Editing Praxiteles (section)

===''Hermes and the Infant Dionysus''===
{{Main|Hermes and the Infant Dionysus}}
[[File:Hermes di Prassitele, at Olimpia, front 2.jpg|thumb|200px|[[Hermes]] bearing the infant [[Dionysus]], by Praxiteles, [[Archaeological Museum of Olympia]]]]
In 1911, the ''[[Encyclopædia Britannica]]'' noted that
: Our knowledge of Praxiteles has received a great addition, and has been placed on a satisfactory basis, by the discovery at [[Olympia, Greece|Olympia]] in 1877 of his statue of ''Hermes with the Infant Dionysus'', a statue which has become famous throughout the world.<ref name=EB-1911/>{{efn|"But the figure of the Hermes, full and solid without being fleshy, at once strong and active, is a masterpiece, and the play of surface is astonishing. In the head we have a remarkably rounded and intelligent shape, and the face expresses the perfection of health and enjoyment. This statue must for the future be our best evidence for the style of Praxiteles. It altogether confirms and interprets the statements as to Praxiteles made by [[Pliny the Elder|Pliny]] and other ancient critics."<ref name=EB-1911>''Encyclopædia Britannica'', 1911.</ref>}}

Later opinions have varied, reaching a low with the sculptor [[Aristide Maillol]], who railed, "It's [[kitsch]], it's frightful, it's sculpted in [[Marseille soap]]".<ref>{{cite book |quote=C'est pompier, c'est affreux, c'est sculpté du savon de Marseille. |first=J. |last=Cladel |title=Maillol. Sa vie, son œuvre, ses idées |place=Paris |year=1937 |page=98}}</ref> In 1948, Carl Blümel published it in a monograph as ''The Hermes of ''a'' Praxiteles'',<ref>{{cite book |author=Blümel, Carl |year=1948 |title=Der Hermes eine Praxiteles |place=Baden-Baden, DE}}</ref> reversing his earlier (1927) opinion that it was a Roman copy, finding it not 4th century either, but referring it instead to a [[Hellenistic]] sculptor, a younger Praxiteles of Pergamon.{{efn|Attribution to a younger Praxiteles on the basis of the inscription ''Pergamon'' VIII, 1, 137 – as first suggested by Morgan (1937).<ref>{{cite journal |first=C.H. |last=Morgan |year=1937 |title=The drapery of the Hermes of Praxiteles |journal=Archaiologike Ephemeris |pages=61–68}}</ref> Carpenter (1954) dismissed this younger Praxiteles as a phantom.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Rhys |last=Carpenter |date=January 1954 |title=Two postscripts to the Hermes controversy |journal=American Journal of Archaeology |volume=58 |number=1 |pages=4–6|doi=10.2307/500766 |jstor=500766 |s2cid=191376162 }}</ref>}}

The sculpture was located where [[Pausanias (geographer)|Pausanias]] had seen it in the late 2nd century AD.<ref>{{cite book |author=[[Pausanias (geographer)|Pausanias]] |title=[[Description of Greece]] |at=5.17.3}} refers to the stone sculpture as ''techne'' of Praxiteles</ref> [[Hermes]] is represented in the act of carrying the child [[Dionysus]] to the [[nymphs]] who were charged with his rearing. The uplifted right arm is missing, but the possibility that the god holds out to the child a [[bunch of grapes]] to excite his desire would reduce the subject to a genre figure, Waldstein (1882) noted that Hermes looks past the child, "the clearest and most manifest outward sign of inward dreaming".<ref>{{cite journal |first=C. |last=Waldstein |title=Hermes with the infant Dionysos. Bronze Statuette in the Louvre |journal=The Journal of Hellenic Studies |volume=3 |year=1882 |pages=107–110|doi=10.2307/623529 |jstor=623529 |s2cid=162005966 |url=https://zenodo.org/record/2485739 }}</ref>{{rp|page=108}} The statue is today exhibited at the [[Archaeological Museum of Olympia]].

Opposing arguments have been made that the statue is a copy by a Roman copyist, perhaps of a work by Praxiteles that the Romans had purloined.{{efn|The career of the Olympia ''Hermes'' reputation was summed up by Wycherley (1982); his advice was to trust to the judgment of Pausanias in this matter.<ref>{{cite journal |first=R.E. |last=Wycherley |title=Pausanias and Praxiteles |journal=Hesperia Supplements |volume=20 |quote=Studies in Spartan Architecture, Sculpture and Topography. Presented to Ion A. Thompson |year=1982 |pages=182–191|doi=10.2307/1353960 |jstor=1353960 }}</ref>}} Wallace (1940) suggested a 2nd-century date and a [[Pergamum|Pergamene]] origin on the basis of the sandal type.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Mary |last=Wallace |year=1940 |title=Sutor supra Crepidam |journal=American Journal of Archaeology |volume=44 |issue=2 |pages=366–367|doi=10.2307/499414 |jstor=499414 |s2cid=191374605 }}</ref> Other assertions have been attempted by scholars to prove the origins of the statue on the basis of the unfinished back, the appearance of the drapery, and the technique used with the drilling of the hair; however scholars cannot conclusively use any of these arguments to their advantage because exceptions exist in both Roman and Greek sculpture.