Abstract
The Venus de Milo, an ancient Greek statue, has been viewed as one of the most celebrated pieces of art in Western culture. It was sculpted during the Hellenistic period between 150 and 50 BC and is believed to be the work of Alexandros of Antioch. The sculpture is thought to depict Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love and beauty. When assembled, the two halves of the sculpture meet in an almost horizontal line that is purposefully obscured by a roll of garment around the hips. It has been noted that the midline of the statue’s face is displaced slightly. German anatomist von Henke observed that Venus’s pelvis is obliquely positioned and that there is a leg length discrepancy. These findings lead him and others to posit that the Venus de Milo might have a subtle spinal deformity. In this review, we examine the literature regarding this famous statue and evidence that the model of the statue might have had a deformity of the vertebral column.
Highlights
BackgroundThe Venus de Milo, an ancient Greek marble statue, has been viewed as one of the most celebrated pieces of art in Western culture [1,2] (Figure 1)
The Venus de Milo, an ancient Greek statue, has been viewed as one of the most celebrated pieces of art in Western culture. It was sculpted during the Hellenistic period between 150 and 50 BC and is believed to be the work of Alexandros of Antioch
It is a depiction of Aphrodite [4], the Greek goddess of sexual love, fertility, and beauty [4,5]
Summary
The Venus de Milo, an ancient Greek marble statue, has been viewed as one of the most celebrated pieces of art in Western culture [1,2] (Figure 1). Among these was thought to be the left hand holding an apple [2], an upper arm [7] and a piece of the plinth (base of the sculpture), where the sculptor Agesandros (Alexandros) of Antioch had carved his name [2,7]. In 1886, the German anatomist Philipp Jakob Wilhelm von Henke (1834-1896) from the University of Tübingen observed that the pelvis of the Venus was oblique, and that her legs were different lengths These observations suggested that the model for the statue limped in life and possibly had a spinal deformity [11]. Louis XVIII accepted recommendations from Quatremere de Quincy, a well-known art critic, who had strong feelings against restoring the arms to the statue [4]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
