A good representation of a pancratiast trying to kick his antagonist seems to be furnished by the small bronze statuette from Autun, South France, now in the Louvre (Fig. 60).[1766] This statuette is of mediocre workmanship, its hard muscles, imperfect proportions, and realism showing that it comes from the Hellenistic period of Greek art. It represents a bearded athlete, who holds his hands ready to strike and his left foot raised apparently to kick his adversary’s leg. The foot is just ready to return to its original position, so that the motive of this poor little statuette discloses a transient period of time between two movements, just as the _Diskobolos_ and _Marsyas_ of Myron did. We have already noted[1767] that on the head is a cap with a ring in the top, by which it could be suspended as a decorative piece, or perhaps as part of a steelyard. Hauser believes that this motive was known to the elder Polykleitos and that this is the interpretation of that sculptor’s statue of a _nudus talo incessens_ mentioned by Pliny, a statue which has formed the basis for much discussion among archæologists.[1768] The Plinian passage, therefore, is to be translated as “the nude man attacking with his heel (_talo_)”—in other words, it describes a statue represented as kicking, which was allowable in the pankration. The manuscripts of Pliny all read _talo_, which Benndorf[1769] thought could be retained only by assuming that the naturalist mistranslated his Greek source γυμνὸς ἀστραγάλῳ ἐπικείμενος, translating the word ἐπικείμενος “standing upon,” as _incessens_ “pursuing.” He therefore assumed that Polykleitos’ statue stood upon an astragalos (_talus_) basis, which he believed was the forerunner of the statue of _Opportunity_ (Καιρός) by Lysippos,[1770] and he referred it to the knuckle-bone basis found at Olympia.[1771] Woelfflin,[1772] however, has shown that _talo incessens_ can only mean “_mit einem Knochel nach Jemand einwerfen_.” Following this, Furtwaengler showed[1773] how impossible on grammatical and other grounds it was to read _talo_ in Benndorf’s sense, since the passage then would mean “advancing towards” or “pursuing,” by means of a knuckle-bone, which is manifestly nonsense. The word could be only instrumental in use, as Woefflin said, _i. e._, the weapon by means of which the man was attacking. Furtwaengler, therefore, followed Benndorf’s earlier alternative reading _telo_, assuming that Pliny mistakenly wrote _talo_ because he was influenced by the presence of the same word in the passage immediately following: _duosque pueros item nudos talis ludentes qui vocantur astragalizontes_.[1774] But Hauser’s interpretation of _talo_ meets all the conditions better, since it keeps the manuscript readings, makes grammatical Latin, and seems to be illustrated by the statuette in question.