Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wzw2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-26T00:11:02.035Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Damophon

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 December 2013

Extract

Mr. A. M. Daniel's article on the above subject (pp. 41 seq.) is so thorough and convincing that it hardly requires further support. But in view of the widespread acceptance of the attribution of the Lycosura statues to a late Roman date, I think a few words in further confirmation of his contention are not out of place.

In spite of the almost unanimous volte-face in the opinion of archaeologists since Dr. Doerpfeld expressed his doubts as to the Greek character of the buildings at Lycosura, my own view (expressed in the Athenaeum, March 22nd, 1890, and at a public meeting of the American School at Athens, January 6th, 1891) that Damophon's work belongs to the first half of the fourth century B.C. has not been shaken. Of course we must all remember that we have here to deal with the question of probability and not of certainty. Yet within these limits it appears to me that the balance of evidence strongly inclines towards the fourth century B.C.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1904

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For the foundation of Megalopolis, see Niese, , Hermes, 1899Google Scholar, Beiträge zur Gesch. Arkadiens, pp. 527 seq. See also Bury, , J.H.S. 1898, pp. 15Google Scholarseq.