a contemporary replica in marble of an original in bronze. Recently, however, Furtwängler has expressed the view that it is a Roman copy of a Pergamene bronze, a view which Bienkowski pronounces probably true. It assumes, however, in Roman copyists, such an exact adherence to a prototype, and such an appreciation of style as can seldom, if ever, be found in workmen of the Roman age. In any case, the original belongs to the same series of representations as the Gaul Slaying his Wife in the Ludovisi collection. The originals of both perhaps stood on the bases discovered at Pergamon recording the victories of Attalus I (241—197 B. C.) and Eumenes II (197—159 B. C.). For the inscriptions on these bases see reff.

Pliny (34, 84) mentions Isigonus (perhaps a corruption of Epigonus), Phyromachus, Stratonicus, and Antigonus as the sculptors of the Pergamene groups. A tubicen or trumpeter by Epigonus is also mentioned by Pliny (34, 88); and Urlichs and Michaelis would identify the present statue with it (Jahrb., 1888, p. 132: cf., however, Petersen, in Röm. Mitth., 1893, p. 253).

The representation of the Celtic type here preserved is the more valuable since the Celts have disappeared as a race, being merged in Iberian and Teutonic stocks.

With the present statue must be compared a torso in Dresden (Pontremoli and Collignon, Pergame, p. 131; Clarac, 872, 2213 (p. 531 R); Bienkowski, p. 4), of fine work, which is a replica of this statue, from neck to hips, without arms, and on the same scale. It would p.340 seem, however, from an examination of the stump of the l. arm, that it was in a more strained attitude (Bienkowski).

The statue was formerly in the Villa Ludovisi, and is first mentioned in the inventory of 1633 (Schreiber, Die antiken Bildwerke der Villa Ludovisi, p. 30), as are the groups of the Gaul and his Wife and the so-called Orestes and Electra: hence Schreiber (p. 12) conjectures that these sculptures were found in or about 1622, when the Villa was built. The statement that the r. arm was restored by Michelangelo was current in the eighteenth century, according to Quojani (p. 61); but Maffei (Raccolta di statue [1704], text to Pl. 65) is wrong in identifying the statue with the torso di gladiatore seen by Aldrovandi in the Cesi collection, and there is no evidence to show that it had been discovered in the sixteenth century. By 1693 it had passed into the possession of Don Livio Odescalchi, nephew of Innocent XI (Rossini, Mercurio errante, p. 94), and was acquired for the Museum by Clement XII (Descrizione di Roma moderna, 1741, p. 10). The report quoted by Sebastiani (Viaggio a Tivoli, p. 280) that it was found in the Villa of Hadrian is referred by Bienkowski to the Dresden torso, formerly in the Chigi collection (loc. cit., p. 6).

In the eighteenth century the statue stood in the centre of the Salone; it was removed to Paris in 1797 and restored in 1816.

Perrier, 32;
Maffei—De Rossi, 65;
Bottari, iii. 67, 68;
Mori, II, Grande 31;
Montagnani-Mirabili, i.¹ 88 = ii.² 104;
Bouillon, Musée des Antiques, II. 21;
Musée Napoléon, IV. 22, p. 51;
Visconti, Op. var., IV, p. 325, No. 96;
Righetti, I. 1, 2;
Armellini, III. 281;
Clarac, 869, 2214 (p. 530 R);
Brunn, Geschichte der griechischen Künstler, I. 444;
Beschr. Roms, III. 1, p. 248;
Murray, II, p. 381;
Friederichs-Wolters, 1412;
Rev. Arch., 1888, p. 280;
Jahrb., 1888, pp. 150 ff.; ib., 1893, pp. 129 ff.;
Röm. Mitth., 1893, p. 253; ib., 1895, pp. 129 ff., pl. II (head only);
Brunn-Bruckmann, 421;
Collignon, II, p. 503, fig. 258;
Overbeck, II.⁴ p. 230;
Helbig, I.² 548 (reff. to earlier literature);
Amelung, p. 195;
Bienkowski, Darstellungen der Gallier in der hellenistischen Kunst, pp. 1 ff. (full reff. to literature on Gauls in ancient Art).
On the inscriptions of Pergamene sculptors see Löwy, I. G. B., pp. 113—122, Frankel, Inschriften von Pergamon, II. 84.

Alin. 5997 (s, a, p, e, g), 5998 (s, a, p, e; back), 5999 (p, e; bead);
And. 1709 (g, n, d, f), 1710 (g, n. d; back), 1710 A (head);
B. 4242 (g, e, s, eg), 4243 (g, e, s; back), 4242 A;
C. R. 713, 714 (back), 419 (g), 420 (g; back), 3 (c), 2071 (f);
Inst. 1449;
M. 690, 689 (back), 690 A (head), 2167 (g), 2168 (g), 2169 (g; back), 2627 (30 × 40).