Share this on Facebook
download .zip with all pictures
Actually one thing to note is that the son on his left (our right) was actually added in later to add to the design, he didn’t even really have two sons. You can kind of tell, because Laocoon and his actual son (our left) are far more entangled together into the sculpture, the second son does appear to be an afterthought imho.
*Source: I just finished history of western art and this was on my final, if I hadn’t returned my textbook yesterday I would cite it. “Gardner’s Art through the Ages: a Global History Volume 1 14th edition*
Also, your source is from 1906, Pliny the Elder had some ideas about this sculpture that he did not explicitly address, such as the idea that he considered this sculpture to be the original, however more recent Vatican work has discovered that it was not only modeled after a bronze original, but also “Vatican work comprises at least seven interlocking pieces”
*[Obligatory Wikipedia Source] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laoco%C3%B6n_and_His_Sons#History)*
In this short video discussion, art historians Dr. Steven Zucker & Dr. Beth Harris also mention that it was mistakenly classified as one single block of marble. They don’t go into detail, but it is stated.
[Video source go to 1:20](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3cwGCezgSQ)