JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

In three studies of votive offerings, the author explores the role played by private patrons in the production of art and inscriptions in Athens in the Archaic and Classical periods. The studies concern additive sculptural groups produced by the contributions of multiple dedicators, a form of display ex plained within the context of votive religion; epigraphical evidence for col laboration between East Greek sculptors and Athenian patrons on 6th-and 5th-century votive monuments; and dedications that have either been mis identified as belonging to Athenian potters and vase painters or erroneously reconstructed as metal or stone vases. ? The American School of Classical Studies at Athens 396 CATHERINE M. KEESLING 7. The only certain example of a dedication of freestanding sculpture by the Athenian state in the Archaic pe riod is the quadriga group commemo rating the victory over the Boiotians and Chalkidians in 506 b.c. (replaced after the Persian sack of the Acropolis in 480); the preserved inscriptions are DAA 168 and 173 (IG I3 501). A colos sal votive column without a preserved inscription, published by Korres (1997), was destroyed in 480 but cannot be dated precisely, and thus it could be at tributed either to the Peisistratids or to the Athenian demos. If the monument was replaced after 480, as Korres sug gests, it is more likely to have been a public monument of the democracy, by analogy with the quadriga group noted above and the Tyrannicides in the Agora.

No abstract

Anthropologists have defined iconatrophy as a process by which oral traditions originate as explanations for objects that, through the passage of time, have ceased to make sense to their viewers. One form of iconatrophy involves the misinterpretation of statues' identities, iconography, or locations. Stories that ultimately derive from such misunderstandings of statues are Monument-Novellen, a term coined by Herodotean studies. Applying the concept of iconatrophy to Greek sculpture of the Archaic and Classical periods yields three possible examples in which statues standing in Greek sanctuaries may have inspired stories cited by authors of the Roman imperial period as explanations for the statues' identities, attributes, poses, or locations. The statues in question are the portrait of the athletic victor Milo of Croton at Olympia, a bronze lioness on the Athenian Acropolis identified as a memorial to the Athenian prostitute Leaina (““lioness””), and the Athena Hygieia near the Propylaia of Mnesikles. Inscriptions on the bases of Archaic and Classical statues in Greek sanctuaries typically named the dedicator, the recipient deity, and the sculptor, but did not include the subject represented or the historical occasion behind the dedication. These ““gaps”” left by votive inscriptions would only have encouraged the formation of iconatrophic oral traditions such as the examples examined in this article.