represent a nude youth standing with the weight of the body on the right leg, the left drawn back and outwards. The head is turned to the left, the right arm is held close to the side (the hand, perhaps, once holding a fillet), and the left forearm is outstretched from the elbow and holds an aryballos in the hand. The two works are manifestly Polykleitan in style—the body, head, and hair treatment resembling that of the _Doryphoros_. He assumed that the feet corresponded in scale with the footmarks on the Olympia base. Helbig, in the first edition of his _Fuehrer_, recognized the kinship between the Vatican statuette and the _Doryphoros_ of Polykleitos, and was prone to accept Furtwaengler’s identification; but later on, in the third edition, he ascribed the statuette only to the Polykleitan circle and denied that its foot position corresponded with that of the Pythokles base. Amelung also, while accepting its Polykleitan character, has shown that the feet of the statuette are closer together than those on the Olympia base and are placed at a slightly different angle. As for the Munich statue, both Helbig and Amelung have ruled it out of the evidence. The head, though similar to that of the statuette, also discloses marked differences, and the legs of the two works do not have the same pose. Loewy agrees with Amelung that the statue of Pythokles conformed with the type of the _Diadoumenos_—especially with the Vaison copy (see Fig. 28)—and with that of the _Doryphoros_.[1511] We can not, therefore, safely assume that the statue of Pythokles has been recovered in any existing copy.[1512] A further variant of the works just discussed should be mentioned here—the beautiful marble statue of a boy victor in Dresden, known as the _Dresden Boy_ (Fig. 45).[1513] In this statue the leg position is nearly like that indicated by the marks on the Pythokles basis, though the left foot is not set so far back nor its tip so far out. The head is turned to the left and slightly lowered, the right arm hung to the side, and the left forearm was outstretched, the hand doubtless holding some athletic article, at which the boy is looking down, perhaps a diskos[1514] or a fillet. This beautiful athlete statue has many stylistic points in common with the _Diadoumenos_, and shows similar Attic influence, and its original may be referred with Furtwaengler to the later period of the master himself. It gives us an excellent idea how Polykleitos may have made his Olympia boy victors appear. A more remote variant seems to be furnished by a fourth-century B. C. bronze statuette of a youthful athlete in the Louvre.[1515] Here the position of the feet, the turn of the head, and the direction of the gaze are the same as in the _Dresden Boy_. However, as the right arm is raised horizontally, Furtwaengler believed that the right hand held a fillet which the youth is letting fall into the palm of the left.