Note 1957 — Chapter V · MONUMENTS OF HIPPODROME AND MUSICAL VICTORS.

So von Duhn, Gardner, and Mahler; the latter in Jh. oest. arch. Inst., III, 1900, pp. 142 f. Furtwaengler, l. c., found von Duhn’s view that the Charioteer is an original work of Pythagoras untenable. He also combated his interpretation of πολύζαλος as a proper name, preferring the suggestion of Washburn that it might be an adjective. However, in a former article (Sitzb. Muen. Akad., 1897, pp. 129 f.) he had emphasized the similarity between the statue and a bronze statuette in London (B. M. Bronzes, 515 and Pl. XVI; Sitzb., l. c., Pl. V, two views) which he believed was almost certainly a product of Magna Græcia. He found the style of the Charioteer Ionic-Attic without Peloponnesian affiliations, and referred it to Amphion or to some unknown artist of the circle of Kritios and Nesiotes. For a similar view, see Homolle, Mon. Piot, IV, 1897, p. 207. Pottier (ap. Homolle, l. c.) assigned it to Kalamis. Cf. also Lechat, Pythagoras de Rhegion, 1905, p. 100.