The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal Volume 5 1977

THE J. PAUL GETTY MUSEUM JOURNAL 

VOLUME 5 

1977 

The J. Paul Getty Museum 

Malibu, California

Volume 5 

Jití Freí, Editor 

Published by the J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu, California 

© 1978 The J. Paul Getty Museum 

All rights reserved 

ISBN 0-89236-000-3 

Produced in Chicago by Ares Publishers, Inc. 

Abbreviation: Getty MJ 

This issue includes for the first time contributions 

dealing with conservation and related matters; thus, it 

is an appropriate tribute to the memory of David 

Rinne, who headed the conservation of antiquities in 

the J. Paul Getty Museum from the Fall of 1973 to 

the end of 1976. The Editor wishes to thank Summa 

Galleries Inc. of Beverly Hills for a grant in Mr. 

Rinne's memory which allowed us to expand this 

volume. A note on Mr. Rinne's conservation of 

ancient marbles will appear in Volume 7. 

Most of the photographs of the pieces in the J. 

Paul Getty Museum were taken by Donald A. Hull, 

the Museum photographer. 

For a forthcoming issue the curators of the 

Museum are preparing contributions on J. Paul Getty, 

our late founder, as a collector. 

Editor

D M 

DAVID RINNE 

CVIVS ARS 

MONVMENTA 

GETTIANA RESTITVIT 

VIXIT ANN XXXV 

AB AMICIS DEFLETVS

CONTENTS 

GREEK AND ROMAN SCULPTURE 

E in Metopenkopfvom Parthenon, M. Weber 5 

Ein Junglingshopf in Matibu, F. Brommer 13 

A Youth from the Parthenon, J. Freí 17 

Ein Grossgriechischer Ahrolith imJ. Paul 

Getty Museum, G. Olbrich 21 

L.S. Fauvel e il c.d. Trono Elgin, L. Beschi 33 

Aristóteles, The Son ofOpsiades and Poly strate, 

Al .N. Oikonomides 41 

The Heroic Graeco-Roman Zeus from the Villa 

d'Esté and Marbury Hall, C.C. Vermeule 43 

Archaic Etruscan Stone Sculpture, M. Del Chiaro 45 

Caesar, J. Freí 55 

A Flavian Relief Portrait in the J. Paul 

Getty Museum, J. Pollini 63 

ANTIQUITIES 

Cycladic Figurines in the J. Paul Getty Museum, 

H. Georgiou 67 

A Gorgon Antefix from Gela in theJ. Paul 

Getty Museum, B. Wohl 75 

Un bol en argent à Malibu, L. Byvanck-Quarles 

van Ufford 79 

A New Mithraic Tauroctony, Al.N. Oikonomides 85 

A Papyrus Letter about Epicurean Philosophy 

Books, J.G. Keenan 91 

PAINTINGS 

Two Newly Discovered Ceiling Paintings by 

Simon Vouet, B.B. Fredericksen 95 

Seven Paintings from the Fesch Collection, 

M. Wynne 101 

Metamorphoses of the Grimani "Vitellius", 

S. Bailey 105 

CONNOISSEURSHIP, TECHNOLOGY, 

CONSERVATION 

A Wild Goat-Style Oinochoe in Malibu, 

C.H. Greenewalt, Jr. 123 

Handles of Greek Vases, T. Schreiber 133 

Conservation of a Hellenistic Wail-Painting in 

Thrace, Z. Barov 145 

Chemical Analysis of Marble Sculptures, 

L. Sangermano, G.E. Miller, D.L. Bunker 149 

Adoration of the Magi, C. Mancusi-Ungaro, 

P. Pinaquy 155 

ADDITIONAL ANTIQUITIES 

Heraklit in Ephesos, J. Freí, G. Schwarz 161 

A Late Minoan Stone Vase, H. Georgiou 175 

Une mosaïque gallo-romaine au Musée 

J. Paul Getty, H. Lavagne 177

Abb. 1 Kopf in Malibu (nach Gipsabguss) Hauptansicht 

Abb. 2 Kopf, Abb. 1, en face (nach Gipsabguss) 

EIN METOPENKOPF VOM PARTHENON 

Angstvolle Spannung beherrscht diesen unterlebensgrossen 

Kopf eines knabenhaften Jiinglings 1 (Abb. 

1-2). Die Asymmetrien des wohlgerundeten Schádels 

und die in der Augen- und Mundpartie und dazu die 

bewegten Nackenmuskeln lassen erkennen, dass der 

Kopf zur rechten Korperseite gewendet war. 

Abkurzungen: 

Brommer F. Brommer, Die Metopen des Parthenon. Katalog und 

Untersuchung (Mainz 1967). 

Rodenwaldt G. Rodenwaldt, Kópfe von den Sudmetopen des 

Parthenon. Abhandlung der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften 

zu Berlin, Phil.Hist.Klasse, Jahrgang 1945/46 Nr. 7 

(Berlin 1948). 

J. Freí danke ich sehr fuer die grosszügige Erlaubnis, dieses 

kostbare griechische Original hier publizieren zu durfen.-E. Berger in 

Gestraffte Muskeln ziehen die betont plastischen 

Oberlider bis auf die Brauenbôgen hoch, trennen fast 

die weichen, kindlich-vollen Lippen voneinander und 

buckeln die Stirn kraftig, zeichnen sich weiterhin als 

Falten in die Wangen und um die Flugel der verlorenen 

Nase ein. 

Basel danke ich herzlich fur hilfreiche Gesprache über diesen Kopf in 

der Skulpturhalle und seine Ermunterung, diesen Aufsatz abzufassen. 

1) J. Paul Getty Museum, 75.AA.47. Pentelischer Marmor; eine 

charakteristische Ader in der linken Gesichtshàlfte. Der Kopf ist 

unterhalb vom Kinn abgebrochen; ein Teil des Nackens ist erhalten; 

die Nase fehlt. Abgesehen von Bestossungen im Gesicht, an den 

Augenlidern und Lippen ist die Oberflaeche weitgehend intakt und 

nicht verwittert. Auf der Mitte des Schádels ist ein kleines rundes 

Loch, vermutlich fuer einen Meniskos (s.note 24). H'ohe Kinn- 

Scheitel 17.5 cm. 

5

Abb. 3 Kopf, Abb. 1, richtes Profil (nach Gipsabguss) 

Abb. 4 Kopf, Abb. 1 Schaedel von oben (nach Gipsabguss) 

Abb. 5 Kopf, Abb. 1, Rueckansicht (nach Gipsabguss) 

Die konzentrierte Anspannung teilt sich als weich 

verschliffene Bewegung auf der jugendlich-straffen 

Haut mit, deren samtigen Charakter der nicht bis zum 

Politurhaften geglàttete Marmor wiedergibt. 

Das noch fast kindlich runde Gesicht umschliesst 

eine gleichmassig-voluminóse Haarkappe, die die 

Ohren frei lâsst und ais federnde Hülle den schón 

gewôlbten Schàdel betont (Abb. 3-4). Die rauhe, 

skizzenhafte Oberflache erfasst die stoffliche Erscheinung 

des Haares. Die Unterschiede von Haut und Haar 

sind in der abgestuften Behandlung der Oberflache in 

Stein übertragen. Diese auswâhlende und subordinierende 

Formung akzentuiert den Bildgehalt. Die bewegten 

Gesichtszüge spiegeln einen seelischen Zustand so 

glaubhaft, dass dieses Bild in einem hôheren Sinn 

naturwahr erscheint. 

Der knabenhafte Jünglingskopf ist ein Meisterwerk 

der hohen Klassik. 

Kopfhaltung und die bewegten Gesichtszüge bestimmen 

den Kopf als ein Fragment aus einer Gruppe; 

genauer, als Teil einer Kampfgruppe. 

Die flüchtigere Behandlung des Haares am Hinterkopf 

(Abb. 5) weist auf ein Hochrelief, von dessen 

Grund der Kopf frei war. 

6

Abb. 6 Jùnglingskopf, Akropolis Museum 699. Foto DAI A 

7

Abb. 7 Parthcnon-Südmetopc III, British Museum, Foto Hirmer 

561.0116 

Abb. 8 Parthenon-Sudmetope V, British Museum. Foto British 

Museum. 

Abb. 9 Parthenon-Sudmetope XXVII, British Museum, Foto Hirmer 

561.0118. 

Abb. 10 Parthenon-Sudmetope XXVIII, 

Hirmer 561.0119. 

British Museum, Foto 

Pentelischer Marmor, die Grosse des Kopfes 2 und die 

Ikonographie lassen fragen, ob dieser hochklassische 

Reliefkopf zu einem Lapithen von den Sudmetopen des 

Parthenon gehort 

2) Zu den Massen der Metopenfiguren zusammenfassend Brommer 

169,-Die Grosse des Kopfes entspricht derjenigen anderer Sudmetopenkoepfe, 

z.B.: 

SI: Parthenon; Lapithenkopf Hohe 17,5 cm. (gemessen am Gips 

m Basel, Skulpturhalle); Brommer 71 f. Taf. 155. 

S VI: Lapithenkopf in Athen, Akropolis Museum 6511 (ex Athen, 

Nat.Mus. 3258) H8he 17,5 cm nach K. Kuruniotis, ArchEph 1913, 

200 Abb. 7; nach M. S. Brouskari, Musée de l'Acropole (Edition de 

la Banque Commerciale de Grèce, Athènes 1974) 158 Abb. 269, 

Hôhe 16,5 cm. Ich habe 1976 im Akropolismuseum aïs HÇhe 

(Kinn-Scheitel) 17 cm gemessen. 

S VII: Lapithenkopf in Paris, Louvre 737, Hôhe 18 cm; 

Encyclopédie photographique de l'art, Tome III (Paris 1938) 162 B; 

Ch. Waldstein, JHS 3 (1882) 229 Taf. 23 gibt aïs Hôhe 17 cm; ich 

habe am Gips in Basel, Skulpturhalle, 18 cm gemessen.-Kentaurkopf 

in London, Brit.Mus. Hôhe 22 cm; Brommer 86 Taf. 189. 

8

Die erhaltenen Jünglingskopfe 3 der Metopen sind 

sehr unterschiedlich geformt. Allenfalls der Kopf von S 

XVI 4 steht unserem Kopf nah. Seine korrodierte 

Oberfláche lâsst aber nur noch sehen, dass die 

verzerrte Physiognomic ebenfalls durch plastische 

Verschiebungen der Gesichtszüge erreicht ist. Unser 

Kopf stimmt zwar mit dem Lapithenkopf S VII 5 im 

Louvre darin uberein, wie an der linken Schlâfe der 

Ubergang von glatter Haut zu rauher Haardecke 

gestaltet ist, und gleichartig ist auch der Ansatz des 

6 

Stirnhaares bel dem Kentaur S XXX . Diese handwerkliche 

Einzelheit besagt aber noch nicht, dass der Kopf 

zu den Metopen gehôrt, denn ein Jiinglingskopf aus 

parischem Marmor von der Akropolis 7 , der wegen des 

Materials nicht zu den Metopen gehbren kann, hat 

einen ganz ahnlichen Ubergang von Haut zu Haar 

(Abb. 6). 

Konnen wir trotzdem unseren Kopf einer Südmetope 

zuweisen Auf Grund der Kopfwendung nach 

rechts kamen die schon bei Carrey 8 fehlenden Lapithenkopfe 

der Metopen S III 9 oder S V 10 in Betracht; die 

Metope S XI 11 ist eher auszuschliessen: der Jünglingskopf 

erscheint bei Carey stark aufwârts gedreht; 

ausserdem passt die drohende Haltung des schwertfuhrenden 

Jiinglings nicht recht zur angsterfullten Miene 

unseres Kopfes 12 . Von den beiden Lapithen, die wir in 

die engere Wahl ziehen, kennen wir im Original nur 

den Kôrper von S III 13 . 

An den beiden erhaltenen Kentaurleibern konnen wir 

Stilunterschiede in der plastischen Durchbildung dieser 

beiden Metopen beobachten und fur die Frage, ob 

unser Kopf sich mit einer verbinden lasst, auswerten. 

Der Kentaur S III 14 (Abb. 7) kampft mit seinem 

menschlichen Oberkorper in komplizierter Drehung 

über seinen steigenden Pferdeleib; die ungleichartigen 

Teile handeln getrennt und ihre Einzelformen stehen 

ebenso parataktisch zueinander 15 . 

Der Kentaur S V (Abb.8) verschmilzt Menschen und 

Pferdeteil zu einem übermenschlichen, kraftvoll agierenden 

Leibgebilde. Die gleitenden Übergange in den 

Muskelpartien erwecken den Eindruck eines von 

innerer Kraft bewegten Korpers. Bis in die Schwanz- 

S V: Kentaurkopf in Würzburg, Martin v. Wagner Museum, 

Antikenabteilung H 2446, Hone 24 cm; E. Simon u. Mitarbeiter, 

M.v.Wagner Mus. Antikenabt. (Mainz 1975) 245 Taf. 59. 

SIX: Jiinglingskopf Athen, Akropolis Museum 722; Hone 19,5 cm 

(gemessen am Gips in Basel, Skulpturhalle); Brommer 118 Taf. 196, 

241, 1 (S XXVII). 

S XVI: Bártiger Kopf im Vatikan, Hóhe 19,2 cm; W. Fuchs in 

Helbig 4 I Nr. 872; Brommer 101 (mit weiterer Literatur zur Frage 

der Zugehôrigkeit zur Metope S XVI). 

S XXXI: Lapithenkopf in London, Brit.Mus., Ho*he 17 cm 

(gemessen wie S I); Brommer 126 Taf. 234. 

spitze hinein regiert ein starker Kraftstrom die ktihne 

Gestalt. 

Nach unserer Kenntnis von der Stilentwicklung ist die 

Metope S V die fortschrittlichere 16 . Der Jiinglingskopf 

gleicht in der plastischen Bewegung seiner von 

Entsetzen geprâgten Gesichtszüge der subtilen Modellierung 

des máchtigen Kentaurleibes 17 . Das spricht 

fur seine Verbindung mit der Metope S V. 

Kann man diese Zuweisung welter erhârten 

Der von Carrey nicht gezeichnete Kopf des Kentaurn 

ist seit langem in einem Fragment eines Bártigen in 

Würzburg (Abb. 11-12) identifiziert 18 . Die beiden Kôpfe 

stimmen áusserlich darin überein, dass ihre antiken 

3) Brommer 71 - 129 Taf. 155 - 239. - Die Zeichnungen der 

Sudmetopen von J. Carrey (1674-78) bei Brommer Taf. 149 - 152. 

Bei Carrey fehlen Jünglingskopfe an folgenden Metopen: II. III. VI. 

XIII. XVII, XXIII. XXVI. 

Der bei Carrey fehlende Lapithenkopf VI wurde 1920 von F. 

Studniczka identifiziert: Brommer 85 Taf. 184. 

Heute fehlen Jünglingskopfe an folgenden Metopen: (die auch bei 

Carrey fehlenden kennzeichnen rômische Ziffern) 2. III. V. 8. 11 

XIII. 14. 15. XVII. XXIII. 24. XXVI. 27. 

Erhaltene Jünglingskopfe (in Klammern Taf. bei Brommer): I 

(161), 4 (176). 6 (184). 7 (189,2) 9. (1%). 11 (241,2,3). 16 (204). 30 

(229). 31 (234). 

4) Brommer 100 Nr. 1 Taf. 204,3.-Der bártige Kopf im Vatikan, 

Brommer 101 Taf. 205 (note 2) wird allgemein als Kopf seines 

Gegners angesprochen; E. Simon, Jdl 90 (1975) 109 und 112 deutet 

ihn ais Ixion, den Stammvater der Kentauren.-Dieser bartige Kopf ist 

plastisch einfacher und weniger ausdrucksvoll ais der Jünglingskopf. 

Daher môchte ich aus stilistischen Gründen den bártigen Kopf dieser 

Metope abschreiben wie K. Jeppesen, ActaA 34 (1963) 137 (mit 

anderer Begründung). 

5) Brommer 86 Taf. 189.2.-Linke Kopfseite bei Rodenwaldt Taf.23 

(nach Gips) und Édition Tel (supra n.2) 162 B. 

6) Rodenwaldt Taf. 17,2. 

7) Athen, Akropolis Museum 699; Hone 22,5 cm.-G. Dickins, 

Catalogue of the Acrop.Mus.Vol. I Archaic Sculpt. (Cambridge 

1912) 266 Nr. 699; H. Schrader, Phidias (Frankfurt a.Main 1924) 

128 Abb. 113 - 115. 119; M.S. Brouskari (supra n.2) 141 Abb. 252. 

Hier nach Fotos des DAInst Athen, die ich B. Schmaltz verdanke. 

8) Brommer Taf. 149. 150. 

9) Brommer 79 f. Taf. 169 - 171. 

10) Brommer 83 f. Taf. 178 - 180. Foto Brit.Mus. 

11) Brommer 93 f. Taf. 199. 

12) E. Simon, Jdl 90 (1975) 103 f. deutet die Gestalt als Peirithoos. 

Diese Deutung kann fur unseren fast kindlichen Kopf nicht 

zutreffen. 

13) Brommer Taf. 169. 171. 

14) Brommer Taf. 169. Foto Hirmer 561.0116. 

15) supra n.9. 

16) Brommer 79 f. (Urteile über S III), 84 (Urteile über S V). 

17) Im Ausdruck verhaltener, in der plastischen Modellierung 

zuriickhaltender sind die Metopenkopfe S IV: Rodenwaldt. Taf.20; 

Brommer Taf. 176,2 und S VII: Rodenwaldt Taf.23; Brommer Taf. 

189,2 mit unserem Kopf vergleichbar hingegen ist der Lapithenkopf 

S XVI: supra n.4. 

18) supra n.2; Rodenwaldt Taf. 9.10 (nach Gips); Brommer 83 Taf. 

180,4; hier nach Museumsfotos, fur die ich G. Beckel herzlich danke. 

9

Abb. 11 Kentaurkopf von der Parthenon-Siidmetope V Wurzburg, 

Martin von Wagner Museum. Foto Museum. 

Oberflàchen - abgesehen von gewaltsamen Beschâdigungen 

nicht verwittert sind 19 . 

Kentaur - und Junglingskopf verbindet ihre Formensprache: 

die plastisch reich differenzierende und dabei 

zuruckhaltend modellierte Bewegung im Antlitz, die 

den altersmâssigen Abstand und den unterschiedlichen 

Seelenzustand gestaltet. 

19) Dieser Kopf hat sich zu Carreys Zeit (1674) nicht mehr in situ 

befunden: S V bei Brommer Taf. 149.-Ungewohnlich gut erhalten ist 

auch die Epidermis des Jünglingstorsos in Athen, Akropolis Museum 

7251, den M.S. Bruskari, AthMitt 80 (1965) 132 Beilage 44,1.2 der S 

Metope XXIII zuweisen môchte. Diesen Lapithenkôrper hat Carrey 

noch gezeichnet; er befand sich langer in situ als die beiden Kôpfe 

der S Metope V, deren Oberfláchenpartien ebenfalls nicht verwittert 

sind. 

10

Abb. 12 Kopf Abb. 9 - Ansicht von rechts 

Schlaffe Haut in der Wangenpartie, Kráhenfüsse 

am âusseren Augenwinkel und fleischige Brauenwiilste, 

die teilweise über das Augenlid sacken, sowie die 

seichte Einbuchtung an der Schlàfe sagen das fortgeschrittene 

Alter des bártigen Kopfes aus; derbe 

Bartzotteln 20 von unbestimmter Form im einzelnen, eine 

- nach der Bruchflàche - kurze, breite Nase mit 

betontem Querwulst am Sattel und eine sehr pralle, in 

20) Zu vergleichen sind die in ihrer Anlage noch erkennbaren 

geordneten Frisuren der alten Manner am Parthenon-Nordfries X, 38 

- 43: A. H. Smith, The Sculptures of the Parthenon (London 1910) 

Taf. 44. Das Haar des Kentaurn ist wilder. Die Beschreibung seiner 

Frisur bei Rodenwaldt 13, als Zopffrisur, ist unrichtig. Siehe dazu 

Th. Lorenz in E. Simon und Mitarbeiter, M.v.Wagner Mus. (supra 

n.2) 245. 

11

der Mitte gekerbte Unterlippe deuten leise, aber 

unmissverstândlich die halbtierische Natur in diesem 

Altersgesicht an 21 . 

Die hochgezogene Oberlippe entblôsst die obère 

Zahnreihe und drückt so eine zornige Erregung aus 

iiber den Gegner, der den Kentaurn durch seinen Griff 

an den Bart belàstigt; aus dem ruhigen Buck spricht die 

Überlegenheit des Alten. Diese thematisch unvergleichbaren 

Kôpfe verbindet ihre qualitàtvolle Arbeit, die mit 

gleichartigen Mitteln die unterschiedlichen Gefühle 

darstellt. 

Die unwillige Erregung des alten Mischwesens und 

die unsagbare Angst seines fast kindlichen Gegners sind 

so unmittelbar verstandlich geworden, dass sie fast 

kunstlos erscheinen. 

Carreys Zeichnung 22 gibt eine gewisse Vorstellung von 

der dramatischen Situation der beiden ungleichen 

Gegner. Wir kennen nur noch den Kentaur, der sich im 

Angriff zugleich dem làstigen Griff des Lapithen zu 

entziehen sucht. Dessen Kôrper war - nach den Spuren 

auf dem Metopengrund23 (Abb. 8) - fast freiplastisch24; 

die Zeichnung làsst erkennen, dass der Leib, knabenhaft 

biegsam in seiner Bewegung, angstvoll dem 

machtigen Gegner ausweicht und ihn mit ausgestrecktem 

rechten Arm abwehrend 25 zu packen versucht. 

Nicht nur die Proportionen 26 , auch die Bewegung des 

Kôrpers erscheint in der Zeichnung noch fast knabenhaft. 

Diese gleiche Altersstufe gibt auch der Kopf 

wieder. Eine Gegenüberstellung mit dem oben schon 

verglichenen etwa gleichzeitigen Ephebenkopf von der 

Akropolis 27 mag es verdeutlichen. In diesem Kopf 

haben sich die kindlichen Rundungen des Knabengesichts 

• in der Wangen und Kinnpartie - bereits 

verloren; Antlitz wie Schádelform sind starker vom 

Geriist der Knochen bestimmt. Man kónnte sagen, der 

Kopf von der Akropolis gibt den wenig alteren Bruder 

des Knaben, um damit den Altersunterschied und 

dariiber hinaus den engen kiinstlerischen Zusammenhang 

in beiden Kôpfen anzudeuten. 

Es scheint mir sehr gut môglich, wenn auch nicht 

beweisbar, dass der Knabenkopf dem Gegner des 

Würzburger Kentaurkopfes gehôrt. 

Die Gestaltung dieser Metope S V ist gleich 

eindringlich wie S I 28 ; in der Differenzierung der 

Stimmung der ungleichen Gegner geht sie iiber letztere 

hinaus 29 . Bei S V lost sich die menschliche Figur vom 

Reliefgrund wie bei S XVI und S XXVII (Abb. 9) 30 . 

S V und S XXVII gleichen sich in der Dramatik der 

Handlung wie in der Komposition der Figuren 

zueinander. Der Überlegene - bei S V der Kentaur, bei 

S XXVII der Lapith - dominiert im Bildfeld über 

einem nur noch abwehrenden Gegner. Diese beiden 

Kampfmetopenbilder schliessen sich gegenüber der S 

XXVIII zusammen, die das Thema weiter spannt: der 

siegessichere Kentaur stürmt ungehindert über den 

leblosen Lapithen hinweg (Abb. 10) 31 . 

Ohne die seelisch differenzierenden Gotter - und 

Menschenbilder des Phidias, Athena Lemnia und 

Anakreon 32 , ist der Bildhauer der Metope S V nicht 

denkbar fur uns; doch haben wir keine Gewissheit, dass 

es Phidias war, der den Meissel führte 33 . 

Martha Weber 

Freiburg im Breisgau 

21) Die eingehende Alterscharakterisierung und der leidenschaftlich 

auf den Augenblick bezogene Ausdruck unterscheiden diesen 

Kentaurn von dem ebenfalls die menschlichen Züge hervorhebenden 

herrscherlich-ruhigen Kentaurkopf der Metope S IV: Rodenwaldt 

Taf.20 (nach Gips); Brommer Taf. 176,2. 

22) supra n.19. 

23) Brommer Taf. 178. 179. 

24) Daher konnte der Kopf rundplastisch gearbeitet werden; seine 

Schádelform ist durch den Reliefgrund nicht beeintráchtigt. Auch 

das verbindet den Knabenkopf mit dem Würzburger Kentaurn: 

Rodenwaldt Taf. 10. - Mit dem weiten Vorragen des Kopfes erklart 

sich auch der Meniskos, den man aus dem Loch auf der 

Schàdelmitte erschliessen kann. (supra n. 1) Abb. 4. An der gleichen 

Stelle hat ein behelmter Metopenkopf ein Loch: Athen, Akropolis 

Museum 728, Brommer 111; 132 Nr. 35; ders. Jdl 75 (1960) 54 Nr. 5 

Abb. 40 b. Man kann nicht ausschliessen, dass hier das Loch zur 

Befestigung cines Helmbusches diente, wie Brommer 111 erwagt, 

oder genauer zur Anbringung des Helmkammes, auf dem der Busch 

befestigt wird. Der Helmkamm bei dem Metopenkopf in Athen, 

Akropolis Museum 3244 ist aber nicht gesondert gearbeitet: 

Brommer 142 Nr.189; ders. Jdl 75 (1960) 51 Nr.24 Abb. 26 a.b. 

25) Andere Deutung der Gebàrden bei E.Simon, Jdl 90 (1975) 102. 

26) E. Simon, (supra, n.25) 102: "Er (der Lapith) war besonders 

schmal und sicher nicht als junger Mann, sondern als Knabe oder 

Ephebe gedacht". 

27) supra n.6. 

28) Brommer Taf. 156. 160. 161; Rodenwaldt Taf. 11-13 (nach 

Gips). 

29) Der Lapithenkopf bei Rodenwaldt Taf. 13. 

30) S XVI: Brommer Taf. 203. 204; supra n. 6. - S XXVII: 

Brommer Taf. 217 - 220. Foto Hirmer 561.0118. 

31) Brommer Taf. 221. Foto Hirmer 561.0119. 

32) Athena Lemnia: Kopf in Bologna, Museo Cívico: G.M. Richter, 

A Handbook of Greek Art (London 1974) 121 Abb. 154. - 

Anakreon: Statue in Kopenhagen, NCGL: Richter 128 Abb. 166. 

33) E. Buschor, Der Parthenonfries (Miinchen 1961) 17, schrieb S V 

and S XXVII dem Phidiasschuler Kolotes zu. - Uberlegungen zum 

Anteil des Phidias nach Plutarch, Perikles 13: W. Schiering, Jdl 85 

(1970) 82 - 93. 

12

1. Kopf cines Jünglins, J. Paul Getty Museum 75.AA.47. 

EIN JÜNGLINGSKOPF IN MALIBU 

Der Jünglinskopf 1 , eine hervorragende Neuerwerbung 

des J. Paul Getty Museums in Malibu, ist zweifellos ein 

gutes griechisches Original aus der zweiten Hálfte des 

5. Jh. v. Chr. Sehr wahrscheinlich ist er attisch. Er 

kann durchaus eine tektonische Verwendung gehabt 

haben. Marmor und Grosse widersprechen den Parthenonmetopen 

nicht. Es muss also geprüft werden, ob er 

zu ihnen gehôrt haben kann. 

Da Kópfe anderer Seiten offenbar sámtlich Opfer 

der Zerstôrung wurden und daher nicht erhalten sind, 

kâme bei einer Zuschreibung an den Parthenon nur die 

1. Den Kopf zu señen hatte ich Gelegenheit im Mi 1975 in London 

und im September 1976 in Malibu. E. Berger verdanke ich einen 

Abguss, J. Freí sehr gute Fotos und die Einladung, diese Zeilen zu 

schreiben. 

13


Südseite in Frage. Da dort ferner allé Kentaurenkôpfe 

bàrtig sind, scheiden diese auch aus. Um einen 

Frauenkopf kann es sich ebenfalls nicht handeln. So 

sieht man sehr schnell, dass unter den ursprunglich fast 

200 Metopenkôpfen des Parthenon nur noch wenige 

Zuschreibungsmóglichkeiten übrig bleiben. Die Drehung 

des Kopf es, die am erhaltenen Halsrest zu 

erkennen ist, sowie die Tat sache, dass der Kopf frei 

vom Grund gearbeitet engen diese Moglichkeiten 

weiter ein. 

Es bleiben nur die drei Jünglingskópfe der Sudmetopen 

III,V und XI übrig. Bis zu diesem Punkt stimme 

ich mit den Ausführungen von M. Weber voll überein. 

Sie hat sich fur die Südmetope V entschieden. Aber 

passt der Kopf dort 

Dass die Haarbildung so ganz anders ist, als bei dem 

dort erhaltenen Kentaurenkopf, wird man nicht als 

Gegenargument anführen, denn auch auf anderen 

Südmetopen haben die Kentauren Locken, die Jünglinge 

aber nicht. Hingegen sollte man bei der star ken 

Anspannung und Dehnung des Kôrpers einen weiter 

geôffneten Mund erwarten, so wie dies bei den 

Jünglingen von S XVI, XXX der Fall ist. Ausserden ist 

das Auge anders, als beim Kentauren von S V, nàmlich 

schmaler, aber dicker umrandet und tiefer im Inneren 

liegend. Man kann sich kaum vorstellen, dass derselbe 

Künstler diesen Jünglingskopf und den Kentaurenkopf 

von S V gemacht haben soil. 

So erhebt sich die Frage, ob der Kopf überhaupt 

vom Parthenon stammen kann. 

14


Innerhalb der Parthenonskulpturen sind verschiedene 

Stilrichtungen und Meisterhànde zu beobachten, 

deren Erforschung erst in ihren Anfàngen steckt. Die 

Variierungsbreite ist gross. Das gilt fur die Metopen 

noch mehr ais für den Fries und die Giebel. Trotz aller 

Verschiedenheit hat sich jedoch ein parthenonischer 

Stil herausgebildet, der sich von dem Stil gleichzeitiger 

Werke in Athen, beispielsweise von dem der Skulpturen 

des Hephaisteion, deutlich abhebt. 

Parthenonischer Stil ist erkennbar, wenn man sich 

eingesehen hat. Man kann Bruchstücke aus stilistischen 

Gründen zuschreiben und diese Zuschreibungen durch 

unmittelbare Anpassung bestátigen 2 . Aber es ist sehr 

schwer, die parthenonische Eigenart in Worte zu 

fassen. Immherhin kennen wir aber nicht weniger ais 

zwei Dutzend Kópfe von den Südmetopen 3 , die uns 

diesen Stil veranschaulichen kônnen. 

Dass es bei ihnen so grob gepickte Haare wie bei 

dem Jünglingskopf gegeben habe, kann man bei dem 

Erhaltungszustand der Metopenkôpfe nicht ausschliessen. 

2. Beispielsweise das Bein der Amphitrite aus dem Westgiebel 

(Hesperia 24,1955,85 ff.). 

3. Die 12 Kentaurenkôpfe von S I,II,IV,V,VII,IX,XVI,XXVI, 

XXIX,XXX,XXXI,XXXII, die 8 Jünglingskópfe von S I,IV,VI,VII, 

IX,XVI,XXX,XXXI, sowie die beiden Jünglingskópfe und der 

weibliche Kopf. Verf., Metopen Taf. 211 und schliesslich der von M. 

Moliesen einleuchtend der Metope S XV zugeschriebene Kopf (AA 

1976, 53-58). Dazu kommen Kópfe, deren Zuschreibung fraglich ist. 

15

4-5 Kopf in London, Kunsthandel (cf. Fussnote 8) 

Áuch dass das Ohr so gar nicht aus der Haarmasse 

gelôst ist, scheint bei den Parthenonmetopen vorzukommen. 

Was jedoch unparthenonisch wirkt, das sind 

die Augen. Es fâllt auf, dass sie schmal sind, dass die 

Lider wenig geschwungen, aber dick und zudem scharf 

abgesetzt sind, sowie dass der Augapfel tief innerhalb 

der Lider liegt und zwar der rechte noch defer als der 

linke. Fine solche Art der Augenbehandlung, die diese 

verschiedenen Züge in sich vereint, ist an den 

Parthenonmetopen nicht zu finden. 

Sie allein würde gegen eine Zuschreibung des Kopfes 

an den Parthenon sehr bedenklich stimmen. Aber 

damit nicht genug kommen zu den stilistischen 

Bedenken noch solche technischer Art hinzu. Einmal 

ist eine so tadellose Erhaltung der Oberflache bei 

keiner Metope zu beobachten. Dann kommen Stachel 

zur Vogelabwehr bei den Metopen des Parthenon zum 

Unterschied von denen aus Olympia nicht vor. 

Schliesslich hat der Jünglingskopf im Haar über der 

Stirnmitte eine Eindellung, die ebenfalls auf keiner 

Parthenonmetope, wohl aber mehrfach auf denen des 

Zeustempels von Olympia 4 zu sehen sind. Rumpf 5 hat 

gemeint, dass dort ein Stirnband mit einer Spitze über 

der Stirnmitte gesessen hat. 

Ein einziges dieser drei technischen Merkmale würde 

starke Bedenken erregen. Allé drei zusammen mit den 

stilistischen Bedenken machen trotz ebenbürtiger Qualitát 

eine Zuschreibung des Kopfes an den Parthenon 

unmôglich 6 . 

Vergegenwârtigen wir uns, wie wenige attische 

Tempel klassischer Zeit wir kennen und wie wenig wir 

von deren Skulpturenschmuck 7 wissen, dann ist es in 

keiner Weise merkwiirdig, dass ein so hervorragender 

Kopf wie dieser auftaucht, ohne dass wir ihn einem 

bestimmten Bau zuschreiben konnen 8 . 

Frank Brommer 

Mainz 

4. 01. Ill 153 Taf. XLV 

5. Rumpf, Symbola Coloniensia 80 ff.-Dazu auch A. Krug, Binden 

in der griech.Kunst 34 ff. 

6. Von den Archaologen, die den Kopf mit mir in London sahen, 

hat ihn ebenfalls keiner fur parthenonisch gehalten. 

7. Fur die Giebel wird dies sehr deutlich durch Delivorrias, Attische 

Giebelskulpturen. 

8. Dies gilt auch fur einen Kopf im Londoner Kunsthandel und fur 

den Bârtigen der Sammlung Baker (D.v.Bothmer, Ancient Art from 

New York Private Collections.1961.Nr.108, dort von D.v.Bothmer 

und E. Harrison den Parthenonmetopen zugeschrieben). Wegen der 

Patinierung kônnte man beim Londoner Kopf an die Giebel von 

Sunion denken (Abb. 4-5 wird R. Symes verdankt). 

16

A YOUTH FROM THE PARTHENON 

The evident affinity between the youthful head acquired 

in 1975 by the J. Paul Getty Museum 1 and the 

Parthenon sculptures suggests a direct connection. The 

general appearance of the head makes clear that it must 

have belonged to a high relief, and possibly to a metope. 

Ernst Berger was the first to state that the head may 

have belonged to a Parthenon metope and Martha 

Weber has attempted to demonstrate that it indeed 

could have belonged to the Lapith of the South Metope 

V. However, several supplementary observations deserve 

mention. 

The head was restored in antiquity. Even if the 

surface is covered by a homogenous, light patina which 

make the modern scratches stand out, it is evident that 

the original surface was altered in many places. The 

most striking example is the area of the nose. After the 

original nose had been broken off, a wedge-shaped 

vertical cavity was cut into the marble, facilitating the 

adhesion of a substitute. Here too, the marks of the 

chisel running horizontally are very evident. 2 The 

surface of the hair was flattened in entirety, without 

respecting the original disposition of the locks; all the 

"pick marks" on the hair are secondary. These 

interventions into the hair were particularly severe in 

the areas over the left temple, above the middle of the 

forehead, and at the nape. Even if the youth never had 

long sideburns, the hair was completely trimmed on 

both sides here, and an improbable rounded curve was 

scratched in on the left side. Both ears had the lobes 

remodelled and the helix flattened; the right one 

especially suffered, with half the lobe cut away and a 

groove cut in above the ear. The hole drilled into the 

crown of the skull is also secondary, made probably for 

the insertion of one end of a metallic clamp, to hold the 

head in place. The eyes and the eyelids were 

considerably retouched as well. The right eyeball 

particularly was clumsily flattened with the consequence 

that the lacrymal gland still evident in the left eye has 

practically disappeared in the right. 

The later repair of this head done by an incompetent 

craftsman is a fate shared by many other ancient 

sculptures, and to a great extent by the marbles of the 

Parthenon including the heads of Lapiths of the South 

Metopes 3 . 

Further observations concern the main viewpoint of 

the head. Following Martha Weber, it was turned to the 

right, with his left cheek and eye revealing more than 

the other half. However, it is the right sternomastoid 

that is tensed and protruding with the left half of the 

face narrowed but the left cheekbone still higher than 

the other side. Further, viewed from above, the 

asymmetry of the occiput also reveals that the most 

protruding hemisphere of the skull, his left, was the one 

close to the background. From these considerations it 

can be seen that the head was turned to the left with the 

right face more fully in view. This excludes the 

identification of our head with the South Metope No. V. 

The style of the head is indeed close to the Phidian 

Parthenon and especially to the metopes. But even if the 

preserved heads from the South Metopes show a wide 

range of stylistic variety, corresponding to the different 

hands, they are much closer, one to the other, than to 

17

1. Recutting of the hair around the right eye including the sideburn 

2. Recutting of the hair 3. Protrusion of the head towards the background at the left back 

18

4. Restoration of the nose and recutting of the left sideburn 

5. Recutting of the nape 6. Recutting of the left ear (from a plaster cast) 

19

the Getty head. This is true even for the youthful head 

of Metope XVI and for the centaur of Metope V, both 

used for comparison by Martha Weber. Yet, as she 

rightly states, they share several details with the Malibu 

head. On the centaur, for example, the deep carving 

around the outer corner and under the eye fold is 

similar, and the tiny wrinkle doubling the upper eyelid 

is matched by the formation of the centaur's eye, 

though on him the tiny wrinkle is found on the inner 

corner instead of the outer. 

But the differences are stronger. Even if there is a 

great variety in the dimensions among the extant 

metope heads, the Malibu head is smaller, and smaller 

not only in dimensions. The greater softness, the 

lépiotes, brings in mind the Acropolis head of a youth 

No. 699, compared by Martha Weber 4 , though the 

expression of the Malibu head corresponds rather to the 

faces of the combatants, as she states. 

Thus, while Dr. Weber has convincingly established 

the stylistic affinity of the Malibu head with the 

Parthenon sculptures, its placement on the South 

Metopes does not seem definite. The poorly preserved 

North side, originally in a more advanced style, may 

provide a better possibility, but without any categorical 

conclusion implied 5 . 

Jifí Freí 

Malibu 

1. 75.AA.47; listed in Recent Acquisitions of Antiquities, The J. Paul 

Getty Museum, June 1st • September 3, 1976, no. 1: "Marble head, 

probably from a Parthenon metope (identified as such by Prof. Ernst 

Berger), about 440 B.C. Possibly the head of a young warrior from a 

lost North metope." 

2. Here are some noses repaired in Antiquity in a comparable way: 

A/ clear cut in one surface, without metallic pin; 1) head of a youth, 

Athens, the Ceramicus 758, Freí AAA 5 (1972) 74, 76, figs. 3-4. 

A.Delivorias, Attische Giebelskulpturen und Akroterien des 5. 

Jahrhunderts (1974) 164 sqq., pis. 56 b-d, 57; 2) veiled female head, 

Rhodes, G.Konstantinopoulos-S.Meletzis-H.Papadakis, Rhodes (4th 

éd., 1972) fig. 24; 3) head of Ptolemy IV, Paris, Louvre, H.Kyrieleis, 

Bildnisse der Ptolemaer (1975), 46 sqq., 171 nr. D 3, pis. 34-35 (the 

cut off nose and chin would be modem restoration, but the surface is 

ancient; there is a clear cut in the marble and the surface of the head 

was repolished in Antiquity, thus an ancient restoration seems to be a 

preferable explanation than a pentimento); B/ cut is less regular, 

comparable to the Getty head: portrait of a young African, Boston 

MFA, M.B.Comstock-C.C.Vermeule, Sculpture in Stone (1976) 

nr.339 (the modern restoration has been removed after the publication 

of the catalogue); C/ cut is irregular, with an iron pin - 1) head of 

Socrates, Boston MFA, Comstock-Vermeule nr.120; head of an 

Athenian stratèges ("Alcibiades", New York MMA, G.Richter, 

Catalogue of Greek Sculpture (1954) nr.104. 

3. The best example is the head of the Lapith from the South metope 

XXX, where the original height of the hair is cut down and the fist of 

the centaur, without any direct touch with the skull of his oponent, is 

"supported" by a pseudo puntello- F.Brommer, Die Metopen des 

Parthenon (1967) pls.229,230. 

4. See above, p. 7, fig. 6. The hair of this head was also completely 

reçut in Antiquity. The volume was reduced and the curls were 

suppressed. 

5. For a new head from the Parthenon, discovered in Copenhagen, see 

M.Moltensen, AA 1976 53 sqq. E. LaRocca found still another in the 

storeroom of the Capitoline Museum. Finally, there is a bearded head 

in the storeroom of the National Museum of Athens, carved in Parian 

marble, which in style and technique is very close to the centaur's 

head from the IX metope and to the head associated with the Lapith 

from the same metope (Brommer pis. 195-1%); a substitute for a 

head, lost already in the 5th century, soon after the sculptures were 

finished 

20

BIN GROBGRIECHISCHER AKROLITH 

IM J. PAUL GETTY MUSEUM 

Skulpturen des VJhs. v.Chr. aus den westgriechischen 

Kolonien sind uns nicht eben zahlreich überliefert. Der 

in Fig. 1-4 abgebildete Marmorkopf im J. Paul Getty 

Museum bietet daher eine erfreuliche Bereicherung 

unserer Kenntnisse. Er stammt angeblich aus Metapontî 

Nur Gesicht und Hals sind erhalten, wahrscheinlich 

als die einzigen Marmorbestandteile einer Figur, 

deren ubrige Teile aus anderen Materialien best anden. 

Solche akrolithe Technik wurde wegen der Knappheit 

des Marmors in den westlichen Kolonien fast regelmàBig 

fur groBplastische Werke angewandt. Die 

Buntheit der Accessoirs aus verschiedenen Materialien 

entsprach wohl auch westgriechischem Geschmack. Die 

Stirn und Gesicht unsymmetrisch einrahmenden Lôcher 

dienten offenbar zur Befestigung bronzener Haare, 

einer Bronzeperrücke oder cines gróBeren Kopfputzes 2 . 

Viereckige Lôcher fur Holzdübel oben und unten 

mar Rieren die Ansatzstellen des Kopfes in den Kôrper. 

Die AnschluBflachen am Hals sind nur rauh bearbeitet, 

ohne die feine Glàttung, die zum Anstücken yon 

Marmor notwendig ware; die groben 'Inkrustationen* 

der linken Seite scheinen Stuck zu sein. 

Anhand der betràchtlichen Asymmetrien des Kopfes 

làBt sich die ursprünglich konzipierte Hauptansicht 

rekonstruieren. Der kürzer geschnittene recht Halskontur 

sowie der starker angespannte linke Halsmuskel 

lassen auf eine gehobene rechte Schulter schlieBen. 

- Die Achse durch Stirn - Nase - Kinn fállt nicht in die 

Achse des Halses. Die ganze rechte Gesichtshàlfte 

hàngt um ein Geringes defer, und da sie schmaler ist 

als die linke, wirkt sic voiler oder kompakter; dadurch 

wólbt sich das kleinere rechte Auge starker, sein 

Oberlid krummt sich etwas steiler. Das schwerere 

Polster des Orbitals lâBt den Blick des rechten Auges 

etwas passiver wirken; sein innerer Augenwinkel 

verlauft steiler und ohne den entenschnabelfôrmigen 

1. Mein verbindlicher Dank fur detaillierte Informationen und 

Anregungen gilt Prof. Dr. Jtfi Freí! 

Parischer Marmor. H:23,3 cm. (inv. no. 74AA33) 

Bruch: rechte Flanke, Nase, rechte Schulter, unterer Rand des 

Halses bestoflen: Mund, rechte Wangc, rechtes Oberlid, Kinn, linkes 

Ohr. Publ.: Ant.Kunst 3, Heft 1, 1960, 48, Tf. 16. 

Schefold, Meisterwerke griechischer Kunst, Basel 1960, 79, Tf. Vü 

29 

21

22 

1. Grossgriechischer Akrolith.J. Paul Getty Museum

Knick des linken Trànenkarunkels. - Die linke 

Mundhàlfte scheint krâftiger geschwungen.-Offenbar 

ist der Kopf demnach auf eine 3/4 Ansicht von links 

konzipiert; (Fig. 1) darauf verweist ebenfalls der 

unsymmetrische Verlauf der feingeritzten Venusringe, 

die rings urn die linke Halsseite, jedoch nur bis zu 2/3 

der rechten Seite durchlaufen. 

Der Kontur der Nackenlinie fâllt nicht senkrecht, 

sondern láuft leicht konkav zum Rücken aus. Der Kopf 

war wohl nicht steil aufgerichtet, sondern etwas nach 

vorn geneigt. Auch der schrâge Profilwinkel der 

Augàpfel lâflt sich am ehesten mit einer Neigung des 

Kopfes und einer Hauptansicht von unten erkláren, in 

âhnlicher Weise wie bei der alten Hera von Olympia 

u.a. Gôtterbildern 3 . 

Aus all dem ergibt sich dann eine leichte Wendung des 

Kopfes zu seiner rechten - gehobenen - Schulter und eine 

geringe Neigung nach vorn abwârts. In dieser Ansicht 

verlieren sich auch jene Verzerrungen und gewissen 

Harten, die ihn in der reinen Frontansicht (Fig. 2) etwas 

verunstalten. 

Solche Neigung hâtte allerdings eine Schrágung der 

Auflageflàche zur Folge. Und mit dieser eigentümlich 

labilen Aufstellung befindet sich unser metapontiner 

Kopf in guter Gesellschaft der meisten groBgriechischen 

Akrolithe, die denn auch infolgedessen háufig 

falsch, d.h. nach hinten gekippt montiert wurden 4 . 

Schon Langlotz waren diese charakteristisch schiefe 

Unterseite westgriechischer Akrolithe sowie deren 

fehlende Verdübelung unverstándlich 5 . Die eckigen 

Dübellocher an Ober- und Unterseite des metapontiner 

Kopfes scheinen demnach - sofern sie ursprünglich, 

nicht spàter zugefügt sind - sogar eine Ausnahme zu 

sein. 

Stilistisch verrat unser Kopf - bei aller Eigenwilligkeit 

- seine unteritalische Herkunft, bestátigt und modifiziert 

bereits bekannte Eigenarten westgriechischer 

Skulptur. - Die Kenntnis seiner Provenienz - Metapont 

- stellt ihn in die Tradition der durch die Forschungen 

der letzten 10 Jahre besser bekannten Kunst dieser 

acháischen Kolonie 6 . Anhand der zahllosen Figuren der 

Kleinplastik und der bereicherten Anzahl groflplastischer 

Werke beginnen sich fórmale Tendenzen abzuzeichnen, 

die auf eine lokale Schule zumindest der 

Koroplastik hindeuten. Inwieweit die westlichen Kolonien 

in der Steinskulptur ihren jeweils eigenen Stil 

entwickelten, ist trotz vieler Neufunde immer noch 

fraglich. Allgemein zwang die Kostbarkeit des Marmors 

meistens zur Dekoration in Ton, so dafl die 

Steinbildhauer entweder 'Wanderkünstler' sein muBten 

2. âhnlich Apollon von Ciro: von Matt/Zanotti-Bianco, Groflgriechenland, 

Zurich 1961, Tf. 160-162. Apollon v. Sosianus-Tempel, 

Rom: Langlotz, Die Kunst der Westgriechen, München 1963, Tf. 117 

3. G. Richter, Korai, London 1968, Figs. 118-121 

2. Grossgriechischer Akrolith. J. Paul Getty Museum 

4. Falsch aufgestellt: Akrolith Ludovisi (Langlotz, Westgriechen, 

Tf. 63) Akrolith Cirb (Langlotz, Westgriechen, Tf. 19, richtig bei v. 

Matt, Groflgriechenland, Tf. 160) 

Akrolith Vatikan (Langlotz, Westgriechen, Tf. 86, 87) 

Akrolith Metapont. (richtig bei Schefold, Meisterwerke, Tf. VII 293) 

Richtig: Kopf Hannover 

Metopen Selinunt 

Athena-Kopf Tarent (Langlotz, Westgriechen, Tf. 99) 

5. Langlotz, Die Kunst der Westgriechen, 71, 76 u.a. 

6. Den verstarkten Grabungsaktivitaten urn Metapont, besonders 

dank der Initiative des zustandigen Soprintendente Prof. D. 

Adamesteanu, verdanken wir eine Fülle neuer Kenntnisse uber 

Topographie, Stadtanlage, Aufteilung des Hinterlandes, der Kulte 

und Tempelbauten sowie der kunsthandwerklichen Hinterlassenschaft. 

So fuhrte u.a. die Aufdeckung eines Topferviertels zum Fund 

einer Werkstatt des Kreusa-Malers. 

vgl. D. Adamesteanu, La Basilicata antica, De Mauro Editore, 1974 

D. Adamesteanu, Metaponto, Napoli 1973 

Atti Convegno Studi sulla Magna Grecia, Taranto 1973 

23

3. Grossgriechischer Akrolith. J. Paul Getty Museum 

- folglich ihre Spuren vielerorts hinterlieBen - oder aber 

môglicherweise Elemente der Bronze - und Terrakottaplastik 

auf dies Material ubertugen. - So gehôrt unser 

metapontiner Kopf einerseits in die Umgebung der 

bekannten groBgriechischen Akrolithe, laBt andererseits 

mit keinem von ihnen einen unmittelbaren 

Werkstattzusammenhang erkennen. 

Die zu steile Aufstellung und starke Unteransicht 

lassen ihn auch unnôtig herb und verzent, seine 

Altertümlichkeiten provinziell erscheinen. Erst in der 

beschriebenen Hauptansicht zeigt unser Akrolith seine 

Reife und Eigenart. 

Recht eigenwillig wirkt seine langgestreckte, fast 

zylindrisch gerundete Grundform. Die Schwere der 

Wangenpartie láBt das Gewicht trotz der hohen Stirn 

und groBen Augen et was mude nach unten rutschen. 

Diese Proportionierung mag ein nachgeschlepptes 

Element des Strengen Stils sein, bildet aber auch eine 

strukturelle Eigenart metapontiner Koroplastik. Zu 

dieser Grundanlage gehôrt auch die sehr flàchige 

Modellierung des Gesichts. Die fast geschnitzte Akzentuierung 

der Details - besonders in der Augen-Stirn- 

Partie - verleiht den Formen eine trockene Klarheit. 

Dem Uberwiegen graphisch-linearer Werte im oberen 

Teil wirkt die Schwere des Volumens der unieren 

Gesichtshâlfte entgegen. Die linearen Elemente sind 

recht unvermittelt mit plastischen Formelementen 

kombiniert, - die schnitzartige Augen, eine weich 

plastische Mundpartie, scharf geritzte Venusringe am 

Raise. Die straff gespannte Oberflàche scheint als 

wesentlicher Faktor im Kràftespiel von Masse und 

Gerüst mitzurwirken und einen gewissen Ausgleich 

divergierender Kraft e zu bilden. Einige strukturelle 

Harten oder auch Widersprüchlichkeiten sind nicht 

unbedingt als metapontiner Eigenart, sondern eher als 

allgemein groBgriechisch zu verstehen. 

24

5. Thronende Gottin. Berlin. 

6. Akrolith Ludovisi. Terme. Foto Hirmer 

K. Schefold bezeichnete diesen Kopf als 'die jungere 

Schwester der thronenden Gôttin von Tarent' 7 (Fig. 5). 

Ihre Verwandtschaft scheint mir nicht so eng, wie es 

die geographische Nàhe beider Stàdte verlangen 

kônnte. Neben Unterschieden der Proportionen, dem 

andersartigen Schnitt der Augen und besonders des 

Mundes liegt der Formulierung des tarentiner Kopfes 

offenbar eine andere - starker plastische - Auffassung 

zugrunde. Die harten Zàsuren der abrupt aneinandergesetzten 

Einzelformen môgen seiner fruheren Entwicklungsstufe 

zuzuschreiben sein; das drastische 

Gegeneinander der Kràfte von Gerust und weichem 

Karnat sind von der ausbalaricierten Spannung des 

Metapontiners zwischen straffer Oberflàche, knappen 

Details und sanften, fast flachen Ubergangen der 

Einzelformen recht verschieden. 

7. Ant.Kunst 3,1,1960,48; Blurnel, Katal.Berliner Museen, 1969, 

Nr.21,Abb.57. 4. Grossgriechischer Akrolith. J. Paul Getty Museum 

25

7. Terrakottakopf. Syrakus. 8. Akrolith Vatikan 

Die GroBflàchigkeit der Formen sowie eine âhnliche 

Proportionierung verbinden unseren Kopf - nichtachtend 

des GrôBen-und Zeitunterschieds - mit dem 

Akrolith Ludovisi 8 (Fig. 6). Auch dieser leidet unter 

den Verzerrungen seiner zu steilen Aufstellung. Auch 

ihn charakterisieren die geringe Tektonik, spezifische 

Antinomien zwischen voluminosen und linearen Formelementen, 

das weiche Quellen des Karnats, die straff 

gespannte Oberflàche und die kleinteilig graphischen 

Akzentuierungen. Âhnliche Strukturen zeigt ein Terrakotta-Kopf 

in Siracusa 8 * (Fig. 7), der dem Metapontiner 

auch zeitlich schon nâher steht. Die dank dem 

flexiblen Material zarte Belebung der Formen, die 

àhnlich sensible Mundpartie wirken weicher und 

weniger trocken. 

Der kolossale Akrolith im Vatikan* (Fig. 8) ist trotz 

seiner zeitlichen Nàhe viel altertümlicher ais unser 

metapontiner Kopf. Trotz des deutlich spürbaren 

inneren Gerüsts und des spitzdreieckigen Untergesichts 

bleiben seine Einzelformen flàchig, das Karnat weich 

und schlaff. Die Dynamik des jüngeren und kleineren 

Kopfes geht dem groflen Akrolith vôllig ab. Dieser 

erscheint - bei aller Qualitât - recht hieratisch 

altertümelnd und mude neben dem sensibel belebten 

hochklassischen Nachfolger. 

Viel nâher steht unserem metapontiner Werk ein Kopf 

in Hannover (Fig. 9a,b), der - wenn auch nicht 

notwendig derselben Werkstatt entstammend, wie 

Amelung annahm 10 - mit den Metopenkôpfen des 

Tempels E von Selinunt eine stilistische Gruppe bildet. 

Seine Verwandtschaft zum Metapont-Akrolith zeigt 

sich besonders in ihrer jeweiligen Hauptansicht, 3/4 

von links. Ihnen gemeinsam sind die groflflàchig 

straff e Bildung des Gesichts, die schnitzartige Akzentuierung 

der Detailformen, die zarten Übergánge. Die 

Proportionen des metapontiner Kopfes sind noch etwas 

gestreckter, sein Untergesicht hàngt voiler und schwerer. 

Die Klarheit der deutlich abgegrenzten Einzelformen 

und die Dynamik des Wechselspiels von Gerüst 

und Masse lassen den Hannover-Kopf fast durchsichtiger 

und besser ausbalanciert erscheinen, verraten 

zugleich auch sein etwas früheres Entstehungsdatum. 

Die sensible Form des Mundes mit seinen zart 

8. Thermenmuseum, Rom. E. Paribeni, Catal.delle Sculture del 

Museo délie Terme, No.l; Helbig, Führer III, Mr. 2342; Langlotz, 

Westgriechen, Tf. 62,63 

8a. Langlotz, Westgriechen, Nr. 41 

9. Helbig, Führer I, Nr.400; Langlotz, Westgriechen, Tf. 86, 87; 

Langlotz, Fruhgriechische Bildhauerschulen, 1927, Tf. 92. 

10. Jdl 35.1920,50,Tf.4; RM 65,1958,2ff. 

26

9.ab Kopf Hannover. Foto DAIR 

verwischenden Übergangen sowie die metallisch knappe 

Formulierung der Augen demonstrieren die fortgeschrittene 

Entwicklungsstufe des Metapontiners. Die 

ubergrofien Trânenkarunkel, die dem hannoverschen 

Auge fehlen, sind sicher kein selinuntiner Charakteristikum, 

wenn auch an den Selinunt-Kôpfen gelegentlich 

stark betont u . Trotz enger Verwandtschaft unterscheiden 

sich unsere beiden Kôpfe Hannover und Metapont 

geringfügig in der Proportionierung, im differenziertes 

Spannungssystem von Masse und Gerüst sowie plastischen 

und graphischen Formulierungen. Der metapontiner 

Kopf durfte etwa 10 bis 20 Jahre jünger sein 

ais der hannoversche. 

Bin áhnlicher Zeitabstand besteht zu den ebenfalls eng 

verwandten beiden akrolithen Metopenkôpfen des 

Tempels E von Selinunt 12 (Fig. 10a,b, 11). Laflt man 

die leichte Entwicklungsdifferenz der beiden untereinander 

einmal aufler acht, so besitzen sie trotz dieser 

Verwandtschaften mit dem Metapontiner - wie der 

àhnlichen Proportionierung von Stirn und Wangenpartie, 

den flàchigen Einzelformen, der weichen Rundung 

des Untergesichts - doch eine wesentlich andere 

Grundstruktur. Sie sind von innen heraus plastisch 

aufgebaut; ihre Lebendigkeit beruht auf der bekannten 

Dynamik zwischen Gerüst und Masse, die noch 

unmittelbar aneinandergesetzten Einzelformen schaffen 

eine vergleichsweise derb bewegte Oberflâche. 

Daneben erscheint der Metapont-Akrolith wiederum 

metallisch glatt und zylindrisch konzipiert; seine 

Bewegtheit scheint mit graphischen Mitteln von aufien 

aufgetragen; seine Dynamik wirkt in den Spannungen 

der zarten Oberflâchenbewegungen, der scharfen 

Akzente und der schweren Grundform. Beide selinuntiner 

Kôpfe dürften dem metapontiner zeitlich vorangehen, 

wobei der Kopf Fig. 10a,b mit der noch 

altertümlichen Bildung des Auges und des Mundes sich 

als der altere erweist. Die Datierung wird zwangslàufig 

durch das entwicklungsmaBig jungste Formelement 

bestimmt, welches in unserem Falle wohl in der zart 

formulierten Mundpartie zu sehen ist. Dieses Detail ist 

am Metapontiner reifer als an alien anderen bisher 

betrachteten Kôpfen und verrat die hochklassische 

Entwicklungsstufe. Eine Datierung des Akroliths von 

Metapont kurz nach den Selinunt-Metopen, um 

450-440 v.Chr. scheint daher gerechtfertigt. 

Eine àhnliche - noch gesteigerte - Sensibilisierung der 

11. vg.Fuchs, iir.RM 1956, 194; Langlotz, Westgriechen, S.83, 

Nr.113. 

12. Palermo, Museo nazionale. RM 1956, 102ff; Langlotz, Tf. 

109-111. 

27

lOab Kopf von Selinunt. Palermo. Foto DAIR 

Mundpartie zeigt ein Athena - Kopf in Tarent 13 (Fig. 

12), jimgerer Nachfolger des Metapont-Kopfes und in 

den Grundproportionen ihm verwandt. Er hat dem 

Metapontiner die reichen Kontrastwirkungen voraus, 

die Vielfalt der nuancenreichçn Ubergànge, die individuelle 

Zartheit um Augen und Mund. 

Der Kopf des bogenschieflenden Apollon im Konservatorenpalast 

in Rom 14 (Fig. 13) ist ais jüngerer 

Verwandter - wegen seiner starken Überarbeitung in 

rômischer Zeit - wohl nur mittelbar zu vergleichen. 

Âhnlich sind die Proportionen in Stirn-Wangenflàche 

und Untergesicht, àhnlich auch die scharfgeschnittenen 

Líder sowie die Hôhe des Orbitals. 

Dieselbe Zurückhaltung ist auch der Beurteilung des 

Akroliths von S. Omobono in Rom 15 geboten; auch er 

- wohl einst Teil eines groBgriechischen Kultbilds - 

erfuhr krâftige rômische Nachbearbeitung, die vor 

allem das Untergesicht entstellten. Seine Verwandtschaft 

zu anderen unteritalischen Áhnlichkeiten zum 

metapontiner Kopf sind in der Proportionierung sowie 

in der Stirn-Augen-Partie erkennbar. 

11. Kopf von Selinunt. Palermo. Foto DAIR 

13. Tarent, Museo nazionale. Langlotz, Westgriechen, Tf. 98,99. 

14. Rom, Palazzo dei Conservatori, Helbig, Fuhrer III, Nr. 1642; 

Langlotz, Westgriechen, Tf. 117. 

15. Mingazzini, in: AA 1950/51, 200,Abb.27 

28

13. Apollo Sosianus. Konservatorenpalast 12. Athena-kopf. Tarent 

Der Akrolith von Ciro, Kultbild des Apollon Alaios, 

sei das letzte Exemplar aus der Gruppe westgriechischer 

Akrolithe um unseren metapontiner Kopf (Fig. 

14). Die Drastik, mit welcher dieser seine unteritalischen, 

gewissermaflen 'ungriechischen' Struktureigenarten 

demonstriert, haben ihm ungerechtfertigte Zweifel 

an seiner Echtheit und Datierung eingebracht 16 . 

Verschiedene auch am metapontiner Kopf erkennbare 

Strukturen erscheinen im Akrolith von Cirb ubersteigert, 

fast degeneriert: die âhnlichen Proportionen, die 

flàchige Komposition der Einzelformen, der áhnlich 

harte Schnitt der Augen und des zarten Orbitals. Die 

âhnlichen Asymmetrien des Gesichts sowie unsymmetrisch 

geritzte Venusringe lassen eine àhnliche 

Wendung des Kopfes folgern. Auch dieser Akrolith 

leidet wegen seiner schràgen Unterseite an einer zu 

steilen Aufstellung. Neben dem alteren und kleineren 

metapontiner Werk, dessen divergierende fórmale 

Kràfte noch im (labilen) Gleichgewicht scheinen, fâllt 

der Ciro Akrolith einigermaBen ab. Kein straffer 

Kontur bàndigt die schwammige Weichheit des Kar- 

16. B.S.Ridgeway, The Severe Style, 1970,122; Schuchhardt, in:AA 

66,1962,317ff; aber: Langlotz, Westgriechen, Nr.ll8f; Franciscis, 

in:RM 1956,96ff; Fuchs, in:RM 1958,4ff. 

14. Apollon Alaios. Reggio di Calabria 

29

15ab 

Marmorkopf. Metapont 

nats; die linearen Betonungen einiger Detailformen 

erreichen kaum eine Belebung der spannungslosen 

Oberfláche. Der Kopf wirkt vergleichsweise leer, 

enthüllt die Labilitât und geringe Energie grolîgriechischer 

Plastizitàt. 

In der Gruppe landschaftlich verwandter Akrolithe 

entwickelte unser metapontiner Kopf seine Qualitât 

und Originalitát. Allgemein westgriechisch sind Struktureigenarten 

wie geringe Tektonik, Flàchigkeit der 

Einzelformen, Nachschleppen altertümlicher Formelemente, 

Divergieren der Kráfte, Antinomien zwischen 

linearen und plastischen Werten. Hinzu kommen 

offenbar gelegentliche Schwierigkeiten italiotischer 

Bildhauer, dem wenig gewohnten Material des Marmors 

gerecht zu werden. Manche Charakteristika 

môgen einfach aus der Übertragung von Formelementen 

der haufiger geübten Bronzetechnik oder Koroplastik 

auf die Steintechnik resultieren; eine Eigenart, die 

E. Paribeni treffend mit 'carattere . . . di terracotta 

glorificata' bezeichnete 17 . So ist den metapontiner 

Werken seit archaischer Zeit durchweg eine metallische 

Flàchigkeit und Trockenheit eigen, ein Überwiegen 

graphisch-linearer Akzentuierung der Einzelformen 18 . 

Ein unlângst in Metapont gefundener Marmorkopf 19 

(Fig. 15a,b) des Strengen Stils setzt diese Eigenart auch 

im V.Jh. fort; seine zarte graphische Oberflachenmodellierung 

stellt ihn in auffâllige Nàhe zu der 

Figuren des Ludovisischen Throns (Fig. 16). Wo auch 

immer man dessen Entstehung lokalisieren mag, 

anhand der Neufunde von Skulpturen des V.Jhs. in 

Unteritalien dürfte seine neuerliche vergleichende 

Strukturanalyse nutzlich sein. 

Um bei unserem metapontiner Kopf zu bleibenrneben 

seinen 'metallischen' Eigenarten findet auch seine 

seltsame Proportionierung ihre Tradition in der 

metapontiner Koroplastik des VI. und V.Jhs.; seine 

fast zylindrische Grundform (Fig. 2;3) mit dem schwer 

hàngenden Untergesicht. Diese Form ist in unserem 

Falle also entweder als nachgeschlepptes Element des 

Strengen Stils zu werten, oder als metapontiner 

Char akteristikum. 

2 Proportions-Schemata sind in der metapontiner 

Plastik kontinuierlich zu verfolgen. Eines zeigt relativ 

kurze Kôpfe mit flach gerundetem Oberkopf und 

knappem dreieckigen Untergesicht. Das andere Grund- 

17. Paribeni, in: Atti Memorie Società Magna Grecia 1954,67. 

18. Über metapontiner Kleinkunst archaischer Zeit siehe meine 

demnâchst erscheinende Diss. 'Archaische Terrakotta-Figuren von S. 

Biagio bei Metapont Vgl. Adamesteanu, La Basilicata antica, 58f. 

19. Adamesteanu, Metaponto, 1973, Fig. 25. 

30

16. Aphrodite. Thron Ludovisi 

schéma bildet langgestreckt zylindrische Kôpfe mit 

hoher Stirn, hoch gewôlbtem Oberkopf und langem 

schweren, gelegentlich auch spitzen Untergesicht. Beide 

Grundformen erscheinen etwa gleich hàufig, beide sind 

auBerordentlich langlebig. 

Ob dièse strukturellen Eigenarten nun aber zur 

Définition eines lokalen metapontiner Stils ausreichen, 

ist schwer zu entscheiden. Trotz gewisser Eigenwilligkeit 

und Originalitàt scheint mir auch dièse Werkstatt 

cher eklektisch zu arbeiten. 

Offenbar gab es in der groBgriechischen Skulptur 2 

divergierende strukturelle Tendenzen: 

- In der einen überwiegen die plastischen Werte des 

Volumens sowie malerische Werte der flieBenden 

Formen. Aïs Gegenkraft wirkt-oft nur schwach - das 

innere Gerüst. Solche Werke scheinen oft extrem 

schwer und üppig, gelegentlich geradezu lasziv oder 

auch leidenschaftlich bewegt. Beispiele finden sich in 

Werken aus Locri, Medma, im Akrolith Cirô, im 

Vatikan-Akrolith. 

- Die andere Tendenz pràsentiert flâchige Grundformen, 

eine pràzise, fast selbstàndige Formulierung der 

Linearitàt, d.h. eine Herrschaft der graphischen Werte, 

die man ais geradezu italisch bezeichnen kônnte. Eine 

straffe Oberflâche und ein meist knapper Kontur 

verleihen solchen Werken ihre Trockenheit. Aïs 

Beispiele seien der Ludovisische Thron, der Jünglingskopf 

Hannover, der Akrolith Metapont genannt. 

Dièse beiden Tendenzen erreichen nur selten Ausgleich 

und Balance; die meisten groBgriechischen 

Werke sind gerade durch Unausgewogenheit der 

Kràfte, Unsicherheiten der Formen gekennzeichnet. 

Auch an unserem metapontiner Kopf ist eine gewisse 

Antinomie der Kràfte zwischen oberem und unteren 

Teil des Gesichts nicht zu übersehen. Besser ausbalanciert 

scheint da der Kopf aus Hannover. 

Das Gleichgewicht der Krâfte besaB môglicherweise 

fur westgriechische Kunstler gar nicht einmal den 

hohen Wert, den es in der Kunst des Mutterlandes 

bedeutete. 

Die Beobachtung einer relativen Selbstàndigkeit 

metapontiner Skulptur von tarentiner Werken des 

V.Jhs. scheint von gewisser historischer Bedeutsamkeit. 

Nach den lapygerkriegen von 471 drângte Tarent heftig 

nach Westen 20 , gründete 433/2 auf dem Terrain des 

alten Siris seine Pflanzstadt Herakleia. In dieser Zeit 

muB Metapont mehr oder weniger abhàngig von 

20. Hdî.VII 20,3; Diod.XI 52,lf.; vgl.E. Ciaceri, Storia délia Magna 

Grecia, II 1927, S.287ff. 

31

Tarent gewesen sein, ohne aber seine Autonomie zu 

verlieren, zumal es kontinuierlich seine Münzen pràgte. 

Seit der Zeit des Strengen Stils ist die Koroplastik 

Metaponts in Typologie und Stil von der Tarents 

praktisch nicht zu unterscheiden. 

Noch ist zur Deutung des Kopfes im J.Paul Getty 

Museum nichts gesagt worden. Die gewaltigen Akrolithe 

Ludovisi, Vatikan, S. Omobono, Cirô gehôrten 

zweifellos zu kolossalen Kultbildern. Seine MaBe 

stellen unseren Kopf cher an die Seite der selinuntiner 

Metopenkôpfe, die er um einige Zentimeter überragt. 

Dièse Grôfte schlieiît allerdings eine Deutung aïs 

Metopenfigur aus, denn die Tempel Metaponts war en 

kleiner aïs der bewuflte Tempel E von Selinunt. Zudem 

spricht bisher nichts dafür, dafl es an Metaponts 

Tempeln überhaupt Metopen mit Marmorreliefs gegeben 

hat; und die anderen Skulpturen-Reste in Metapont 

21 passen weder in der Grôlîe noch chronologisch 

zu unserem Akrolith. Bleiben die Môglichkeiten einer 

Giebelfigur, einer Weihgeschenkfigur, eines Kultbildes. 

Ein Giebel scheint mir wegen der fehlenden passenden 

Reste in Stein unwahrscheinlich, zumal das Tempelgelânde 

bisher eifrig durchsucht wurde. - Die Deutung 

aïs Votiv-Figur ware ohne weiteres môglich; doch auch 

aïs Teil eines Kultbildes ist unser Akrolith - trotz seiner 

dafür geringen Grôite - denkbar. Im ersteren Falle ware 

der Kôrper wohl aus Stein zu ergânzen; bei einem 

Kultbild dürfte dieser cher aus einem Holzkern mit 

Metallbeschlàgen, evtl. auch mit einem Stoffgewand 

bekleidet zu denken sein; auch kann ein Kultbild 

Schmuck und Accessoirs aus kostbaren Materialien 

getragen haben. 

Über den genauen Fundort ist nichts bekannt. Eine 

Votiv-Statue kônnte im weiteren Umkreis des Tempelgelàndes 

und der Agora gestanden haben 22 . 

Von den 4 Stadttempeln Metaponts lieflen sich 2 mit 

Sicherheit dem Apollon Lykeios und der Hera 

zuweisen 23 . Weiterhin fanden sich in unmittelbarer 

Nâhe Votive an Athena; ob der (offenbar àlteste) 

Tempel C ihr oder der Aphrodite oder einer anderen 

Gottheit geweiht war, ist noch nicht geklârt. Der 

'Besitzer' des vierten, ionischen Tempels ist ebenfalls 

noch nicht identifiziert. Die Hera residierte aufierdem 

am vor den Mauern gelegenen Tempel der 'Tavole 

Palatine'; Artemis besan ein berühmtes Quellheiligtum 

auBerhalb der Stadt. 

Ob aber aïs Kultbild oder aïs Votiv-Statue, der 

Akrolith im J.Paul Getty Museum hat sicher zur Figur 

einer Gôttin gehôrt; über Aufstellung und Hauptansicht 

ist eingangs genug gesagt. Die erhobene rechte 

Hand kann Zepter, Fackel, Lanze oder ein anderes 

Attribut gehalten haben, die gesenkte Linke eine 

Spendeschale, Oinochoe, ein Tier oder auch gar nichts. 

Die Überlieferung nennt Demeter, Hera, Artemis, 

Athena aïs in Metapont besonders verehrte Gôttinnen 

24 . Ob unsere Gôttin nun die grolte westgriechische 

Demeter mit Kreuzfackel und Schweinchen, Polos und 

Schleier, die Persephone mit der Fackel, Hera mit dem 

Zepter, Artemis mit Fackel und Tier, Athena mit 

Lanze und Bronzehelm darstellte, ist wohl nur noch 

subjektiv zu entscheiden. 

Gesche Olbrich 

Rom 

21. Bogenschütze, verschiedene Kôpfe, Gewandfragmente, Tierfragmente 

u.a. vgl.Adamesteanu, Metaponto, Fig. 25ff. 

22. vgl.Hdt.IV 15 

23. Tempel A bzw.Tempel B. Adamesteanu, Metaponto, 43ff; Ders. 

La Basilicata antica, 22ff 

24. G. Giannelli, Culti e miti della Magna Grecia 2 , 1963,65ff. 

32

Fig. 1 II trono Elgin 

L.S. FAUVEL E IL C.D. TRONO ELGIN 

Nel 1837 il barone O.M. von Stackelberg, nella prima 

parte délia sua celebre opera "Die Graeber der 

Hellenen" 1 , presenta e commenta il trono marmóreo 

(fig. 1) (noto principalmente per il gruppo dei 

Tirannicidi, schizzato a bassorilievo su uno dei suoi 

fianchi) gia ad Atene, poi nella collezione privata di 

Lord Elgin a Broomhall (Scozia), ed ora nel Museo J.P. 

Getty a Malibu (California; inv. 74.AA.12; fig. 5-6). E 

la prima ampia menzione "pubblica" di un monumento 

che ha richiamato successivamente varié volte Tattenzione 

degli studiosi 2 ; ma poiche questa prima presentazione 

comprende, tra varié argomentazioni oggi supérate, 

Testatto impiego di un método combinatorio 3 che, 

awalendosi di documenti numismatici e di fonti 

antiche, identifica lo schema del celebre gruppo storico 

nel bassorilievo citato, sara utile aggiungere qualche 

dato inédito e qualche considerazione che illumini la 

storia ateniese del monumento, prima délia sua 

emigrazione all'estero nel 1818 4 . 

Un primo accertamento: la data di pubblicazione nei 

Graeber, 1837, non è da intendere come data della 

identificazione proposta. Lo Stackelberg fu ad Atene 

1) O. M. von Stackelberg, Die Graeber der Hellenen, Berlin 1837, 

pp. 33 ss. 

2) Cfr. la vecchia bibliografía in A. Michaelis, Journ. Hell. Stud., 

5, 1884, p. 146; piu recentemente, Ch. Seltman, in Journ. Hell. 

Stud., 67, 1947, p. 22 ss., tav. VI ss.; C. C. Vermeule, in,4w. Journ. 

Arch., 59, 1955, p. 132; B. Shefton, in Am. Journ. Arch., 64, 1960, 

p. 173 ss.; G.M.A. Richter, The Furniture of the Greeks, Etruscans 

and Romans, London 1966, p. 30, fig. 138; oltre che, naturalmente, 

nella ricca bibliografía dei Tirannicidi (cfr. S. Brunnsàker, The 

Tyrant-Slayers of Kritios and Nesiotes, II éd., Lund, 1971); J. Freí, in 

AthMitt. 91, 1976, p. 185ss., tav.65ss. 

3) Tale método aveva fatto scuola, allora, a Roma, da dove 

proveniva lo Stackelberg quando giunse in Grecia, neH'ambito degli 

epigoni del Winckelmann, C. Fea, E. Q. Visconti e A. Nibby (cfr. A. 

Rumpf, Archaologie, I, Berlin 1953, pp. 62 ss., 77 s., 80 s.; II, 

Berlin 1956, p. 121; C. Anti, Propedéutica archeologica, Padova 

1966, pp. 95 ss.). 

4) Cfr. Michaelis, op.cit., p. 146; A. H. Smith, Journ. Hell. Stud., 

36, 1916, pp. 286, 294. II trono, acquistato, come si vedrà, già nel 

1811, fu spedito dal Pireo solo nel 1818, quando i "marmi Elgin" 

erano già entrati nel British Museum; per questo motivo esso rimase 

nella collezione privata degli Elgin. 

33

Fig. 2 Fauvel, 5/A/. ^Vaí., Ms5. /ranc. 22577.7, //W [nostro A] 

ripetutamente, durante il suo viaggio in Grecia dal 1810 

al 1814 5 , ed e a quel periodo che va riferita la sua 

autopsia del monumento. Egli afferma, infatti, che il 

trono era situato "am Platz des ehemaligen Prytaneum" 

ad Atene, dove crede (ignorando le sorti successive del 

monumento) 6 che esso si trovi ancora, naturalmente al 

tempo dell'edizione délia sua opera, nel 1837. La 

precisazione e significativa perche implica, da parte 

dello Stackelberg, l'ignoranza del Memorándum dello 

Hamilton nelle due edizioni del 1811 e del 1815, oltre 

che nella sua versione tedesca del 1817 7 , nelle quali il 

trono è già ricordato tra gli acquisti di Lord Elgin, con 

l'espressa identificazione nei suoi bassorilievi del gruppo 

di Armodio e Aristogitone, da un lato, e dell'uccisione 

delía cortigiana Leaina, dall'altro. II che ci convince che 

il primate nella identificazione è dello Stackelberg, 

nonostante il ritardo della'sua edizione, e che quindi è 

degna di fede la sua affermazione, non priva di 

orgoglio, che a lui si debba "die erste Erklárung und 

Bekanntmachung" del monumento 8 . Oserei anzi diré 

che fu proprio 1'identificazione dello Stackelberg a daré 

un pregio al trono stesso, prima d'allora non menzionato, 

e quindi a provocare, con ogni probabilité, 

l'intéresse e l'acquisto di esso da parte degli agenti di 

Lord Elgin, tra gli ultimo mesi del 1810 (data del primo 

soggiorno ateniese dello Stackelberg) e il 1811 (data 

della prima edizione del Memorandum citato) 9 . Il fatto 

stesso che egli non ricordi il trono tra i matériau di Lord 

Elgin o del suo agente Lusieri, mentre per vari altri 

monumenti di loro proprieta vi e un esplicito ricordo 

nella sua opera, prova che la sua autopsia dovette esser 

precedente all'acquisto; del resto la sua convinzione 

del 1837 che il trono si trovi ancora ad Atene ne e una 

indiscutibile riprova. 

Ma dove era esattamente il trono, allorchè lo 

Stackelberg ne delineo la forma e i particolari Come si 

maturo e si diffuse la sua identificazione del gruppo dei 

Tirannicidi nel bassorilievo che sta alia destra del trono 

5) Cfr. N. v. Stackelberg, Otto Magnus von Stackelberg, Schilderung 

seines Lebens, Heidelberg 1882, pp. 61 ss., 81 ss., 159 ss. 

6) Non era il solo ad ignórame la sorte: cfr. la nota di F. Osann, in 

J. Stuart-N. Revett, Die Alterthümer von Athen, II, Darmstadt 

1831, p. 438, nota 2, e le osservazioni del Michaelis, op.cit.. p. 146. 

7) W. R. Hamilton, Memorandum of the Subjects of the Earl of 

Elgin's Pursuits in Greece, Edinburgh 1811, p. 32; id., II éd., 

London 1815, p. 33; id., Denkschrift über Lord Elgin's Erwerbungen 

in Griechenland, Leipzig 1817, p. 22 s. 

8) Stackelberg, Die Graeber, p. 34. 

9) Stackelberg lascia Atene, dove era giunto nell'autunno del 1810, 

il Capodanno del 1811 (N. v. Stackelberg, op. cit., pp. 85, 92 ss.). 

34

(alla sinistra per chi guarda) e del sacrificio délia figlia 

Chthonia da parte di Eretteo, sul lato opposto Una 

risposta a tali quesiti pub essere facilitata dair esame di 

alcuni passi inediti dei manoscritti di L.S. Fauvel 10 , 

oltre che dalla considerazione del quadro topograficomonumentale 

dell'Atene del tempo e délia fortunata 

presenza, allora, di un numeroso gruppo di antiquari e 

artisti interessati, corne il Fauvel, allé antichita délia 

città, tutti in rapporte con lo Stackelberg 11 . 

Il Fauvel, colpito, corne già prima di lui Stuart e 

Revett 12 , dalla presenza di sedili marmorei in vari punti 

délia città antica, ne fa cenno nei seguenti passi 13 : 

A) Paris, Bibl Nat., Mss. Franc. 22877,1, f.181. 

 

B) Paris, Bibl. Nat., Mss. Franc., 22877,1, f. 81. 

(in un rápido elenco di materiali presi ad Atene da 

Lord Elgin) 

 

Fig. 3 L'altro trono presso la Sotira Licodimo (1975) 

C) Paris, Bibl Nat., Mss. Franc., 22877.1. f. 125. 

(a proposito del monastero di Dafni, presso Atene) 

4.. . Il y a encoré près de la porte de l'église un siège 

antique avec des chouettes et dans une chapelle un 

chapiteau dorique qui sert d'autel. . .£> 

D) Paris. Bibl. Nat., Mss. Franc. 22877, 1, f. 104 (fig. 7) 

(il foglio appartiene ad un "Cahier d'inscriptions avec 

dessins" che inizia al f. 91 del ms. citato) 

A sinistra, in alto, è schizzato il trono, visto di tre 

quarti dal lato ove figura scolpito il gruppo dei 

Tirannicidi. Sotto ad esso la didascalia: "siège de 

marbre bleuâtre à Sotira Lycodemou. ooriça 

Arjx°¿ £ M ou (sic)" In alto » s °P ra a trono, aggiunto a 

10) Cfr. la biografía a cura di Ph.E. Legrand, in Rev. Arch., 1897, 

I, pp. 41 ss., 185 ss., 385 ss.; II, pp. 95 ss.; 1898, pp. 185 ss. Per i 

rapporti tra Fauvel e Stackelberg, documentati da corrispondenza 

inédita e dal numeroso materiale dell'antiquario francese accolto nei 

Graeber, cfr. anche Ath. Ann. Arch., 4, 1971, p. 421. 

11) P. Goessler, "Nordische Gaste in Athen um 1810", in 

Arch.Eph., 1937, 1, p. 69 ss.; W. Schiering, in Handbuch der 

Archâologie, Allgemeine Grundlagen der Archaologie, München 

1969, p. 58. 

12) Stuart-Revett, The Antiquities of Athens, III, London 1794, C. 

III. pp. 19, 25, 29; id., Die Alterthümer von Athen, II, Darmstadt 

1831, pp. 410, 423,430, 437 ss. 

13) La datazione dei fogli dove tali ricordi appaiono non è esplicita 

ne pub esser fácilmente ricavata dall' ordine di successione col quale 

appunti sparsi sonó stati rilegati, dopo l'acquisto délie carte Fauvel 

da parte délia Bibl. Nat. di Parigi; elementi impliciti alia descrizione 

permettono fácilmente una datazione relativa, col terminus p.q. del 

1811. Nei passi citati, per la publicazione dei quali si ringrazia la 

Direzione della Bibl. Nat. di Parigi, si è seguita 1'ortografia 

dell'autore. 

35

Fig. 4 Fauvel: Chiesa della Sotira Licodimon 

matita (certo posteriormente alla radazione del disegno) 

il nome "Elgin", a ricordo dell'acquisto awenuto. 

Accanto, su due righe, ê l'appunto a penna "on lit sur 

répaisseur du dossier BOH00I MOA . . ." A flanco del 

trono, a destra del campo figurato, è una columella 

funeraria con I'inscrizione AFIOAAQNIO! / 0EOAOTOY/ 

AAIMOIIIO (sic), edita, in forma corretta, in I.G., 

II/III 2 , 5532, e situata nella necropoli del Cerámico. 

I passi citati permettono alcune considerazioni e 

deduzioni. Risulta innanzitutto chiaro che il nostro 

trono era collocato, prima délia sottrazione ad opera 

degli agenti di Lord Elgin, presso la Sotira Licodimou, 

la grande chiesa bizantina situata al bordo dell'attuale 

via Philhellinon, a ridosso della cui facciata si conserva 

ancora oggi Taltro trono ricordato dal Fauvel (fig. 3) 14 . 

Durante la turcocrazia, e forse anche in periodo 

bizantino, la chiesa, ora officiata dai Russi, costituiva il 

katholikon di un monstero, gravemente danneggiato dal 

terremoto del 1701 e definitivamente demolito da All 

Kasekl nel 1778, allorchb il suo materiale servi per la 

14) II trono presenta L'anatirosi sui due fianchi; e quindi "de ceux 

du milieu du cercle". 

36

ápida costruzione del tratto dell'ultima cinta difensiva 

délia città che correva appunto immediatamente a S-SE 

della chiesa stessa, divenuta allora metochi del 

monastero di Kaisariani 15 . La notizia del Fauvel sembra 

anche confermata da uno schizzo della chiesa eseguito 

dallo stesso autore, dopo 1'erezione del muro di Al\ 

Kasekl che si nota sullo sfondo: nell'angolo inferiore 

destro del campo figurato e schizzato il trono, visto di 

dorso, mentre altro materiale sembra essere addossato, 

come ora, alia facciata della chiesa (fig. 4) 16 . 

Come si concorda il dato concreto di questa coerente 

documentazione del Fauvel con Tindicasione dello 

Stackelberg, legata, come sembra, ad una ipotesi di 

topografía storica Pensava, forse, lo Stackelberg che 

Tarea della Sotira Licodimou corrispondesse a quella 

deirantico Pritaneo, o, forse, a distanza di tempo dal 

suo soggiorno ateniese, ha creato confusione tra aree 

topografiche diverse Poichè, fino ad uno studio 

recente 17 , si è voluto ricavare dall'indicazione topográfica 

dello Stackelberg deduzioni utili per l'esegesi sulla 

funzionalità originaria del trono, il caso di questa 

divergenza va approfondito e discusso. 

Vari troni marmorei erano sparsi, allora come oggi, 

in diversi punti della città di Atene. Fauvel, come s'e 

visto, ne indica con precisione l'ubicazione. 

Uno era collocato nella chiesa dei SS. Anargiri, sulle 

pendici NE deH'Acropoli,neirámbito di un monastero 18 , 

ed uno era già presse TArcivescovado di Atene, a quel 

tempo nell'area circostante la Panagia Gorgoepikoos o 

piccola Metrópoli 19 . Questo seconde, già delineate da 

Stuart e Revett è ricordato come esistente nel metochi di 

H. Cyriani, presso il palazzo vescovile (cioe nella chiesa 

di S. Nicola, metochi del monastero di Kaisariani) 20 , era 

stato donato nel 1801 dall'arcivescovo di Atene ai 

genitori di Mary Nisbet, moglie di Lord Elgin: 

imbarcato al Pirco nel settembre del 1802, naufrago a 

Cerigo, fu recupérate ed è ancora conservato presso gli 

eredi dei Nisbet, a Biel in Scozia 21 . II Fauvel ricorda 

semplicemente di averio visto e giustamente lo qualifica 

come il primo a destra di una serie di troni, gia 

congiunti, dei quali quello dei SS. Anargiri sarebbe 

stato il primo a sinistra, per chi vi sta sedufo. In effetti 

il trono Biel e scolpito e decorato sul suo lato destro, 

mentre sul sinistro è preparata l'anatirosi per la 

congiunzione, in serie, ad altri. II trono dei SS. Anargiri 

e probabilmente quello che appare, ancora in Stuart e 

Revett 22 , senza tuttavia un riccordo esplicito della sua 

ubicazione: decorato sul suo lato sinistro, puo essere 

appunto "le premier du côte gauche, y étant assis". Il 

Fauvel sembra ignórame la sorte, non precisando se ivi 

il trono esistesse o esista ancora: certo è che non risulta 

tra i pochi materiali antichi ancora ai SS. Anargiri, ne 

ci è nota la sua attuale ubicazione. 

La decorazione dei due troni porta il Fauvel 

airipotesi che essi siano appartenuti ad uno stesso 

complesso, ad una linea di proedria per intenderci, e a 

discutere sullo loro originaria sistemazione 23 . Egli crede 

(è concorda in questo con tutta la tradizione di studi 

topografici, legata ad un passo di Pausania) 24 che il 

Pritaneo fosse nella zona dei SS. Anargiri e che, quindi, 

il trono presso la Metrópoli fosse disceso nella città 

bassa dalla sua sede originaria. Nella stessa área, tra i 

SS. Anargiri e la piccola Metrópoli, il Fauvel ricorda, 

quasi a rinforzo della sua teoria, anche un doppio trono, 

"de ceux du milieu du cercle". La notizia ritorna anche 

in Stackelberg, il quale ricorda, appunto nella zona del 

Pritaneo, "die . . . von grossen Marmorblocken 

gehauenen, einfachen Doppelsitze", e, poco prima, altri 

troni ancora, che inducono lui, corne il Fauvel, nella 

ipotesi di uno loro originaria pertinenza al Pritaneo 25 . 

15) A. Mommsen, Athenae Christianae, Leipzig 1868, pp. 66 ss.; G. 

Sotiriou, EuçETifeiov TGOV Êoatcüvixcüv Mvrtfjcfcüv TY\C, 'EAAadoç, I, A, 

'Atfrçvai, Atene 1927, pp. 80 ss. Per le mura di Ali Kaselù cfr. J. 

Travlos, FIoAEodo^txr) 'E££Ai|K TOJV 'Atfrjvcov, Atene 1960, pp. 195 ss. 

16) Paris, Bibl. Nat., Estampes: L. Fauvel, G b 15 b, f. 39 (18 x 22 

cm.); cfr. L. et R. Matton, Athènes et ses monuments du XVII siècle 

a nos jours, Atene 1963, p. 316, fig. 180, tav. CVII. 

17) Seltman, op. ci t., p. 27. 

18) Mommsen, op. ci t., p. 16, n.5; Sotiriou, op.cit., p. 96 s.; 

Travlos, op.cit., p. 259; la chiesa e situata sul bordo dell'attuale via 

Pritaniou. 

19) Cfr. Hesperia, 34, 1965, p. 193, fig. 10. 

20) Stuart-Revett, Antiquities, cit., Ill, C.III, pp. 19, 25; id., 

Alterthümer, cit., II, p. 410, Lief. 27, tav. 9. Per la chiesa di S. 

Nicola: Mommsen, op.cit., p. 119, n. 143; Sotiriou, op.cit., p. 113, 

n. 20. 

21) Seltman, op.cit., pp. 27 ss.; J. Ghennadion, '0 Aoçdoç "EAyiv, 

Atene 1930, p. 11; Richter, op.cit., p. 100, fig. 496. 

22) Stuart-Revett, Antiquities, cit., Ill, C.IV, p. 29; id., Alterthümer, 

cit., II, p. 430, p. 437 ss., nota 10, Lief. 27, tav. 10,3. Da 

rilevare, tuttavia, nelle due tradizioni, una divergenza nel numéro 

délie corone. 

23) L'incertezza sembra giustificare, nel suo elenco dei materiali 

Elgin, la presenza, non altrimenti attestata, di due troni ornad di 

tavole e corone: in realta gli unici due troni attestati nei trasporti dei 

materiali Elgin sono il trono Biel e il trono Broomhall. 

24) Paus., 1,18,3. Cfr. K. S. Pittakis, L'ancienne Athènes, Atene 

1835, pp. 132 ss., 139; W. M. Leake, The Topography of Ancient 

Athens, II, éd., London 1841, p. 269; E. Breton, Athènes, Paris 

1862, pp. 261 ss. Per il problema topográfico del monumento cfr. 

recent. Travlos, op.cit., pp. 24, 28, 36, 81. 

25) Stackelberg, op.cit., p. 34; la coppia di sedili e, probabilmente, 

quella conservata, tra materiali vari, all'esterno della párete N del 

Museo Nazionale di Atene. 

37


Gli stessi accenni ci convincono, quindi, che anche lo 

Stackelberg seguiva la tradizione comune che collocava 

il Pritaneo sulle pendici nordorientali dell'acropoli. 

Ipotesi a parte, viene comunque attestata una 

concentrazione di troni marmorei nella zona ritenuta 

del vecchio Pritaneo. Un'altra área di concentrazione di 

essi era presso la città di Adriano: ce ne informano 

Stuart e Revett, che li mettono in rapporto, come troni 

di Ginnasiarchi, col vicino Liceo o, come troni di 

Magistrat!, col tribunale del Delphinion 26 , e ce ne dà 

conferma il passo di Fauvel che ne ricorda due, presso 

la Sotira Licodimou. 

Due aree, quindi, tra le quali lo Stackelberg púa aver 

creato confusione. 

Esce dai limiti della presente nota il problema 

dell'esegesi della decorazione nonchè deiroriginaria 

sistemazione e funzionalità del trono Elgin, isolato, per 

forma, stile, e datazione, rispetto alia series degli altri 

troni, ricordati dal Fauvel ad Atene e Dafni, arricchitasi 

in seguito di altri esemplari 27 . Vorrei solo sottolineare i 

motivi della loro diaspora nell'Atene medioevale e 

26) Stuart-Revett, Antiquities, p. 25; id., Alterthümer, cit., p. 410. 

27) Caratterizza la serie di questi troni la costante presenza del 

motivo decorad vi di una coppia di civette sulla fronte del sedile: cfr. 

esempi e bibliogr. in Rumpf, Oesterr. Jahresh., 39, 1952, p. 86, n. 

14; Richter, op.cit., p. 100. Uno studio dettagliato su di essi e in 

corso ad opera del dott. C. Gasparri. 

38


moderna. Come s'è visto, essi trovarono un reimpiego 

neir ámbito di monasteri ed a questo motivo è dovuta 

anche la diaspora di alcunidi essi in collezione straniere. 

Ce lo dice un passo del Memorandum di Hamilton 28 , 

secondo il quale Tarcivescovo di Atene avrebbe dato a 

Lord Elgin il permesso di cercare e portar via antichità 

esistenti nelle chiese e nei monasteri delta citta e dei 

dintorni; tra queste antichità e ricordato appunto il 

trono dei Tifannicidi, che dobbiamo pensare gia 

pertinente all'exmonastero délia Sotira Licodimou. 

Un ultimo appunto, per concludere, sulle esegesi 

relative ai due gruppi figurati a bassorilievo ai due lati 

del trono. L'individuazione del gruppo dei Tirannicidi, 

operata dallo Stackelberg sullo scorcio del 1810, dovette 

immediatamente convincere e colpire la societa degli 

antiquari e artisti, allora presenti ad Atene. Fauvel, gli 

archeologi danesi Bronsted e Koes, 1'architetto tedesco 

Haller von Hallerstein, il pittore J. Linckh, gli architetti 

inglesi Ch. Cockerell e Foster, Lord Byron, il pittore 

Lusieri, agente di Lord Byron, erano, negli ultimi mesi 

del 1810, alia vigilia délie scoperte di Egina e Basse, i 

nomi piu rilevanti di questa societa 29 . E certo la 

proposta di Stackelberg dovette diffondersi rápidamente 

e daré adito a discussioni. Questo non tanto per il 

28) Hamilton, loc.cit.; K. Simopoulos, -¿voi TalidieoTec arr/v 'EAAáda, 

Atene 1975, p. 315 s. 

29) Goessler, op.cit., a nota 11; Simopoulos, op.cit., pp. 132 ss. 

39

gruppo dei Tirannicidi, quanto per quello, contrapposto, 

di un guerriero che uccide una figura femminile, 

caduta ai suoi piedi. Lo Stackelberg propose di 

riconoscervi Eretteo che uccide la figlia Chthonia, in 

ossequio all'oracolo deifico, per ottenere la vittoria di 

Atene su Eleusi 30 : esempio di virtu monarchica in 

parallelo con I'esempio di virtu repubblicana del gruppo 

dei Tirannicidi, nella coerenza di una esegesi di 

carattere simbolistico, legata alia storia deirAttica. 

Hamilton, riflettendo dal canto suo un'ipotesi di natura 

più narrativa, riconosce nella scena discussa un 

completamente délia vicenda dei Tirannicidi, con 

1'uccisione della cortigiana Leaina che aveva preferito 

privarsi della lingua piuttosto che tradire ai Pisistratidi i 

suoi compagni 31 . Fauvel porta nella questione una terza 

variante. In forma estremamente sintética egli ricorda 

su un lato "Armodius et Aristogiton" e sull'altro 

"Aristodème". Tra i vari personaggi di questo nome è 

facile supporre che Fauvel, assiduo lettore di Pausania, 

abbia inteso TAristodemos di Messene 32 . Durante la 

prima guerra messenica Toracolo deifico aveva, infatti, 

ingiunto ai Messeni di offrire, per il buon esito délie 

operazioni, una vergine agli dei inferi; Aristodemos, 

superando opposizioni e contrasti, sacrifico la propria 

figlia. Un caso análogo quindi a quello prospettato 

dairipotesi dello Stackelberg ma qui, oltre i confini 

dell'Attica, nell'orizzonte piu largo della storia ellenica. 

Nessuna di queste ipotesi e oggi piu sostenibile 33 . 

Abbiamo voluto, tuttavia, richiamare l'attenzione su di 

esse, per sottolineare implícitamente, e in margine alla 

correzione di un dato di provenienza, Timmediata 

fortuna di una identificazione, quale quella del gruppo 

dei Tirannicidi, che avrà il suo idéale e sostanziale 

completamento nel 1859, ad opera di C. Friederichs 34 . 

Luigi Beschi 

Roma 

Fig. 7 Fauvel, Bibl Nat., Mss. Franc. 22877.1, f. 104 [nostro D] 

30) Sul mito cfr. P.W., III, 2, c. 2523 n. 4, s.v. Chthonia. 

31) Paus., I, 23, 1; Plin., Nat.Hist., 34, 72; Plut., RECÍ 

adoAfox-, 8. 

32) Paus., IV,7,7; 9,6 ss.; P.W., II, 1896, c. 921 s.n.7, s.v. 

Aristodemos; cfr. Legrand, in Rev. Arch., 1897, II, p. 100. 

33) Cfr. Seltman, op.cit., p. 26. 

34) C. Friederichs, "Harmodios and Aristogeiton", in Arch. Zeit., 

17, 1859, cc. 65-72. 

40

Stele of Opsiades and Polystrate, J. Paul Getty Museum 73.AA.116 (another view) 

ARISTÓTELES, THE SON OF 

OPSIADES AND POLYSTRATE 

In my article 'Two Attic Funerary Stelai in the J. Paul 

Getty Museum", Getty MJ. II, 1975, pp. 53-56, 

publishing the stele of Opsiades and Polystrate (ibidem, 

pp. 53-54, Fig. 1) I did not mention in the 

prosopographical commentary their son Aristóteles. It is 

interesting to note, that from the inscriptions recording 

the name of Aristóteles son of Opsiades of Oion, the 

family's wealth, obvious from the quality of a funerary 

monument like the one prepared for the grave of 

Polystrate, can now be connected with Attic silver 

mining. 

From IG II 2 1582, line 85, we learn that Aristóteles 

son of Opsiades of Oion, ca 342/1 BC, was the 

registrant of a mine located in the Attic déme of 

41

Amphitrope. From line 92 of the same inscription, we 

learn that Aristóteles is at the same time one of the 

lessees of the mine. Further evidence for Aristóteles' 

active engagement in mining comes from the appearance 

of his name in another "mining inscription'' 

dating in the same decade as IG II 2 1582 (Hesperia 

XIX, 299: for date ibidem, p. 200). 

Despite the fact that neither Opsiades nor his son 

Aristóteles appears in the recently published "libro 

d'oro" of the wealthy ancient Athenians (J.K. Davies, 

Athenian Propertied Families 600-200 B.C., Oxford, 

1971), there is no doubt in my mind that they belong to 

this group. 

One more mention of Aristóteles (or another son of 

Opsiades also engaged in mining) may be the one in 

another 'mining inscription* (Hesperia XIX, 261; No. 

19, line 37) where the editor reads: 

[ ]adouç£|0î'ou 

One is tempted to make a restoration here based on 

the above inscriptions, to read as follows: 

[-- 'AçioTOTE'Arçç 'Oîfir] adoul| Ofou 

Adding the son of Opsiades II, Aristóteles, to the 

stemma of the family creates no problems, but makes 

its revision necessary. The revised stemma accompanying 

this 'addendum' differs from that of the 

previous note (p. 53, note 1) only in the entries for 

Opsiades II and Aristóteles, his son and the brother of 

Hierokleia. 

Al. N. Oikonomides 

Loyola University, Chicago 

42

THE HEROIC GRAECO-ROMAN ZEUS FROM THE 

VILLA D'ESTE AND MARBURY HALL: A CULT 

IMAGE CREATED AFTER A MAJOR HELLENIS- 

TIC (PERGAMENE) PROTOTYPE 

Although damaged, the head of this masterpiece 

acquired by the J. Paul Getty Museum has never been 

broken 1 . Its strongly Hellenistic character indicates that 

this statue goes directly back to a Zeus in a temple at 

Pergamon around 160 B.C. or to a similar statue in 

precious materials, bronze, or marble created for a city 

of the East under Pergamene influence. The original of 

the statue which Clarac and Michaelis admired in 

Cheshire in its restored condition is not to be associated 

with the Capitoline Jupiter of about 80 B.C. and the 

descendents of that later cult image, for the head of the 

Jupiter on the Capitoline Hill was much less free, much 

more academic in the tradition of the Otricoli Zeus, the 

large statue in the Vatican, and, ultimately, the work of 

Bryaxis (the Younger) at the outset of the Hellenistic 

age. 

The head of the Zeus from Marbury Hall betrays an 

original as filled with emotion as those of the gods of 

the Altar of Zeus Soter which once stood at Pergamon, 

and clearly derived from the same workshop. Adolf 

Michaelis wrote of the head as having a "good-natured 

expression", but this may have been due to the older 

restoration, which must have smoothed out and 

idealized the features. Actually, all aspects of the face of 

the Marbury Zeus are rather fearsome to behold, as 

befits a monumental statue of the so-called Second 

Pergamene School. Although slightly toned down by the 

copyist and somewhat smoothed over in antiquity and 

the post-Renaissance period, the muscles follow the 

proportions of the Zeus from the principal frieze of the 

Altar of Zeus 2 . The fact that, for a late Hellenistic 

1) H.: 2.07m. Coarse-grained Greek (island ) marble. A. 

Michaelis, Ancient Marbles in Great Britain, Cambridge 1882, p. 

501, no. 1; Clarac, 111. 396D, 666A; C.C. Vermeule, Hesp. 45,1976, p. 

71, pi. 12d (inv. no. 73.AA.32). 

2) M. Bieber, The Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age, New York 1955, 

p. 115, fig. 459. 

Fig. 1 Zeus Marbury Hall 

creation or a Graeco-Roman copy, head and body are 

more than normally dependent on Pergamene models 

can be understood by comparison with the statue of 

Poseidon in the National Museum at Athens, from 

Melos, which has been identified as classicizing work of 

the middle of the second century B.C. 3 The seated god, 

presumably Chronos, watching the birth of his son Zeus 

43

Fig. 2 Head of the Zeus Marbury Hall. 

in the East Frieze of the Temple of Hekate at Lagina 

near Stratonikeia in Caria, stands very close to the 

source of the Marbury Hall Zeus, and also, from subject 

and internal associations as well as location in the late 

Hellenistic East, in a collateral ancestral relationship 

with the Westmacott Jupiter in the J. Paul Getty 

Museum 4 . 

The old restoration of the Marbury Hall Zeus with a 

thunderbolt in the right hand is correct, as can be seen 

in the smaller replica (1.05m. in total height, and 

therefore half-"lifesized"), brought to the Imperial 

Ottoman Museums in Constantinople in 1900 from the 

Vilayet of Aydin (ancient Tralleis) 5 . Gustave Mendel 

called the Zeus from Demirdji "bon travail hellénis- 

3) Bieber, op.cit., p. 160, fig. 684. 

4) Bieber, op.cit., p. 165, fig. 704; C.C. Vermeule, Getty MJ, 2, 

1975, pp. 99 ff. 

5) G. Mendel, Catalogue des sculptures, II, Rome 1966 (reprint), 

p. 248, no. 535, fig. in text. 

6) Jiff Freí has provided the inspiration for this brief note, written 

in the field at Morphou, Cyprus, and dedicated to the memory of Sir 

Charles Nuffler, my close companion of nearly a decade, of 

humanistic studies in the Greek imperial world. 

tique", after a model by the master Lysippos or his 

school at the outset of the Hellenistic age, which is 

correct in a general sense since Pergamene bodies stem 

from the restless proto-naturalism of Lysippos while the 

faces are derived from those of Skopas earlier in the 

fourth century B.C. The statue with the head 

preserved (or restored to include the left shoulder with 

characteristic cloak), in the courtyard of the Museo 

Archeologico, Florence, shows the differences between 

these two statues and the canonical, Graeco-Roman 

copies after the several variations of the Capitoline 

Jupiter 6 . In this general milieu, the Zeus once admired 

and later badly neglected during its sojourn in the 

British Isles can now be reappraised as landmark of 

Pergamene sculptural influence in the Roman imperial 

world, in Italy as well as in the Greek East. 

Cornelius C. Vermeule 

Boston 

44

ARCHAIC ETRUSCAN STONE SCULPTURE 

The J. Paul Getty Museum may justly boast of a good 

sampling of Etruscan stone (nenfro) sculpture of the 

Archaic period which, as representative of Etruscan 

stone sculpture of relatively large scale other than 

sarcophagi, is rare for any single collection in the 

United States. 1 Of the four Getty tufa sculptures, two 

are executed in-the-round (Figs. 1-2,7-9); the remaining 

two (Figs. 12, 18-19) are reliefs, and may have originally 

formed part of a single monument. 2 

1. Sphinx (Figs. 1-2) 

71.AA.292. 

Preserved height, 51 cm., max. width, 29 cm.; 

max. depth, 39 cm. 

The sickle-shaped wings, lower forelegs, 

and major portion to the rear of the body 

which includes its haunches and hind legs 

are altogether missing. There is severe 

damage to the top of the head—particularly 

at the left side—and to the lower part of 

the face itself. With the exception of the left eye, 

the surviving features of the face are 

considerably worn or chipped. 

Despite the poor state of preservation, the Getty 

sphinx nonetheless retains the stiff and formal pose, yet 

alert quality that characterizes the role of the Etruscan 

sphinx as guardian figure to a tomb. 3 In the general 

shape of its head and facial features, the Getty sphinx 

shares much in common with a sphinx in Vienna (Fig. 

3). 4 But for an important section of the sickle-shape 

wing which is still in evidence near the nape of the neck, 

by some strange coincidence, the Vienna sphinx reveals 

almost the same amount of preserved portions as does 

the Getty sphinx. The contours of the exceptionally 

large open eyes, the shape of the nose and mouth, and 

the ponderous and wig-like hair, both in shape and 

general treatment of the tresses trailing on each side of 

the head, are remarkably similar. This "hairstyle" 

contrasts sharply to those sphinxes with their hair 

1. Nenfro is a hard grey variety of tufa (tufo), a stone of volcanic 

origin which is characteristic to parts of present day Tuscany and 

Latium; see A. Hus, Recherches sur la statuaire en pierre étrusque 

archaïque (Paris, 1961), pp. 443ff. Tufa is easily cut with a sharp tool 

and was commonly used by Etruscan sculptors for architectural 

moldings, altars, sarcophagi, and other sculptures of relatively large 

scale. For a selection of Etruscan tufa sculpture in an American 

collection: cf., C. Vermeule, "An Etruscan Zoo Revisited," Bulletin of 

the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston LXII (1964), pp. 103-113. 

2. I wish to thank Dr. Jifí Freí, Curator of Classical Antiquities, for 

the opportunity to study and publish the four Etruscan stone 

sculptures. I must acknowledge the diligent research of Ms. Constance 

Okada, a student in my graduate seminar in Etruscan Art at the 

University of California, Santa Barbara, for some of the data and 

observations incorporated in this paper. 

3. See W. L. Brown, The Etruscan Lion (Oxford, 1960), p. 62; A. 

Hus, p. 398ff.; and E. Richardson, The Etruscans (Chicago, 1964), 

p. 95. 

4. Vienna, Private Collection: see Studi Etruschi IV (1930), pis. VII, 

VIII, 1 and pi. IX, 1; see also A. Hus, p. 41, no. 8 and pi. XXII, 8. 

45

Figs. 1,2: Tufa Sphinx Inv. no. 71. A A.292 

arranged in large horizontal plaits. 5 Since a portion of 

the upper brow of the Getty sphinx is missing, it is not 

possible to ascertain whether or not she possessed a 

series of large curls as does her Vienna counterpart or, 

perhaps, a filet set flush against the brow as known 

from other stone sphinxes. 6 Comparison of the rounded 

and more finished modelling of the neck area on the 

Vienna sphinx with the Getty example on which the 

neck remains broad, flat, and unworked, discloses the 

range of attention, or competency often displayed by 

sculptures that may be products of a single workshop. 

An especially close stylistic parallel to the Getty 

sphinx is the head of the well-known tufa centaur from 

Vulci, (ca. 575 B.C.), presently in the Museo di Villa 

Giulia, Rome (Fig. 4). 7 The condition of the centaur's 

head illustrates well the "daedalic" style which 

flourished at Vulci during the first quarter of the 6th 

century B.C. 8 Both the head of the Getty sphinx and of 

the Vulci centaur approximate the same shape, exhibit 

a similar swelling to the broad cheeks, with the large 

eyes, flaring nose, and wide mouth very much alike in 

form and contours. The only difference between them is 

in the treatment of the large ropes of hair falling to 

either side of the faces: on the sphinx, the direction of 

the diagonal striations is downward; on the centaur, it is 

upward. 

5. See Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston XLII (1964), 

p. 108, fig. 9. 

6. See E. Dohan, "A Xoanon from Narce," Studi Etruschi X (1936), 

pp. 9-13 and pi. I. 

7. A. Hus, p. 44f., no. 17 and pi. XXII. Although many of the 

following references to the Vulci center are given by Hus, they and a 

few others are listed here for the sake of convenience: G. Giglioli, 

Lane Etrusca (Milan, 1935), pi. LXVIII; M. Pallottino and M. 

Hurlimann, An of the Etruscans (London, 1955), pi. 38; G. 

Hanfmann, Etruskische Plastik (Stuttgart, 1956), pi. 7b; M. 

Santangelo, Musei e Monumenti Etruschi (Novara, 1960), p. 88; G. 

Mansuelli, The An of Etruria and Rome (New York, 1965), pi. 8; L. 

Banti, // Mondo degli Etruschi (Rome, 1960), pi. 32; and The 

Etruscan Cities and their Culture (Berkeley, 1973), pi. 43c 

8. A. Hus, p. 174. 

46

Fig. 3: Tufa Sphinx Vienna, Private Collection 

That the Getty sphinx and the Vienna sphinx were 

originally seated rather than standing sphinxes, is 

testified by more complete examples and, 9 to a large 

extent, by a series of winged lions carved in nenfro. Two 

lions which can be dated to the early years of the 6th 

century B.C., one in the Ashmolean Museum with its 

wings missing (Fig. 5), 10 the other from Vulci with sickle 

wings yet preserved, (Metropolitan Museum of Art, Fig. 

6), 11 show striking similarities with the Getty sphinx in 

the rendering of specific details on the body. The deeply 

modelled horizontal planes at the sides of the lion's 

body are reflected by the incised lines on the Getty 

sphinx. In addition, they possess the same broad curved 

band which, judging by the New York lion, represents 

the upper edge or border of the wing. For the decorative 

treatment of the area from the shoulder muscles down 

to the forelegs, the Ashmolean lion offers a particularly 

Fig. 4: Tufa Centaur from Vulci Rome 

close analogy to the Getty sphinx. 12 

On the evidence of the close proximity in style 

between the heads of the Getty sphinx and the Vulci 

centaur and the analogies drawn with the winged lions, 

the Getty sphinx may be a product of a Vulci workshop 

and dated to the first quarter of the 6th century B.C. 

9. Notizie degli Scavi di Antichita 1931, p. 234, fig. 4; U. Tarchi, 

L'Arte Etrusco-Romano nelVUmbria e nella Sabina I (Milan, 1936), 

pll. II, HI; A. Hus, pi. XXXVI, 34; Bull ofMFA LXII (1964), p. 108, 

fig. 9; and D. Strong, The Early Etruscans (New York, 1968), p. 61. 

10. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, inv. no. 1963.32; See Bull ofMFA 

LXII (1964), p. Ill, fig. 14. 

11. New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art. See Bull ofMFA LXII, 

(1964), p. 112, fig. 16; Bulletin of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, 

October, 1960, p. 45; and E. Richardson, pi. XVII. 

12. Note the same area on the winged lion in Boston, inv. no. 61.131: 

Bull ofMFA XLII (1964), p. 112, fig. 15. 

47

Fig. 5: Tufa Winged Lion Oxford Fig. 6: Tufa Winged Lion New York 

Figs. 7,8: Tufa Kore (Sphinx ) Inv. no. L.75.AA.27 

48

Fig. 9: Tufa Kore 

Fig. 10: Tufa Sphinx Copenhagen 

2. "Kore" (Sphinx Figs. 7-9) 

75.AA.27 Anonymous loan. 

Preserved height, 56 cm.; max. width, 38 cm.; 

max. depth, 23 cm. 

Head and armless torso remains. 

Considerably worn and damaged surface 

particularly at the top of the head, the forehead, 

and the left side of the face. 

Bibliography: Catalogue, Etruscan Art. 

Otis Art Institute of Los Angeles County, 

1963, p. 12; M. Del Chiaro, Etruscan Art 

from West Coast Collections, Santa Barbara, 

1967, no. 13. 

That the torso represents a female rather than a male 

is implicit from the tunic (the neckline is faintly visible) 

and the character of the coiffure with its long tresses, 

three to each side of the face, falling loosely across the 

shoulder and down the front of the body. At the back of 

the head, the hair, which is neatly arranged in nine long 

parallel tresses with striations that create an overall 

herringbone pattern, terminates in a horizontal undulating 

edge near the shoulder blades. The hair is swept 

back in a bold wave over the ears, and thereby imparts 

a greater prominence to the ears. "Kore" may presently 

serve to identify the type of the Malibu sculpture but, in 

view of the incomplete nature of the sculpture, one 

cannot altogether discount the possibility that it, too, 

like the preceding Getty sculpture, may represent a 

sphinx. 

The general shape of the head, the full jaw, and the 

high "undaedalic"' brow, strongly recall a stone sphinx 

in Copenhagen (Fig. 10). 13 Like the Getty kore, it also 

possesses a smallish tight-lipped mouth with upturned 

corners, narrow, widely spaced almond-shaped eyes 

rendered with a nearly horizontal lower edge, and a 

13. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek: A. Boethius et al, Etruscan 

Culture, Land and People (New York, 1962), figs. 350-352. 

49

Fig. 11: Tufa Frieze Block Inv. no. 71.AA.267 

gracefully arched "eyelid". However, the hair style of 

the Copenhagen sphinx differs significantly from that of 

the Getty kore in its general character and details. At 

the damaged brow of the Getty kore, there is still visible 

the trailing ends of the fringe or bangs (hair combed 

down onto the forehead) a hair style fashionable for 

korai and/or sphinxes from a different artistic atmosphere 

than Vulci, namely, Chiusi. 14 There, the bangs, 

which are most often corkscrew or peppercorn in shape, 

normally terminate in a straight rather than a serrated 

line. A terracotta head (antefix) in Copenhagen from 

Praeneste (Southern Etruruia) offers a striking parallel 

to the Malibu head for the treatment of its bangs. 15 But 

the Vulcian features are stronger and it seems that the 

Malibu Kore is best attributed to a sculptor from Vulci 

active to about the middle of the 6th century B.C. 

3. Frieze with Sphinx and Grazing Stag (Fig. 11) 

71.AA.267 

Preserved length, 77 cm.; height, 34 cm.; 

width, 18 cm., height of frieze, 18 cm. 

Bibliography: Sotheby, Dec. 1, 1969, no. 154. 

At the far left of the frieze (height, 18 cm.), there is 

carved a sphinx walking to the left and looking straight 

ahead, its head in profile to the left, its upheld tail 

curled echoing the turn of the sickle-shaped wings. 

Directly behind the sphinx, a stag to left with lowered 

head and heavy but graceful antlers, grazes nonchalantly. 

Comparable animals certainly derived from 

Greek prototypes are not difficult to find in Etruscan 

art as can be readily seen in the Etruscan imitations of 

Corinthian pottery from the early 6th c. B.C., that is, 

Etrusco-Corinthian. 16 More closely related to relief 

sculpture, however, are a distinctive series of nenfro 

sculpture which, for lack of a better identification, have 

been called tomb "doors" or "door slabs." Perhaps the 

designation, "lastroni tarquiniese" is more appropriate 

14. From Chiusi: A. Hus, pi. XXXVI, 34, G. Giglioli, pi. LXXVII, 5, 

and D. Strong, p. 61; Notizie degli Scavi di Antichita, 1931, p. 234f., 

figs. 4 and 5, and pi. Ill; A. Hus, pis. XXX, 4 and 5, XXXIII, 21-25, 

and XXXV, 33. From Cortona but attributable to the "Chiusine" 

School: Studi Etruschi XX (1948-49), pi. 5, fig. 1; M. Pallottino and 

M. Hurlimann, pi. 37; and A. Hus, pi. XXXIII, 25; and G. Mansuelli 

p. 101. 

15. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek: see A. Boethius et al, fig 

403. 

16. For some recent studies of Etrusco-Corinthian: see G. Colonna, 

"II Ciclo etrusco-corinzio dei Rosoni," Studi Etruschi XXIX (1961), 

pp. 47-88 and pis. XII-XXIV; G. Colonna, "La cerámica etruscocorinzia 

e la problemática storica deirorientalizzante recente in 

Etruria, "Archeologia Classica 13 (1961), pp. 9-24. J. Szilágyi, "Italo- 

Corinthica," Studi Etruschi XXVI (1958), pp. 273-287 and pis. 

VI-VIII; D. Amyx, "Some Etrusco-Corinthian Vase-Painters," Studi 

in onore di Luisa Banti (Rome, 1965), pp. 1-14 and pis. I-V; J. 

Szilágyi, "Remarques sur les vases Etrusco-Corinthiens de l'Exposition 

Etrusque de Vienne," Archeologia Classica 20 (1968), pp. 1-23 

and pi. I-XIV; F. Zevi, "Nuovi vasi del Pittore délia Sfmge Barbuta," 

Studi Etruschi XXXVII (1969), pp. 39-58 and pis. XIV-XXVI; J. 

Szilágyi, "La fabbriche cerámica Etrusco-Corinzia a Tarquinia," 

Studi Etruschi XL (1972), pp. 19-71 and pis. I-X; J. Szilágyi, "The St. 

Louis Painter," Acta Classica Universitatis Sdentiarum Debreceniensis. 

X-XI (1974-75), pp. 5-14; and E. Paola Porten Palange, "Olpe 

Etrusco-Corinzia in una collezione privata ticinese," Quaderni ticinesi 

di numismática e antichita classiche V (1976), pp. 7-25. 

50

Fig. 14: Bronze Chariot Relief Munich, fur Antike Kunst 

Fig. 12: Tufa Relief Tarquinia, Museo Nazionale 

Fig. 15: Incised Bucchero Kantharos Rome, Museo di Villa Giulia 

Fig. 16: Incised Bucchero Amphora Rome, Museo di Villa Giulia 

in view of their Tarquinian provenance, sepulchral 

association, and bulky character. 17 There is general 

agreement that these decoratively rich tufa reliefs date 

Fig. 13: Tufa Reliefs Tarquinia, Museo Nazionale 

17. Tomb doors or tomb slabs, and the like, since they may have been 

used to seal the doorways and/or upper open areas of Tarquinian 

tombs: see Notizie degli di Antichita 1930, pp. 167 ff., 1931, pp. 

226ff., and 1952, pp. 224ff.; A. Akerstrom, Studien über die 

etruskischen Gràber (Oxford, 1934); M. Pallottino in Monumenti 

Antichi della Accademia di Lincei 36 (1937), pp. 197ff.; and P. Riis, 

Tyrrhenika (Copenhagen, 1945), p. 66f. We may look forward to a 

study by G. Colonna, / lastroni di pietra arcaici di tipo tarquiniese to 

be published in a forthcoming number of Studi e Matériau di 

Etruscologia e Antichita Italiche, University of Rome. 

51

Fig. 17: Tufa Frieze Block Inv. no. 71.AA.337 

predominantly to the first half of the 6th century B.C. 18 

Compared to the Getty reliefs, their carving is more flat, 

almost "cut-outs", with a profuse use of incision for 

details. There are many Tarquinian "door" reliefs with 

the same animals in the Getty frieze found walking 

sphinx and grazing stag (see Figs. 12-13). 19 

A provocative detail located at the extreme right of 

the frieze, the human leg, has yet to be considered. To 

judge by the height and proportion of the leg within the 

frieze, it could not possibly be that of a standing or 

striding figure. Nor, on the evidence of the rounded 

knee which appears above the midpoint of the frieze, 

could it be taken for the bent knee of a running figure 

in the Knielauf position which frequently appears on 

Tarquinian nenfro reliefs (see Fig. 12). 20 Similarly, it 

does not seem tenable that the bent leg belongs to a 

curious breed of squatting figure, either winged-human 

or gorgon, depicted with torso in strict frontal view, 

arms held upwards or out to the sides, and head set 

front ally or in profile to the right or the left (see Figs. 

13-14). 21 Little space would have remained within the 

Getty frieze for the upper body of such squatting 

figures. 

A better or more plausiable explanation may be 

found for the "dangling" human leg on the Getty relief 

through a consideration of an astonishing theme in 

Etruscan art, in wall painting, on bronzes, and on 

painted or incised vases, where a lion or feline 

("panther" or "leopard", see infra, note 24) devours 

some part of human anatomy, a head, 22 or more often, a 

18. W.L. Brown, p. 51; M. Pallottino and M. Hurlimann, p. 138; and 

L. Banti, Cities, p. 240. 

19. See M. Santangelo, pp. 150-151; M. Pallottino and M. 

Hurlimann, pi. 34; L. Banti, // Mondo degli Etruschi pi. 40 below, 

and Etruscan Cities, pi. 38b. From Vulci rather than Tarquinii, and a 

cippus rather than "door" slab, there appears a walking sphinx: see 

Banti, Etruscan Cities, respectively pi. 39 and pi. 43b. Grazing stags 

on a terracotta plaque from Poggio Buco near Vulci and now in 

Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek: Banti, Etruscan Cities, 

respectively pi. 38 above and pi. 54a. 

20. M. Santangelo, p. 150; G. Giglioli, pi. LXXI, 2; M. Pallottino and 

M. Hurlimann, pi. 34. 

21. M. Santangelo, p. 151; G. Giglioli, pi. LXXIX,I,LXXXVII, 3. M. 

Pallottino and M. Hurlimann, pi. 51. 

22. See M. Pallottino and M. Hurlimann, pi. 71 and W.L. Brown, pi. 

XLII. 

52

Fig. 19: Tufa Leopard Boston, Museum of Fine Arts 

Considerable damage to the relief at the broken 

and jagged left-hand side of the block. The 

left ear of the leopard is missing. 

Bibliography: Sotheby, Dec. 1, 1969 no. 154 

Fig. 18: Tufa Frieze Block (End of block) 

leg (see Figs. 15-16). 23 A close look at the leg on the 

Getty relief discloses that directly above and slightly to 

the right of the rounded knee, there is another rounded 

form which may be the extant portion of an animal's 

muzzle. Unfortunately, the nenfro block could not have 

been broken off at a more crucial point! Nevertheless, 

the presence of human leg can now be understood and 

thereby adds greater significance to the frieze since it 

marks the only example of the theme known to me in 

Etruscan stone sculpture. 

The second nenfro relief retains a seated animal and, 

at its right end serving as a finial or terminating 

element, the protome of a leopard (or panther) 24 

modelled in exceptionally high relief (Fig. 18-19). 

4. Frieze with Seated-Animal (Griffin) and Leopard's 

Head (Figs. 17-18) 

71.AA.337 

Preserved length, 57 cm.; height, 36 cm.; max. 

width, 18 cm. Height of frieze, 18 cm. 

To judge by the height of the frieze (18 cm.), which 

equals that of the relief previously discussed, and the 

general character of the poorly preserved animal 

(gaping lion or griffin) yet visible, the two sculptured 

tufa blocks must have served to decorate one large 

monument. Since the animal seated to the left within 

the frieze is damaged, identification poses a problem. 

Can it be a lion with gaping jaw, whose ruff is suggested 

by a faint line which runs vertically down the side of the 

head It must be remembered, however, that a ruff is 

sometimes present on the heads of griffins. 25 If the 

gaping beak-like character to the head is not simply a 

coincidence of breakage, the animal may be safely 

23. A. Rumpf, Die Wandmalereien in Veii (Potsdam, 1917), p. 44; G. 

Giglioli, "Un 'ánfora di bronzo inédita délia necropoli di Orvieto," 

StudiEtruschilV (1930), pp. 103-125 and pis. XII-XIII; Notizie degli 

Scavi di Antichita 1928, p. 99; W.L. Brown, pi. 18; F. Johansen, 

Reliefs en Bronze d'Etrurie (Copenhagen, 1971), pi. XVIII; M. 

Bonamici, I Buccheri con Figurazioni Graffite (Florence, 1974), 

assorted plates. Bonamici believes Veii to be the center for bucchero 

incised with animals devouring human limbs (p. 156). See also P. 

Bocci, "Motivi etruschi sui bronzi atestini ed alpini," Studi in onore 

di Luisa Banti (Rome, 1965), pp. 69-79 and pi. XVII in which the 

author recognizes additional Etruscan centers for the remarkable 

iconography that finds its way into Etruria during the orientalizing 

period. 

24. Such feline animals are generally identified as "panthers" or 

"leopards": see W.L. Brown, Appendix II, pp. 170ff. who suggests 

that such animals are better regarded as leopards. "Panther" and 

"leopard" are of course synonomous. 

25. See Mémoires of the American Academy in Rome V (1925), pi. 

31. 

53

assumed to be a griffin. Analogies for the gaping griffin 

can be readily found in Etruria; note for example, the 

griffin-head adjuncts to bronze cauldrons, 26 or the 

seated and walking griffins which appear on terracotta 

or tufa reliefs. 27 

For the head of the leopard which approximates 

sculpture in-the-round (Fig. 18), two especially close 

parallels in nenfro sculpture may be cited: two reclining 

leopards (most probably from Vulci) in Boston (e.g., 

Fig. 19). 28 Relatively flat in cross-section yet carved in 

the round, the Boston felines were doubtlessly sepulchral 

animals which served as guardian figures to an 

Etruscan tomb during the second quarter of the 6th 

century B.C. 29 Like the Getty leopard, one of the Boston 

felines holds its head down close against the body, and 

all three heads share large staring eyes, small ears set 

close against the head, and a wrinkled snarling nose 

which on the Getty leopard is less conspicuous due to its 

heavily worn surface. The remarkable discoveries at 

Poggio Civitate (Murlo, near Siena) include examples of 

terracotta leopard ("pantera") heads which share many 

features in common with the three foregoing heads. 30 At 

the same site, a terracotta griffin head with gaping 

mouth was unearthed, which, together with the 

terracotta leopard heads, must date to the beginning of 

the 6th century B.C. 31 

From the close stylistic parallels that exist between 

the two Getty nenfro frieze blocks and the Tarquinian 

"door" reliefs, the three-dimensional Boston sepulchral 

leopards, and Etrusco-Corinthian and bucchero pottery, 

etc., a date for the Getty reliefs within the first half of 

the 6th century B.C. is most probable. And, like the 

Getty sphinx and "kore", the place of manufacture was 

southern Etruria, most likely at Vulci. 32 

Mario A. Del Chiaro 

University of California, 

Santa Barbara 

26. Mémoires 29 and 31; M. Pallottino and M. Hurlimann, pi. 30; 

and A. Boethius et al, pi. 36. 

27. On a terracotta plaque: see L. Banti, II Mondo degli Etruschi pi. 

38 and Etruscan Cities pi. 54a. On nenfro reliefs: see M. Pallottino 

and M. Hurlimann, pi. 34; and E. Richardson, pi. XVIIIb. 

28. Boston, Museum of Fine Arts, inv. nos. 61.130 and 63.2757: see 

Bull ofMFA XLII (1964), p. 102f., figs. 1-4, p. 105, fig. 6. 

29. Greek, Etruscan and Roman Art (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), 

rev. éd., 1963. p. 190, 194, no. 181. 

30. K. Philips Jr. in Notizie degli Scavi di Antichita 1966, p. 17., figs. 

20-21. 

31. American Journal of Archaeology 73 (1969), pi. 80, fig. 4. 

32. A re-examination of the Getty Etruscan stone sculptures has 

convinced me that the tufa, in its texture and particularly in its 

bluish-grey color, is of the variety common to the Vulci area. 

54

CAESAR 

Until recently, no positively identified sculptural 

portraits of Gaius Julius Caesar were extant in 

America's collections 1 . Now the J. Paul Getty Museum 

houses two images of the great dictator. In 1973, the 

Museum acquired Caesar Getty 2 and in 1975 Caesar 

Bliicher 3 . Their presence in Malibu provides an 

opportunity for a review of the whole of Caesarian 

iconography 4 . 

A natural starting point for this reappraisal is with 

the coins bearing Caesar's profile. Though specialists in 

ancient numismatics have established a sound classification 

for the coins of Caesar 5 , a fresh look at them 

from the art-historical rather than numismatic point of 

view may add some new evidence. Also, a closer 

comparison of the images on coins with those on gems 

and sculptures may shed new light on all the depictions 

of the emperor. 

Although the most exact rendering of the actual 

features of Caesar should be found in representations of 

the man made during his lifetime, this is not always so. 

On the coin struck in 48/7 B.C. in Nicomedia 6 , a rather 

generalized face is shown, much more youthful than 

Caesar actually was at this date, (he was 52 or 53). 

Another coin, struck in 46 B.C. in Corinth 7 exhibits 

some more individualized features, but it has little in 

common with later, better documented images. The 

short and straight hair for example, is completely 

different from the styles found on later coins. A parallel 

to the Nicomedia mint is to be found in the sculptured 

portrait of the youngish Caesar identified by V. H. 

Poulsen 8 and known in two copies, Chiaramonti 9 and 

Milles 10 . Here the expressive face bears none of the 

unmistakable advances of old age. However, these two 

copies present some slight problems. Both are works of 

the Augustan period, but they may reproduce an earlier 

original, for the style points to pre-Augustan times. 

Nevertheless, the possibility that we face replicas of a 

posthumous creation, or even a heavily edited version of 

an earlier work, cannot be excluded 11 . 

The denarii struck by Mettius in 44 B.C. 12 provide the 

best image of Caesar in his lifetime, and the coins are 

unanimously recognized as such. But is it really Caesar 

on the face of the Mettius denarii Yes, and no. Age 

and past labors deeply mark his face, with the web of 

wrinkles on his neck witness to his active life. There is a 

great deal of the portrait in this image, though some 

details contradict the view of Caesar reported by ancient 

sources. Ancient writers attest to Caesar's pleasure at 

the privilege granted to him of wearing the laurel 

wreath, for it hid his baldness. His vanity must have 

been equally soothed with his image on the Mettius 

denarius, for a mop of hair snakes over his pate like a 

thick and ill-fitting toupee. There is nothing of the 

individual in this detail since this same hair scheme 

appears on the imaginary portrait of the legendary king 

Ancus Marcius, on a coin struck in 59 B.C. 13 Moreover, 

when designing the hair the artist seems to have 

disregarded the odd shape of Caesar's skull, a peculiar 

detail which the only "naturalistic" portrait 14 shows to 

be idiosyncratic. This modification of the skull may be 

however, a purely numismatic convention, one which 

maintained the traditional balance between the head 

The first version of this note was presented at "Ancient Coins", a 

weekend conference, 18, 19, October 1975, organized by the UCLA 

Extension and Numismatic Fine Arts, Encino. 

Johansen: Flemming S. Johansen, Antichi ritratti di Gaio Giulio 

Cesare nella scultura, Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 4, 1967, 

7-68, pll. 1-27. 

Vollenweider: Marie-Louise Vollenweider, Die Portratgemmen der 

rômischen Republik (1972, 1974) 

1. The beautiful Stroganoff head in New York (B. Schweitzer, Die 

Bildniskunst der rômischen Republik 38, figs. 20, 80, 84) is not 

Caesar; the heads in Berkeley (below note 49); Toledo and one once 

in Worcester (below note 50) are not ancient. 

2. See below note 42. 


4. See Johansen. 

5. For bibliography see Vollenweider 243, sqq., especially the 

important contributions by A. Alfôldi. 

6. Johansen 8, fig. 1, p. 10; Vollenweider pi. 75.3. 

7. Johansen 12, fig. 2, p. 10; see also note 23 below. 

8. See Johansen 21. 

9. Johansen 40 sq., pi. 22. 

10. Johansen 41, pi. 23; non vidi; the skull seems to be irregular in a 

way comparable to the head from Tusculum. 

11. An attempt to date the fragmentary intaglio in the Cabinet des 

Médailles (below note 32) in Caesar's lifetime (Vollenweider 120 note 

2) does not seem entirely convincing. 

12. Vollenweider pll. 75.5, 79, 80.9-10, 84.12, 85.7.9.14. 

13. Observed by Vollenweider 121; see Vollenweider pi. 78.7. 

14. From Tusculum, see below note 24. 

55

56 

1. Caesar Blücher. J. Paul Getty Museum

and the circular edge of the coin. 

This denarius of Mettius was a numismatic success 

and it was used as the standard for all other issues of 

Caesar from the critical year 44 B.C. onwards 15 . This 

includes the poor effigies on the reverse of Octavian's 

coins 16 , as well as the pieces struck by Anthony in 

Gaul 17 , where Caesar's features are slightly modified to 

the striking looks of the Triumvir. 

The general acceptance of the appearance of Caesar 

as codified by the Mettius denarii extends beyond 

numismatics. Simplified or embellished, most often with 

an added left hand, the image of Caesar is found on 

numerous intaglios and mass-produced glass pastes 18 . 

Several names 19 had been proposed for this oft-repeated 

type until Marie Vollenweider convincingly demonstrated 

that only Caesar could have claimed such 

widespread popularity. Some of them were found in 

military camps. It seems probable that they belonged to 

the legionnaires faithful to their murdered leader. Two 

masterpieces of engraved gems reveal the same pose, 

but the head in both is much closer to sculptured 

portraits than to the stereo-typed numismatic type. The 

portraits of Caesar on the amethyst in New York 21 and 

on the cornelian in Florence 22 are far more life-like than 

ones on the coins and the glass pastes, and the artistic 

quality indeed is incomparably better. Both, but 

particularly the Florentine stone, share with the Mettius 

coin the deep wrinkles on the neck. On the other hand, 

both, but more so the New York gem, make no pretense 

at flattery in showing his bald head with its slightly flat 

contour. Caesar's age stands revealed in a much harsher 

light in these two gems, but the face still radiates strong 

will, superior intellect, in a word, greatness. This is how 

the man must have appeared to his time 23 . 

Among the sculptural portraits there exists only one 

which may go back to the very last year of Caesar's life, 

the head from Tusculum Castello d'Ague 24 , now in 

Museum of Antiquities in Turin. It is the least idealized 

portrait of the man. Two peculiar features offer nothing 

particularly attractive or glorious: the skull is flat on 

top, though two bulges break the surface, one on the 

left side of the crown, and the other on his right 

forehead. He still has some hair but it is clearly fast 

receding. As on the gem portraits the wrinkled neck 

registers, as is fitting for such an old campaigner, the 

years spent in campaigns in burning sun and freezing 

cold. This is the same idiosyncratic feature recorded on 

Mettius' coin. In other respects as well, the sculptured 

portrait agrees with the numismatic one, but the 

sculpture surpasses the official stylization of the coins, 

despite the more open revelation of age and deformities. 

The Caesar portrayed here is much more the successful 

general than the annointed ruler and it is understandable 

that this image found limited fortune in Imperial 

times. Though no exact replicas of the Tusculum type 

are extant, two poorly preserved variants which seem to 

go back to the same prototype 25 possess the peculiar 

head shape and the deeply wrinkled neck. 

Although literary sources report that many statues 

were erected for Caesar during his lifetime 26 , it is 

impossible to identify the prototype of the Tusculum 

head and its variants with any of these. All three are 

later copies, the principal example from the Augustan 

period, and the others from a slightly later date. 

Appianus reports, that at Caesar's funeral, a wax 

image of the murdered dictator was displayed close to 

the bier 27 . This brings to mind the traditional practice 

of the Roman aristocracy; the manufacture of a death 

mask made to preserve the face of the deceased. It was 

to serve as a model for sculptural portraits and to stand 

among the ancestral images. Many portraits of 

venerable republicans were made in this way, although 

it is clear that in the process the image developed into 

more than a purely mechanical reproduction of the 

dead man. Indeed, the fades hippocratica, the drawn 

15. Vollenweider pll. 78.2.3.4, 80.6.7, 81.4, 83.7, 84.2.4.11, 85.12 

(44 B.C.); 80.3-5, 83.8-9, 84.6 (43 B.C.); 84.10 (42/1 B.C.). 

16. Vollenweider pi. 85.6. 

17. Vollenweider pi. 85.13. 

18. Vollenweider pll. 80.8.12, 81.2.7-10.12, 82.1-12, 83.1-3, 84.1.3. 

5.7, 85.1.2.4, perhaps also 86 (glass pastes); 84.9 (Cornelian); 86.6 

(clay impression). 

19. Johansen 12 ("a poet, Antisthenes, Aristotle, or Ennius"); see 

especially K. Kraft, Jb. fur Numismatik und Geldgeschichte 13, 

1963, 7 sqq., who successfully confused not only this issue but the 

whole iconography of Plato, Zeno, Aristotle and Menander. 

20. Ant. Kunst 3, 1960, 81 sqq., Gymnasium 71, 1964, 508 sqq. 

21. Vollenweider pll. 77, 78.1; identified as Caesar already in 1956 

by G. Richter (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Catalogue of 

Engraved Gems, no. 469). 

22. Vollenweider pi. 80, 1,2,11. 

53. Some other glyptic images may be mentioned here. A ring in the 

Louvre (Johansen 22 fig. 8, p. 13: Augustan; Vollenweider pi. 

81.1-5), may be close to the prototype of the pastes (note 18 above). 

The gilded bezel of an iron ring in the British Museum (Vollenweider 

pi. 85.10) and its replica, a paste in Vienna (Johansen 23 fig 9, 

Vollenweider pi. 85.11) give a simplified image comparable to the 

coin minted in Corinth (above note 7). The amethyst in Syracuse 

(Johansen 21, fig. 7, Vollenweider pi. 85.5.11) may not be ancient 

(Johansen 13). The Blatner Coll. cornelian (Johansen 19 fig. 6, 

Vollenweider pi. 89.4-6.11) seems to be retouched, especially the eye 

may be enlarged; Caesar The splendid chalcedony, private coll. 

(Vollenweider pi. 76) can hardly be Caesar. For the amethyst Pauvert 

de la Chapelle Coll. in the Cabinet des Médailles, see below note 32. 

24. Johansen 23 sq., pi. 16; recognized as a portrait from Caesar's 

lifetime by E. Simon, Arch. Anz. 1952,134. 

25. Johansen 24, describes rightly as variants of the same prototype: 

1. Woburn Abbey, 35 sq., pi. 17 (non vidi). 

2. Florence, Palazzo già Antinori, 36, pi. 18 (non vidí). The head 

in Munich, Residenz (36 sq., pi. 19) must go back to the same 

prototype; it is indisputedly ancient, but extensively cleaned and 

re-cut. 

26. Johansen 13 sqq. 

27. de bello civili II 147, Johansen 17. 

57

58 

2. Caesar Getty

3-4 Caesar Getty 

look with which death's grip marks the face, was only 

partially maintained in artistic elaboration. While in 

fact rigor mortis marks the entire face, in the sculptured 

portraits this remains only in the prominent cheekbones, 

sunken cheeks, and to a lesser degree, in the 

mouth which is often pulled down at the corners. The 

eyes, on the other hand, are rendered by the standard 

schema of the classical tradition, with no trace of a dead 

man's protruding eyelids or the general deformation of 

the orbital. The best illustration of this procedure is the 

powerful portrait of the Republican in Dresden 28 , aptly 

compared by Schweizer to the mortuary masks of 

Canova and Moltke 29 . 

Among the extant types of Caesar, there is one 

portrait which fits well into this category, the portrait of 

Camposanto 30 and its replicas 31 . The hollow cheeks, 

marked nasal-labial line and the drooping skin around 

the corners of the mouth reflect unequivocally the 

28. B. Schweitzer, Die Bildniskunst der romischen Republik, 114ff, 

figs. 175, 176 and figs. 11-14. 

29. cf. E. Buschor, Das Portrat (1960) 25 sqq: a confrontation of 

the death mask of Schiller with his sculpted portrait and of the 

"life" mask of Goethe with his painted portrait reveal the limits of 

the mechanical cast and the creative superiority of the artist in 

rendering the individual. 

30. Johansen 22 proposes another chronology; 28 sq., pi. 7. 

31. 1. Pitti, Johansen 29 sq., pi. 7. 

2. Leiden, Johansen 30, pi. 8; despite the poor preservation an 

excellent, perhaps the best replica. Caspar Kern kindly provided 

the information that there is no other evidence for Nijmegen as 

the alleged provenance than the circumstance that some objects 

from the same collection came from this site. Some other items 

in that collection originated from Grosseto, a much more 

suitable provenance for this portrait. 

3. Capitoline Mus., Magazino, Johansen 31, pi. 9; very good 

replica. 

4. Terme, Johansen 31, pi. 10; identical with ex-Villa Mattei 

(Johansen 31 sq., pi. 13) as demonstrated by U. Jantzen, RM 

75, 1968, 170 sqq. 

5. Rieti, Palmegiani coll., Johansen 32, pi. 12 (non vidi), Johansen 

23: "di scarsa importanza" 

6. Nottingham, Johansen 33, pi. 14 (ravaged, non vidi). 

7. Mus. Torlonia, Johansen 39 sq., pi. 21. The apparent differences 

result from modern reworking (as stated already by J. Sieveking, 

B.Ph.W, 1936,413). 

The head in Leningrad, Johansen 31 sq., pi. 11, Voíinina, Le 

portrait Romain (Musée de l'Ermitage), (1974), 137 sq., no. 3, is not 

ancient, even if repaired and repolished. I was able to examine the 

piece in 1956; the same conclusion was reached later by R. Bianchi- 

Bandinelli who communicated it to the authorities of the Hermitage. 

The head Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 565, Johansen 33 pi. 15.0 (id. 23, 

29 "variante"), does not represent Caesar; broken from a relief 

59

6. "Caesar" Florence, Museo archeologico 

funerary mask. The artistic interpretation of the mask 

effect in this case applies to more than just the 

classically inspired eyes. Compared to the likenesses of 

Caesar made in his lifetime, the whole face here seems 

spiritualized and ennobled: the peculiar skull has been 

gently rounded off, the wrinkles on the neck smoothed, 

and the hair has been given the fullness of the 

prevailing Augustan fashion. Even if the imprint of 

death has been softened, the basis must have been the 

funerary mask, for in the fragmentary amethyst in the 

Cabinet des Médailles 32 , which must have also derived 

from the same original as the Camposanto type, the 

fades hippocratica is even more apparent. The head of 

Caesar from Thasos 33 , crowned with head raised 

heavenwards in the tradition of Hellenistic rulers, stems 

from the same prototype. Caesar Blücher 34 (fig.l), which 

originally belonged to a statue capite velato, reveals an 

5. Caesar Getty 

idealization of the features while softening the death 

mask appearance. It is not an intimate portrait, it needs 

to be viewed from some distance. The outstanding 

32. Johansen 7, fig. 5 (p. 12: reproduction of the type Chiaramonti); 

Vollenweider pi. 75.1-24 (see above note 11). 

33. Johansen 43, pi. 27. 

34. 75.AA.46, Pentelic marble, H. 36.5 cm (fig. 1). 

L. Curtius, R. Boehringer. Eine Freudesgabe (1957), 153 sqq. 

M. Borda, Gaio Giulio Cesare (1957), 58. 

R. Herbig, Kôlner Jb. für Vor-und Frühgeschichte 4, 1959, 7 sqq. 

R. Herbig, Gymnasium 72, 1965, 167 sqq. 

Recent Acquisitions of Antiquities, J. Paul Getty Museum, June 1 - 

Sept. 3, 1969, no. 7. 

While the preceding publications accept the identification with 

Caesar, the following deny it: 

V.H. Poulsen, Les portraits Romains I (1962), 11. 

Johansen (1967) 54, no. 10. 

U. Jantzen, RM 15, 1968, 172. 

60

7-8 "Caesar" Budapest, Museum of Fine Arts 

quality of the carving makes it probable that the slightly 

under life-size statue could have been part of an official 

lararium or other interior shrine, perhaps intended to 

represent him as Pontifex Maximus. On top of the head 

L. Curtius discusses two protruding puntelli with a 

small circular indentation in the middle, which served 

for the three-point technique of copying, eloquent 

evidence that the face reproduces a known type. 

The Camposanto type is also the basis of the Caesar 

Chiaramonti 35 , known in four replicas 36 of which the 

name piece is far superior, despite its restorations. The 

emotive and spiritual qualities of the man, emphasized 

already in the Camposanto type are here developed 

further to show the charisma of an inspired hero who 

could lead a whole empire by the balanced application 

of strength and wisdom: no more the dictator, but 

Divus lulius. This portrait must have been created as an 

instrument of Augustan propaganda, with a close 

parallel in Virgil's allusions to Caesar and surely serving 

to embody the values Augustus wanted attributed to 

himself. 

A fragmentary statue in Copenhagen 37 , which seems 

to fall in between the last two types illustrates how the 

Chiaramonti type stems from the Camposanto type. 

While the larger than life-size quality is already present, 

there still remains much of the funerary mask. 

With the development of the empire the Chiarmonti 

Caesar may have proved inadequate to embody the 

divine founder of the Empire. A more inspired, 

superhuman image was necessary to justify the 

pretensions of a Nero or a Domitian. Thus, it is likely 

that in the second half of the century the prototype of 

Caesar Contarini 38 was created, if not in the Eastern 

35. Johansen, 21, dates the original in the last year of Caesar's life, 

comparing the denarii of Mettius. 

36. 1. Vatican, ex-Chiaramonti, Johansen 25 sq., pi. 1. 

2. Turin, Johansen 26, pi. 2. 

3. Vienna, Johansen 27, pi. 3. 

4. Parma, Johansen 27, pi. 4, (non vidi) 

37. Johansen 28, pi. 5A and 5B. 

38. Johansen 42, pi. 25. 

61

9. "Caesar" Budapest, Museum of Fine Arts 

Mediterranean, then surely in the environs of the 

strongest Hellenistic tradition. Caesar here is personified 

as Dominius and Deus, an image comparable to the 

followers of the great Alexander, or to such as the ruler 

in Museo délie Terme. 

The Caesar Contarini presents such a flamboyant 

personality that its authenticity has been questioned. 

The modest variant in Sparta 39 is welcome proof not 

only of its authenticity, but of the limitations of 

archaeologists. 

The Caesar Contarini raises the man to the level of 

the gods: the next step was to present him in colossal 

scale. Ironically, this was done under the modest 

Trajan; Caesar Farnese 40 possibly stood in Trajan's 

forum alongside several other over life-size heads 41 . The 

features of the great dictator in this portrait go back to 

39. Recognised as a variant by Johansen 24, ib. 42, pi. 26. 

40. Johansen 37, pi. 20 A.B.; Johansen dates the colossal head to 

the 17th century, but the surface and the workmanship are ancient. 

41. I owe this suggestion to Paul Zanker. 

42. 73.AA.46; marble with large crystals, cleaned with acid; behind 

the ears, intentionally not finished; bach flut. H. 53.5 cm. 

43. Johansen 14, fig. 3. 

44. H.P. von Blanckenhagen Jd I. 53, 1944, 45 sqq. 

45. Johansen 53-50, 52-58 lists many examples (including the 

ex-Luxburg head). 

46. Johansen 38, pi. 20 C.D. 

47. Museo archeologico, no inv. no.; I owe the photograph to G. 

Maetzke. 

48. Sala a Croce Greca, Johansen 41, pi. 24 A.B. (considered as 

ancient). 

49. Re-cut and restored, but not ancient; Johansen 44, pi. 24 C.D. 

(considered as ancient, a variant of the head in the Vatican, Sala a 

Croce Greca). 

50. e.g. the head in Toledo, Johansen 53, no. 2 ("Basel Art 

Market") 57, no. 47 ("Toledo"), or the head once exhibited in 

Worcester, Johansen 58, no. 53. 

51. Szépmüveszéti Muzeum, 69.4A; I owe the photographs to 

J.Gy.Szilagyi. 

52. Rochester (NY), Memorial Art Gallery, cf.EG.Suhr, AJA 59 

(1955), 319 sqq,pl.94.1-2. 

the Camposanto or Chiaramonti prototypes. Caesar's 

baldness is emphasized more than in earlier portraits, 

but this individual touch merely enhances the divine 

nature of the otherwise detached Olympian appearance, 

and to some extent Trajan's features were amalgamated 

into the basic scaffold of Caesar's face. This aspect is 

still more striking in Caesar Getty 42 , (fig. 2-5), originally 

inserted into a togatus statue. The kinship between 

Caesar and Trajan is more apparent here, for the 

idiosyncratic facial traits have been blurred in favor of a 

more general, impersonal representation. This Caesar 

comes allegedly from Asia Minor and a comparison 

with the Casesar Farnese brings out clearly the 

differences between the style of Italy and the prevailing 

Hellenistic tradition of the Eastern Mediterranean. 

Nevertheless, both Trajanic Caesars correspond perfectly 

to the profile of the dictator on a commemorative 

issue struck under Trajan 43 , confirming the basic 

consistency in the various portrayals of Caesar during 

this period, whether in colossal statues, or on coins. 

No later versions of Caesar's portrait are known as yet 

but some may still come to light. The existence of a 

Trajan from late antiquity 44 also suggests the strong 

possibility of a Constantinian Caesar. However, Caesar 

found fortune again in the Renaissance and later. A 

complete list 45 of modern portraits of the Caesar lies 

beyond the scope of the present note, but some samples 

may illustrate the rebirth of interest in the great man. 

The head inserted into the statue 46 in the Palazzo 

Senatorio corresponds very well to the tradition of the 

Trajanic Caesar but is a better parallel to the art of 

Renaissance portraiture. An unpublished over life-size 

head in Florence 47 may be slightly later than this one. 

The head in the Vatican 48 , considered to be another 

genuine Caesar type, is a rather tormented Baroque 

version, while a mutilated piece in Berkeley 49 is a 

product of the Neo-Classical trend of the late eighteenth 

century. The Napoleonic period seems to have been 

particularly prolific in the production of Caesars, and 

the subsequent reign of his namesake nephew is to be 

credited with the rich harvest of forgeries which has 

continued until the present day. 50 An under life-size 

"Caesar" in Budapest 51 may be an appropriate 

conclusion. It dates from about 1800 and was originally 

part of a complete set of the XII Roman Emperors: a 

matching Claudius survives. 52 

Jiff Freí 

Malibu 

P.S. Some more Caesars from Greece should have been noted. A 

youthful bust from Thera is a variant of the Campo Santo type 

(Th.Lorenz, AM 83 1968 243 sqq., pis. 84 sqq.) A head in Corinth is a 

welcome confirmation of the type Farnese (A.Datsoulis-Stavrides, 

AAA 3 1970 109 sq.) A well-known head in Athens, National Museum, 

was identified by A.Datsoulis-Stavrides (Pelt. 28 1973 [1975] 243 sqq.) 

as a local variant of the Caesar from Tusculum. Two other candidates 

may not represent Caesar (N. Bonacassa, Boll, d' arte 46 1961 7 sqq., 

id. Ritratti Greci e Romani délia Sicilia 1974 nrs. 32 and 33). 

62

A FLAVIAN RELIEF PORTRAIT 

IN THE J. PAUL GETTY MUSEUM 

In the collection of the J. Paul Getty Museum at Malibu 

is an over life-sized male portrait head, inv. 74.AA.37. 

The sculpture is of a white, medium-grained crystallized 

marble. The head, which measures c. 29 cm. in height, 

is split almost vertically along a line through the left eye 

to the chin. The end of the nose and the outer rim of the 

ear have been broken off. The right brow, right eye, 

chin, and upper and lower lips are somewhat more 

abraded than the left brow and the area of the right 

cheek. Also evident are minor nicks over the surface of 

the head. Recent chips are visible on the right front of 

the neck. In the front part of the skull above the 

forehead is a rectangular hole c. 2.5 cm. deep, with an 

adjoining groove to the right. Toward the back of the 

head is another hole in which remains part of an 

ancient bronze insert. To the left of this, a small part of 

the head has been broken away. The cranium, which 

swells slightly, has been left somewhat rough, unlike the 

rest of the head, which is smoothly finished. Patina and 

root marks over the entire surface of the sclupture 

indicate that the piece had lain buried in the ground. A 

vein in the marble extending from the right temple to 

the chin absorbed impurities from the soil, leaving the 

brownish streak now visible on the right cheek. 

The carving of the work is of a high quality. The 

sculptor has defined well the underlying bony structure 

of the face. The prominent brows, deep-set eyes, double 

chin, and taurine neck of the Getty head reveal a 

powerful individual. These facial features strongly 

suggest a Roman rather than a Greek 1 . At the base of 

the neck the marble turns out slightly, indicating that 

the figure was wearing a garment. Although the precise 

type of vestment can no longer be determined, we may 

reasonably conjecture that the garment may have been a 

toga, if this individual were a Roman. 

Seen from the front, the head appears to be 

unnaturally compressed, too narrow in width to have 

been carved originally in the round. The remaining 

portion of the left side of the face also projects forward 

in comparison with the right side. This asymmetrical 

arrangement of the features indicates that the head had 

once been part of a monument carved in high relief. 

The cleavage down the left side of the head is slightly 

curved. That the portrait had been removed as a unit is 

indicated by several nicks obviously made by a chisel 

along the contour of the skull. In his description of this 

piece, E. Bielefeld has suggested that two bronze clamps 

were used at the front and back of the head for the 

purpose of remounting it 2 . However, if the head had 

actually been joined to another block by clamps, the cut 

surface would have been worked to insure a smoothly 

fitting join, instead of being left rough and irregular as 

it has been. Moreover, the unfinished surface of the 

cleavage indicates that the head was never remounted. 

In fact, the piece has been neither reçut nor reworked in 

any way. Therefore it is apparent that the holes and 

grooves in the head were simply for the attachment of 

some form of bronze ornament, such as a laurel 

wreath 3 . The fact that the surface of the cranium above 

the zone for the attachment of headgear is roughly 

finished might suggest that hair was painted in this 

area. However, both the region of the right temple 

where hair would normally grow, and the rolls of fat 

high up on the back of the neck where one might also 

find hair, are smoothly finished. Likewise, the presence 

of a vein extending diagonally across the right temple 

along the normal hairline indicates that the sculptor did 

not intend to represent hair in this area. It is thus very 

likely that the person depicted was bald. The surface of 

the cranium may have been left rough because it would 

have been partially or entirely hidden by the headgear if 

the relief were set above eye-level 4 . 

We do not know when or why the Getty portrait was 

separated from its background 5 . The patina covering 

the cut surface of the sculpture, including those points 

at the top of the skull where the chisel struck, does 

1. E. Bielefeld, Kunsr\\'erke der Antike (Gallerie der Antike) 

(Frankfurt 19) 21, has also noted that the head appears to be of a 

Russian racial type. 

2. Ibid., 20: "Spater hat man ihn indessen wieder auf einen (Relief-) 

Hintergrund montiert." 

3. J.Frel, Recent Acquisitions. Ancient Art, the J.Paul Getty Museum. 

Malibu. California (Pullman, Wash. 1974) no. 21, is also of the 

opinion that the Getty head wore a laurel wreath. 

4. Note the treatment of the bald priest from the Athenian Agora: 

E.B. Harrison, The Athenian Agora I: Portrait Sculpture (Princeton 

1953) 12, pi. 3.1 

5. Possibly the head had been removed in antiquity. 

63

indicate, however, that the removal and burial of the 

head had not been recent 6 . The possibility that the 

Getty head formed part of a grave relief cannot be 

entirely ruled out 7 . However, because of the size and 

high quality of carving of the Getty head, it is more 

likely that this sculpture had been part of an official 

relief of considerable importance 8 . 

The facial features of the Getty portrait are not 

distinct enough to be attributed to a specific historic 

personage. Because the absence of hair precludes the 

dating of the head on the basis of hairstyle, a general 

date for the work can be established only through 

stylistic analysis of the carving of the sculpture. Because 

of its realistic features, Bielefeld dated the Getty head to 

the first third of the first century B.C., comparing it 

with portraits of the late Hellenistic world and of the 

late Roman Republic 9 . However, closer parallels may be 

found with the portraiture of the Flavian period, as, for 

example, two portraits of Vespasian in the Terme 

Museum in Rome—one from Minturnae 10 , another 

from the Tiber 11 . The reaction in imperial portraiture to 

Augustan and Julio-Claudian classicism" 12 and the 

consequent revival of Republican "realism" 13 which 

came with the death of Nero and the accession of Galba 

in 68 A.D. were carried over into the portraiture of the 

earlier Flavian period 14 . The realism of the Getty head 

is apparent in the heavy, prominent brows, hollowed 

cheeks, thick lips, and baggy, thickly lidded eyes, 

wearily set in their cavernous sockets. However, except 

for the slightly furrowed naso-labial lines, the head is 

devoid of the linear quality common to so many 

Republican portraits 15 . A tendency toward fussiness of 

detail in the carving of facial features, characteristic of 

Republican portraiture in general, is apparent even in 

those portraits cited by Bielefeld for comparison with 

the Getty sculpture 16 , such as the late Hellenistic heads 

from Délos 17 , and the Hellenistically influenced works 

from Italy, such as the General from Tivoli in the 

Terme Museum 18 and the Cicero in the Capitoline 

Museum in Rome 19 . By contrast, meticulous details 

have been smoothed away in the Getty head. The face 

has been modeled to create an undulating surface, 

especially evident in the rolls of fat at the nape of the 

neck and in the flabby flesh beneath and at the sides of 

the chin. The fluid transitions of the facial planes 

produce an "illusionistic" effect difficult to capture in 

photographs. 

The manner of carving, as well as the provenience of 

the marble, suggests that the Getty head is a product of 

one of the larger sculptural centers of western Asia 

Minor, such as Pergamon or Ephesus: both had a 

long-standing tradition of sculptural workshops where 

sculptors continued to be active in the first century 

A.D. 20 The predominant artistic currents in Rome itself 

6. On the basis of present scientific analysis we cannot determine with 

any degree of precision how long the head lay buried. 

7. Cf. Bielefeld, op. cit., 23, who states, "Zwar konnte man meinen, 

dass es einst einem Grabrelief angehort habe. Aber Grabstelen dieses 

Ausmasses sind uns aus dem Hellenismus wohl unbekannt." 

8. Such as the second century A.D. reliefs from the Great Antonine 

Altar of Ephesus in the Kunsthistorisches Museum in Vienna: C. 

Vermeule, Roman Imperial Art in Asia Minor (Cambridge, Mass. 

1968) 95-123. See also Freí, op. cit. 

9. Bielefeld, op. cit., 21f. 

10. Inv. 128571: G. Daltrop, U. Hausmann, and M. Wegner, Die 

Flavier (Das romische Herrscherbild II. 1) (Berlin 1966) 79f, pi. 1. 

11. Inv. 53: B. Felletti Maj, Museo Nazionale Romano: I ritratti 

(Rome 1953) 80, pi. 142; Daltrop, et al., op. cit., 79, pi. 8a-b. 

12. A tendency away from the cold "classicism" of the Augustan and 

earlier Julio-Claudian period in favor of the richly picturesque 

modeling of past Hellenistic sculpture may be noted already in the 

portraiture of the emperors Claudius and Nero. See, for example, the 

head of Claudius in the Lateran Museum in the Vatican (inv. 9950): 

A. Giuliano, Catalogo dei ritratti romani del Museo Profano 

Lateranense (Vatican City 1957) 33f, pis. 21.36a, 22.36b-c; the portrait 

of Claudius from Samos in the Tigrani Museum (no. 44): R. 

Tolle-Kastenbein, Samos XIV: Das Kastro Tigani (Bonn 1974) 174, 

fig. 327; and the head of Claudius in the Palazzo dei Conservatori 

(iirfr. 2443): N. Bonacasa, "Ritratto di Claudio del Museo Greco- 

Romano di Alessandria," RomMitt 67 (1960) 1340f, pi. 40.1, and k. v. 

Heintze, "Bildniskopf des Kaisers Claudius," Helbit II (Tubingen 

1966)421. For the portraiture of Nero we may note as examples the 

head of Nero in the Terme Museum in Rome (inv. 618): Felletti Maj, 

op. cit., 73, fig. 123, and U. Hiesinger, "The Portraits of Nero," AJA 

79 (1975) 119, pi. 24, figs. 43, 44; and the head of Nero in the 

Worchester Art Museum in Worchester, Mass. (ace. no. 1915.23): 

Hiesinger, op. cit., 120, pi. 25, figs. 45-47. 

13. Sculptural portraits of Galba are not common because of the 

shortness of his reign and because of the destruction of many of his 

statues after his death. For the problems involved in Galban 

portraiture, see E. Fabbricotti, Galba (Studia Archaeologica 16) 

(Rome 1976). The best evidence for Galban portraiture is numismatic; 

coins represent him in a very realistic manner, in keeping with his 

image as restorer of the res publica: BMC I, nos. 1-236, 267-272, pis. 

52-54, 55.13-14, 55.16-19, 56.1-9, 58.1-5, 58.7, p. 399f, nos. 38 bis, 163 

bis. 221 bis. 

14. For Flavian portraiture, see the entire study made by Daltrop, et 

al., op. cit. 

15. See, for example, Vessberg, op. cit., 173ff, and B. Schweitzer, Die 

Bildniskunst der romischen Republik (Leipzig 1948). 

16. Bielefeld, supra, n. 12. 

17. For Delian portraiture, see C. Michalowski, Délos XIII: Les 

Portraits Hellénistiques et Romains (Paris 1932) 11-14, 25-32, pis. 

X-XI, XXI-XXIV; C. Hafner, Spdthellenistische Bildnisplastik (Berlin 

1954) 32f, 62f, 68, pis. 11.MK5, 26.A6, 28.A14. 

18. Inv. 106513: Vessberg, op. cit., 273f, pis. XLVIII-XLIX; 

Schweitzer, op. cit., 63f, figs. 63, 65-66; H. v. Heintze, "Statue eines 

Feldherrn," Helbig III (Tubingen 1969) 220f. 

19. Inv. 589: A. Hekler, Die Bildniskunst der Griechen und R'ômer 

(Stuttgart 1912) XXXIII, fig. 160; Schweitzer, op. cit., 92-94, lOlf, 

figs. 142, 146; L. Laurenzi, "II ritratto di Cicerone," Atti del I 

Congresso Internazionale di Studi Ciceroniani I (Rome 1961) 108, pi. 

VII.9-10; H. v. Heintze, "Kopf des Cicero," Helbig II (Tubingen 1966) 

169. 

20. J. Inan and E. Rosenbaum, Roman and Early Byzantine Portrait 

Sculpture in Asia Minor (London 1966) 6, lOf, 15, 20-30. 

64

during the Flavian period soon spread in both official 

and private portraiture throughout Asia Minor and 

other parts of the Roman Empire 21 . In modelling and in 

the summary treatment of facial details, the Getty head 

21. Giuliano, op. cit., 168; Inan and Rosenbaum, op. cit., 15. 

65

is similar to an over life-sized head of Vespasian from 

Pergamon in the Bergama Museum 22 . A comparable 

manner of carving and treatment of expressive facial 

features are also evident in private portraits of the 

Flavian period from Asia Minor, such as the head of a 

man from Samsum in the Istanbul Museum 23 , a male 

portrait from Ephesus in the Selcuk Museum 24 , and the 

head of a man from Magnesia ad Sipylum in the 

Manisa Museum 25 . 

Since the large size of the Getty portrait suggests that 

it could have been part of some official commemorative 

relief in which an emperor was represented, we must 

consider whether any emperor might possibly be 

depicted by the head. Vespasian, whose portraits 

correspond stylistically with the Getty sculpture, was 

sixty years of age when he became emperor in 69 

A.D. 26 ; the individual represented by the Getty portrait 

appears to be of about this age, but the features of the 

Getty head are not at all like those of Vespasian. In 

fact, the only emperor of the first century A.D. who 

does resemble the subject of the Getty portrait is 

Vitellius, who was fifty-seven years of age at the time of 

his death in 69 A.D. 27 The features of Vitellius are 

known from his coinage 28 and from two marble heads, 

one in the Bardo Museum in Tunis 29 and the other in 

the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen 30 . 

However, there are several problems with an 

identification of the Getty portrait as Vitellius. The 

correspondence of the facial features of the Getty head 

with any of the numismatic or sculptural representations 

of Vitellius is not close enough to make certain an 

identification as Vitellius. In all of his images, Vitellius 

is depicted with short hair, while the man represented in 

the Getty head appears to be bald. The historical 

circumstances of Vitellius' short-lived reign also argue 

against his being depicted in the Getty sculpture 31 . In 

the East, no coins are known to have been minted in 

Vitellius* honor, and no sculptural portraits of him, or 

even statue bases inscribed with his name, have thus far 

been found 32 . Therefore, it would seem that any 

resemblance between the Getty head and the known 

portraiture of Vitellius is coincidental. Rather than an 

emperor, the Getty head may represent some lesser 

personage of the Flavian period, such as a magistrate, 

important private citizen, or non-officiating priest 33 , 

who might also have been depicted wearing a laurel 

wreath 34 . 

John Pollini 

American Academy 

Rome 

22. Inv. 157: Inan and Rosenbaum, op. cit., 67, pi. XVI.2-3; Daltrop, 

et al., op. cit., 78. 

23. Inv. 4753: Inan and Rosenbaum, op. cit., 102, pi. LIX.1-2. 

24. Inv. 605: ibid., 123, pi. LXXXII.1-2. 

25. Inv. 26: ibid., 162, pi. CXVI.3-4. 

26. Suet. Vespasian, 2.1, 24; Dio Cass. 66.17.3; Eutropius, 7.20. 

27. Suet. Vit. 18; Tac. Hist. 3.86; Aur. Vict. Caes. 8.5; Eutropius, 

7.18. Cf. Suet. Vit. 3.2, who indicates that Vitellius was born in 15 

A.D.; on this contradiction, since Suetonius gives his age at death as 

fifty-seven, rather than fifty-four, see L. Holzapfel, "Romische 

Kaiserdaten," Klio 15 (1917) 106-108. J. Freí, op. cit., has considered 

the possibility of a Vitellian identification for the Getty head. 

28. BMC I, 368-393, 400; H. Jucker, "Vitellius," Jb. d. Bernischen 

Histor. Museums 41-42 (1963) 332-344. 

29. Inv. 1784: Jucker, op. cit., 344-355, figs. 36-38. 

30. M. Gjodesen, "De tre Kejsere. Litteraere og plastiske Portraetter," 

Meddelelser fra Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 16 (1959) 28-44, figs. 

19-21; Jucker, op. cit., 352-357, figs. 39-41. 

31. Though Vitellius was hailed as emperor on the second and third 

of January, 69 A.D., by the legions of Germany (Tac. Hist. 1.57), he 

was not recognized throughout the Empire as emperor until his 

acceptance by the Senate on April 19 (CIL VI, no. 2051.85). However, 

on the first of July, the legions in Egypt declared for Vespasian (Tac. 

Hist. 2.79), who was then in command of the Jewish campaigns (Tac. 

Hist. 1.10; Suet. Vespasian, 4.5-6; Joseph. BJ, 3.6-8; Dio Cass. 

63.22.1 a ), and by the middle of July the entire East had sworn 

allegiance to Vespasian (Tac. Hist. 2.81). It is therefore improbable 

that after mid-July any monument would have been erected in honor 

of Vitellius in Asia Minor. In fact, news of Vitellius' acceptance by the 

Senate would probably not have reached Asia until some time in May. 

Even in the interim between May and July support for Vitellius in the 

East is not attested. Moreover, the governor of Asia, Fonteius 

Agrippa, was a Vespasianic rather than a Vitellian loyalist (Tac. Hist. 

3.46; CIL III, no. 6083; see also A. Bosworth, "Vespasian and the 

Provinces. Some Problems of the Early 70's A.D.," Athenaeum N.S. 

51 (1973) 67f], 

32. It has been suggested that a small rock crystal head from 

Caesarea in ancient Syria is a possible portrait of Vitellius: J. H. I., 

"A Portrait of Vitellius () in Rock Crystal," QDAP 1.4 (1932) 153f, 

pi. LVIII. Though the facial features vaguely resemble those of 

Vitellius in frontal view, the profile is defintely that of Trajan. I thank 

J. Freí for his suggestion that the local artist who carved this small 

crystal was most likely copying the features of Trajan from a coin. 

33. An officiating priest in Roman ritual would have appeared with 

his head veiled: I. S. Ryberg, Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art 

(MAAR 22) (Rome 1955) 30, 42-44. 

34. For the use of the laurel in Roman rituals, see A. Steier, s.v. 

"Lorbeer," RE XIII.2 (1927) 1441, and Ryberg, op. cit., 47, n. 46. 

Various figures in the sacrificial and processional friezes of the Ara 

Pacis, for example, wear laurel wreaths: Ryberg, op. cit., 30, pis. 

XI-XII. Some portraits from Asia Minor also show individuals 

wearing an elaborate turban-like crown: G. Jacopi, Clara Rhodos V.2: 

Monumenti di scultura (Rhodes 1932) 100, pi. VII; Inan and 

Rosenbaum, op. cit., 124f, 128, 171f, pis. LXXXIII.4, LXXXV.1-2, 

LXXXVII.1-2, CXXVI. This turban-like headdress was apparently 

worn only by local priests in the Greek East (ibid., 124f, n. 2) and 

would not have been worn by the individual represented in the Getty 

portrait if he were of a Roman racial type, as he seems to be. 

66

CYCLADIC FIGURINES IN THE J. PAUL GETTY MUSEUM 

The Getty collection in Malibu includes four Cycladic 

figurines; two are complete examples and two are 

heads, broken at the neck. These pieces were acquired 

in 1971 from the New York art market. Nothing is 

known about their precise provenance. This study will 

present all four pieces and will discuss the comparative 

material in an attempt to place the Getty pieces within a 

stylistic and chronological framework. Recent research 

on the subject of Cycladic figurines (Renfrew, Doumas, 

Caskey) makes the task of attribution feasible. 

CATALOGUE: 

I. Marble Cycladic figurine, 71. A A. 124 

(Folded arm type) 

Dimensions:* 

total h. .209 m. 

1. of head from crown to chin. .039 m. 

w. at shoulder .066 m. 

w. at elbows .053 m. 

w. at waist .041 m. 

w. at ankles .023 m. 

thickness at neck above break .009 m. 

thickness at breast .022 m. 

thickness at stomach .022 m. 

thickness at knee .018 m. 

thickness at ankle .009 m. 

Condition: 

The figurine is relatively intact with a few minor 

breaks. The nose has lost its original contour and is 

fractured along the central projecting line. An uneven 

break in the neck separates the head from the body just 

above the shoulders. This break has been repaired in 

modern times with a metallic pin. The top of the head is 

* Break at neck repaired with metal dowel creates 

separation between neck and body resulting in an 

inaccuracy of approximately 2 mm. in the vertical 

measurements. 

67

Fig. 1. J. Paul Getty Museum 71.AA.124 

slightly worn on the back. The remainder is in good 

condition except for a chip out of the right heel 

extending to the left heel. 

Description: 

The figurine is similar to standard folded arm 

figurines (FAFs) featuring a head which tilts backward, 

a frontal torso, arms folded over the stomach, knees 

bent slightly forward and feet which are placed at a 

downward slanting angle and do not carry or support 

weight. 

Distinctive markings on the front include a series of 

horizontal and vertical lines indicating the placement of 

the arms on the torso. A slight irregularity of the 

surface on the centre front of the arms may indicate the 

fingers. The stomach is marked by a curved line above 

the pubic area which is not otherwise defined. The legs 

are separated by a groove but are not free-standing. The 

knees and ankles are defined by slight incision and 

modelling. The feet project outward from an indentation 

at the ankle and are separated at the instep. Toe 

incisions are particularly noticeable on the left foot. 

On the reverse side, the head which slopes and tilts 

backward is finished in a flattened ovoid area at the 

crown. A wide inverted V separates the skull from the 

long neck. A sharper, equally wide V extends from 

either side of the lower neck to the spinal cavity vhich 

leads from the neck to the feet. From the back, the 

arms are distinguished from the torso by shallow, 

wedge-shaped grooves. 

Microscopic examination revealed that the surface is 

badly corroded and mottled, especially on the top side. 

The crystalline structure of the marble is obvious at the 

break on the heels. 

Ultraviolet examination determined that the surface 

had been varnished. 

68


II. Marble Cycladic figurine, 71.AA.128 

(standing type) 

Dimensions: 

total h. .142 m. 

1. of head from top to chin .026 m. 

w. at top of shoulder .031 m. 

w. at arms .032 m. 

w. at hips .135 m. 

thickness at neck .009 m. 

thickness at breast .010 m. 

thickness at torso .010 m. 

Condition: 

There is a recently repaired break at the juncture of 

the neck with the shoulders. The right leg is missing 

and was repaired in antiquity. A hole has been drilled 

into the right thigh and a second drill hole must have 

been placed in the missing portion of the leg allowing 

the two pieces to be clamped together. This is a 

standard form of repair in the Bronze Age. The left leg 

is broken at the same level as the right leg but the break 

and the repair are both more recent. 

Description: 

The head is vertically aligned and ovoid. The face is 

carefully modelled and less stylized than figurine I. The 

chin projects forward slightly. The eyes are marked by 

hollowed out sockets on either side of the nose which is 

a projecting stub. Below the nose, a slightly concave 

area indicates the placement of the mouth. 

From the side, the shape of the head is somewhat 

small in proportion to the rest of the figure and seems 

to have been reworked or reçut. The colour of the 

69


marble is lighter at the top of the head. Observation 

under the microscope reveals that this surface is 

smoother in texture relative to the rest of the piece. 

Further observation under ultra-violet light confirmed 

that the head had been recarved within modern times. 

The figurine is approximately the same thickness at 

all points. The total effect is flat and elongated, 

emphasized by a long thin neck. The shoulders slope 

outward and slightly downward. The arms are stumps 

on either side of the torso. 

Incisions include a wide V marking the collar bone. 

Vertical lines separate the arms from the torso. The 

breasts are set widely apart and project from the body. 

The naval is indicated and incisions mark the pelvic 

area. The left knee and the buttocks are indicated by 

slight bulges. 

Further observation under the microscope revealed 

scratchings on the right eye and the fact that some red 

coloration on the left eye is not paint. Ultraviolet 

observation suggests that the arms were retooled, in 

addition to the head, and the inside of the leg area was 

probably reduced as well as both sides of the crotch. 

The left foot shows signs of alteration where it was 

probably flattened. The break on the right leg and the 

drill hole flouresced as ancient. 

III. Head, marble Cycladic figurine, 71.AA.125 

(folded arm type) 

Dimensions: 

maximum preserved h. .089 m. 

h. from top of head to chin .070 m. 

1. of nose .032 m. 

w. at top of head .036 m. 

w. at widest part of face, front .043 m. 

d. of neck .020 x .028 m. 

Condition: 

The head is broken off at the point where the neck 

would have joined the shoulders. This fragment is 

otherwise in good condition. Some scratchings are 

visible around the nose. Original tool marks were noted 

on the back. The marble is discoloured to a rusty red. 

This may be paint or another type of incrustation and is 

especially pronounced on the front. 

Description: 

The shape of the head is rounded at the top, flattened 

into an oval. The temples are constricted and the 

contour of the face flares outward at the level of the 

nose reducing again on the chin, which forms a rounded 

U shape. The back side of the head is rounded, flares 

upward in profile and is flattened at the crown. The 

shape of the head recalls a stylized calyx. 

Two incisions appear on either side of the back of the 

neck. These separate the skull from the neck and curve 

upward but do not meet. To the left of the nose, a cavity 

around a slightly raised area may indicate modelling of 

the eye. 

The microscope revealed extensive reddish colour on 

the surface of the face. The scratchings around the nose 

break through the surface patina. Ultraviolet examina- 

70


tion showed that the break on the neck is relatively 

recent and the nose area was indeed recarved as well as 

the chin line. The bulge and cavity on the left eye may 

be paint "shadows". 

ultraviolet light the neck break appeared very old. The 

front surface may have been sanded. Therefore, if the 

piece was reworked, the coloration in the eye area 

cannot be ancient. 

IV. Head, marble Cycladic figurine, 71.AA.126 

(folded arm type) 

Dimensions: 

maximum preserved h. .086 m. 

h. from top of head to chin .079 m. 

1. of nose .032 m. 

w. at top of head .051 m. 

w. of head at bridge of nose .049 m. 

Condition: 

The head is broken off at the lower neck. The lower 

tip of the nose is fractured. The surface of the stone is 

very smooth on the front, rougher on the back. Some 

rusty-red discoloration is visible on the surface. 

Description: 

The head curves backward at a sharp flat angle. The 

chin is sharply V shaped when viewed frontally. The 

crown is marked by a flattened oval. The lines are 

angular, the surface treatment very flat, the modelling 

minimal. There are no incisions on either side. The nose 

projects sharply and features a long spine. 

Microscopic examination showed a slight trace of 

reddish colour on the left side of the nose. Under 

DISCUSSION: 

The complete figurine I (71. A A. 124) of the folded 

arm variety can be compared to a series of figurines 

from the cemetery site of Spedos on the island of Naxos. 

This piece is comparable to number 108 from Spedos 

illustrated in Zervos (1957:107). Other similar pieces are 

to be found in the Goulandris collection (Doumas 

1968:98-99, 102; fig. 104a, fig. 207). 

The two heads (71. A A. 125 and 126) are also to be 

classified as belonging originally to folded arm figurines 

and are quite possibly from the same site as they display 

similar stylistic features. According to Renfrew's 

classifications, Spedos FAFs belong to the Keros-Syros 

or EC II culture which is contemporary with EB II in 

the rest of the Aegean (Renfrew 1969:9). The date range 

for EC II would be approximately 2500 to 1900 BC. 

Spedos figurines are characterized by a flattened 

surface at the top of the head, distinctly flexed knees, 

few incisions, and feet which are not meant to bear the 

weight of the sculpture (Renfrew 1969:20). The surfaces 

are generally flattened and the contours sharp and 

angular. 

The Spedos variety of FAF is of particular interest 

because it is the most common type. Certain features of 

the Spedos variety are more accentuated than in other 

71

FAFs. Most FAF figurines have a straight vertical 

profile. The knees do not bend or are only slightly 

flexed; they are not usually marked by modelling and 

incision. The foot does not break at the ankle and 

project forward. Only the Kapsala variety (Renfrew 

1969: ill. 2, fig. IV A) has some of the characteristics of 

the Spedos type but it is far more roundly modelled. 

The Dokathismata type (Ibid.: ill.3, IV B) has a similar 

foot. The complete Getty Spedos FAF is unusual in 

having broad, squared shoulders whereas the majority 

of these sculptures generally display narrower proportions 

(typically, Zervos 1957: 107, fig. 108). 

The Spedos variety of FAF has been found all over 

the Aegean (Renfrew 1969:21) but is best known from 

the type site on Naxos. Spedos figurines come primarily 

from cemeteries and therefore probably had a function 

closely associated with death and funerary practices. 

Because of the differences between these and other 

FAFs and because of their distinctive features, close 

analysis of the form of this variety might reveal some 

clues as to the function of the type or the sculptor's 

intent in using the convention revealed here. 

The folded arms of this type of figurine may have 

their iconographical origins in a pose in which the 

hands are placed under the breasts (as in the Plastiras 

type, see below and Figurine II). But the folded arms in 

the Spedos variety enclose the composition and do not 

emphasize the breasts or sexuality in general. Furthermore 

in the Spedos group the breast tends to be very 

small and the pubic area is frequently not emphasized 

or incised. Therefore, the sexual aspect of these 

figurines is diminished. The figurines are obviously not 

meant to stand on their own because of the formation 

of the feet. This has nothing to do with the ability of the 

sculptor as many Cycladic figurines are deliberately 

made to stand. The pointed feet must be explained by 

the limitations imposed by the artistic convention. The 

convention, if read simply and, we hope, correctly, 

demands a figure which does not stand, which has 

flexed knees, head slanting backwards and arms folded 

across the stomach. This position may well represent a 

stylization of the standard position of bodies in tombs. 

Cycladic burials of this period are inhumations and the 

skeletons are commonly flexed with the knees drawn up 

and the arms folded across the chest or stomach. This 

correlation between the figurines and Cycladic burials 

suggests that the figurines may personify death or may 

be effigies of the dead person. The latter possibility is 

the less likely as most of the figures are female. They 

must in some way represent death or sleep. 

Naturalistic figurines found in neolithic contexts are 

generally thought to refer to fertility and reproduction. 

The abstraction of such naturalistic forms to a more 

simplified expression which remains iconographically 

human, female and organic may reflect a philosophical 

and religious development. Where the figurines were 

originally symbolic of the eternal birth, death and 

reproduction cycles of nature, their abstracted descendants 

may refer by extension to the death and rebirth of 

mankind, or of the soul, as a mirror image of the 

physical organic cycle. The female form is as 

appropriate for symbolic use here as in the earlier 

context. Such belief in an afterlife is obvious 

considering the multiple grave gifts in Cycladic tombs 

and the elaborate construction of the tombs. Only some 

Cycladic figurines are to be explained by this suggested 

theory; it does not apply universally to the many 

different known types, including the male figures. 

The Spedos variety as seen in Figurine I is in marked 

contrast to Figurine II (71.AA.128). This piece can be 

classified as a Plastiras type of figurine belonging to the 

earlier EC I Grotta-Pelos culture (Renfrew 1969:6). The 

sample of known Plastiras figurines is very small 

(Renfrew 1969:6). Renfrew (ibid.) lists twelve known 

pieces of the female Plastiras type to which the Getty 

figurine can now be added. 

Plastiras figurines are more naturalistic than the later 

Spedos variety and may have evolved from a steatopygous 

neolithic standing type (Preziosi and Weinberg 

1970:4). Plastiras figurines do not display folded arms. 

The features of the face, eyes and mouth in particular, 

are marked and modelled. The soles of the feet are flat 

and horizontal and can support weight. The profile of 

the body is vertical and flat with no flexion at the knees. 

The head is ovoid and does not tilt backwards as in the 

Spedos type. The pubic area is clearly defined by 

incision and the legs are separated. The Plastiras 

figurines usually have arms flexed at the elbows with 

fingers touching under the breasts, across the stomach. 

In the case of the Getty figurine the arms are stumps 

delineated by incisions on either side of the torso front 

and back. There are no traces of the arms ever having 

been carried across the front on this example. 

A group of four Plastiras figurines comparable to the 

Getty piece were recently found within a single tomb by 

Doumas in the Plastiras cemetery (Doumas 1963:283, 

Renfrew 1969:6). However, it is possible that Plastiras 

figurines were used in contexts other than funerary. The 

fact that the Getty piece was repaired in antiquity 

suggests that the figurine might not have been used 

exclusively in a burial context. One would hardly open a 

tomb to repair an object! The fact of the repair implies 

a different sort of original or continuous use (Mylonas: 

1959). Therefore, this type of figurine appears to be 

different in function from the Spedos FAFs and the 

indication of its use as seen in the repair gives some idea 

of a possible difference in function as well as find 

context. 

These four Cycladic pieces in the Getty collection 

represent an important and interesting addition to the 

72

small quantity of European prehistoric art in Southern 

California museums. The two figurines and the two 

heads are of excellent quality and workmanship. They 

are undoubtedly originals as the microscopic and 

ultraviolet examinations revealed. This is important to 

establish as Cycladic art has frequently been forged in 

recent times primarily because the artistic conventions 

of this prehistoric period are especially appealing to the 

modern sensibility. The simplicity of these four pieces, 

the beauty of their finely modelled contours and their 

linear style maked them excellent examples of the art of 

the Cycladic culture. 

Hará Georgiou 

University of California, Irvine 

BIBLIOGRAPHY 

Caskey, J.L. 

1964a. Excavations at Kephala in Kea. Hesperia 33, 

314-335. 

1964b. Greece, Crete and the Aegean Islands in the 

Early Bronze Age. CAH, I 2 , XXVI(a). 

197J,. Marble Figurine from Ayia Irini in Keos. 

Hesperia XL:2,113. 

Detrew, P. 

1962. la Culture néolithique tardive en Bulgarie. 

Istanbuler Mitteilungen 12, 11-17. 

Doumas, C. 

1963. Deltion 18, KuAaOEç, Chronika 283, 278. 

Doumas, C. 

1968. The N.P. Goulandris Collection of Early 

Cycladic Art. Praeger. 

Erlenmeyer, M. 

1965. Von der frühen Bildkunst der Kykladen. 

Antike Kunst 8, (Heft 2) 59-71. 

Evans, J.D. and Renfrew, C. 

1968. Excavations at Saliagos near Antiparos. 

Hockmann, O. 

1969. Zur Formenschatz und Ursprung der schematischen 

Kykladenplastik. Berliner Jahrbuch für 

Vor- und Frühgeschichte 18. 

Majewski, K. 

1935. Figuralna Plastyka Cycladzka. Geneza i 

Rozwoj Form. 

Müller, V. 

1929. Frühe Plastik in Gríechenland und Kleinasien. 

Mylonas, G. 

1959. Agios Kosmas. Princeton. 

Papathanasopoulos, G. 

1961-62 KYKAAAIKA NAZOY, Deltion 17, 104-151. 

Preziosi, P.G. 

1966. Cycladic Objects in the Foss and Farland 

Collections. AM 70. 105-111. 

Preziosi, P.G. and Weinberg, S.S. 

1970. Evidence for Painted Details in Early Cycladic 

Sculpture. Antike Kunst 13, 4-12. 

73

Renfrew, C. 

1967. Cycladic Metallurgy and the Aegean Early 

Bronze Age. AJA 71. 

Renfrew, C. 

1969. The Development and Chronology of the 

Early Cycladic Figurines. AJA 73. 1-32. 

Schefold, Karl 

1965. Heroen und Nymphen in Kykladengrabern. 

Antike Kunst 8, 87-90. 

Stephanos, C. 

1905. Les tombeaux prémycéniens de Naxos, Comptes 

Rendus du Congrès International d'Archéologie. 

Wace, AJ.B. 

1949. Prehistoric Stone Figurines from the Mainland. 

Hesperia Suppl. 8. 

Weinberg, S.S. 

1951. Neolithic Figurines and Aegean Interrelations. 

AJA 55, 128-129. 

Wiesner, J. 

1938. Grab und Jenseits. 

Zervos, Ch. 

1957. L'Art des Cyclades, Du début à la fin de l'âge 

du bronze, 2500-II00 avant notre ère. Editions 

"Cahiers d'Art", Paris. 

Thimme, J. 

1965. Die religiose Bedeutung der Kykladenidole. 

Antike Kunst 8, 72-86. 

74

A GORGON ANTEFIX FROM GELA 

IN THE J.P. GETTY MUSEUM 

The figure of Medusa had a continuous, even if not yet 

fully explored position in the iconography of Greek art 1 . 

In spite of early developed artistic conventions, she is an 

instructive vehicle for a study of the changes of artistic, 

representational concepts from the early 7th c. B.C. 

through the Hellenistic period. The literary tradition 

connects the Gorgon sisters with the West and with the 

Hesperides 2 , a fact which it is interesting to link with 

the immense popularity of the image in the Western 

part of the Greek world, in Magna Graecia as well as in 

Etruria. The Greek Sicilian centres have all yielded rich 

remains of Gorgon representations: Syracuse, Selinus, 

Agrigento and last but not least Gela, the likely 

provenience of the architectural terracotta under 

consideration in this article. (Figure I) 3 

Inv. nr. 72.AD.124. Antefix with a Gorgon head. 

Height 18.5cm. Width (preserved) 19.5cm. Thickness 

(Above nose) 2.7cm. (at neck) 1cm. Red clay with 

1. For early uses in art see e.g. Enc.delVarte antica (v.Gorgone) and 

H. Besig, Gorgo und Gorgoneion in der archaischen Griechischen 

Kunst. Diss. Berlin 1937. 

2. Hesiod, Theog. 274ff. 

3. I want to thank Prof. Jití Freí, Curator of the Antiquities of the 

J.P. Getty Museum for his kindness and assistance in my work on this 

item. 

75

whitish slip 4 , dark red coloring preserved on eyes, hair, 

mouth, cheeks, necklace and earrings. Plastically 

rendered wrinkles at the corner of the eyes, tongue 

hanging out, no tusks. The breaks are all on the left 

side: all hair under the ear is gone as well as all hair at 

the side of the ear with a small exception next to the 

earring. Section of the top part of the covertile is extant 

behind the diadem. 

The antefix is part of the rich and important 

terracotta tradition of ancient Gela. The lack of marble 

on Sicily encouraged the use of other materials for 

sculpture 5 and the good supply of clay around Gela 

resulted in a local production from the earliest years of 

the settlement in the 7th c. B.C. 6 The apotropaic power 

embodied in the image prompted the creation of a 

number of various architectural Gorgons in Gela, of 

different size and of different time 7 . The category of our 

antefix is, although well known, however, probably the 

least well published of all 8 . 

After its foundation by Rhodo-Cretan settlers in 689 

B.C. 9 the city grew to see its greatest wealth and 

territorial expansion during the last half of the 6th c. 

and especially the early decades of the 5th c. B.C. under 

the tyrants Kleandros, Hippokrates and Gelon. It is to 

the fervent building activity of these years that one must 

attribute the small sanctuary of our antefix. And the 

Carthaginian attack of 405 B.C. destroyed it along with 

the rest of the city. 

P. Orsi started archaeological investigations early this 

century 10 . While he concentrated on the necropolis of 

ancient Gela, he nevertheless explored and touched 

upon most of the key points of the city itself. When 

after a long period of silence work was resumed in 1951 

under D. Adamesteanu, P. Orlandini and the superintendent 

for Agrigento, P. Griffo, the efforts were 

focused primarily on the ancient acropolis, centered 

around the cult of Athena Lindia 11 . The city was located 

on an extended hill stretching along the seaside roughly 

in SE-NW direction 12 . The southern section of this hill, 

the area of the so-called Molino a Vento, ending with 

the bluff towards the river Gelas, constituted the 

acropolis in archaic and classical times. It is here we 

may look for the building of the Gorgon antefix. While 

the southern tip of this acropolis with the 6th and 5th c. 

B.C. Athena temples have been well published 13 , we are 

not equally fortunate for the northern end of the 

acropolis. 

A characteristic of the religious life and architecture 

of Gela in the archaic and classical period was a great 

proliferation of small religious shrines, both inside and 

outside of the acropolis 14 . Many of them cannot (or have 

not yet) been assigned to particular functions or 

particular divinities. Our only clue to the existence of 

some of these structures lies in the remains of 

architectural terracottas, which was a fundamental, 

abundant and colorful feature of Gelan 6th and 5th c. 

4. Cf. the remark about Sicilian terracottas made by R.A. Higgins in 

Catalogue of the Terracottas in the British Museum, vol. 1 (Text), 

297: "When [the clay is] orange, it is frequently covered with what 

looks like a green or cream slip. This is in fact not a slip, but a discoloration 

of the surface, presumably brought about by something in 

the soil, since the same phenomenon is to be seen on Rhodian and 

Attic imports found in Sicily." This assumption is supported by the 

Getty antefix where this cream color appears not only on the front but 

also on the back side, as well as over the dark red paint on cheeks and 

forehead locks. 

5. See P. Orsi, "Gela. Scavi del 1900-1905." M.A. 17 (1906) 571-75. 

6. For the patterns of importation and local production see e.g. P. 

Orlandini, "Gela. Topografía dei santuari e documentazione 

archaeologica dei culti." Riv. dell'Ist. Naz. d'Archaeologia e storia 

dell'arte, n.s.15 (1968) 28. 

7. The list does not include items later discussed in this article. For 

the Gorgoneia of the 6th c. B.C. Athenaion, both large and small, see 

L. Bernabo-Brea, "L'Athenaion di Gela e le sue terrecotte architettoniche", 

Ann. Sc. Arch. Atene 27-29 (1949-51) 71-74; for other 

examples in various locations of the city, see Orlandini (above note 6) 

35 fig. 16; N.S. 1956, 237, 386f, Fig. 2: N.S. 1962, 369-74, fig. 46, 47, 

48; also E.D. Van Burén, Archaic Fictile Revetments in Sicily and 

Magna Graecia, Washington. 1923, 138 nr 7, 154 nr 14, 160 nr 1. 

8. One interesting Gelan antefix category extant in several well 

preserved examples is a Silen type: see esp. N.S. 1956, 229ff., N.S. 

1960, 112ff., Arch Class. 6 (1954) 251-66, 8 (1956) 47, 5 (1953) 1-9, 

14 (1962) 42-45; good illustrations in P. Griffo - L. Matt Gela, N.Y. 

Graphic Society 1968, fig. 95 and in E. Langlotz Ancient Greek 

Sculpture in Southern Italy and Sicily, N.Y. 1965 fig. 33. 

9. J. Bérard La colonisation grecque de l'Italie méridionale et de la 

Sicile, 2nd éd. Paris 1957. On the debate over the date of the 

foundation see H. Wentker "Die Ktisis von Gela bei Thukydides", R. 

Mitt. LXIII (1956) 129-39; on the oldest pottery found see N.S. 1962, 

345f. and P. Orlandini, Cronache di archeologia e storia dell'arte 2 

(1963) 50-56. 

10. "Gela, Scavi del 1900-1905", M.A. 17 (1906) 1-766. 

11. The published material since the reopening of excavations in 1951 

is a maze of preliminary reports and occasional areas of more 

complete presentations, done primarily by D. Adamesteanu and P. 

Orlandini. The most profitable beginning is P. Orlandini (above note 

6), whose long article is a summary of the work up to that point. The 

general excavation reports for the work from 1951 and on are found in 

N.S. 10 (1956) 203-414; N.S. 14 (1960) 67-246; N.S. 16 (1962) 340-408; 

P. Orlandini, Kokalos 1 (1961) 137-144; 12 (1966) 8-35, 13 (1967) 

176-79; M.A. 44 (1962) 1-78; in addition to the articles on segments of 

material already mentioned (above note 8) the following have most 

bearing on our topic: D. Adamesteanu, Rev. Arch. 49-50 (1957) 

1:20-46, 11:147-80; Arch. Class. 10 (1958) 9-13. Two excellent 

monographic size treatments are: L. Bernabo-Brea (above note 7) and 

E. Meóla, "Terrecotte orientalizzanti di Gela" M.A. XLVIII (1971) 

1-85) P. Griffo - L. Matt, Gela, N.Y. Graphic Society 1968, is for a 

general public, but has excellent illustrations and a useful, discussive, 

but not complete bibliography p. 213-16 (only through 1963); other 

bibliographies - none complete - are found in N.S. 1960, 68f., N.S. 

1962, 340 and in Enc. dell'arte antica (v. Gela). 

12. Maps are found in N.S. 1956, 203, Orlandini (above note 6) Tav.I, 

and Griffo-Matt (above note 11) 171f. For the distribution of 

sanctuaries and habitations over the hill in different periods, see N.S. 

1962, 341-45. 

13. Op.cit. above note 7. 

14. See N.S. 1956, 373, 386; N.S. 1960, 87f; M.A. 1962,4ff. 

76

B.C. architecture. When Orlandini remarked in 1968 15 

that the architectural terracottas already had been 

published in various places, this was certainly true for 

most important categories except for that of our Gorgon 

antefix, which regretfully has so far been the subject 

only of preliminary and eclectic references. I want to 

review these references briefly: 

1. N.S. 1956,237. A fragment (lOxlOcm) comprising the 

eye, ear, forehead locks and part of the tresses of the 

right side. It is said to be identical with nr 3 (below) 

and of a common type; it is dated to the beginning of 

the 5th c. B.C. 

2. N.S. 1956, 247, fig. 1, 2 (243). A fragment (lOxlOcm) 

comprising the lower right side of the face, half of 

the mouth, no tongue, tresses in five concentric rows. 

"On the basis of their hair treatment" it is surprisingly 

enough dated to the second half of the 

6th c. B.C.; surprisingly because it is clearly part of 

our type, at least as far as a photographic investigation 

alone can determine. I would tentatively suggest 

that the date be moved down, or at least that the 

fragment be considered an early antecedent of our 

type. 

3. N.S. 1956, 271f, fig. lia. A fragment (height 11.5cm) 

comprising the eye, upper part of the ear, forehead, 

locks and diadem of the right side; it is reported to 

be of the same type as above, nr 1, i.e. of an early 

5th c. B.C. date. 

4. N.S. 1956, 273. A report of one complete example of 

nr 3 (above) plus fragments of more. The reference to 

the identical nature of an antefix in the British 

Museum 16 verifies the type beyond a doubt. 

5. Rev. Arch. 1957, 46 fig. 17 (45). It is complete except 

for the locks beside and below the left ear; the upper 

part of the antefix is repaired from several pieces and 

a small section of the diadem is missing. It seems to 

be the very same one as the example reported to be 

in the Museum at Gela in another source 17 . Since, 

however, no provenience within the city is given for 

nr 5, we cannot tell whether it is in fact also the same 

as the complete example mentioned above as nr 4. 

6. N.S. 1962, 373f., fig. 46, 47 and 48. Several small 

fragments were found in close connection, which 

need more thorough sorting than is possible here. Let 

it suffice to point out that fig. 48a, said to be of the 

same type as in the British Museum, cannot possibly 

qualify for that, since there is a wavy area outside the 

forehead locks instead of a flat diadem. On the other 

hand, fig. 47a, a small fragment, could possibly be of 

our type and should not, as is done, be combined 

with 48e which has neither earrings nor wrinkles by 

the eye. 

What can these examples tell us about the location of 

the building which they once decorated The pieces are 

not consistently concentrated around the remains of a 

single, identifiable building 18 , although they all come 

from the acropolis area. Generally speaking they are, 

however, from the northern half of that area, and in 

view of the important findings of nr 3 and 4, perhaps we 

can suppose a structure somewhere in the vicinity of the 

Heraion as the location of these Gorgons 19 . Possibly 

they belong to more than one building. This is as far as 

one can take the analysis only relying on bibliographical 

information. 

We will now turn to other known examples of this 

antefix type to be found in collections outside of Sicily: 

A. British Museum inv. nr 1137 20 . 

B. Two examples on the Swiss art market in 1975 21 . 

C. One example from a private collection deposited 

in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek, Copenhagen 22 . 

Since all of these are in fair state of preservation it is 

possible to make at least a preliminary stylistic 

comparison between five examples: one from the Getty 

Museum, one from the British Museum, one from the 

Museum in Gela and two from Switzerland. Even a 

study based only on photographic evidence, such as the 

present one, reveals that the antefix in the Getty 

Museum and the two from Switzerland must come from 

the same mold. The shared irregularities are of 

convincing nature and include the following features: 

the left ear slightly larger than the right one, the same 

off-centre part of the forehead locks, irregular size of 

the forehead locks and irregular placing of a strip of 

hairband under each ear 23 . 

15. O p. cit. (above note 6) 20. 


17. G. and V. DeMire-F. Villard, Sidle grecque, Paris 1955, plate 77. 

18. The following locations are connected with the references quoted 

(cf the maps above note 12): 

1) Between Calvario and Molino a Vento (more to the south than the 

Heraion) 

2) Carrubazza, i.e. east central slope (opposite side from the 

Heraion) 

3) Municipio platform, i.e. the Heraion area 

4) Same as in nr 3. 

5) No location given (identical with nr 4) 

6) NW of the Athenaion. 

19. See Orlandini (above note 6) 31-33. It is stated p.31 that the many 

later building phases have eliminated every trace of the sanctuaries 

themselves. 

20. See Higgins (above note 4) Text vol. 309, Plate vol. nr 155. E.D. 

van Burén, (above note 7) 144 nr 7) 144 nr 36. 

21. Gallerie Heidi Vollmoeller, Zurich, Catalogue of 1975 year's sale 

of ancient art. One antefix is on the cover, both are illustrated and 

described p. 12. 

22. Unpublished, observed by the author in July 1976 but not studied. 

23. On the other hand the paint traces on the diadems are different: 

from what little can be seen on the Getty example (a line at lower left 

side); all three from the same mold appear to have had a different 

painted pattern: on one Swiss example (nr 56) a zig-zag pattern is 

clearly seen on the photo. 

77

Another slight variant is constituted by the British 

Museum antefix 24 . There one finds five rows of tucked 

up tresses below the ear (instead of four), the maximum 

width of the face in relation to the maximum height is 

greater, making for a broader face, the strip of 

hairband under the right ear is surrounded by hair, 

making it a less prominent feature, the lower curves of 

the tresses join the chin and neck in a slightly different 

manner, further out to the side. 

A third variant is found in the example from the Gela 

Museum 25 . It is closer to the Getty variant than to the 

one in the British Museum, but it shares one feature 

with the latter, namely that the earrings are larger than 

on the Getty example. The tresses have here only four 

rows, as does the Getty antefix, but they are differently 

arranged. 

These preliminary distinctions raise many interesting 

questions concerning types and their variants 26 , repeated 

capacity of a mold and of the latitude allowed in 

differences of shape and coloring between repeated 

items of a given structure. In the absence of a more 

complete publication of the material it is premature to 

even speculate about possible series or stages of 

revetment containing our antefix. 

One additional interesting side to the whole question 

of Gorgon types in ancient Gela should be mentioned. 

As part of an apparently recurring tendency there have 

been found archaizing examples based on our Gorgon 

antefix dating from the Hellenistic period 27 . These 

terracottas, probably from a secular building, testify to 

the popularity of this particular Medusa rendering. 

When you in addition find four reduced size, archaizing 

Gorgons, clearly derived from the antefix type, fastened 

onto the rim of a well 28 , you feel yourself in the presence 

of a canonical force which indeed makes you wonder 

about the importance of the building the antefixes 

originally belonged to, or - for that matter - about the 

artist who created the successful archetype. 

In conclusion, a few remarks about the inherent 

stylistic qualities of the antefix, especially in the larger 

context of Magna Graecia. In the lively and quite 

independent Sicilian coroplastic tradition, Gela was one 

of the chief centres of manufacture. Here is produced in 

the first quarter of the 5th c. B.C. an unusually 

humanized Gorgon face 29 . Not only are the tusks and 

snakes gone • they never had an important role even in 

6th c. Gela - but the sense of form has clearly classical 

flavor. This is noticeable both in the general stringency 

of the proportions of the face as well as in details such 

as the modelling of the nose and the planes of the eye. 

Old monstrous, iconographical conventions are in this 

gorgoneion juxtaposed to a more sensitive plasticity, a 

not surprising phenomenon in this period of transition, 

although it is an early appearance in the Medusa image. 

Also the earrings and the diadem are transferred from a 

very different tradition, namely that of the Ionian kore. 

Perhaps we can suggest that these humanized-feminized 

features, so characteristic of the Gelan Medusa are due 

to an Eastern Aegean influence primarily channelled 

through the mother city, Rhodes 30 . In the rendering of 

the hair we might feel closer to Attic ideas. The 

synthesis, however, is thoroughly Sicilian. 

Birgitta Wohl, 

California State 

University, Northridge 

24. The discernible paint on the diadem is here instead a band of 

alternate light and dark squares. 

25. De Mire • Villard (above note 17) plate 77 and Rev. Arch. 1957, 

45 fig. 17. 

26. See Higgins (above note 4) 4f; for a systematic treatment of the 

procedures and classifications of small coroplastic items, see R.V. 

Nicholls, "Type, Group and Series: A Reconsideration of some 

Coroplastic Fundamentals", B.S.A. XLVII (1952) 217-26. 

27. N.S. 1960, 171, fig. % (dimensions 18 x 22 cm). A particularly 

noticeable difference from the early 5th c. B.C. archetype is seen in 

the curved eyebrows. See also P. Orlandini, "II gusto per I'imitazione 

deirantico nella Gela del IV-III sec. av. Cr.", Arch. Class. X (1958) 

240-42. On the archaizing trends in the statues of Athena Lindia, see 

P. Orlandini (above note 6) 28. 

28. N.S. 1060, 136 fig. 16. 

29. In the many Gorgon antefixes from Tarentum the monstrous 

qualities were always strongly pronounced, and together with a 

disproportionately round and flat face they last well into the 5th c. 

B.C. See e.g. C. Laviosa, "Le antefisse fittili di Taranto'*, Arch. Class. 

6 (1954) 217-50, also E.D. van Burén (above note 20) Plate XIL, fig. 

55-60 from Tarentum. 

30. Cf Rhodian female heads in e.g. R.A. Higgins (above note 4) 

plates 139, 140, 141 and 147. 

78

UN BOL EN ARGENT A MALIBU 

En 1921, Matteo délia Corte publia les trouvailles faites 

dans la villa romaine de N. Popidius Florus, située aux 

abords de Boscoreale 1 . On a pu tracer le plan de la villa. 

Les trouvailles sont entrées dans la collection de la 

Signora Zurlo-Pulzella; outre des fresques qui ornaient 

à mi-hauteur les parois peintes en jaune, deux 

mosaïques en noir et blanc, un pied de table ainsi que 

des vasques en marbre et trois lampes en terre cuite, 

celles-ci comprenaient un assez grand nombre de vases 

et d'ustensils en bronze. La plupart de ces vases se 

trouve à présent dans le J. Paul Getty Museum à 

Malibu. Le Musée possède même quelques pièces 

intéressantes qui ne figurent pas dans la publication, 

entre autres trois vases en argent: une coupe profonde a 

deux anses et une passoire 2 , puis le bol qui fait l'objet 

de la présente étude (figs. 1-5) 3 . Je suis reconnaissante 

envers M. Jíri Freí, conservateur des antiquités du J. 

Paul Getty Museum, qui m'a confié la publication de 

cette belle pièce. 

Le bol montre le modèle profond, sans épaule ni col 

et sans rebord accentué, qui, en Egypte, a été d'usage 

fréquent pendant l'époque helle'nistique 4 . La forme, 

arrondie à la base, s'élargit graduellement vers le bord 

supérieur. Celui-ci est lisse, à l'exception d'une ligne 

gravée, horizontale, aux deux tiers de la hauteur. 

Tel qu'il est conservé, le vase se compose d'une 

enveloppe, décorée a reliefs, et d'un intérieur lisse, coulé 

séparément. Les.deux parties sont soudées au bord qui 

fait partie de l'intérieur. Originairement, le vase avait 

en plus deux anses, posées verticalement, et un pied. 

Des traces évidentes font preuve qu'autrefois, les anses 

étaient attachées en bas, entre les deux scènes, 

c'est-à-dire, en dessous de l'endroit où les queues des 

oiseaux ornant la panse, se rencontrent; en haut, elles 

reposaient sur le bord en se divisant vers la gauche et 

vers là droite. En outre, des traces au centre de la 

rosette a huit feuilles, décorant le fond extérieur du 

vase, témoignent de l'apport d'un pied, perdu à 

présent 5 . 

La décoration du bol comprend, sur la paqse, des 

scènes de la vie des cigognes et, contre le fond, la rosette 

mentionnée. Les bords bien accentués des huit feuilles 

de la rosette se recourbent légèrement vers le centre; le 

reste de leur contour est sommairement indiqué. Au 

dessus de la rosette, une ligne horizontale en relief 

sépare le fond du vase de la panse; elle signifie le terrain 

où les scènes se déroulent. Celles-ci représentent, des 

deux côtés du vase, à gauche et a droite d'une plante 

centrale, une paire de cigognes, soit au combat avec un 

serpent, soit s'occupant de leur toilette 6 . 

La face la plus mouvementée, probablement le devant 

du vase (Figs. 1-2), montre une grande cigogne qui 

tourne la tête en arrière, le bec ouvert pour se débattre 

contre un serpent; celui-ci, enroule autour des pattes de 

l'oiseau, fixe le regard sur son adversaire. A gauche de 

la plante centrale, l'autre cigogne recourbe le long cou; 

elle lève le bec entrouvert pour arranger ou pour 

nettoyer les plumes de l'aile gauche, déployée contre le 

fond. Sur le revers, les cigognes se tiennent plus 

tranquilles (Figs. 3-4). Celle de gauche retourne la tête, 

1) M. délia Corte, NSc XVIII (1921), figs. 12-20. 

2) La coupe porte a l'intérieur un médaillon gravé 7 , composé' de quatre 

cercles concentriques autour d'un motif de losanges, puis deux 

groupes de cercles concentriques, l'un au bord, l'autre entre le bord et 

le me'daillon; les anses recourbées sont légèrement surélevées 

("chicken-bone handles"). —La passoire, de forme ronde, a une 

poignée que se termine en col de cygne recourbé. 

3) Mus.Inv. 72.AI.33—H.: 7.3 cm; diam. au bord supérieur: 10.3 cm. 

4) BABesch XLV (1970), 132.—L'étude citée s'occupe surtout des bols 

hellénistiques en verre dore. 

5) M. JiH Freí a confirmé la présence de traces des anses et du pied, 

traces que l'on ne découvre pas sur les photographies. 

6) II n'est pas certain que les échassiers représentés ici soient 

vraiment des cigognes. Les ailes pendantes, où les plumes caudales 

sont nettement indiquées, font plutôt penser à des craniches: cf. J.H. 

Breasted, Geschichte Aegyptens (Phaidon, 1936), pi. 214. D'autre 

part, les craniches se nourrissent uniquement de plantes et d'herbes, 

tandis que les cigognes aiment les petits serpents, les grenouilles etc. Il 

faut croire que l'artiste a observé attentivement des luttes de cigognes 

et de serpents, mais qu'il a reproduit les oiseaux selon une image qu'il 

avait dans la mémoire, ou d'après un exemple. 

79

Fig. 1-2 Bol en argent, J. Paul Getty Museum 72.AI.33 

80

Fig. 3-4 Bol en argent, J. Paul Getty Museum 72. A 1.33 

81

picotant entre les plumes de son dos, la cigogne a droite 

se baisse pour attaquer un petit serpent dont la tête à 

bec ouvert exprime l'angoisse. Les plantes au centre 

s'¿levent d'un calice compose de deux hautes feuilles à 

pointe recourbée; sur le devant, ce calice sort à son tour 

d'une corolle de feuilles dentelées. Les longues tiges 

portent de grands fruits qui font penser à des épis. Ici et 

là, des petits oiseaux ou des insectes de format exagéré 

sont assis sur les tiges 7 . 

Le thème montrant les échassiers dans leurs 

occupations usuelles, est très aime' à l'époque hellénistique 

tardive et au début de l'époque impériale. Dans un 

article précèdent, nous avons essayé de démontrer que, 

parmi les représentations conservées, il est possible de 

distinguer deux groupes qui montrent une différence 

considérable 8 . Le premier comprend des compositions 

où les échassiers et les autres oiseaux sont incorporés 

dans un véritable "paysage" de plantes aquatiques et 

d'arbres tronques terminant en feuilles et en boutons; 

les scènes se découlent sur toute la panse. Dans l'autre 

groupe, la composition est répartie sur les deux faces du 

vase; les échassiers y sont l'élément principal, tandis 

que le paysage est réduit à l'acanthe centrale 9 . Il paraît 

admissible de reconnaître dans le premier groupe le 

style alexandrin; l'attribution des vases du second 

groupe a l'influence artistique de l'Asie Mineure est 

appuyée par les représentations sur des vases en terre 

cuite de la fin du 1er siècle av.J.-C., trouvés uniquement 

en Asie Mineure et en Russie Méridionale 10 . 

Un bol, provenant de la Dacie, et deux vases de 

Boscoréale illustrent bien les deux genres (Figs. 5-6) 11 . 

Un troisième groupe qui se situe à l'époque augustéenne 

en montre, pour ainsi dire, une fusion. Les vases de la 

Pierpont Morgan Library a New York sont de beaux 

Fig. 5 Bol en argent, J. Paul Getty Museum, avant la restauration 

7) Parmi les insectes, sur la face, on de'couvre l'abeille, les ailes 

levées, dans l'attitude de l'hiéroglyphe: cf. Sir Alan Gardiner, 

Egyptian Grammar (1957), 477, Sign List, section L, nr.2.—Je dois les 

informations biologiques (voir aussi note 6) a mon amie Mlle Dr. 

Maria Rooseboom. 

8) "Les vases en argent à échassiers conservés à Istanbul", Mélanges 

Mansel (1974), 335-343, voir p. 342. 

9) Au début, l'ensemble est encadré parfois de deux maigres tiges 

fleuronnées. 

10) Dorothy Kent Hill, "Roman Jugs with Barbotine Decoration", 

Journ. of the Walters Art Gallery IX (1946), 68-79, voir figs. 1-3. 

11) D. Tudor, Germania 37 (1959), 238-242, 2 figs. — M.A. Héron de 

Villefosse, "Le trésor de Boscoréale", Mon.Piot (1899), 73-77, nos. 

11-12, pis. XI-XII; L. Byvanck-Quarles van Ufford, Zilveren en 

gouden vaatwerk uit de Griekse en Romeinse Oudheid (Ter Burg, 

Alkmaar, 1973), pi. XXXVI. Fig. 6 Bol en argent, de la Dacie 

82

Fig. 71 Vase en argent, de Boscoréale 

exemples d'une pareille combinaison 12 : sur les deux 

faces de chaque vase, les echassiers sont l'élément 

principal de la composition, tandis que les plantes 

fleuronnées rappellent l'ancien "paysage" dans une 

forme stylisée (Fig. 7). 

Le bol du J. Paul Getty Museum entre dans la 

dernière catégorie. La symétrie de la composition sépare 

nettement les scènes des deux faces; les echassiers sont 

Télément principal de la composition et la plante 

centrale rappelle l'ancient "paysage". Mais, a l'opposition 

de la monumentalité stylisée des scènes sur les 

vases de la Pierpont Morgan Library — monumentalité 

décorative, mais plutôt froide —, l'artiste qui a créé le 

bol de Malibu a su rendre la vie des oiseaux avec une 

grande vivacité; en même temps, il a eu l'oeil attentif 

pour la composition décorative. Par le naturel des 

représentations, son oeuvre rappelle de près l'ambiance 

paysagiste du bol de la Dacie que nous venons de 

mentionner (Fig. 5). 

Malheureusement, le bol de la Dacie est perdu; nous 

n'avons qu'une ancienne photographie assez vague et 

un dessin oîi les détails ont été copiés au mieux. La 

décoration naturaliste a recouvert la panse en une frise 

continue: une grande cigogne au milieu de la face, deux 

autres à gauche et à droite, tournées vers le centre et, 

sans doute, une quatrième sur le revers, représentées au 

bord d'un ruisseau dans un paysage de plantes 

aquatiques et d'arbres tronqués. La composition du bol 

de Malibu est différente. Pourtant, la vivacité monumentale 

de ses echassiers est proche de la grande 

cigogne au centre du dessin. 

En étudiant de plus près les echassiers du bol de 

Malibu, une particularité saute aux yeux, c'est-à-dire, la 

forte incision des lignes qui marquent les plumes 

caudales (cf. note 6). Pour autant qu'on puisse juger du 

bol de la Dacie, les lignes accentuées dans les ailes de la 

grande cigogne témoignent d'une pareille manière de 

rendre les détails. L'artiste des echassiers si statiques du 

vase de la Pierpont Morgan Library a recherché un effet 

semblable, mais en reproduisant le motif connu d'une 

façon stylisée, il l'a fait avec des lignes moins dures. 

Néanmoins, quelle différence si l'on compare K cette 

manière la rondeur presque tendre du plumage des 

echassiers sur les vases de Boscoréale au Louvre (Fig. 

6) 13 ! 

12) G.M.A. Richter, 'Two silver cups in Mr. J.P. Morgan's 

collection", Art in America VI (1918), 171-176, figs.; id., Journ. of the 

Walters Art Gallery IX (1946), 75-77, figs. 8-11. — Zilveren en gouden 

vaatwerk, pi. XXXVII. 

13) La même rondeur du relief caractérise le skyphos du rameur, 

trouve à Pompéi: A. Maiuri La Casa del Menandro e il suo tesoro di 

argentería (1932), 265-310, pis. XVI-XXIV; Zilveren en gouden 

vaatwerk, pi. XXXI. Plus tard, cette manière de rendre les détails se 

retrouve encore dans la représentation appauvrie des bols d'Istanbul, 

Mélanges Mansel, pis. 113-116. 

Fig. 8 Bol en argent, Pierpont Morgan Library 

83

Nous connaissons deux vases plus récents décoras 

d'une frise continue, reproduisant la vie des echassiers 

dans un paysage dru. Sur un bol de l'ancienne 

collection Fejervari, a présent au Musée Britannique, 

sont représentés quatre groupes de deux echassiers, 

chaque groupe étant séparé du prochain par un arbre 

qui étend ses branches à gauche et IL droite 14 . La frise 

est bordée, en haut comme en bas, d'une bande perlée. 

Le relief est peu accentué. Pourtant des lignes assez 

fortes marquent le dessin des ailes. L'autre vase, un 

gobelet en argent provenant de la Casa del Menandro à 

Pompéi, porte au centre la scène de lutte d'un échassier 

et d'un serpent qui s'est enroulé autour de lui et dont 

l'échassier tient la tête dans son bec 15 . Les lignes 

rigidement incisées se retrouvent ici surtout dans le 

dessin des grands épis. 

Nous arrivons ainsi à attribuer le bol du Getty 

Museum à, l'influence artistique d'Alexandrie, probablement 

a un artiste alexandrin 16 . Quant à la date, le bol 

parait antérieur au vase de la Pierpont Morgan Library 

qui se place à l'époque augustéenne tardive 17 . Il vaut la 

peine de vérifier cette conclusion par une autre 

méthode, c'est-à-dire en partant de la fonction 

artistique du relief. Or, dans le développement 

artistique qui se situe entre le début du 1er siècle 

av.J.-C. et la fin de la première moitié du 1er siècle de 

notre ère, un changement s'est produit dans les rapports 

entre la décoration en relief et le fond contre lequel 

cette décoration se dessine 18 . Pendant cette période, le 

relief qui, d'abord, interrompt à peine la transition 

coulante de la panse du vase au pied, devient à fur et à 

mesure plus haut; des détails de la représentation se 

détachent du fond, interrompant de plus en plus la 

ligne du contour pour être exécutés à la fin, parfois, sur 

un rebord qui fait saillie 19 . Le bol de Malibu ne montre 

pas un relief excessivement élevé. Pourtant le contour 

est moins régulier qu'il ne l'est, par exemple, pour le 

vase à echassiers du Louvre (fig. 6). De cette façon, on 

arrive aussi a une date vers la fin du 1er siècle av.J.-C. 

Une considération de caractère pratique rend toute 

date antérieure peu probable. C'est que les vases datant 

de l'époque hellénistique montrent tous — s'ils sont 

restés en usage — des traces d'usure; d'ordinaire, leur 

enveloppe, devenue extrêmement fragile, est en partie 

corrodée. Ce n'est pas le cas du bol du Getty Museum. 

En revanche, une autre considération met obstacle à 

une date plus récente. C'est le fait qu'on a apposé un 

pied qui a couvert en grande partie la rosette du fond. 

De toute évidence, l'artiste n'a pas prévu cet apport; 

mais, IL l'époque romaine, la forme ne répondant pas au 

modèle désire, on a ajouté le pied. Nous connaissons 

d'autres exemples d'une pareille modification. Entre 

autres, deux bols en argent du genre dit "bol mégarien" 

et qui font partie du trésor conservé à Hildesheim, ont 

été enrichis à une date ultérieure de deux anses et d'un 

pied 20 . On a retrouvré parmi les pièces détachées du 

trésor les anses appartenant a l'un des bols. Les pieds 

manquent, mais sur chaque rosette du fond deux 

empreintes de circonférence différente recèlent qu'on a 

changé deux fois l'aspect des vases en apposant tantôt 

un pied élancé, tantôt un pied large et trapu. A en juger 

par le modèle des anses, le bol de Malibu a eu, dans sa 

nouvelle version, un pied plutôt élance'. 

Concluons en proposant d'attribuer la composition 

des reliefs du bol au J. Paul Getty Museum à Malibu à 

l'art alexandrin et d'en placer l'exécution vers la fin du 

1er siècle av.J.-C. 

L. Byvanck-Quarles van Ufford 

Leyde 

14) H.B. Walters, Catalogue of the Silver Plate in the British Museum 

(1921), 16.17, no. 72, pi. XII. Malgré la vivacité du dessin, l'ensemble 

ne fascine pas. Évidemment, la réproduction souvent répétée des 

motifs a fait perdre de la fraicheur aux scènes. 

15) Maiuri, La Casa del Menandro e il suo tesoro di argentería, 

347-348, no. 13, pi. XLV. Une date vers le milieu du 1er siècle apr. 

J.-C. parait admissible. 

16) Le dessin du plumage, détail de caractère plus ou moins 

technique, appuie d'une façon inattendue la repartition proposée des 

vases à echassiers en deux groupes distincts, voir Mélanges Mansel, 

342. 

17) Le vase en terre sigillée, provenant de l'atelier de C. Ateius et qui 

rappelle les vases de la Pierpont Morgan Library (Zilveren en gouden 

vaatwerk, 95, fig. 15 et pi. XXXVII) rappelle aussi les représentations 

du bol du Getty Museum. 

18) L. Byvanck-Quarles van Ufford, Varia Histórica, aangeboden aan 

Prof. Dr. A.W. Byvanck (1954), 71-82 (voir surtout 73-75 et 79-81); 

id., BABesch XXXV (1960), 84-85. 

19) Quatre skyphoi peuvent illustrer l'ensemble du développement: le 

skyphos du rameur (voir n. 11), les skyphoi de Hoby (Vagn H. 

Poulsen, "Die Silberbecher von Hoby", Antike Plastik VIII, 1968, 

69-74, pis. 42-55), le "skyphos de Claude" (L. Byvanck-Quarles van 

Ufford, Festoen, Melanges A.N. Zadoks-Josephus Jitta, 1976, 202-207, 

figs. 1-2), les skyphoi de Berthouville (E. Babelon, Le trésor 

d'argenterie de Berthouville, 1916, 88-93, nos. 6-7, pis. IX-X).—Cf. 

Zilveren en gouden vaatwerk, pis. XXXI-XXXV. 

20) E. Pernice und F. Winter, Der Hildesheimer Silberfund (1901), 

28-30, voir figs. 9-10, pis. VI-VII; U. Gehrig, Der Hildesheimer 

Silberfund (1967), 23, nos. 17-18, figs. 17-18. 

84

A NEW MITHRAIC TAUROCTONY 


In the years which have elapsed between the publication 

of my book on Mithraic Art and the preparation of this 

article for publication, the unique bronze statuette of 

'Mithra eques' which I published in it 1 is no longer the 

only monument of Mithraic cult in the J. Paul Getty 

Museum. A new and very important Mithraic tauroctony 

has been recently donated to the museum and 

added to its collections; the first publication of which 

appears in the following pages. 

To my understanding, the contribution of publications 

describing previously unknown and unpublished 

Mithraic monuments 2 must not be limited to the 

purpose of providing supplementary material for the 

CIMRM. The real value of some of those new 

monuments depends heavily on the amount of new 

information that they can provide regarding the 

Mithraic myth and the interpretation of the various 

symbolic figures and forms known from the already 

published material. 

The new Mithraic tauroctony now in the J. Paul Getty 

Museum is happily a monument that nobody can call 

"one more tauroctony/' It belongs to this small and 

select group of archaeological finds which provide to 

our knowledge either a positive new interpretation or a 

valuable and documented decision on a previously 

disputed point of monumental symbolism. As such, I 

am sure that it can claim after this publication a very 

prominent position among the known and published 

monuments of Roman Mithraism. 

1. Oikonomides, Al.N. Mithraic Art: A Search for Unpublished and 

Unidentified Monuments. Chicago 1975. 11. 'Bronze Statuette of 

Mithra on Horseback in the J. Paul Getty Museum', pp.85-92. Figs. 

30-33. 

2.

Fig. 1 J. Paul Getty Museum 76.AA.63 (front view) 

MITHRA TAUROCTONUS OR BULL-SLAYER. 

Central fragment from a monumental Roman sculpture, 

dated ca. the middle of the second century A.D. White 

Italian marble (Carrara) and fine workmanship point 

towards the possibility that we are facing a work 

produced by one of the group of sculptors who had their 

workshops in the area of what can be called 

Metropolitan Rome. The lack, however, of an exact 

record of the place where the fragment was found leaves 

open the possibility that the sculpture may have been 

made in or near Rome but for a Mithraeum 3 located in 

one of the provinces. 

Height: 31.le; width: 34.3c; depth: 23.5c 

76.AA.63, anonymous donation in memory of J. Paul 

Getty and David Rinne. 

3. Cf. p. 90 and notes 16, 17, 18. 

86

Fig. 2 

Reconstruction of the Mithraic Tauroctony in the J. Paul Getty Museum 

Despite the fact that some of the important parts of 

the sculpture are missing, the preserved part allows us 

to appreciate the excellence of the sculptor's art and the 

masterful way he depicted this very significant scene of 

the Mithraic myth. On our fragment only the part of 

Mithra's body below the waist (right leg missing) and 

the head-less body of the powerfully sculpted subdued 

bull (the extended portion of the front left leg missing, 

as well as the extended portion of the back right leg) 

remain. 

The complete scene of the Mithraic tauroctony or 

bull-slaying as represented in Roman art is known from 

a great number of monuments. 4 Our restoration (fig. 2) 

is an attempt to help the reader's imagination in 

restoring the missing parts of the sculpture and is based 

on the data supplied by tauroctonies belonging 

stylistically to the same artistic group. The two 

photographs of the fragment (figs. 1 & 3), viewed 

alongside in parallel with the drawing of the restoration, 

provide the eyes of the art historian and the 

archaeologist with all the necessary details for classification 

and comparative study, better than any possible 

documentary list or literary description. 

Mithra's Persian costume is identifiable from the 

preserved part of the cloak and the typical baggy 

trousers. On the part of the cloak partially covering the 

right leg lies the flat scabbard of a short Roman sword. 

Traces of this sword (broken and missing) can be 

observed between the god's right knee and the well 

sculpted skin-fold of the bull's neck, exactly at the place 

where the bull is supposed to receive the powerful 

mortal wound. Traces of red color still are visible, 

indicating that once the whole sculpture was painted 

4. The first important collection of those monuments was the work 

of F. Cumont, Textes et Monuments figures relatifs aux Mystères de 

Mithra, 2 vols., Bruxelles 18%-1898. The second and more complète 

collection, presently used as the basic reference, was the work of J.M. 

Vermaseren, Corpus Inscriptionum et Monumentorum Religionis 

Mithraicae, 2 vols., The Hague 1956-1960. (Abbr. CIMRM). 

87

with the bright colors 5 known to be used in Mithraic art. 

The special value, however, of the new sculpture of 

the Mithraic tauroctony does not originate from its 

artistic excellence but from one secondary but important 

detail:,the way that the minor animals assisting or 

accompanying Mithra Tauroctonus have been placed by 

our unknown sculptor. On this particular detail it may 

be necessary to examine minutely the new evidence, 

which 'de facto' invalidates forever some of the 

interpretations proposed by the earliest school of 

Mithraic archaeology. 

Among the different minor animals 6 depicted on the 

known Mithraic representations of the tauroctony or 

bull-slaying, we know that three of them, the dog, the 

serpent, and the scorpion played an important role in 

the myth from their frequent occurence. Unhappily, no 

ancient text known until now has preserved any 

important portion of the Mithraic myths, so that the 

interpretation of the artistic representations and the 

various group scenes on the art-monuments remains 

an open field for scholarship. 

Franz Cumont, 7 the Belgian scholar who is considered 

by many 8 as the real "father of Mithraic studies," 

was the first who tried to offer an interpretation of the 

presence of the three animals in the tauroctony scene. 

Using Zoroastrian symbolism, Cumont proposed that 

the dog was the good creation of Ormazd, i.e. an ally of 

Mithra, and the serpent and the scorpion Ahriman's 

evil creations, i.e. enemies of Mithra. The fight of good 

and evil, according to Cumont, 9 appears in the 

symbolism of the dog fighting the snake and in the 

scorpion's effort to consume the bull's genital parts. 

Cumont's interpretation has been widely accepted 

and remained practically unchallenged until 1971, when 

J.R. Hinnells read his "Reflections on the Bull-Slaying 

Scene" at the first International Congress of Mithraic 

Studies in Manchester. 10 In this paper, Hinnells 

successfully supported the view that Cumont's interpretation 

of the symbolism of the dog, the serpent and 

the scorpion could not be supported by the monuments 

because "it is difficult, if not impossible, to name a 

[Mithraic tauroctony] relief on which it is certain that 

the dog and the snake are fighting . . . The majority of 

reliefs simply portray the dog and the snake going for 

the eternal blood but each ignoring the other. 11 

Hinnells' well-taken and well-supported points on the 

alleged "fight" of the dog and the snake succeeded in 

revising partially Cumont's established idea that their 

symbolism could be used as evidence "for a dualistic 

theology of primordial battle comparable to the myth in 

Greater Bundahisn.6." 12 Concerning the symbolism of 

the scorpion, however, the position held by Hinnells 

faced a more resistant scepticism. It could well be that 

the serpent was not a symbol of Ahriman . . . but who 

could easily accept the idea that Cumont was wrong in 

interpreting the scorpion as a symbol of the destructive 

force of evil 

In his effort to prove that the symbolism of the 

scorpion was also was open to question, Hinnells was 

missing the support of the monuments representing the 

Mithraic tauroctony. For, it is a fact that the majority of 

5. Color printing did not provide its help to the two major works 

mentioned in note 4. Recently, however, Mithraic monuments have 

been illustrated in full color in some of the works that are essential for 

the study of Mithraism and Mithraic archaeology. I list here those 

that I consider important: 

Vermaseren, MJ. Mithriaca I: The Mithraeum at S. Maria Capua 

Vetere. Leiden 1971. 

Vermaseren, MJ. "Mithra e Mithrei" in Enciclopedia dell'Arte 

Arnica V(1963), p. 116-122 (Three superb plates from the frescos of 

the Marino Mithraeum). 

Cumont, F. "The Dura Mithraeum." in Mithraic Studies I, 

pp.151-214 and II, pis. 19-30. 

Daniels, Ch. Mithras and His Temples on the Wall. Newcastle upon 

Tyne 1967. (Cover). 

6. The raven, the lizard and the lion occasionally accompany the 

dog, the serpent and the scorpion in some reliefs of the tauroctony. 

From the fact that they do not appear in the scene as having a special 

role assigned to them by the myth and also that they do not appear in 

what we can call 'artistic' monuments, we can understand that they 

may have been added to the myth by a later, more 'literary' version. 

7. Cumont's works have always enjoyed a rather wide readership in 

the English speaking world. The Mysteries of Mithra, translated by 

TJ. McCormack and published in Chicago in the year 1903, was 

followed by a parallel edition in London the same year. Reprinted in 

paperback form in 1954 in New York, the book remains in print as a 

result of more than ten annual reimpressions. Oriental Religions and 

Roman Paganism (orig. ed. Chicago 1911, repr. ed. New York 1956 

and reimpressions), Astrology and Religion among the Greeks and 

Romans (London 1911, repr. ed. New York 1957 and reimpressions). 

8. There is, however, a vocal minority proclaiming that Cumont's 

theories have created problems for a healthy study of Mithraism in the 

Roman Empire. Cf. Gordon, R.L., "Cumont and the Doctrines of 

Mithraism," in Mithraic Studies I, p. 215-248. Gordon believes 

(ibidem, p. 216-7) that "... the basic categories in terms of which 

Cumont formulated his ideas about Mithraism, and which profoundly 

influenced his presentation of it, are themselves open to question; not 

only because his immediate model was a version of Zoroastrianism, 

but because he arbitrarily forced the material into an intellectual 

mold." 

9. Cumont, F. The Mysteries of Mithra. Chicago 1903; Repr. p. 136. 

10. Hinnells, J.R. "Reflections on the Bull-Slaying Scene." in 

Mithraic Studies II, pp. 290-312, pis. 10-13. [Further references to this 

paper will appear as Hinnells, MIST II.] 

11. Hinnells, MIST II, p. 293. His minute observations on details of 

Mithraic art such as those which appear in this article "Reflections on 

the Lion-Headed Figure in Mithraism" in Acta Irónica IV, 1975, pp. 

333-369 and the article "The Iconography of Cautes and Cautopates" 

in Journal of Mithraic Studies, I.I, 1976, pp. 36-67, are hopeful 

indications that Hinnells will one day produce a major work on 

Mithra and Mithraism. Those minute observations, however, should 

not create beards where they do not exist, like in the case of a relief 

most valuable for Mithraic mythology now in the Guildhall Museum, 

(cf. Oikonomides, A1.N. Mithraic Art, pp. 30-37 and Hinnells, J.R. in 

JMS I,l,1976,p.46). What Hinnells considers as a 'beard' is simply 

dirt and smog, which the museum personnel never had the time to 

clean. 

88

Fig. 3 J. Paul Getty Museum 76.AA.63 (back view) 

the monuments represent the scorpion against the bull's 

genital parts. Such a position could hardly bring into 

dispute Cumont's idea that, by trying to consume the 

animal's genitals, the scorpion was trying "to poison in 

it, the very souces of life." 13 

Among the arguments brought forward by Hinnells, 

there were many really valid examples from ancient 

monuments and artifacts which support the idea that in 

the symbolism of the Greco-Roman world the scorpion 

was not always associated with the idea of evil. The fact 

remained, however, that among those examples which 

were available for documenting his position, Hinnells 

had no support from the monuments representing the 

Mithra Tauroctonus. Proving beyond any doubt that 

Hinnells was absolutely right in not considering the 

scorpion as necessarily an evil symbol is the new 

Mithraic tauroctony now in the J. Paul Getty Museum. 

Campbell 14 was the first one to observe that among 

the representations of the scorpion on monuments 

illustrating the Mithraic tauroctony, only one (CIMRM) 

shows his tail in the stinging position. Elaborating on 

12. Hinnells, MIST II, p. 293. 

13. Cumont, F. The Mysteries of Mithra. Chicago 1903, p. 135. 

14. Campbell, L. Mithraic Iconography and Ideology. Leiden 1968, 

p. 26. 

89

this observation, Hinnells 15 added that ". . . on many 

monuments at least, the artist was not concerned to 

show the deathly sting of the scorpion, for its tail lies 

completely inert." 

The scorpion sculpted on our fragmentary sculpture 

of the Mithraic tauroctony is lying happily with his tail 

completely inert on the middle of the bull's belly and 

completely unconcerned with the animal's genitals. 

Near the genitals, as far as we can say from a badly 

broken part still protruding from the bull's body, the 

serpent was located. As for the dog, we can still see part 

of its head and the front legs sculpted in relief on the 

bull's body below the broken part from the slaying 

sword. 

There is no question that it will be rather hard to 

consider this inactive scorpion as a symbol of the 

destructive powers of evil opposing Mithra. If a name is 

necessary for him, the most fitting would be "the 

scorpion saviour", because, by proving that Hinnells 

was right 16 to attack Cumont's interpretation, it saved 

all the scorpions represented on Mithraic tauroctonies 

from being called in the future "symbols of evil." 

Stylistically, the Mithraic tauroctony published for 

the first time in this paper belongs to the unhappily 

small group of Mithraic sculptures that one could 

consider as works of well-trained and unquestionably 

professional sculptors. The possibility that it is the 

product of a workshop located in the area of 

Metropolitan Rome 17 is the most probable, but this fact 

cannot support an assumption that it was also 

discovered originally in the same area. We must always 

remember the Mithraic sculptures of the Walbrook 

Mithraeum which are also products of a Metropolitan 

Roman workshop but which were actually exported 18 to 

the province of Britain. 

Considering the order of the minor animals 19 and 

particularly the special case of the scorpion already 

discussed above, our sculpture has no parallel among 

the Mithraic tauroctonies known and published until 

now. As for the placement of the serpent by the genitals 

of the bull, this is also a unique feature. In the three 

other tauroctonies where the serpent appears in the 

same place, it is always accompanied by the scorprion 

(CIMRM 88,89,158). 

Some special details which can be observed on the 

preserved part of Mithra's body and the anatomy of the 

bull suggest the idea that the same archetypal pattern 

used by our sculptor was used by some other sculptors 

whose works were found among the ruins of the city of 

Rome (CIMRM 417,546,548). 

Al.N. Oikonomides 


15. Hinnells, MIST II, p. 298. 

16. Hinnells, MIST II, p. 300.1 am happy only with the first part of 

Hinnells' conclusion stating that "the scorpion on Mithraic reliefs 

does not depict evil..." The second part "... but it is an astrological 

sign conveying, perhaps among other things, ideas of fertility" 74 leaves 

me unsatisfied. What idea of fertility can be conveyed to the viewer by 

the scene of the scorpion attacking the bull's genitals What is the 

meaning of "an astrological sign" involved in the scene of the 

tauroctony 

It appears, however, that Hinnells was right when he pointed out 

that in astrology the sign of Scorpius governs the genitals. Following 

this point, Roger Beck's 'A note on the scorpion in the tauroctony' in 

Journal of Mithraic Studies I.2,1976,pp. 208-209 brings to the 

discussion 'Zoroaster's advice' to sow "when the sun has traversed 

twelve degrees of Scorpius and the moon is in Taurus." (Pliny H. N. 

XVIII.24 [55.200]). 

Beck believes "that the advice attributed to Zoroaster in Pliny is 

very germane to the interpretation of the Mithraic tauroctony, and 

particularly to the interpretation of the role of the scorpion." 

17. The striking stylistic similarity between the famous tauroctony in 

the Vatican (CIMRM 548), the relief in the Cincinnati Art Museum 

[from Rome] and some other equally artistic tauroctonies also from 

Rome, establish the possibility that this workshop had created its own 

'special pattern' for the Mithraic tauroctony. This pattern's originals 

could now be related to the earlier masterpieces of Nike/Victory 

slaying the bull. 

18. Oikonomides, Al.N. Mithraic Art, pp. 11-22, 91-94. 

19. The interpreation of Mithraic monuments is by now gradually 

progressing towards a better knowledge of the religion of Mithras in 

the Roman empire. Cumont and Vermaseren have opened the path, 

indicating the necessity of a comparative study of the known 

monuments. Others will carry on from this stage searching for the 

unknown paths leading to the interpretation of the remaining problem 

- figures in Mithraic symbolism. But we must never forget that before 

Cumont and Vermaseren, the interpretation of Mithraic monumnets 

was far more primitive and absurd than anything seriously suggested 

in our own day. The best illustration of such conditions that I can give 

here is the description of a Mithraic tauroctony relief in the Journal of 

Edward Gibbon, the famous English historian who wrote the 

Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire: 

9. A great bas relief, of a sacrifice to Mithras; The two Chariots 

ascending and descending in the heavens mark the Sun, and a 

religion which suffered strange alterations between Persia and 

Rome. The priests are in Phrygian bonnets. One of them is stabbing 

the victim. 

(Bonnard, G.A. Gibbons Journey from Geneva to Rome. London 

1%1. p. 249). 

Edward Gibbon's Journal, from April 20 to October 2, 1764 is the 

source of this description, a brief text illustrating eloquently the 

knowledge about the Mithraic tauroctony reliefs current in his times. 

This knowledge of course changed gradually for the better in the 

Nineteenth and Twentieth centuries (Cumont's TMMM was published 

between 18% and 1898). 

90

A PAPYRUS LETTER ABOUT 

EPICUREAN PHILOSOPHY BOOKS 

The J. Paul Getty Museum is housed in a successful 

recreation of the Villa del Papyri in Herculaneum. Of 

the various types of artwork and artifacts bequeathed 

to the modern world by antiquity and now among the 

Museum's holdings, however, there was until recently a 

gap whose filling would have made the correspondence 

between the two buildings even more nearly complete. 

There were no papyri in the Museum's collection even 

though the original Villa was named after its rich 

library of papyrus rolls, containing mostly Epicurean 

texts. The first step to improve the situation in Malibu 

was taken by Mrs. Lenore Barozzi who generously 

presented the J. Paul Getty Museum with two papyri. 

One of them, the subject of this note, is particularly 

appropriate in that its contents concern Epicurean 

philosophy books. 1 

As is the case with most of the papyri that have 

survived the centuries, the physical appearance of this 

one is unimposing. There is one large fragment, 5.8 cm. 

in width by 10.7 cm. in height, to which two small 

fragments have been placed in alignment. 2 Three tiny 

bits have broken off from the main piece and have 

defied attempts to replace them in their proper 

positions. One bears the trace of a letter (not enough 

survives to establish its identity), the others bear 

respectively the letters ad and ou. The hand that wrote 

the body of the text is regular and easily legible, 

certainly belonging to the Roman period and within 

that period, with some likelihood, to the latter half of 

the second century. 3 A salutation and what has been 

read as a date were added at the bottom (apparently) by 

a different hand, 4 thinner and more rapid than the first 

hand. 

Remains of a left-hand margin are preserved in one 

of the two small fragments. Although that piece cannot 

be joined cleanly to the main piece, it appears to have 

broken away from the upper left-hand part of the text. 

It has therefore been positioned close to, but not flush 

1) It provided the subject matter for a paper I delivered at the 107th 

Annual Meeting of the American Philological Association in 

Washington, D.C. J. Paul Getty Museum, 76.AI.27 

2) Not without raising difficulties and doubts; for which see 

Commentary, notes to lines 3-5 and 15. The fragment at the upper left 

(see Figure) measures 3.0 x 1.7 cm.; that at the lower left, 1.6 x 1.7 cm. 

3) Though less regular and calligraphic and not identical in all its 

letter shapes, the hand in many respects resembles that which 

transcribed the Berlin copy of the Gnomon of the Idios Logos (B.G.U. 

V 1210, prob. A.D. 161/180). See R. Seider, Paléographie der 

griechischen Papyri, vol. I (Stuttgart, 1967), pi. 37, or O. Montevecchi, 

La Papirologia (Torino, 1973), pi. 57. 

4) Not inconceivably, it is the same hand writing more quickly. 

91

against, the main fragment. If that positioning is right, 

or nearly so, it means that not too much has been lost at 

the left side of the papyrus. There is no way, however, to 

estimate the loss on the right side. The result is that the 

papyrus is nearly complete from top to bottom, with 

only a line or two of address missing at the top; but its 

width has suffered losses, modest on the left, 

inestimable on the right, and of such an extent generally 

as to preclude attempts to establish with precision the 

flow of thought in the text. 

Luckily, what has remained of the papyrus clearly 

indicates its form and subject matter: it is a letter about 

books, and more precisely, about Epicurean philosophy 

books. As many as six Epicurean works are mentioned, 

most with their titles preserved in whole or in part. 

Most, as would be expected, are works by Epicurus 

himself, but at least one may be from the corpus of 

writings by Epicurus's most beloved disciple, Metrodorus. 

5 As far as judgement is possible, it is these books 

that constitute the primary and perhaps, apart from the 

usual formalities, sole subject matter of the letter. What 

was to be done with them The answer to this question 

is probably supplied by the verb forms avaTiEJ^co and 

aneoTEiAa, preserved respectively in lines 7 and 8 of the 

text. They suggest that the sender of the letter is also a 

sender of books: he will send, and has already sent, a 

selection of Epicurean tracts to his addressee. He is 

possibly an older adherent providing pertinent literature 

to a younger devotee or more recent convert. The 

circumstances may therefore reflect those of a roughly 

contemporary but far better known Epicurean letter, 

that of Diogenes of Oenoanda to Antipater, preserved in 

fragments 15 and following of the former's famous 

inscription. There, at one point, Diogenes affirms: "I 

have sent, as you requested, the (books) 'On the Infinity 

of Worlds'." 6 

It is unfortunate that the names of the correspondents 

of the papyrus letter are lost. If not scholars, they 

were, as just suggested, presumably adherents to 

Epicurean philosophy. The exact provenance of the 

letter is also unknown. All that can be said is that it 

must have come from the Egyptian chora. It was 

certainly sent there after being written, possibly even 

written there if not in Alexandria. There is only one clue 

toward greater precision on this point: the verb 

avanqÀiiJœ. If, as frequently in Egyptian Koine, the 

prepositional element indicates relative position with 

respect to the Nile, then the recipient of the letter was 

"upriver" (ava-) with respect to its sender, a circumstance 

consistent with the letter's having been written in 

Alexandria, a city where such books as those mentioned 

in the letter might more readily have been found. 

Whatever the case, in its concern for philosophy 

books, this papyrus is a precious bit of testimony for the 

existence of an interest in Epicureanism in the Egyptian 

countryside in the Roman period. 7 In its concern for 

books it invites comparison with P.Oxy. XVIII 2192, a 

letter of the second century A.D. in which the writer 

asks that copies of books 6 and 7 of Hypsicrates' Comic 

Characters be made and sent to him, 8 and with P.Berol. 

21849, a fifth-century letter in which the writer urges 

thé return of books he had lent the addressee, namely 

Alexander Claudius's commentary on Demosthenes and 

three works by Menander Rhetor. 9 

Only one side of the papyrus is inscribed. No trace of 

writing (an address, for example) has survived on the 

reverse side. The text of the letter, written as is usual 

with the fibers, is as follows: 10 

5) The work by Metrooorus: line 2 and Commentary note. For the 

other works: lines 3, 4, 5, 6 and 11 with notes. 

6) Diogenis Oenoandensis Fragmenta, éd. Chilton (Teubner, Leipzig, 

1967), Fr. 16, col. 1.4-6: TO TIE.QI aneiQiac, XO£^GDV, cuc rjlicoocK, 

arr/OTEiAa oot. Cf. col. 11.12 ff. 

7) Evidence thereto is otherwise exceedingly scarce. For example, only 

a handful of Epicurean texts are listed in Roger A. Pack, The Greek 

and Latin Literary Texts from Greco-Roman Egypt (2nd edn., Ann 

Arbor, 1965). They are nos. 2574-2579, two of which at least are of 

Ptolemaic vintage. 

8) Reproduced in E. G. Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient 

World (Oxford, 1971), as no. 68. The letter also mentions inter alia 

certain "prose epitomes of Thersagoras's work on the myths of 

tragedy." The papyrus is listed by Pack as no. 2091. 

9) H. Maehler, "Menander Rhetor and Alexander Claudius in a 

Papyrus Letter," GRBS 15 (1974), 305-311. Also pertinent is P.Primi 

(= P.Mil.Vogl.) I 11, a letter of the second century listing works by 

Antipater, Boe'thus, Chrysippus, Diogenes and Posidonius; Pack no. 

2093. Incidentally, the Berlin letter and the letter edited in the present 

paper should both be added to Pack's list of "Book Catalogues" 

(op.cit. nos. 2087-2093). 

10) Because of doubt as to the spacing and position of the small 

fragment at the upper left (see earlier comments in this introduction 

and below, note to lines 3-5) with respect to the main fragment, I have 

not included in the transcription estimates on the extent of the 

lacunas at the beginning of the lines. If the fragment is rightly 

positioned and spaced, then the lacuna in the first half of line 5 may 

be set at roughly six letters, with about eight letters missing at the 

beginnings of lines 6 and 7, seven at the beginning of line 8, five at the 

beginnings of lines 9 through 11, and so forth. I take line 15 to be 

complete—but only if the fragment at the lower left is correctly placed 

(see note ad loc.). 

92

TRANSLATION 

1 

5 

10 

15 

"... greetings, . . . book(s) of() Metrodorus . . . 

Epicurus's (book) 4 On Justice* . . . best 'On Pleasure' . . 

. For the 2nd book 'On ...'... (to) another friend . . . 

I will send ... I sent through the hand of ... -leites 

does not seem to me ... so that to me ... books . . . 

Greet . . . 

"Farewell. Year 4, Choiak 4." 

COMMENTARY 

2. Mrjrlçodcoçou: the broken letter is far more likely to 

be rho than lambda. Accordingly, another attractive 

possibility, that the name should be restored as 

'AnoAlAodoucou, can be dismissed. Apollodorus was a 

voluminous Epicurean .writer, responsible for more than 

93

400 books, including a biography of Epicurus. See 

Diogenes Laertius X.2 and 25. For a listing of titles by 

Metrodorus: ibid. X.24. Yet another possibility, raised 

by J0rgen Mejer (letter of 25 April 1976), is that this line 

does not refer to a work by Metrodorus but to one 

entitled r\eo\ Mr/rçodcoçou, somehow equivalent to 

Epicurus's work whose title is given simply as 

Mr]TQOdcoQoc in Diogenes Laertius X.28. 

/Ji/JA[i':/3i/}A[iov or /Ji/JA[ia. Accusative is likely; 

whether singular or plural is uncertain. 

3-5. It is certain from the position of the small 

fragment prior to mounting that it comes from the 

upper left-hand portion of the papyrus. In three 

successive lines it bears the following: xo[, OQI[, you[. 

Whether the fragment's alignment with lines 3-5 is right 

is open to question; it might also have been aligned with 

lines 2-4 or with lines 4-6. In defense of the alignment 

with lines 3-5, it may be said that this positioning 

produces the most attractive readings, particularly in 

suggesting the restoration 'Em]|xo[u]cou in lines 2-3, 

and less significantly, though still importantly, dg/[o]Tcov 

in line 4. But, of course, by very reason of these results, 

the fragment's position may come under suspicion. The 

reader should therefore exercise caution in accepting or 

using the readings at the beginnings of lines 3-5. 

3. The letter after dixaiootivrjc is certainly alpha; 

kappa cannot be read; therefore xa[i'cannot be restored. 

It is still likely that this line refers, though in shortened 

fashon, to the treatise UZQI dixaioouvrjç xaï TGOV îiAAcuv 

agETcov, listed by Diogenes Laertius (X. 27-28) as being 

among Epicurus's best productions. 

a.[: if the letter after alpha is lambda (a distinct 

possibility) then restore, as Mejer suggests, something 

like o£[Ao. 

4. "{/'TilçUiflTrjç rçdovrfc: TTCQÍ the usual preposition in 

book titles, was written first, then emended to \m¿Q. 

Upsilon was squeezed in above the line, iota canceled 

with a short oblique stroke. The work that is meant is 

presumably Epicurus's book De voluptate, cited by 

Cicero, De divinatione 11.27.59 (cf. H. Usener, Epicúrea 

[Stuttgart, 1966; repr. of 1887 edn.], p. 101), but not to 

be found in Diogenes Laertius's list at X.27-28. For the 

frequent interchange of unec and TTEÇI in Koine, see E. 

Mayser, Grammatik der griechischen Papyri aus der 

Ptolemaerzeit, II.2 (Berlin and Leipzig, 1934; repr. 

1970), pp. 450-54; Blass, Debrunner, and Funk, A 

Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early 

Christian Literature (Chicago, 1961), §§ 229(1) and 231. 

5. you: perhaps restore Ao]|you, running over from the 

preceding line. 

TO yàç ]} neeft'The 2nd book 'On . . .'." Several of 

Epicurus's works are known to have run to two or more 

"books," i.e. papyrus rolls. This was presumably one of 

them. See again Diogenes Laertius X.27-28, passim. 

6. £.[: perhaps restore 'ETT[IXOUQOU, £n[ioToAr]v, or 

CTr[ioroAac. The reference could be to a work, a letter or 

letters, addressed to a friend of Epicurus's other than 

Metrodorus (line 2). 

9. IAEOTJC: broken lambda, or perhaps mu. My 

original inclination was to take this as the ending of a 

personal name; but I have found few examples of names 

ending in this manner. If the broken word does refer to 

an individual, a more reasonable conjecture is that this 

is part of a word giving the man's place of origin, i.e., 

the man was a Hermopolite, Antinoopolite or the like. 

Therefore restore, exempli gratia, something like 

'EçôuTiolAenTjç (- TioAemjc = -TroAiTrjc, an example of 

the most common type of iotacism). 

oux oQarai: seems unusual, but the word division 

appears correct and the reading of the individual letters 

is certain. 

10. Ijâurtov: or lâvr[œ. 

11. Between ev and ¿¿cm the line is badly damaged; 

only the very tops of the letters are visible. The traces at 

the end of the line are puzzling, possibly (far from 

certainly) marred by cancelation. There appears to be a 

fragmentary letter, written above the line, to the upper 

right of the iota. 

15. The small fragment at the lower left poses 

difficulties of placement and, accordingly, of establishing 

a correct text. Because it carries the letter's 

salutation, the fragment must belong to the bottom of 

the papyrus; moreover, the handwriting style, more 

rapid than that of the first hand (though see above, ftn. 

4), matches that found at the bottom of the main 

fragment. The main issue is whether the small 

fragment, which contains only one broken line of 

writing, should be set against line 14 or line 15 of the 

main fragment. The latter alternative is adopted here. 

L d' = ("ETOU^) (TETOÇTOU), i.e. the fourth regnal year 

of an emperor, or of emperors, whose name is not given. 

[Xo]iaY: read Xoiox. The final chi, as opposed to the 

more usual kappa, and the suspension of the letter 

above the line (usually indicating an abbreviation), cast 

some doubt on this reading. The superlinear stroke over 

the following delta make its status as a cipher clear. 

Choiak 4: normally November 30; in leap years 

December 1. 

James G. Keenan 


94

TWO NEWLY DISCOVERED CEILING PAINTINGS 

BY SIMON VOUET 

Since Crelly's monograph on Simon Vouet published in 

1962 1 a number of paintings, some of them of 

considerable importance, have turned up in various 

parts of the world and the list of his works continues to 

grow. It was still unexpected, however, to find two 

major canvasses (masquerading under the name of 

"Van Loo") on a ceiling in California where they have 

remained unnoticed by scholars for six decades. 2 

Unfortunately the present location of the two 

paintings, in a duplex in William Randolph Hearst's 

residence at San Simeon, makes it difficult to 

photograph them properly and the reproductions 

offered here will no doubt one day be improved upon 

when the canvasses can be removed from the ceiling and 

cleaned. 3 Nonetheless, the first photographs are, one 

hopes, sufficiently clear to dispel any question about 

their authorship. 

The subject of the best of the two is Diana and 

Endymion (fig. 1), a theme often found on bedroom 

ceilings during the seventeenth century. Diana is seen 

leaning down from behind the clouds, illuminated by 

the crescent of the moon. Inside the crescent one sees 

her chariot and a putto seated on top. Endymion is 

painted with a great deal of foreshortening, resting on 

the slope of Mt. Latmus, holding his staff and, instead 

of sleeping, looking up at Diana. Another putto is 

tugging at his robes. 

The subject of the second canvas (fig. 2) is more 

difficult to interpret exactly. Nepture is shown in the 

foreground, slightly over half length, astride two sea 

horses one of whose head peers out at the spectator; the 

other turns his head away and seems to look back at 

Nepture. Behind them one sees a massive colonnade 

with part of a statue seen between two of the columns at 

the left. Standing before the colonnade is a woman who 

is leaning toward Neptune and may in fact be running, 

as her clothing is in some agitation. I know of no other 

compositions with which one can directly compare this 

theme, but there is some reason to think that the 

woman is Amphitrite. 

The normal representation of Neptune and Amphitrite 

depicts them on the open sea, in a sort of 

"triumphal" arrangement surrounded by putti or 

tritons. Amphitrite is usually seen unclothed. A 

composition of this nature was also painted by Vouet 

for a vestibule at Fontainebleau, and although the 

painting has since disappeared, the engraving by 

Dorigny of 1644 shows that it corresponded in type to 

the standard representations of this subject (fig. 3). 

There are many details in common with the San Simeon 

picture, notably the way in which the horses and 

Neptune are rendered; but the Amphitrite at Fontainebleau 

was unclothed and riding on the back of the 

horses, held by a Triton. There is no sign of land. 

However, there are one or two representations that 

depict another episode in the legend of Amphitrite, the 

so-called Wedding of Neptune and Amphitrite, that are 

much closer to the San Simeon ceiling in type. The most 

notable is a picture in Hungary that is probably by an 

artist in the studio of Schónfeld and presumably 

painted a little after mid-century (fig. 4). 4 It shows 

1. William Crelly, The Painting of Simon Vouet, 1962. 

2. The paintings measure approximately 185.5 x 127 cm. (73 x 50 

inches) and were purchased by Mr. Hearst at Clarke's in New York 

in February, 1921. They still have labels identifying them as the work 

of Van Loo which was probably the name given them at that time. 

3. They are installed in the ceiling of one of the "duplexes" in the 

new wing of the castle at San Simeon. The room is split into two 

sections, one part raised to a kind of mezzanine. The Endymion is 

above the bed on the mezzanine and is only 10 feet or so from the 

floor. The Neptune is above the lower portion, and is approximately 

twice that far from the floor. 

4. H. Pee, Johann Heinrich Schônfeld, 1971, pp. 270-71, no.ABlO, 

with bibliography. The painting belongs to the Museum István Király 

in Székesféherva'r. 

95

% 

1. Vouet, Diana and Endymion. San Simeon, Hearst Historical 

Monument.

2. Vouet, Neptune and Amphitrite () San Simeon, Hearst Historical 

Monument. 

97

Italian, would exist that could have served as the 

prototype for an artist such as Schônfeld. Perhaps other 

depictions of the subject exist unknown to me. But the 

one in Hungary, as undistinguished as it may be, is, I 

believe, close enough to at least tentatively justify the 

identification. 

It is true that Neptune and "Amphitrite" are not in 

the act of being married in the San Simeon painting, 

nor do they even join hands. Neptune, at best, might be 

said to have brought his horses near enough to the shore 

to allow Amphitrite to jump on, and it has more the 

appearance of a bareback rescue in a western film than 

the marriage of a god and a goddess. On the other hand 

the colonnade may very well be that of a circular temple 

such as that in the background of the Hungarian 

picture, and the statue (of Vesta) can be seen inside the 

temple in both pictures. Finally there is no other scene 

that includes Neptune that could plausibly be connected 

with the San Simeon composition. 

Both of the San Simeon canvasses are unusual in 

shape in that their corners are indented. They are not 

unique in Vouet's oeuvre in this respect, but it is 

nonetheless possible that the San Simeon pictures were 

originally square and have been cut in order to make 

them fit the decoration. That they were originally parts 

of a ceiling is made likely by the foreshortening, or more 

accurately, the viewpoint, di sotto in su, which is most 

3. M. Dorigny after Vouet, Neptune and Amphitrite, engraving,prominent in the Diana and Endymion. This viewpoint 

1644. 

Neptune with his entourage at the shore, taking a 

crowned woman, evidently Amphitrite, by the hand. 

Behind her are Cybele (recognizable by her mural 

crown) and a group of ladies with flowers in their hair. 

In the background on a hill is a round temple, similar 

in type to the famous temple at Tivoli. Because of the 

offerings being presented from both sides, it is apparent 

that a wedding is probably intended, and since 

Amphitrite was the only goddess associated with 

Neptune in this way, it seems likely that the picture does 

indeed depict their wedding. 

Another picture, this one more certainly by Schônfeld 

himself, and showing what is obviously the same 

subject, is in Czechoslovakia. 5 It is very similar in 

arrangement but omits the temple on the hill. Its date is 

generañy thought to be in the 1660's. 

A third painting, by Gerard de Lairesse, and therefore 

still later in date, is not known to me in 

reproduction, but may also represent the same subject. 6 

It corresponds to the picture in Hungary in that it also 

includes Cybele and (apparently) part of a temple. 

It does not seem likely that a subject of this nature 

would have been painted only three or four times and 

one might logically expect that a more prominent 

version by an artist such as Poussin, or perhaps an 

can be found in other ceilings by Vouet, most notably in 

the Four Virtues at Versailles done probably in the mid 

1630's. It was also employed in the frescoes of the Hôtel 

Séguier (ça. 1637/38) and the Château de Wideville 

done between 1640 and 1643. But the most relevant 

comparison must be with the now destroyed ceiling 

frescoes painted for the Château de Chilly in 1630/31. 

The compositions of the two principal scenes, the Rising 

of the Sun and The Rising of Moon (fig. 5), are known 

to us from Dorigny's engravings of 1638 and one sees 

there, especially in the latter, a use of the di sotto in su 

very similar to the Endymion at San Simeon. In 

addition the crescent moon looms up behind the clouds 

as in Endymion and encloses a chariot also very much 

like that seen behind Diana's head. 

There is perhaps a further relationship between the 

Chilly frescoes and the two at San Simeon. The 

5. H. Pee, op. cit., pp. 166-67, no. 103; the painting belongs to the 

collection of Schloss Vizovice in Czechoslovakia. 

6. The picture is described in the 1907 Vienna catalogue as no. 1014: 

"Zybele empfangt Neptun und Amphitrite. Links am Meeresufer 

vor einem Sàulenportal sitzt die Gôttin mit ihrem Gefolge. Von 

rechts naht auf seinem Wagen, von Nymphen umgeben, Neptun mit 

Amphitrite, die Gaben des Meeres bringend." The picture does not 

appear in recent catalogues. 

98

4. J. Schônfeld follower, The Wedding of Neptune and A mphitrite, 

Székesfenervar, Museum Istvan Kiraly. 

5. M. Dorigny after Vouet, The Rising of the Moon, engraving, 1638. 

99

à Thuile, au nombre de onze de chaque côté, & un 

sur la cheminée. On y remarque Diane & 

Endimion, Neptune & Amphitrite, Androméde, 

Europe, Pan & Syrinx. Au-dessous il y a de petits 

Paysages & des vues de Châteaux, peints dans le 

goût de Paul Bril. Les ornemens de Sculpture & les 

Caryatides qui règlent l'Architecture de cette 

galerie, sont de Sarazin. 

6. Vouet, Bacchus and Ariadne. Paris, Chavagnac collection. 

description of the decorations at Chilly given by A. J. 

Dézallier d'Argenville 7 in the next century before their 

destruction reads as follows: 

Les appartemens ne sont recommandables que par 

leur grandeur. On voit au premier étage une galerie 

peinte par Vouet, aidé de Perrier, qui a long-tems 

étudié & travaillé sous lui dans ce Château. Le plafond 

est à compartimens de stuc, avec de grosses 

bordures autour des tableaux peints à fresque. 

L'assemblée des Dieux est au milieu, & aux extrémités 

le lever du Soleil & celui de la Lune. Le 

reste est rempli par quatorze sujets de la Fable. 

Les murs sont ornés de Caryatides & de grouppes 

d'enfans, avec des panneaux carrés & ovales peints 

7. Voyage pittoresque des environs de Paris, 1762, pp.221-222. A 

similar description is also in his Abrégé de la vie des plus fameux 

peintres. 1762, p. 16. 

8. Crelly, op.cit., no. 116. The suggestion that it came from Chilly 

was first made by Dimier in Bulletin de la Société de l'Histoire de 

l'art français, 1924, pp. 15-19. 

The presence in this gallery of two scenes depicting 

Diana and Endymion and Neptune and Amphitrite 

leads one to suggest that the two paintings at San 

Simeon might in fact have been done for Chilly. 

Dézallier d'Argenville specifies that they were done in 

oils rather than fresco, so they might have survived. On 

the other hand, the extreme foreshortening in the 

Endymion episode at San Simeon makes it an 

improbable wall painting, unless perhaps it was very 

high and near the ceiling. Taken altogether the evidence 

cannot, I believe, be used to definitely maintain that we 

are dealing with two of the twenty-three lost paintings 

from the gallery at Chilly. It does seem, however, like a 

good possibility. 

It is noteworthy that another picture which has also 

been proposed as being one of the missing Chilly 

pictures, a Bacchus and Ariadne (fig. 6) now in the 

Chavagnac collection in Paris, 8 originally had a shape 

very similar to that of the San Simeon paintings. It has 

since been extended to make a complete rectangle, but 

it once had indented corners. There is no proof that the 

gallery at Chilly included a Bacchus and Ariadne, but 

the style of the Chavagnac canvas is fairly close to that 

of the Endymion, and the indented corners lend some 

credence to the idea that they all came from the same 

ensemble. 

Whether one accepts this proposal or not, the two 

new canvasses must in any case date from the 1630's. 

The Endymion scene seems especially reminiscent of his 

Italian pictures done in the prior decade; the Neptune is 

dryer and much more decorative in color, looking 

forward to his works of the next decade. 

While the San Simeon pictures may not rank among 

Vouet's greatest masterpieces, they do represent a 

crucial period in his development and in that of ceiling 

decoration in the north. Examples of such decorative 

work from the seventeenth century have seldom reached 

this country and those at San Simeon are probably the 

most important to be found outside of France. 

Burton B. Fredericksen 

Malibu 

100

1. Cavedone. Mars and Venus. (No. 1) 2. Jouvenet. The taking down from the Cross (No. 2) 

SEVEN PAINTINGS 

FROM THE FESCH COLLECTION 

Recently the present writer gave an account 1 of how 

fifteen paintings formerly in the collection of Cardinal 

Fesch came to be part of the initial holding of the 

National Gallery of Ireland. They were brought from 

the Roman dealer, Alessandro Aducci, in 1856. 

At that time Aducci offered the Board of the Dublin 

Gallery more paintings than they were in a position to 

buy, including four Lanfrancos, one of which is now in 

the J. Paul Getty Museum. 2 Apart from these four 

Lanfrancos seven other paintings from the Fesch 

collection were offered to the National Gallery of 

Ireland by Signor Aducci. It is useful to describe these 

as they contribute a little more to our relatively meagre 

knowledge of the great Fesch collection. Five of these 

paintings can be located today but two are "missing", 

and are known only from the pencil sketches sent by 

Aducci to Dublin. 

1. GIACOMO CAVEDONE, Mars and Venus (Fig. 1) 

Sale reference: probably GEORGE (1845), lot 1316, 

unattributed, bt. Aducci 

Size given: 5 pieds 10 pouces by 5 pieds 4 pouces 

Metric equivalent: 1.89 by 1.73 m. 3 

Note: This is probably the painting that passed 

through Christie's: 12 December, 1863, lot 112; 

and 28 May, 1864, lot 138. 

101

3. Régnier. St. Sebastian tended by St. Irene. (No. 4) 

4. Seghers. The Denial of St. Peter. (No. 5) 

102

2. JEAN JOUVENET, The taking down from the 

Cross (Fig. 2) 

Sale reference: GEORGE (1844), lot 359, bt. Aducci 

Size given: 13 pieds 0 pouces 9 lignes by 6 pieds 

3 pouces 6 lignes 

Metric equivalent: 4.24 by 2.04 m. 

Note: This painting was subsequently sold at the 

Monte di Pietà in Rome, 1875, lot 1229 

(information kindly supplied by Monsieur Jean- 

Pierre Cuzin). 

3. MARCO PALMEZZANO, Mystic marriage of St. 

Catherine (Fig. 5) 


Size given: 8 pieds 0 pouces 6 lignes by 5 pieds 7 

pouces 6 lignes 


Present size: 2.46 by 1.78 m. 

Coll.: Marquess of Northampton, Compton Wynyates, 

Warwickshire, England. 

Note: This is probably the painting that passed 

through Christie's: 12 December, 1863, lot. 121; 

and 28 May, 1864, lot 147. 

4. NICOLAS REGNIER, St. Sebastian tended by St. 

Irene (Fig. 3) 


Size given: 5 pieds 3 pouces by 6 pieds 9 pouces 



Coll.: Ferens Art Gallery, Kingston upon Hull, 

England. 

Note: In the Fesch sale the painting was attributed 

to Francesco Gentileschi. 

5. GERARD SEGHERS, The Denial of St. Peter 

(Fig. 4) 


Size given: 4 pieds 9 pouces 6 lignes by 6 pieds 




Coll.: The Earl of Mansfield at Scone Palace, 

Scotland. 

Note: For the correlation of this painting with the 

distinguished history of the Fesch version, see B. 

NICOLSON in The Burlington Magazine, Vol. 112 

(June 1971), pp. 304 ff. 

1. Gazette des Beaux-Arts, vol. 89 (January 1977), pp. 1-8. 

2. Ibid, p. 7. 

3. Metric equivalent given to nearest two decimal points only. 

5. Palmezzano. Mystic marriage of St. Catherine. (No. 3) 

6. FILIPPO TARCHIANI, attributed to, Supper at 

Emmaus (Fig. 6) 

Sale reference: GEORGE (1845), lot 1040 

Size given: 3 pieds 1 pouce 10 ligiïes by 4 pieds 




Coll: Los Angeles County Museum of Art (William 

Randolph Hearst Collection) 

Note: In the Fesch sale the painting was attributed to 

Louis Le Nain. 

7. VALENTIN DE BOULOGNE, Christ expelling the 

money-changers from the temple (Fig. 7) 

Sale reference: GEORGE (1844), lot 438 

Size given: 6 pieds 1 pouce 6 lignes by 8 pieds 

1 pouce 0 ligne 



Coll.: Gallería Nazionale d'Arte Antica, Palazzo 

Corsini, Rome. 

Michael Wynne 

National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin 

103

6. Tarchiani, attributed to Supper at Emm au s. (No. 6) 

7. de Boulogne. Christ expelling the money-changers from the temple. (No. 7) 

104

METAMORPHOSES OF THE 

GRIMANI "VITELLIUS" 

la. Grimani "Vitellius," Venice Archeological Museum. 

Among the most important sculptures used by painters 

of the Italian Renaissance, such as the Laocoôn and the 

Torso Belvedere, is the magnificent marble head said to 

1. This article is a condensation and updated version of my Masters 

thesis written in June of 1975 under the direction of Professor Peter 

Meller at the University of California at Santa Barbara. 

The bust is believed to be one of the sculptures unearthed in Rome 

in the excavations of Cardinal Domenico Grimani begun c. 1505. G. 

Traversari, Ritratti, 63; and M. Perry, "The Statuario Pubblico of the 

Venetian Republic/' Saggie e Memorie diStoria dell'Arte, VIII, 1972, 

'78f. Domenico Grimani purchased a vast vineyard on the northern 

slope of the Monte Cavallo for the purpose of erecting a villa, a site 

identified at present as being in front of the Piazza Barberini in 

Rome. P. Paschini, "Le Collezioni Archeologiche dei Prelati Grimani 

d^l Cinquecento," Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia, 

V, 1928,151. Reference is made of this purchase in the will of a 

son of Antonia Grimani dated 1518: R. Gallo, "Le Donazioni alla 

be of the Emperor Vitellius. Sent by Cardinal Domenico 

Grimani from Rome to Venice in 1523 and now in the 

Archaeological Museum in Venice (Fig. I), 1 it is known 

Serenissima di Domenico e Giovanni Grimani," Archivio Véneto, 

Quinta Serie, L-LI, 1953, 35. Sculptures which were uncovered in the 

excavations are mentioned in a contemporary booklet of 1513: 

Paschini, "Collezioni Grimani," 151. Upon the death of Julius II in 

1513, Domenico Grimani transfered the "Vitellius" to the Palazzo 

San Marco. Gallo, "Donazioni Grimani," 35. Thus the bust was 

probably labeled "Vitellius" sometime after its discovery, perhaps as 

early as 1505, but before its transfer to the Palace c. 1513. 

The following opinions have been expressed about the Grimani 

"Vitellius:" ancient (with doubts), second half of the 1st cent. A.D. 

(but not Vitellius); B. Forlati Tamaro, // Museo Archeologico del 

Palazzo Reale di Venezia, 2nd Ed., 1969, 23; ancient, ca. 130 A.D., 

the same man represented in some medallions on the Arch of 

Constantine: C. &nu, II Museo Archeologico di Venezia, Rome, 1930, 

105

Ib. Grimant "Vitellius, " Venice Archeological Museum. 

2. Giovanni Cavino, Vitellius Malibu, J. Paul Getty Museum. 

106

to be the source of numerous sculptures, 2 coins struck 

in Padua in the 16th century (Fig. 2), 3 and the model of 

many drawings by Tintoretto or members of his school. 

As the Grimani "Vitellius" was in Rome in 1523, the 

year of its transfer to Venice, it is not surprising to find 

examples of its use in works by Balassare Peruzzi. The 

head was used as the model for the large man giving 

alms to a reclining nude in Peruzzi's painting The 

Presentation of the Virgin, ca. 1523 in the church of S. 

Maria della Pace in Rome. 4 

A drawing in the Louvre (Inv. 1410) attributed to 

Peruzzi is preparatory to the painting and proves the 

naturalistic head in the painting was derived from the 

sculpture (Fig. 3). The drawing is in ink, with wash and 

white heightening, 565 x 891 mm. A detailed caricature 

of the sculpture by Peruzzi appears on a sheet of head 

studies in the Kupferstichkabinett in Berlin and is 

tentatively dated 1523-26 by C. Frommel. 5 

From 1525 until 1593, the Grimani "Vitellius" was 

displayed in the Ducal Palace in Venice where 

privileged artists could study it and make plaster casts 

from it. 6 One such cast, now in the University Museum 

in Padua, belonged to Marco Mantova Benavides, a 

16th century Paduan art collector (see note 3). The cast 

was part of the Benavides Collection sometime after 

1517 to 1543. The following entry is recorded in the 

1695 inventory of the Benavides house. 

135; J. Sieveking, "Zum Bildnis des Kaisers "Vitellius," Festschrift 

fur Georg Habich zum 60. Geburtstag, 1928, 44; A.N. Zadoks- 

Josephus Jitta, "A Creative Misunderstanding," Nederlands Kunsthistorisch 

Jaarboek, 23, 1972, 3ff.; of Hadrianic date; G. 

Traversari, Ritratti, 64; Renaissance: E. Visconti, cited in A. 

Mongez, Iconographie Romaine, Paris, 1824, II, 195; Arndt 

Amelung, EA t no. 2636; M. Gjtfdesen, "De Tre Kejsere Litteraere 

og Plastiske Portraetter," Meddelelser Fra Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, 

K0benhavn, 1957, 29; ancient or possibly by Alessandro Vittoria: 

E. Schwarzenberg, review of B. Candida, / Caichi Rinascimentali 

nella Collezione Mantova Benavides, (Padova, 1967), Gnomon, 

XLII, 1970, 611. In my opinion the Grimani "Vitellius" is a 

Renaissance work of the 1st quarter of the 16th century with 

perhaps minor restorations near the end of the century. In 1587 

Domenico Grimani's Antiquities were restored by Titiano Aspetti. 

Alessandro Vittoria was in part responsible for an inventory of 

these antiquities and may have taken part in the restoration. Perry, 

"Statuario," 112 and 118, fn. In a forthcoming article in Rivista 

Tedesca, II, 1977, P. Meller discusses the attribution of the 

Grimani "Vitellius." 

2. For a list of the sculptures after the Grimani "Vitellius" see J. 

Bernoulli, Rbmische Ikonographie, II/2, 12-20 and Zadoks-Jitta, 

"Misunderstanding." It is my opinion the relief head in the Getty 

Museum matches the coin types of Vitellius and is of the Emperor; 

Recent Acquisitions, Ancient Art, The J. Paul Getty Museum, 

Malibu, California, Pullman, Wash., 1974, no. 21, see J. Pollini, 

above pp. 63ff. 

3. J. Paul Getty Museum, 75.AK.90; presented by Derek Content, 

Recent Acquisitions of Antiquities, 1.VI-2.IX.1976, no. 34. The 

medal is attributed to the Paduan medallist Giovanni Cavino (ca. 

1499-1570), and is based upon antique coins as well as the Grimani 

"Vitellius." The obverse shows the bust of "Vitellius" looking 

3. Baldassare Peruzzi, Study for the Presentation of the Virgin, Detail 

of a man giving alms, Paris, Louvre (Inv. 1410). 

right, and laureate with the inscription A . VITELLIVS . 

GERMANICVS . IMP . AVG . P . M . TR . P (see R. Lawrence, 

The Paduans, Medals by Giovanni Cavino, Hewit, N.J., 1964, no. 

27): and it corresponds to obverses of Roman sesterces (see: H. 

Mattingly and E. Sydenham, The Roman Imperial Coinage: Vol. I, 

Augustus to Vitellius, London, 1923, 226, nos. 8 and 9). Cavino 

probably had access to the Venice sculpture or the plaster cast of it 

owned by the Paduan, Marco Mantova Benavides (1489-1582) (see 

note 7). Cavino made numerous medals of Benavides and Cardinal 

Marino Grimani of Venice (Lawrence, Paduans, 23ff, nos. 84-86, 

93 and 94). The reverse shows Mars helmeted, advancing right, 

carrying a trophy over his shoulder, holding a spear and bears the 

inscription S . C (See: Lawrence, Paduans, 12, no. 28); and it 

corresponds to reverses of Roman sesterces (See: Mattingly, 

Imperial Coinage, Vol. I, 268, nos. 3 and 7, pi. XVI). For a 

discussion of the coin portraits of Vitellius see: H. Jucker, 

"Vitellius," Jahrbuch des Bernischen Historischen Museums in 

Bern, 1961-1962 41/42, 331-357. 

4. C.L. Frommel, Baldassare Peruzzi als Maler und Zeichner, 

Wien, 1967/68, 189ff., pi. LXb. 

5. Ibid, 129 and 134, pis. LXII and LXIIIb. I believe the sketch of 

the head next to that of the "Vitellius" was derived from Inv. 141 

in the Museo Archeologico in Venice which was considered to be a 

portrait of Vespasian. The details of hair are probably due to the 

artist's attempt at caricature but may be copied from the sculpture 

before it was reworked by a Renaissance sculptor. The head of 

Vespasian was among the sculptures of the Grimani bequest. 

Traversari, Ritratti, 103ff, pi. 87. 

6. From 1523 until 1525 the "Vitellius" was stored at S. Chiara di 

Murano. Anti, // Museo Archeologico, 7. From 1593, for nearly 

two centuries, the sculpture was shown in a public museum which 

adopted the title of the collection, Statuario Pubblico. Perry, 

"Statuario," 75ff. 

107

4. Follower of Jacopo Tintoretto, Portrait of a Gentleman, early 17th Cent., Birmingham City Art Gallery 

(photo: Courtesy of the City of Birmingham). 

"Gran testa bellissima studiosa di Aulo Vitellio 

imperatore sopra la quale dissegnî) et imparo il 

famoso Egreggio Pittor venetiano, Giacomo Robusti 

detto Tintoretto essendo tra rellievi più 

perfetto.' 7 

The plaster cast of the Tintoretto shop is mentioned 

by Domenico Tintoretto in his will of 1630. 

"I bequeath to my brother (Marco) all the casts in 

the studio. And if Bastian (Sebastiano Cassieri) my 

boy will still be in my service at the time of my 

death, I bequeath to him four of these casts, 

namely a head of Vitellius, a full-length figure, and 

two torsos of his own choice/' 8 

It is likely the cast mentioned in the will is the one 

shown in the Portrait of a Gentleman attributed to a 

follower of Jacopo Tintoretto in the Birmingham City 

Art Gallery (Fig. 4). 9 

The first list of Tintoretto drawings presumably from 

the plaster cast of the Grimani "Vitellius" was by D. 

Hadeln, who mentioned nine drawings and attributed 

them to Jacopo. 10 The Tietzes rejected Hadeln's 

7. Quoted in Candida, / Caichi, 39. 

8. Quoted in Tietzes, Drawings, 258. 

9. P.C. Brookes, Exhibition of Birmingham Paintings at Messrs. 

Wilderstein, London, 1970, no. 10. The attribution and possible 

identification was verbally confirmed by Mr. Brooks (April 20, 1977). 

10. Hadeln, Tintoretto Zeichnungen, 24. 

108

attributions, preferring to attribute the drawings to 

Tintoretto's shop. Furthermore, the Tietzes added ten 

drawings to the list, making a total of nineteen drawings 

ultimately deriving from the Grimani "Vitellius;" 11 six 

additional Tintoretto drawings after the Grimani 

"Vitellius" are listed here. 

All of the twenty-five drawings are in black chalk, 

and all except two have white heightening. The 

drawings appear on sheets of many different colors 

ranging in size from 430 x 280 mm to 260 x 200 mm. At 

least eleven of the sheets were drawn on the verso. Most 

of the sketches occupy nearly all of the paper and are of 

the plaster cast seen from various angles. A plurality of 

the drawings are of the head seen slightly from below. 

A very fine drawing by Jacopo Tintoretto of the 

Grimani "Vitellius" is in the University of Erlangen. On 

the verso is a refined version of the study on the recto 

(Fig. 5). 12 The drawing is very close in style to Jacopo's 

sketches of the same model from the Koenigs Collection 

and the École des Beaux Arts. It is evident in these 

drawings that Jacopo did not use white chalk solely for 

accent, that is, "white heightening;" rather he used 

white to help model the head, and finally he covered the 

white with black chalk for half-shadows. The drawing in 

Erlangen exemplifies the procedure and results suggested 

by M. Boschini when he refers to Tintoretto's 

collection of casts after some of Michelangelo's 

sculptures. 

"... e ridottosi in una picciolo stanza, con un 

lumicino impiegava il di e la notte nel rittrarli in 

disegno innumerabili fíate in ogni positura; formandosi 

in questa guisa neiridea un'ottima 

cognizione di bel contorno, di perfette forme, e un 

possesso del chiaroscuro e di tutte in fine parti del 

buon disegno." 13 

The drawing of the Grimani "Vitellius" in the Rasini 

Collection in Milan is inscribed "Questa testa si (di) é 

de man de madona Marietta." 14 Based on this 

inscription the drawing has been attributed to Marietta 

Tintoretto (1556-1590). In contrast to Jacopo's interest 

in showing the effects of light on the sculpture, the 

Rasini drawing shows Marietta's preference for a simple 

outline style; the effect of the drawing is mainly twodimensional. 

"Marietta aims more at neatness of execution than 

at picturesque effects; she is not urged by an 

abundance of creative ideas as was her brother 

Domenico." 15 

11. The Tietzes list the following drawings: To Jacopo, Haarlem, Coll. 

Koenigs, I 341, and Paris, Ecole des Beaux Arts, 12054; to Marietta 

Tintoretto, Milan, Cell. Rasini; to Domenico Tintoretto, London 

5. Jacopo Tintoretto, Drawing after the Grimani "Vitellius," 

Erlangen, Univ. Library (photo: Courtesy of the University of 

Erlangen). 

British Museum, 1907-7-17-42, 43 and 53; to- Tintoretto School, 

Florence, Uffizi, 734 and 1662E, Haarlem, Coll. Koenigs, I 340, 

London, British Museum, 1885-5-9-1656-1660, Munich, Graphische 

Sammlung, 2982, Naples, Gabinetto delle Stampe, Oxford, Christchurch 

Library, L 9, Paris, Louvre, 5382. Only eighteen drawings are 

listed by the Tietzes as they did not list L 10 in Oxford, Christchurch 

Library, a drawing noted by Hadeln. The drawing in Oxford, 

Ashmolean Museum, 717 is in my opinion not by anyone connected 

with the Tintoretto school, neither is the fine North Italian drawing 

sold in Munich, at A. Weinmuller on October 13th and 14th, 1938. H. 

Leporini, "Die Versteigerung von Handzeichnungen bei A. Weinmuller, 

München," Pantheon, 1938/Oct., 331. 

12. The drawing is described in Tietzes, Drawings, 280 as the "head 

of a Roman Emperor" by Jacopo. 

13. M. Boschini, Descrizione di Tutte le Pubbliche Pitture della Citta 

di Venezia e Isola Circonvicine o Sia Rinnovazione della Ricche 

Minere, Reprint of 1733 éd., Venice, 1974, 40f. Although Tintoretto 

typically used the head for background figures as in his Christ Before 

Pilate in the Scuola di San Rocco, a more important use is shown in 

The Last Supper in Venice, Chiesa di San Polo. 

14. A Morassi, Disegni Antichi della Collezione Rasini in Milano, 

Milan, 1937, 33. 

15. Tietzes, Drawings, 293. 

109

7. Here attributed to Veronese, Drawing after the Grimani 

"Vitellius," Windsor, The Royal Art Collection (photo: A.C. 

Cooper and Courtesy fo Windsor Library). 

6. Paolo Veronese, Feast in the House of Simon Levi, 1573, Detail of 

the Steward, Venice, Academy (photo: Osvaldo Bohm). 

Three drawings of the Grimani "Vitellius" appear on 

the versos of the oil sketches for the Temptation of a 

Saint in the bound volume of drawings by Domenico 

Tintoretto (c. 1560-1635) in the British Museum. These 

drawings are rather weak in comparison with the other 

known drawings of the sculpture as noted in the 

misrepresentation of the contours of the cheeks and 

hair, the uncontrolled use of shadow in 1907-7-17-53, 

and the unrealistically small eyes in 1907-7-17-43. The 

drawings are probably by a member of Domenico's 

school and may be dated after 1594, the year of Jacopo's 

death. 16 

Two other drawings which may be grouped on the 

basis of style are in the St. Annen Museum in Lübeck 

and the Budapest Museum of Fine Art. These drawings 

are more correctly attributed to a follower of Jacopo 

Tintoretto due to the highly individual conception of the 

head which is distinctly different from that shown in the 

drawings by Jacopo and Marietta but which is similar to 

that shown in the plaster cast in the painting in the 

Birmingham City Art Gallery. The drawing in the 

Munich Graphische Sammlung is related to 1662E in 

the Uffizi and is probably a school drawing. 

Of the twenty-five drawings some may be grouped on 

the basis of similar views. Four of the five drawings in 

the British Museum (1885-5-9-1656 to 1658 and 1660) 

are of the head turned slightly right and seen slightly 

from below, a view roughly matching that shown in a 

relatively unknown sketch on the verso of a drawing 

recently purchased by a private collector from Paris. 

The drawing in the Pierpont Morgan Library shows the 

head in nearly the same highly foreshortened view as the 

drawing in the Ecole des Beaux Arts. 

The surprisingly large number of drawings of the 

Grimani "Vitellius" testifies to the great importance of 

the head as a training piece in the Tintoretto shop, but 

16. Ibid., 263-265. In 1594 Domenico assumed control of the shop. 

"Domenico Tintoretto evidently considered opening his studio, with 

its famous collection of casts to all painters for the purpose of study." 

D. Rosand, "The Crisis of the Venetian Renaissance Tradition," 

L'Arte. Milan, 1970, XI, 32. 

110

the magnificence of the Grimani "Vitellius" was 

recognized by most if not all Venetian artists of the 

sixteenth century. Jacopo Bassano and members of his 

shop, Bonifazio Veronese and Schiavone used the head 

in many of their paintings to depict main figures as well 

as secondary ones. 17 Perhaps the most creative 

transformations of the Grimani "Vitellius" are to be 

found in examples by Paolo Veronese. 

In 1573 Veronese painted the Feast in the House of 

Levi for the refectory of the Domenican Convent of St. 

John and St. Paul. 

"La cosa pero più ammirable, che veggasi in questo 

quadro sono le bellissime, e differenti arie di teste, 

nelle quali Paolo vi pose tutto lo studio ritraendo 

nella figura d'un grasso convittato la testa Vitellio 

in modo singolare, oltre moite altre tolte dal 

naturale con raro, e ben inteso carattere." 18 

In the inquisition of 18. July 1573 Veronese described 

the Feast in the House of Levi. He said he painted Levi 

in front of the column on the left, and in front of the 

column on the right he painted "a steward who I 

imagined had come there for his own pleasure to see 

how things were going at the table" (Fig. 6). 19 

A drawing in Windsor Castle showing the profile view 

of the Grimani "Vitellius" clearly proves Veronese's use 

of the head for the steward (Fig. 7). The drawing is of 

the head in near profile looking right. It is in black 

chalk with white heightening, and it is lined. A reversed 

view of the head was chosen for the painting, but the 

8. Paolo Veronese, Drawing of the Head of a Woman, Chicago, Art 

Institute of Chicago (photo: Courtesy of the Art Institute). 

17. The Grimani "Vitellius" type occurs in Bonifazio's paintings in 

Milan, Brera, Christ at Emmaus, The Finding of Moses, and The 

Adulteress Before the Redeemer, D. Westphal, Bonifazio Veronese, 

Munich, 1931, pis. X and XVII. C. Ricci, La Pinacoteca di Brera, 

Bergamo, 1907, no. 145; and in Venice, Academy, The Judgement of 

Solomon, Westphal, pi. VII; and in Dresden, Gemaldegalerie, The 

Finding of Moses, H. Menz. Venezianische Malerei 15 Bis 18 

Jahrhundert, Dresden, 1968, pi. 16. 

A drawing by Jacopo Bassano of the "Vitellius" is on the verso of a 

sketch in the Louvre of Abraham for the fresco, The Sacrifice of 

Abraham c. 1575 in the church at Cartigliano. M. Serullaz and R. 

Bacou, Le XVI Siècle European Dessins du Louvre, Paris, 1965, 50. 

M. Muraro discusses this drawing and the uses of the head by 

members of the Bassano shop. 

"... Jacopo e i suoi figli hanno tenuto présente il cosidetto 

'Ritratto di Vitellio' per meglio esaltare e caratterizzare un personaggio 

della loro cerchia: e il tipo biondo che abbiamo notato a 

Cartigliano, a San Giacomo dall'Orio e che, dopo la 'Predica di 

San Paolo' di Marostica, ritornera, alquanto invecchiato, nella 

'Resurrezione di Lazzaro' delle Gallerie veneziane. 

M. Muraro, "Jacopo e Francesco da Ponte a Cartigliano," Arte 

Véneta, VI, 1952, 55. Examples of the "Vitellius" type are in the 

following paintings by Jacopo Bassano: Cittadella, Arcipretale, 

Supper in the House of Emmaus, E. Arslan, / Bassano, Milan, I, 

1960, fig. 1; Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, Dispute in the Temple, 

Arslan, II, pi. 27; Hampton Court, Martyrdom of a Saint, Arslan, II, 

pi. 43; Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, Way to Calvary, Arslan, II, 

pi. 50; and Civezzano, Parrocchiale, Arslan, II, pi. 176. The type also 

occurs in the following paintings attributed to Leandro Bassano: 

Turin, Galleria Sabauda, The Small Market, N. Gabrielli, Gallería 

Sabaudi Maestri Italiani, Torino, 1971, pi. 63; Vincenza, Museo 

Civico, Marriage at Cana, Arslan, II, pi. 271; Vienna, Kunsthistorisches 

Museum, November, Arslan, II, pi. 286; Venice, Brass Coll., 

Susanna, Arslan, II, pi. 310; Stockholm, National Museum, The 

Supper of Anthony and Cleopatra, Arslan, II, pi. 313. An example by 

Francesco Bassano is shown in Florence, Pitti, Christ at the House of 

Martha, Brogi 7822. 

The "Vitellius" type also appears in Rome, Galleria Borghese, The 

Return of the Prodigal Son, no. 186, attributed to Antonio Palma (ca. 

1510-15 to ca. 1575), Brogi 15920. The use of the Grimani "Vitellius 

by Andrea Schiavone is noted in Tietzes, Drawings, 249. 

18. Boschini, Descrizione, 251. It is not clear whether Boschini noted 

the "Vitellius" as the source of the steward or the figure under the left 

arch. Noting the important use of the head and for a fat figure, it is 

likely Boschini meant the steward. The quotation is interpreted by G. 

Piovene and R. Marini,Z,'Opera Completa del Veronese, Milan, 1968, 

114, to refer to the figure under the left arch. P. Meller recognized the 

Grimani "Vitellius" as the model for the steward and suggested that 

it was also the model for the seated figure. 

19. Copies of Suetonius' Twelve Caesars were available in Venice even 

before 1500; Venetian artists could have known the legendary 

gluttonous character of Vitellius. The most common use of the 

sculpture was as a model for stewards' or dinner guests, though it 

appears also as figures unrelated to food. See R. Klein, Italian An 

1500-1600: Sources and Documents, New Jersey, 1966, 130. 

Ill

9. Here attributed to Veronese, Drawing after the Grimani 

"Vitellius," Windsor, The Royal Art Collection (photo: Courtesy 

of Windsor Library). 

straight cut. Shadow falls across the bridge of the nose 

in equivalent locations. The corner of the eye, the 

nostril, and the creases of the neck and chin are 

delineated and shaded in the same way. In general the 

heads of the drawing and the painting appear to be 

similarly aged versions of the head shown in the 

sculpture, the flesh being portrayed as softer and more 

flabby. 

The Windsor drawing has been attributed on the 

basis of style to Marietta Tintoretto, the Rasini drawing 

being the basis of comparison. 21 Clearly Marietta's 

rapid heavy-handed outlines are completely unlike the 

fine lines of the Windsor drawing shown in the hair, 

and in the parallel crosshatchings forming the shadow 

of the ear. While the concept of the head in the Rasini 

drawing is affiliated with other renderings by members 

of the Tintoretto shop, the concept of the head in the 

Windsor drawing is clearly not. 

The Windsor drawing is here attributed to Veronese 

not only on the basis of the unmistakable similarity to 

the head of the steward in Veronese's painting, but on 

the basis of a comparison with other chalk drawings of 

heads believed to be by Veronese. In Veronese's Head of 

a Woman in the Art Institute of Chicago, the outlines 

and the features of the face are similarly suggested with 

only a few heavy-handed lines (Fig. 8). 22 Fine parallel 

hatchings of the nose and eyes of the female head are 

like the hatchings that indicate the shadow of the ear in 

the Windsor drawing. The white chalk used to model 

the ridges of the ear is carefully applied to well-defined 

areas, an application to be found in many other 

drawings by Veronese. 

Another drawing in Windsor Castle, also in black 

chalk, is of the Grimani "Vitellius" seen from above 

(Fig. 9). In Windsor, it is listed as by Marietta 

Tintoretto because of its similarity to the profile 

drawing. However, this drawing is inscribed on the 

mount "P. VERONESE" in an 18th century hand. 23 

Based on stylistic considerations the attribution to 

10. Paolo Veronese, Supper in Emmaus, 1559-1560, Paris, 

Detail. 

drawn head appears to be preparatory to the painting. 20 

Most importantly, the full side of the head and the 

shaded front of the face are shown in both works. The 

mouth is shown close to the nose in these two 

works—slightly unlike the positioning of the mouth in 

the sculpture. The awkwardness of the mouth in the 

drawing is due to the slightly outward turn of the head 

and is eliminated in the painting by means of the strict 

profile view. The hair line meets the ear at the same 

place in the drawing as it does in the painting and is a 

Louvre. 

20. A. Ibpham and J. Wilde, Italian Drawings at Windsor Castle, 

London, 1949, 338, no. 959. The drawing appears extensively rubbed, 

and it is likely a counter-proof was made from the drawing so that the 

head was reversed as it is in the painting. Veronese recognized the 

right side of the "Vitellius" as the better of the two sides. He could 

have easily made a drawing of the left side, but he would have had to 

copy the awkward satyr-like ear of this side. 

21 Morassi, Disegni, 33. 

22. D. Sutton, "Sunlight and Movement, Splendours of Venetian 

Draughtsmanship," Apollo, London, 1974, 100/Oct., 277, pi. 8. 

23. Popham and Wilde, Italian Drawings, 338, no. 960. Although 

Veronese is not well known for his chalk drawings, an inventory of 

Veronese's studio taken in 1685 lists 126 charcoal or black drawings. 

The Tietzes attribute only sixteen drawings in black chalk to 

Veronese. Tietzes, Drawings, 334. 

112

Veronese is, in my opinion, correct. As in Veronese's 

drawing of the Head of a Woman in the Art Institute of 

Chicago, the head and features are shown in an outline 

style, but more importantly the hair is indicated by 

numerous straight lines, a typical Veronese mannerism. 

Other drawings showing this trait are in London, 

Collection Archibald G.B. Russell, The Head of a 

Negro; Paris, Louvre, The Head of a Negro; and 

Florence, Uffizi, Head of a Woman. 24 

As is the case with the profile drawing of the Grimani 

"Vitellius" this drawing proves Veronese's use of the 

sculpture as a model for an important figure in one of 

his paintings. Specifically, this drawing was one of a 

group of sketches prepared for the head of the waiter in 

Veronese's painting in the Louvre, The Supper in the 

House ofEmmaus (Fig. 10). It is evident Veronese was 

interested in copying only the head; the fact that he did 

not adopt the sideward pose of the bust is of little 

importance. As is the case with the profile study, 

Veronese reversed the view of the head for the painting. 

What serves to connect the drawing with the painting is 

the very dark outlining of the facial features and even 

more importantly the distribution of shadow. Perhaps 

the most peculiar similarity is shown in the nearly black 

rounded shadow of the right eye of the two heads. As in 

the Feast in the House of Levi, Veronese changed the 

image of the Grimani "Vitellius" to depict a waiter 

older and less refined. 

An important use of the Grimani "Vitellius" by 

Titian is shown in his Christ Mocked ca. 1575 in the 

City Museum of Saint Louis, Missouri (Fig. II). 25 Titian 

used the Grimani "Vitellius" as a model for the head of 

Pilate. The small mouth, heavy jowls, and full cheeks 

are the same as the features of the sculpture. Perhaps 

11. Titian, Ecce Homo, 1575, Saint Louis, City Art Museum 

(photo: Courtesy of St. Louis City Art Museum). Detail. 

24. D.F. von Hadeln, Venezianische Zeichnungen der Spat renaissance, 

Berlin, 1926, pis. 29, 51, 52. The "Vitellius" type occurs in 

the following paintings by Veronese: Dresden, Gemàldegalerie, 

Christ and the Centurion, Wedding at Cana, Christ Bearing the 

Cross, Piovene and R. Marini, L'Opéra Compléta del Veronese, 

Milan, 1968, pis. 154b and 150, H. Menz, Venezianische Malerei, 

pi. 107; Venice, Ateneo Véneto, Christ Among the Doctors, P. 

Zampetti, Guida allé Opère D'Arte délia Scuola di S. Pantin 

(Ateneo Véneto), Venice, 1973, pis. 15 and 16; Paris, Louvre, Feast 

in the House of Simon the Pharisee, Esther and Ahasuerus, Marini, 

pi. 163. A. Orliac, Veronese, translated by M. Chamot, Paris, 

1940, pi. 137; Florence, Uffizi, Esther before Ahasuerus, Marini, 

pi. 31; Milan, Brera, The Supper in the House of Simon, Marini, 

PI. 137; Madrid, Prado, Wedding at Cana, Orliac, pi. 70; Venice, 

Academy, The Coronation of the Virgin, Orliac, pi. 100; Vienna, 

Kunsthistorisches Museum, Esther before Ahasuerus, Marini, pi. 

225; Rimini, S. Giuliano, The Martyrdom of Saint Julian, Orliac, 

pi. 111. 

25. H. Wethey lists five copies of the Saint Louis painting. In these 

paintings the Grimani "Vitellius" is not as well understood. The 

current opinion of the Saint Louis painting is that it is a sketch 

which remained in Titian's shop as a study piece. H. Wethey, The 

Religious Paintings, New York, 1969, fn. 130. 

12. Tintoretto, Drawing after the Grimani "Vitellius," Oxford, 

Christchurch Library (photo: Courtesy of Christ Church, Oxford). 

113

engraving in the Uffizi by Giacomo Franco after 

Palma's design for an illustration of an early drawing 

book published in 1611 entitled De excellentia et 

nobilitate delineationis libri duo. 29 Three views of the 

head are among the sketches of heads in the Uffizi 

engraving. 

The Grimani "Vitellius" was known through copies 

and plaster casts in other artistic centers of northern 

Italy. In Verona, for instance, Paolo Farinati and 

Felice Brusasorci used the head in representations of 

Vitellius as one of the series of twelve emperors 

mentioned by Suetonius. 30 Less known is the use of 

the Grimani "Vitellius" by Antonio Campi and 

presumably by the other members of the Campi shop 

in Cremona. 31 

13. Jacopo Palma (the Younger), Drawing of the Head of a Man, 

Rome, Academy of Saint Luke. 

better than any other artist, Titian was able to closely 

approximate the highly expressive quality of the 

sculpture. 

A drawing of the Grimani "Vitellius" in the 

Oxford Christchurch Library is of the same threequarter 

view of the sculpture as the head of Pilate in 

Titian's painting (Fig. 12).* 6 The general appearance 

of the head of this drawing and the head in Titian's 

painting is nearly the same. Though I believe the 

drawing is correctly attributed on the basis of its style 

to Tintoretto, the drawing makes it clear Titian's 

model for the head of Pilate was the Grimani 

"Vitellius." 27 

One other interesting Venetian adaptation of the 

Grimani "Vitellius" is shown in a sketch from the 

book of drawings by Jacopo Palma (the Younger) in 

the Academy of Saint Luke, Rome (Fig. 13). The 

drawing, described as the Head of a Man, is of the 

sculpture looking slightly right with lifelike long hair 

and Roman drapery details. It is drawn in reddishbrown 

and black chalk on oatmeal colored paper, 385 

x 255 mm. 28 That Palma made more imitative 

sketches of the Grimani "Vitellius" is known from an 

26. Black chalk with white heightening on buff, 393 x 263. On the 

verso is another study of the "Vitellius." D. Hadeln, Tintoretto 

Zeichnungen lists it as by Jacopo as does J.B. Shaw, Drawings by 

Old Masters at Christ Church Oxford, Oxford, 1976, 207, pis. 440 

and 441. The Tietzes list it as shop. The painting in Saint Louis was 

originally considered to be by Tintoretto, A.L. Mayer, "An 

Unknown Ecce Homo by Titian," The Burlington Magazine, 

LXVII, New York, 1935, 35. 

27. A drawing of the "Vitellius" tentatively attributed to Titian is 

in the Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid. The drawing is of the head 

seen from below nearly in profile looking left, in crayon, 242 x 177 

mm. H. Wethey, III 237. Titian used the "Vitellius" type for the 

head of one of the kings in his painting(s) of the Adoration of the 

Magi versions of which are in the Escúdale, Milan, Cleveland, and 

Paris, F. Valcanover, L'Opéra Compléta di Tiziano, Milano, 1969, 

pis. 407 and 422-425. 

28. L. Grassi, // Libro dei Disegni di Jacopo Palma il Giovane 

all'Accademia di S. Lúea, Roma, 1968, 27, pi. 17. 

29. "The complète volume thereby offers a full set of exampla for 

the artist, models for the drawing of the human body as well as a 

set of classical formulas to guarantee a certain iconographie 

correctness." 

D. Rosand, "The Crisis of the Venetian Renaissance Tradition," 

L'Arte.Xl, 1970, 12, 

"Among the model heads (shown in the Uffizi engraving) are 

several well known ancient portraits, busts of the emperors 

Vitellius and Galba, as well as Laocoôn." 

Ibid., 27, pi. 16. 

30. Two drawings of Vitellius by Paolo Farinati are in London, 

Hallsborough Gallery (1972) and in Windsor, Royal Art Coll. 

(4994). The heads of these sketches were studied from the 

"Vitellius." Perhaps these full-lengths were for the frescoes of the 

twelve emperors mentioned by D. Zanandreis for the Casa 

Guarienti ai Filippini. F. dal Forno, Paolo Farinati, Verona, 1965, 

63. A use of "Vitellius" probably from a copy is shown in Felice 

Brusasorci's painting of the Emperor in Valeggio, Coll. Portalupi, 

L. Magagnato suggests that Veronese artists had access to the copy 

of the "Vitelilus" by the school of Micheli Sanmicheli (ca. 1530) 

for the facade of the Palazzo Bevilaqua in Verona. L. Magagnato, 

Cinquant'Anni di Pittura Veronese 1580-1630, Venice(), 1974, 

62ff, pis. 33 and 35. 

31. Battles at or near Cremona determined the reign of Emperor 

Vitellius. Within thirty miles of Cremona the Soldiers of Vitellius 

defeated the soldiers of Otho; as a result Otho killed himself, and 

Vitellius marched to Rome to crown himself emperor. Cremona was 

also the site of the fall of Vitellius—the triumph of Vespasian. 

114

14. Antonio Campi, Susanna and the Elders, ca. 1570. Brescia, Pinacoteca Tosio-Marinengo (photo: 

Courtesy of the Pinacoteca Tosio-Martinengo). 

15. Antonio Campi, Drawing of Susanna and the Elders, c. 1570, Worcester, Mass., City Art Museum (photo: Courtesy 

of the Worcester Art Museum). 

115

16. Antonio Campi, Drawing of a Standing Youth and the Grimani "Vitellius," Milan, Ambrosiana (photo: Perotti). 

Antonio Campi (1546 - c. 1591) painted Susanna and 

the Elders, for the Municipal Palace in Brescia c. 1570 

(Fig. 14). The painting was part of a series of eight 

scenes of justice in the Sala dei Dottori, Giudici 

Collegiati. 32 

A preparatory drawing for this painting is in the 

Worcester Art Museum in Massachusetts (Fig. 15). The 

drawing is in pen and ink on light brown paper lOVix 

16*/2 in. Antonio Campi adopted the pose of the figure 

of the elderly man on the far right in the drawings for 

the elder on the left in his painting. E. Tietze-Conrat 

writes concerning an old collector's attribution of the 

drawing: 

"His attribution [incorrectly to Titian] which is 

based on mere quality and perhaps also on the 

32. S. Ostrow, Visions and Revisions, Providence, 1968, 20f., pis. 1 

and 2. 

116

17. Antonio Campi, Drawing after the Grimani "Vitellius," London, 

Collection C. King (photo: Sotheby's). 

general composition with dominating figures in the 

foreground and on the Vitelliustype of one of the 

old men, deserves no discussion." 33 

I have found an unrelated, but neverthless detailed 

drawing by Antonio Campi of the Grimani "Vitellius" 

on a sheet in the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in Milan (Fig. 

16). 34 The Ambrosiana drawing shows a figure of a 

youth in the center of the paper, and the head of 

"Vitellius" in larger scale in the lower right corner. The 

drawing is in black chalk with many lines drawn in ink, 

262 \ 191 mm. 

The small sketchy head of the figure on the extreme 

right in the Worcester drawing is a simplified version, at 

a different angle, of the "Vitellius" study in the 

Ambrosiana. In both drawings Antonio Campi drew 

numerous creases in the forehead, downward turned 

corners of the mouth, scanty outlines to define the hair, 

and distressed bags under the eyes. 

For the painting however, Antonio Campi slightly 

changed the appearance of the head. He painted a 

younger and bolder type instead of the older and 

meeker type shown in the Worcester and Ambrosiana 

drawings. Whereas in the drawings the eyebrows curve 

downward as do the corners of the mouth, in the 

painting the visible eyebrow and the corners of the 

18. Antonio Campi, Susanna and the Elders, c. 1570 (detail), Brescia, 

Pinacoteca Tosio-Martinengo (photo: Courtesy of the Pinacoteca 

Tosió Martingengo). See fig. 14. 

mouth curve upward. The hair is uneven in the drawing, 

but it is even in the painting. 

Recently two drawings of the Head of a Roman 

Emperor tentatively attributed by P. Pouncey to 

Antonio Campi were sold at Sotheby's to Mr. Clifford 

King of London (Fig. 17). 35 These red chalk drawings, 

256 x 216 mm. and 231 x 192 mm., are also of the 

Grimani "Vitellius." The larger drawing shows the head 

looking right and is more naturalistic with curly, even 

hair. The other drawing is more sculptural and is seen 

in profile looking left. The odd looking ear indicates the 

drawing was done directly from the Grimani "Vitellius" 

or from an accurate plaster copy of it. 

33. E. Tietze-Conrat, "A Master Drawing Drawing by Antonio 

Campi," Art in America. 27, New York, 1939, 160-163. The 

Worcester drawing was probably used only for a very general 

concept of the composition for the painting. Antonio Campi 

probably made more detailed studies. The drawing has been 

discussed as by Giulio Campi; Antonio referred to Giulio's rough 

sketch to make his own drawings and to do the painting, Ostrow, 

Visions, 20, suggests that this kind of cooperation was common in 

16th century workshops. 

34. G. Bora, Disegni di Manieristi Lombardi, Vicenza, 1971, 36, 

no. 38. 

35. Sotheby and Co., Old Master Drawings, London, 10 Oct. 1974, 

Lot 120, 23, pi. 10. 

117

19. Wallerand Vaillant, A Young Artist in His Studio, sold at Sotheby's April 19, 1972, lot 86,(photo: A.C. Cooper). 

118

The slightly larger more naturalistic drawing of 

"Vitellius" of the King Collection is roughly similar to 

the head of the elder in the painting in Brescia and may 

even be a study for it (Fig. 18). Subtle differences are 

noted in the somewhat longer, more upright and slightly 

outward turned head of the painting, but it is important 

to note that the lifelike facial modeling and naturalistic 

treatment of the hair and mouth occur in both works. 

Though the use of the head in Campi's painting is not 

immediately recognizable, when one considers the 

intermediary stages—that is, the drawings of the 

Grimani "Vitellius" and the sketch for the compositionthe 

use of the Grimani "Vitellius" is clearly evident. 

Renaissance artists of Northern Italy appreciated the 

unique physiognomy of the Grimani "Vitellius" and 

they regarded it as the most important sculpture for the 

study of the representation of heads. The painters 

transformed the image of the sculpture not only to 

disguise their source but to create lifelike characters of 

various roles. For the most part, bold and noble 

characters created from the magnificent Grimani 

"Vitellius" served to support and enhance characters 

studied from live models. 

Preliminary research indicates the tradition of 

studying and using copies after the Grimani "Vitellius" 

was continued by 17th century Netherlandish artists. 36 

A particularly fine Dutch example illustrating the use of 

a cast of the head as a model for drawing is shown in 

Wallerand Vaillant's painting A Young Artist in His 

Studio, sold at Sotheby's April 19,1972, lot 86 (Fig. 19). 

An earlier example is shown in Hendrick Goltzius' 

painting of the emperor in the Grunewald Castle in 

Berlin (Fig. 20). 37 1 believe Rubens used the head as the 

model for his painting of Bacchus in the Hermitage 

(Fig. 21). The view of the head is similar to that shown 

in 1885-5-9-1658 in the British Museum attributed to a 

member of the Tintoretto school (Fig. 23). However, the 

the youthful conception of the head and in particular 

the small mouth is due to the style of the copy of the 

20. Attributed to Hendrick Goltzius, Bust of the Emperor Vitellius, 

c. 1616, Berlin, Grunewald Castle. 

36. Rembrandt owned two sculptures of "Vitellius" K. Clark, 

Rembrandt and the Italian Renaissance, Gluckstadt, 1966, 193-209. 

Presumably these were based upon the Grimani head. 

37. The painting was part of a series of emperors painted 1618-1628 

for Prince Frederik Hendrik. As Goltzius died in 1617, it is believed 

the painting was done before 1616 and without the intention of 

being part of the series. R. Oldenbourg, "Die NiederlSndischen 

Imperatorenbilder in Kôniglichen Schlosse zu Berlin," Jahrbuch der 

Kdnigl. Preuss. Kunstammlungen, XXXVIII, 1917, 182-191, pi. 

106. Verwaltung der Staatlichen Schlosser und Garten, Jagdschloss 

Grunewald, Berlin, 1975, 52. J. Van Gelder notes the monogram of 

Frans Pietersz. de Grebber (Haarlem 1573-1649) and suggests the 

painting was by him. J. Van Gelder, "Rubens in Holland in de 

zeventiende eeuw," Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek III 

1950/1951, 133, fn. 1. 

21. Peter Paul Rubens, Bacchus, Leningrad, Hermitage Museum. 

119

22. Attributed to Peter Paul Rubens, Drawing of the Head of "Vitellius," Vienna, Albertina (photo: Courtesy of the Albertina). 

Grimani "Vitellius" shown in the drawing attributed to 

Rubens in the Albertina (Fig. 22). 38 

38. A drawing in Chatsworth attributed to Rubens is allegedly from 

an Italian copy of "Vitellius" in Ruben's house in Antwerp. F. 

Baudoin, Ruben's House: A Summary Guide, Antwerp, 1964, 19. The 

sketch in Chatsworth was taken from the obverse of an antique coin. 

The direct source and the purpose of the Albertina drawing is not 

clear; M. Rooses, L'Oeuvre de P.P. Rubens, Anvers, 1892, V, 213, 

claims it was after the sculpture in the Louvre. As P. Cervera has 

suggested, it could have been studied from a painting of the sculpture 

as suggested by the treatment of the eyes. 

120

23. Tintoretto School. Drawing after the Grimani "Vitellius," London, British Museum (photo: Courtesy of the British Museum). 

121

A Description of Six Relatively Unknown Tintoretto 

Drawings of the Grimani "Vitellius" 

1. Budapest, Szépmüveszéti Muzeum, 58.392. 

Nearly frontal view of head, looking slightly right, 

and tilted left. 

(verso: similar view but looking slightly more right) 

Charcoal heightened with white on gray-green paper; 

312 x 222 mm. 

Bibliography: Ivan Fenyó, Disegni Veneti del Museo 

Budapest, Neri Pozza, Vicenza, 1965, 32. 

The museum lists the drawing as by a member of 

Tintoretto's workshop. The drawing is related to the one 

Lübeck. 

2. Erlangen, Universitátsbibliothek, Bock 1542. 

Nearly frontal view of head, turned slightly left, and 

seen slightly from below. 

(verso: similar view but turned slightly more left) 

Black chalk heightened with white on buff colored 

paper; 411 x 272 mm. 

Late inscription: "Jacopo Tintoretto" 

Bibliography: Tietzes, Drawings, 280. 

The Tietzes attribute this drawing to Jacopo 

Tintoretto. It has been known as a drawing of the "head 

of a Roman Emperor." 

3. Lübeck, St. Annen Museum, AB 389. 

Nearly frontal view of head, turned slightly right, seen 

slightly from below. 

Black chalk heightened with white on gray paper; 325 

x 250 mm. 

Provenience: Collection Sir Thomas Lawrence. 

Bibliography: Max Hasse, Die Zeichnungen Alter 

Meister in der Lïibecker Graphiksammlung, Museen 

fur Kunst und Kulturgeschichte der Hansestadt Lübeck, 

1969, 24. 

The drawing is listed by the museum as by Jacopo 

Tintoretto. It is my opinion the drawing is related to the 

one in Budapest. P. Brookes says this drawing is most 

like the plaster cast in the Birmingham City Art 

Museum. Brookes, Exhibition of Birmingham Paintings, 

entry 10. 

4. New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, 1959.17. 

View of head turned slightly right, seen in foreshortening 

from below. 

Charcoal heightened with white on lined gray paper; 

332 x 250 mm. 

Bibliography: Bean and Stampfle, Drawings from 

New York, 68. It is my opinion the drawing is related to 

the one in Paris, École des Beaux Arts. 

5. New York, Collection Woodner. 

Frontal view of the head turned slightly left. 

(verso: similar view) 

Black chalk heightened with white on oatmeal 

colored paper; 406 x 278 mm. 

Inscription: verso "Testa di Vitellio Cavata dal 

Rilevo," in brown ink. 

Watermark: Greek cross on circle Briquet 2989) 

Bibliography: Frederick G.» Schab, Woodner Collection 

I: A Selection of Old M aster Drawings before 1700, 

William H. Schab, New York, 1971, entry 31. 

The drawing is listed in the collection as by Jacopo 

Tintoretto. 

6. Paris, Collection Pilartz 

Nearly frontal view of head, seen from below. 

(recto: Study after Michelangelo's Samson with the 

Two Defeated Philistines) 

Black chalk heightened with white; 350 x 229 mm. 

Provenience: Christies, 29 June 1971, lot 53. 

Exhibited: Royal Academy Diploma Galleries, The 

Paul Oppe Collection, 1958, no. 382. National Gallery 

of Canada, March 1961, no. 148. Edinburgh, Italian 

16th Century Drawings from British Private Collections, 

1969, no. 83, pi. 35. 

Postscript: 

Stephen Bailey 

J. Paul Getty Museum 

Malibu 

Sculptural versions of the head are shown in vanitas 

still-lifes in Munich, Alte Pinakothek, Inv. 6579 

attributed to a Leiden artist ca. 1628 (the painting 

includes a book by Suetonius); and in St. Gallen, 

Kunstmuseum by Georg Gsell (1617-1740). (See Hoilandische 

Malerei des 17. Jahrhunderts, Munich, 1967, 

41, pi. 24; and Schweiz. Inst. fur kunstwissenschaft, 

Das Schweizer Stitteben im Barock, Zurich, 1973, 52 

and 58. 

122

Fig. 1 Lion from the oinochoe figs. 4-14. 

A WILD GOAT-STYLE OINOCHOE IN MALIBU 

The handsome oinochoe illustrated in figs. 1,4-14 was 

acquired by the J. Paul Getty Museum in 1972 

(inventory number 72.AE.127) and is one of the few 

complete examples of Eastern Greek Wild Goat-style 

painting in the American west. 1 

This article, with its conclusion that the oinochoe is 

not a genuine product of the seventh-sixth century B.C., 

was prepared before the Getty Museum's conservation 

laboratory had subjected the oinochoe to a thermoluminescence 

test, which demonstrated that it was indeed a 

forgery. The test was repeated three times in the 

laboratory of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. 

Although complete the vessel has been broken and 

the slightly mottled look of the surface is due to 

judicious retouching along breakage lines. The clay, as 

revealed on the underside of the vessel, has a pale 

pinkish-brown colour. The outside of the vase is covered 

with a yellowish-cream "paint", over which there is 

decoration in dark "glaze". 2 The paint is now very thin, 

1) This study was made possible through the kindness of J. Freí, 

Curator of Antiquities at the J. Paul Getty Museum. 

Fragments from the shoulder of another Wild Goat-style oinochoe, 

decorated in what Ch. Kardara has called the style of Mixed 

Technique and recovered at Naucratis, are scheduled to be published 

in another article of this Journal. 

2) Paint means what some call slip. Glaze means Greek glaze or 

Greek black glaze, as discussed by J.V. Noble. The Techniques of 

Painted Attic Potter (New York 1965) 31-34. 

123

Figs. 2-3 Attic cups by the Antiphon Painter. Norbert Schimmel 

Collection. 

and reveals the texture of the clay surface, which has 

some grits and many tiny pocks. In several places there 

the glaze has worn away, the paint directly underneath 

(i.e., where glaze had been) appears to stand up in relief 

from the adjacent painted 'reserve' area (figs. 13-14). 

As curious as this relief effect is the porous look of the 

vessel's surface: pores in the surfaces of painted vases 

usually were eliminated by burnishing or by a thick slip 

in order to reduce absorbency and provide a slick 

ground receptive to brush work. Might our vase have 

been cleaned with some acidic solution which has 

altered the surface texture 

The glaze (applied also on the inside of the neck) has 

a fundamentally blue-black colour and lacks the warm 

brown tone characteristic of Greek glaze, even at its 

blackest. In several places, however, the black blends 

abruptly to reddish-brown (particularly conspicuous on 

the grazing goat just to the left of front center and on 

the inside of the neck; less so on the rump and haunch 

of the deer, shoulder, rump, and haunch of the lion, 

and the floral chain to left of front center), which 

evidently illustrates the effect of uneven firing in a 

three-stage firing operation. 3 

The glaze has worn thin or flaked off in places, 

particularly on lip and handle (where the intensively 

chipped effect even looks deliberate) and on the foot 

and lower body. In some places where the glaze has 

worn or been abraded there appears to be an 

undercoating of grey, like a separate layer between 

paint and glaze (e.g., on the rump of the front center 

goat and the body of the one which follows behind; and 

on the floral chain). 

The inside surface of the vessel, as seen through the 

mouth aperture, has a uniform covering of what looks 

like dilute glaze (which has run off the "peaks" and 

collected in the "valleys" of the wheel rings). 

The vessel stands .365 m. high to the top of the 

handle, .305 m. to the top of the lip; and has a 

maximum diameter of .236 m. Oinochoe, the ancient 

Greek name now conventionally assigned to Greek 

one-handled pitchers like ours in Malibu, literally 

means 'wine-pourer'; 4 and although the shape would 

accommodate other liquids - and sometimes accommodated 

solids 5 - ancient Greek scenes of daily life show 

that these vessels regularly were used for wine, which 

they transmitted in the socially-approved dilute form 6 

3) As discussed by Noble (supra, n. 2) 70-83. 

4) G. M. A. Richter, M. J. Milne, Shapes and Names of Athenian 

Vases (New York 1935) 18-20. 

5) An oinochoe filled with cereal grains was recovered from Iron Age 

contexts at Gordion in Phrygia during the University of Pennsylvania 

excavations of 1973 (information kindly furnished by K. DeVries); cf. 

"amphorae" containing slices of salted dolphin in Armenia, 

Xenophon, Anabasis 5. 4. 28. 

6) The Greeks' practice of drinking wine mixed with water is as old as 

Homer (///as 9. 203; Odysseas 9. 208-210; 14. 78; 21. 294). For ancient 

traditions concerning the origin of the practice, Philochorus fr. 18 (ed. 

Muller) ap. Athenaeus, Deipnosophistae 2. 38 c-d; cf. 5. 179 e, 15. 693 

d-f; Philonides, TTEÇI HVQWV KOI oTEcpavcov ap. Athenaeus 15. 675 a-b. 

For various proportions, Athenaeus 10. 426 b - 427 a, 429 f - 430 a 

(five parts water to one part wine; 5:2, 4:1; 3:1, 2:1, 1:1, attested in 

the writings of Cratinus, Menander, Hesiod, Ion, Anacreon, etc.), 

Odysseas 9. 208-210 (20:1, for the wine given to Odysseus by Marón); 

cf. Chaeremo fr. 16 (ed. Nauck) ap. Aristotle, Problemata 3. 16 (873 a 

25), Plutarch, De Pythiae Oraculis 23. 406 b, Athenaeus 13. 562 e (via 

Theophrastus, EQWTIKOC fr. 107 [ed. Wimmer]: mixed according to the 

temper of the imbiber). 

For wine mixed with sea water, Phaenias of Eresus fr. 32 (ed. 

Muller) ap. Athenaeus 1. 31 f - 32 a (one part sea water to fifty parts 

must, to make otvoç avtfcrru'a); Pliny, Historia Naturalis 14. 9. 73 - 14. 

10. 78 (produced at Clazomenae, Ephesus, Cos). 

124

Figs. 4-7 Wild Goat-Style oinochoe. J. Paul Getty Museum 72.AE.127. 

125

Fig. 8 Wüd Goat-Style oinochoe. J. Paul Getty Museum 72.AE.127 

Fig. 10 Wild Goat-Style oinochoe. J. Paul Getty Museum 72.AE.127 

126

Fig. 9 Wild Goat-Style oinochoe. J. Paul Getty Museum 72.AE.127 

Fig. 11 Wild Goat-Style oinochoe J. Paul Getty Museum 72.AE.127. 

127


from the 'mixer', crater or lebes, to the drinking cup 

(figs. 2-3). 7 

General features of the shape - broad shoulder, low 

neck, trefoil lip (the result of pinching, to make the 

spout more effective), 'reeded' handle, and rotelles at 

the juncture of handle and lip - are characteristic of 

oinochoae made in various regions of the Greek world 

during the seventh and sixth centuries B.C.; but subtle 

distinctions of contour and proportion associate ours 

with varieties produced in the Eastern Greek region and 

commonly called 'Rhodian', from the island where 

many well-known examples have been recovered, 

although they evidently were also made and used in 

other parts of the Eastern Greek world. 8 

'Rhodian' oinochoae shape variation is largely 

coordinate to decorative style. The decorative style of 

our oinochoe (further, infra) is essentially the common 

and standardized one which Ch. Kardara has called 

Classical Camiran. 9 Only the broad, swelling body of 

our oinochoe, however, is consistent with Classical 

Camiran oinochoae proportions; the upper parts are 

more or less idiosyncratic. The lip is rather high, and 

more appropriate to a 'Rhodian' variety of generally 

more slender form, used for a decorative style which has 

been called Naucratite or, by Kardara, Mixed Technique. 

10 The handle is composed of two rather than the 

7) Figs. 2-3, kindly furnished by Mr. Norbert Schimmel and 

reproduced with his permission, show details from both sides of a cup 

by the Antiphon Painter in New York, Norbert Schimmel Collection; 

O. W. Muscarella, éd., Ancient Art: the Norbert Schimmel Collection 

(Mainz 1974) 61. cf. also the stamnos by Smikros, Brussels, Musées 

Royaux d'Art et d'Histoire, A 717, P. E. Arias, M. Hirmer, A History 

of Greek Vase Painting (London 1962) 322-323, pi. 105; Beazley 

ARV 2 20 no. 1; and cup by the Dokimasia Painter, New York 

Metropolitan Museum of Art, 06.1021.188, Noble (supra, n. 2) 126; 

Beazley ARV 2 413 no. 15. 

Silenoi and hetairai who drink directly from amphorae, therefore, 

e.g., on cups by Epiktetos and in New York, Beazley ARV 2 75 no. 56 

and 50 no. 190 respectively, are uncouth not merely because their 

action is grotesque but because they consume wine neat. 

For wine and water mixed in the cup, Odysseas 14. 78; Xenophanes 

fr. 5 (ed. Diels) ap. Athenaeus 11. 782 a; cf. Cratinus fr. 273 (ed. 

Kock) ap. Athenaeus 11. 782 d. 

8) For recent attempts to identify the products of regional schools, H. 

Walter, Frühe Samische Gefasse; Chronologie und Landschaftsstile 

ostgriechischer Gefasse ("Samos", V; Bonn 1968); E. Walter-Karydi, 

Samische Gefasse des 6. ïahrhunderts v. Chr.; Landschaftsstile 

ostgriechischer Gefasse ("Samos", VI. 1; Bonn 1973). 

9) Ch. Kardara, Rodiake Angeiographia ("Library of the Archaeological 

Society in Athens", 49; Athens 1963) 89-174; supplementary 

plate B (for oinochoae profiles), cf. R. M. Cook, Gnomon 37 (1963) 

503-504, 506. 

10. Kardara (supra, n. 9) 199-248; cf. E. R. Price, "Pottery of 

Naucratis", JHS 44 (1924) 180-222; K. F. Johansen, "Clazomenian 

Sarcophagus Studies", Acta Archaeologica 13 (1942) 1-64, also B.M. 

61. 10-24.14. 

128

usual three 'reeds'. Most curious of all are the position 

and spacing of the rotelles. The rotelle element of 

pottery oinochoae is borrowed from metalwork where it 

had been developed for practical reasons: in the metal 

oinochoe rotelles are simply the ornamental terminals of 

a bar which effectively broadens the grip of the handle 

and strengthens its attachment to the thin lip. 11 Only a 

few pottery oinochoae, notably the splendid Levi 

oinochoe in the Louvre, maintain the design of metal 

rotelles 12 but all reproduce the broad spacing and 

integration with the lip which are basic to the original 

concept. On our oinochoe in Malibu, however, the 

rotelles are spaced close to the handle and, when seen 

from the sides, appear only tangential to the lip. 

The painted decoration is the distinctive Eastern 

Greek kind whose rich, tapestry-like friezes and pattern 

represent for many students the epitome of Greek 

orientalizing art; it has been dubbed after the most 

prominent of its animal figures the Wild Goat style. The 

particular decorative program of our vase is that of the 

distinctive sub-style which Kardara has called Classical 

Camiran: 13 simple guilloche on the neck, 14 tongues at 

11) P.Jacobsthal, "Rhodische Bronzekannen aus Hallstattgrabern", 

JDI 44 (1929) 208; E. Buschor in A. Furtwangler, K. Reichhold, 

Griechische Vasenmalerei: Auswahl Hervorragender Vasenbilder III 

(Munich 1910) 266. 

12) Jacobsthal (supra, n. 11) 209 figs. 10-13. 

13) Kardara (supra, n. 9). 

14) The guilloche on the neck may also be double, as on an oinochoe 

from Kameiros, G. Jacopi, "Esplorazione Archeologica di Camiro - 

II, T ' Clara Rhodes 6-7 (1932-1933) 219, pis. VI, VII; or triple, as on 

the Levi oinochoe in the Louvre, E. Pottier, CVA France 1, Louvre 1 

(Paris 1922) pis. 6, 7. 

15. A. H. Layard, A Second Series of the Monuments of Nineveh 

(London 1853) pi. 56; W. Andrae, Coloured Ceramics from Ashur and 

Earlier Ancient Assyrian Wall-Paintings (London 1925) pis. 11-14, 19. 

The occurrence of this "flower-bud" chain motif in the decoration of 

the alabaster threshold from Nineveh and of floor painting in a tomb 

of the late sixth century B.C. near Elmali in Lycia (information kindly 

furnished by M.J. Mellink), both of which evidently simulate floor 

carpets, provides explicit evidence for the importance of textiles in the 

transmission of motifs from the Near East to the Greek world. 

16. Shoulder friezes with this more informal arrangement evidently 

belong to no particular school or group; cf. the arrangement on 

oinochoae assigned by Kardara (supra, n. 9) to the following variants 

of the Classical Camiran style: Painter of the Birds of.Prey, p. 95 nos. 

1, 5; Group of the Budapest Oinochoe, p. 96 no. 3; Workshop of the 

Stags, pp. 100, 101 nos. 3, 15;'Workshop of the Butting Goats, p. 102, 

no. 2; Workshop of the Ducks, p. 107 no. 5; and to the Transitional 

Style, p. 181 no. 1. 

17) Wild Goat oinochoae might have two friezes below the shoulder, 

e.g. Jacopi (supra, n. 14) 219, pis. VI, VII; three friezes, e.g. L. 

Laurenzi. "Necropoli lalisie (Scavi dell'Anno 1934)", Clara Rhodos 8 

(1936) 31, fig. 11 on p. 30; or five friezes as on the Levi oinochoe, 

Pottier (supra, n. 14). 

the top of the shoulder, continuous loop divider bands 

on the body, lotus flower and bud chain - one of the 

most conspicuously Near Eastern of Greek orientalizing 

motifs 15 - on the lower body. The only aberration in the 

general scheme is the absence of decoration on rotelle 

faces and handle. 

In the figurai friezes the usual kinds of creatures 

natural and fabulous promenade in a kaleidoscopic 

wonderland. As always, the shoulder frieze is the more 

(sometimes most) elaborate and the only one axially 

organized, presumably because interruption by the 

handle at the back imposes a particular focus. Here as 

frequently, the substitution of a non-frontal, unsymmetrical 

creature, in this case a goose, for the more 

traditional stylized floral motif in the center modifies 

the formality of the arrangement. 16 Flanking the central 

goose are a grazing deer, facing, and a griffin sejant, 

turned away. Beyond and facing the deer is a lion 

passant; beyond and facing the griffin a bull passant 

with head lowered. 

The single 17 continuous frieze on the body displays 

the canonical file of creatures of the same kind, in this 

case the goat which has given the style its name (figs. 

4-7,14) not the commonplace domesticated species of 

Greeks' everyday experience - 

raí \JLZV £/uai XUTIOÓV T£ Km ai/iAov aíy£c EÓOVTI 

xai OXVQV naTEOVTi xai ¿V xoâQom x£ovrai 


129


- but the glamorous untamed Capra aegagrus, whose 

brilliant acrobatics and noble length of horn 18 have 

enthralled artists since earliest times (figs. 15-16). 19 

If the decoration's grammar and vocabulary are 

conventional, however, orthography is not: the iconography 

of creatures and ornament includes numerous 

unorthodoxies, of which the following are particularly 

striking. 

(1) Certain filling ornament motifs, viz. the full and 

half rosettes with circle-on-stick petals and the dot 

18) The horns of the wild goat shot by Pandaros in the Iliad (4. 

105-113) were sixteen palms long (109: TOU x/ca £x x£cpaAr)ea TT£cpúx£i); cf. R. Lydekker, Royal Natural History II 

(London 1894) 239 (goat horns "upward of 5>2Vi inches" in length). 

Pandaros used the horns to make a bow; for this use, A. J. Evans, 

The Palace of Minos at Knossos IV (London 1935) 832-836; J. 

Chadwick, The Mycenaean World (Cambridge 1976) 130-131. The 

arts of Crete show wild goats used as sacrificial animals, cf. the 

attractive bronze plaques from Kato Syme Viannou, reported by H. 

W. Catling, "Archaeology in Greece 1974-75", Archaeological 

Reports for 1974-75 (London 1975) 27-28 and references; more 

fancifully as draught animals yoked to chariots, J. Boardman, Greek 

Gems and Finger Rings; Early Bronze Age to Late Classical (London 

1970) 102, pi. 110. 

19) Fig. 15, reproduced by kind permission of Leonard von Matt 

from S. Alexiou, N. Platon, H. Guanella, Ancient Crete (New York 

1967) pi. 193, illustrates one of many splendid representations in 

Minoan art: on a stone rhyton from the palace at Zakro; for the 

beautiful device of wild goats mating on a gold signet, R. Higgins, 

Minoan and Mycenaean Art ("Praeger World of Art"; New York 

1967) 52 ill. 50. According to a popular tradition canonized by 

Aristotle, Historia Animalium 9. 6 (612 a 3) and repeated by many 

later writers of Classical Antiquity (including Theophrastus, Virgil, 

Pliny, Dioscurides, Aelian, Plutarch), the wild goats of Crete used 

dittany (Origanum dictamnus) to cure themselves of arrow wounds; 

the sources are collected in E. K. Platakis, 0 AIKTAMOI THI KPHTHI 

(Herakleion 1975). 

Fig. 16, reproduced by kind permission of Col. W. R. 

Prescott, illustrates a drawing in the possession of the same by 

Edward Lear, dated July 5, 1864 and labelled "The Landscape Painter 

Perceives the Moufflons on the tops of the Mountains of Crete" 

(reproduced in V. Noakes, Edward Lear; the Life of a Wanderer 

(Boston 1969) 202). 

Highly stylized wild goats (or ibexes) are a striking motif on the 

famous goblet of the fourth millenium B.C. from Susa, R. de 

Mecquenem, "Catalogue de la céramique peinte susienne conservée 

au Musée du Louvre", Délégation en Perse, Mémoires 13 (1912) 

105-106, pis. 1 no. 4, 4 nos. 1, 2; for ancient remains of Capra 

aegagrus in Iran, J. Boessneck, "Tiernochenfunde vom Zendan-i 

Suleiman (7. Jahrhundert v. Christus)", Archaeologische Mitteilungen 

ans Iran 6 (1973) 108. 

For general discussions of Capra aegagrus in ancient art and its 

distribution in Crete and Asia Minor, K. F. Kinch, Vroulia (Berlin 

1914) 265-272; Evans (supra, n. 18) 832-841; H. Kumerloeve, "Zur 

Verbreitung kleinasiatischer Raub- und Huftiere sowie einiger 

Grossnager", Sàugetierkundliche Mitteilungen 15 (1967) 394-398, fig. 

30 on p. 396. 

130

Fig. 15 Minoan stone vase from Kato Zakro (photo Leonard von Matt) 

rosette with double ring of dots (the last in the goat 

frieze near the back of the vase; figs. 5-7) never to 

the writer's knowledge appear in the Classical Camiran 

repertoire. 

(2) Griffin and lion lack proper ears; although the 

upper ends of their collars, which uncharacteristically 

extend beyond the top contour of their heads, could be 

construed as such (figs. 1,10). 

(3) The L-shaped reserve spaces in the further hind 

legs of the goats are shaped to represent genitals (pi. I). 

The proper function of these spaces is to differentiate 

leg and underbelly. True genitals (penises) are rendered 

in outline further forward and pendent below the belly. 

(4) The tongues at the top of the shoulder all have 

central dividers (figs. 4-7). Normally at least one pair 

and sometimes more on either side of the front axis 

lack dividers, in subtle response to the axial conception 

of shoulder decoration. 

(5) The lower hind legs of griffin and lion are 

rendered in silhouette (figs. 1,10) rather than outline 

and reserve. 

20) A strange Wild Goat style vase from lasos in Caria, however, 

shows a dog with similarly contoured jaw, D. Levi, "lasos. Le 

Campagne de Scavo 1969-70", ASAtene 31-32 (1969-70) 506-507, 

fig. 58. 

131

There are other aberrant features. The exaggerated 

reserve contour of the goose's jaw and its stunted talons 

(fig. 9) must be exceptional if not unique. 20 The 

bases of the goats' ears are broad, and give no hint of 

the delicate attenuation so often favored. The deer's pelt 

evidently lacks dapples, in reserve or white-painted 

(figs. 6,8). 21 The griffin's wing has no pin-feather zone, 

and consists entirely of quill feathers (fig. 10). A 

technical peculiarity is the apparent absence of red 

paint, normally used to colour figures and motifs in the 

friezes. 

The Wild Goat style can accommodate a fair amount 

of eccentricity (with respect to the norm of 'Rhodian' 

material), as demonstrated by pottery of Aeolic, 

"Ephesian", and other fundamentally Eastern Greek 

styles, and by individual pieces like the Vlastos oinochoe 

in Athens and the richly polychrome oinochoe from 

Siana on Rhodes, now in Vienna; 22 and there is strange 

provincial and derivative Wild Goat style pottery from 

the periphery of the Greek world in western Asia Minor 

and Italy whose peculiarities are only just becoming 

known. 23 None of this material, however, helps to 

explain the idiosyncracies of our oinochoe, which are as 

alien to other fundamentally Eastern Greek styles as 

they are to the Classical Camiran and which are not the 

striking ones of provincial and derivative Wild Goat 

styles. 

To the writer at least the first four idiosyncracies 

listed above seem inconsistent with fundamental 

attitudes and conventions of ancient Wild Goat style 

painting, 24 and suggest that our oinochoe is not a 

product of the seventh and sixth centuries B.C. Like the 

apparent peculiarities of technique (especially the 

absence of brown tones in the glaze) and form 

(especially the spacing of the rotelles), a certain stylistic 

impotence, conspicuous in the weakly-rendered heads of 

lion and griffin and hindquarters of the lion, reinforces 

but is not crucial to this conclusion. If the vase is a 

genuine antiquity, however, its authenticity sooner or 

later should become vindicated through the recovery of 

similar Wild Goat style pottery in certifiable contexts. 

C.H. Greene wait, Jr. 

Berkeley 

Fig. 16 Drawing by Edward Lear 1864. 

21) For techniques of dappling on deer pelts, C. H. Greenewalt, Jr., 

"Orientalizing Pottery from Sardis: the Wild Goat Style", California 

Studies in Classical Antiquity 3 (1970) 63 n. 15. 

22) For this material, E. Walter-Karydi, "Âolische Kunst", Studien 

zur Griechischen Vasenmalerei ("Antike Kunst Beiheft", 7, Bonn 

1970) 3-18; C. H. Greenewalt, Jr., "Ephesian Ware", California 

Studies in Classical Antiquity 6 (1973) 91-122; idem, "Fikellura and 

"Early Fikellura" Pottery from Sardis", California Studies in 

Classical Antiquity 4 (1971) 153-180; Walter (supra, n. 8) nos. 612, 

613 (pottery from Old Smyrna), 622 (the Vlastos oinochoe), 630 

(oinochoe from Siana in Vienna). 

23) For provincial and derivative Wild Goat style pottery from 

western Asia Minor, Greenewalt (supra, n. 21) 55-89; idem, "Two 

Lydian Graves at Sardis", California Studies in Classical Antiquity 5 

(1972) 118-120, 129-130; idem, "Lydian Vases from Western Asia 

Minor", California Studies in Classical Antiquity 1 (1968) 151-154; 

Levi (supra, n. 20); K. T. Erim in M. J. Mellink, "Archaeology in Asia 

Minor", AJA 73 (1969) 223; cf. P. P. Betancourt, 'The Age of 

Homer," Expedition 12 (1969) 14 no. 88; A. Terracotta Oinochoe", 

City Art Museum Bulletin 1 (1965) 3, 6 (oinochoe in St. Louis, 

Missouri). There is also material in the Archaeological Museums of 

Istanbul and Izmir, which A. Pasinli and E. Cakir kindly have shown 

me. 

For 'Rhodo-Etruscan' (or 'Etrusco-Rhodian') Wild Goat style 

painting, by the Rondini Painter, A. Giuliano, "Un Pittore a Vulci 

nella II Meta del VII sec. A. C.", Jdl 78 (1963) 183-199; idem, "Un 

Pittore a Vulci nella II Meta del VII sec. A. C. (Addenda)", AA (1967) 

7-11; A. D. Trendall, Greek Vases in the Logic Collection 

(Christchurch 1971) 50-51, pi. Ill no. 9; N. Kunisch, Antiken der 

Sammlung Julius C. und Margo Funche (Bochum 1972) 50-51 no. 54. 

D. A. Amyx kindly reminded me of this material and supplied all 

references. 

24. Rosettes with circle-on-stick petals occur on kinds of Wild Goat 

style pottery which not only are distinctively different in style from 

Classical Camiran but are considered by many scholars to be later in 

date; cf. Walter-Karydi (supra, n. 8) nos. 979 (dish from Syracuse), 

1009 (bowl from Naucratis), 1068, 1073 (plates from Rhodes), 1117 

(plate from Tocra); Arias, Hirmer (supra, n. 7) 280, pi 27 (the 

Euphorbos plate). 

132

HANDLES OF GREEK VASES 

Scant attention has been paid to the methods used in 

forming handles of Greek vases and little has been 

published. It has been generally accepted that most of 

the handles of these vases were made by the rolling 

method. The most recent discussion of the manufacture 

of Attic vases is by J. Noble. 1 He states, when discussing 

the handles on amphorae, "Ancient Attic potters . . . 

rolled lumps of clay between their hands or on a flat 

surface until they formed long ropes or 'snakes' of clay. 

The 'snakes' were modified at the potters' discretion." 

This present study was inspired by a chance handling 

of an Attic vase handle at the J. Paul Getty Museum. 

Being a potter, I was struck by the similarity of the 

handle to a pulled type of handle used in modern 

pottery studios. Since examining ancient Greek vases in 

the J. Paul Getty Museum, my opinion is that most 

handles were probably made by the pulling method 

rather than, as previously held, by the rolling method. 

Clay is soft and pliable when it is wet. As it is exposed 

to the air, it hardens, becoming less pliable as it reaches 

the leather-hard or firm stage, when it can no longer be 

shaped by hand. Only minute modifications can then be 

made by the use of tools. 

There are four common methods of making handles: 

rolling, pulling, wire cutting and moulding. From the 

evidence of the vases examined, only the first two 

techniques were used in Greek pottery and these 

procedures have not changed appreciably from ancient 

times. 

In the rolled handle, a lump of wet clay is rolled 

between the hands or on a smooth, flat surface to form 

a long rope of clay. This rope or "snake" of clay is then 

bent to the desired shape and left until it has reached a 

degree of firmness which allows the potter to fit it to the 

pot. The formed handle is attached to the pot with clay 

"slip", a supersaturated clay so wet it can be poured. 

Attaching the handle to the pot before it reaches the 

leather-hard stage and while it still has some pliability 

has the advantage of allowing the potter to make minor 

adjustments in the shape of the handle. In this way it 

better relates to the form of the pot. Or the potter may 

I thank Faya and Jiff Freí for kind help in preparation of this article. 

1. Noble, J.V., The Techniques of Painted Attic Pottery, N.Y., 1965, 

p. 14. 

133

1 A,B: Olpe by the Gorgon painter, about 590 B.C. (76-AE-55). This 

rolled, double handle has minute irregularities along its 

length. 

1C: A cross-sectional view of the same 

handle as 1A,B. 

choose to wait and attach the handle at the leather-hard 

stage. Rolled handles, even though created with great 

care, have minute irregularities in width due to 

irregularities in the shape of the potter's hands and 

fingers. It requires the gentlest touch of the fingertips in 

the final forming stage, or sanding and sponging the 

handle during the leather-hard stage, to eliminate most 

of these irregularities. 

In an early sixth century B.C. olpe by the Gorgon 

Painter (76-AE-55) 2 (Fig. la,b) an easy view of the inner 

side as well as a clear cross-sectional view is afforded as 

the top portion of the long, narrow, rolled double 

handle is missing. The handle was left reserved 

(unpainted) except for four decorative stripes, and 

evinces no sign of pull-lines, whereas minute irregularities 

are visible along the length of the handle as the olpe 

is rotated. (Fig. le) 

To make a pulled handle, a cone-shaped lump of wet 

clay is held in one hand with the neck end of the lump 

facing downward. With the moistened free hand, a 

repeated gentle squeezing and pulling motion causes the 

clay to assume an elongated form. (Fig. 2a) Longitudinal 

lines develop as a result, much like the lines left in 

the clay when a potter throws a piece on the wheel. 

These lines add a flowing quality to the pulled handle 

not found in those which are rolled. Pulled handles tend 

to be thicker and wider at the origin of the pull, thinner 

and narrower at the termination. Micrometer readings 

taken on the ancient vases reveal this configuration. 

(See chart la) A graceful, flowing curve is evident in 

vertically oriented pulled handles. When the potter 

turns the hand holding the clay, the handle will bend of 

its own weight into a loop. (Fig. 2b) This natural loop 

lends a quality beautifully in harmony with the finished 

vase. "The result is more pleasing than anything 

accomplished by rolling/' 3 

Ancient Greek vases evince eleven different types of 

handles as follows: 

2. Anonymous donation. Greek Vases in the J.P,G. Museum, 

January-April 1977, #12. 

3. Kenny, John, The Complete Book of Pottery, N.Y. 1949, p. 51. 

134

2A: Pulling a cylindrical handle. 

2B: When the handle is fully pulled, the potter turns his hand to 

allow a loop to form in the clay. 

3A: Attic column krater, 510-500 B.C. (75-AE-80) with 

pulled cylindrical handles. 

The cylindrical and double pulled handles are made 

by curling the index finger around to the base of the 

thumb, making an "O" shape. As the handle is pulled, 

the thumb and finger remain in a relatively relaxed 

position. A nearly round handle results if the potter 

slightly rotates the pulling hand around the handle to a 

new position before commencing each stroke. Otherwise, 

a somewhat triangular shape results. The Attic 

column krater (75-AE-80) 4 (Fig. 3a, 3al) 510-500 B.C. 

has a good example of a cylindrical handle, and a 

fragment (no inv. no.) (Fig. 3b,c,d) in cross section 

shows the more triangular shape resulting when the 

hand is not rotated. 

Double handles are made by fitting two cylindrical 

handles together, cementing them with clay slip. 

Possibly the triple, quadruple and twisted handles are 

variations of the same method. 

Handles that are segmentai in section are made by 

positioning the thumb and index finger in the same 

manner as for cylindrical handles but by tightening the 

index finger, thus flattening the portion of the handle in 

contact with the tissue pad at the base of the index 

finger. 

• In making a concave handle the potter commences to 

form a cylindrical handle. When the desired size is 

reached, the index finger is crooked into a half circle 

4. Anonymous donation. Recent Acquisitions of Antiquities, the 

J.P.G, Museum June-September 1976, #83, Greek Vases #24. 

135

3B: Position of hand for pulling a cylindrical handle. 

3C: A triangular shape in the handle results when the potter does 

not rotate the pulling hand, as in this Attic column krater 

fragment, end on view. 

3D: Attic column krater fragment shown in 3C. 

4A: Pulling a concave handle. The thumb tip forces a 

concavity into the round handle. 

4B: Concave handle bent to form a loop. 

4C: Apulian goat-head rhyton about 300 B.C. (71-AE-380) with a 

concave handle. Note the pull-lines. 

4D: Side view of rhyton shown in 4C. 

136

6: Two Apulian rhyta, (71-AE-195, 71-AE-196) the handles 

pulled by a left and a right hand, respectively. Note high 

left side of the bull-head handle, on the left, and high 

right side of the ram-head handle, on the right, with conresponding 

off-centered concavities. 

5A: Polychrome lekythos, third century B.C. (76-AE-95) 

showing shallow concavity in its handle. 

with the tip of the thumb placed opposite the crook of 

the index finger. By gently forcing an indentation into 

the round handle with the tip of the thumb at each 

successive pull, a concave handle is formed. (Fig. 4a) 

Such a handle is seen adjacent to a fourth century B.C. 

ewe goat-head rhyton (71-AE-266) 5 in Figure 4b,c,d. 

Other examples of the concave handle include a third 

century B.C. polychrome lekythos (76-AE-95) 6 Sicily, 

with a shallow indentation caused by the thumb turned 

somewhat sidewise. (Fig. 5) The handles of two Apulian 

rhyta (Ram 71-AE-195; Bull 71-AE-196) 7 (Fig. 6), are 

pulled one by a left and the other by a right hand, 

shown by the off-center appearance of the concave 

portion of the handle to the right or left correspondingly. 

This off-centered aspect is not an uncommon 

character in concave handles due to the physical 

impossibility of turning the thumb so it is directly 

opposite the middle segment of the crooked forefinger. 

In making ribbon handles, the index finger is bent at 

a ninety degree angle at the second joint. The thumb is 

placed on top of the most distal joint of the index 

finger, or between these two joints, with both thumb 

and forefinger tensed. (Fig. 7a,b,c) In cross section, 

ribbon handles may vary in thickness, some higher on 

one side and some higher in the middle, depending on 

the position of the thumb when the clay is pulled. An 

example of this variation is the lekythos signed by the 

5. cf. S. Holo, Getty M J 1 (1974) 89, 91, figg. 16-17. 

6. Presented by Gordon McLendon. 

7. Holo 85 ff., 86. figg. 1-3, 87. figg. 6-8, 90 figg. 11-12. 

137

c 

8 

7A: Pulling a ribbon handle, broad view. 

7B: Same handle as Figure 6A, turned 90 degrees showing near 

side thinner than far side. 

1C: Same handle as Figure 6A,B, looped to form a handle showing 

irregularity of thickness - thicker on left side than right. 

8A: Lekythos signed by Amasis, about 550 B.C. (76-AE-48) -a thick, 

wide origin of pull on the neck of the vase, and thinner, 

narrower insertion on the body of the vase. 

8 B: Same handle as 8A, broad view, showing typical irregularity of 

thickness in ribbon handles - higher on right side than left. 

Amasis Painter (76-AE-48) (Figs. 8a,b) 8 . The vase shows 

decided signs of wear and therefore no pull-lines are 

obvious on the unglazed portion of the handle. In cross 

section it is higher on the right side and it decreases in 

width from origin of pull on the neck to insertion on the 

body (see Chart No. 1). 

The flat strap handle is the result of a continuation of 

the flattening process of the ribbon handle, with the 

pads of the thumb and forefinger used for pulling the 

last few strokes. (Fig. 9) Like the above Lekythos, a 

Capanian duck askos (71-AE-403) with flat strap handle 

also shows the origin of the pull on the neck of the vase 

and the insertion onto the body. 

The center-ridged handle is the most difficult to pull. 

A ribbon handle is started and when an oval cross 

sectional shape is reached the middle finger is slipped 

8. Presented by Mr. and Mrs. Bruce McNall. 

138

9: Pulling a flat-strap handle using thumb and tip of forefinger 

to flatted the clay. 

10: Thumb tip and tip of forefinger are opposing the middle 

finger to produce a center-ridge handle. 

the base, corresponding to the thickness of the origin of 

the handle, with a thinner area remaining in the center. 

(Fig. 13,a,b) The undulating curves of some horizontal 

handles are made by allowing gravity to pull the middle 

portion off-center. (Fig. 13c) These curves, along with 

the pull-lines, create a graceful, continuous flow not 

found on rolled, molded, or wire-cut handles. 

Two examples illustrate this natural bend: an Attic 

hydria from about 500 B.C. (75-AE-83) (Fig. 14) 10 , and 

an Attic hydria fragment (no number) (Fig. 15). There is 

a typical overall upward bend and a slight flattening to 

the curve in both. No pull-lines are obvious in the intact 

fully glazed hydria handle, but can be seen on the 

reserved portion of the fragment. A third example is 

seen in a fourth century B.C. Campanian bell krater 

(71-AE-390) (Fig. 16) which has obvious pull-lines. This 

krater has an exaggerated upward bend to the handles. 

This probably occurred when the potter gave the 

natural bend an extra push as he positioned the handle 

to dry. (Fig. 17a,b,c) 

Richter 11 recognizes the great skill and sense of 

beauty in the work of the Athenian potter through the 

construction of Attic vase handles when she says, 'The 

handles grow out of the vase like branches from a tree 

which gives them a living quality." 

Jacobsthal 12 writes of the "stream of power" which 

flows from the neck of the vase into the handle and 

back into the body of the vase; 'The handle is of 

behind the handle while the opposing thumb tip and tip 

of the forefinger are placed opposite the middle finger. 

The thumb and forefinger create the central ridge as the 

handle is pulled. (Fig. 10) The sharp, harsh ridge line 

produced is softened by running a finger over the ridge. 

A deeper groove will result on one side of the central 

ridge if care is not exercised in keeping the finger tips 

opposed. Both of the handles on a fourth century B.C. 

lebes gamikos (71-AE-396) (Fig. 11) display this 

asymmetric grooving while an Attic pelike (75-AE-81) 9 

(Fig. 12) shows symmetrical grooving. 

To make horizontally positioned pulled handles, the 

potter relaxes the squeezing motion each time he nears 

+he end of the pull, leaving a thickened lump of clay at 

9. Anonymous donation. Recent Acquisitions #85, Greek Vases #43. 

10. Anonymous donation, Recent Acquisitions #84, Greek Vases #34. 

11. Richter, G.M.A., The Craft of the Athenian Pottery, N.Y., 1923, 

p. 21. 

12. Jacobsthal, P., Ornamente Griechischer Vasen, Berlin, 1927, 

p. 13. 

11: Campanian lebes gamikos (4th c. B.C.) (71-AE-396) 

showing asymmetrical grooving of both handles in a 

center-ridge pulled handle. 

12: Attic pelike (75-AE-81) with symetrical grooving in a 

center-ridged pulled handle. 

139

14: Attic Hydria (75-AE-83) with an off-center bend to the 

horizontal handle. 

15: Attic hydria fragment showing the same off-center bend 

and flattening of the curved portion of the cylindrical 

handle. 

13A: Pulling a horizontally situated handle thicker on both 

ends and thinner in the center. 

13B: Same handle as in Fig. 13A elongating the thin center section. 

13C: Undulating middle section of the same handle as Fig. 13A,B 

where gravity has pulled it off-center. 

16: Small Campanian bell krater (71-AE-390) with exaggerated 

bend to the horizontal handles. 

140

17A: Making the loop for a horizontally situated handle 

with an exaggerated bend - first step. 

After gravity pulls the center section off-center, the 

potter gives a gentle but firm snap or push to create a 

handle with an excessive bend. (Front view, Fig. 17B and 

side view, Fig. 17C. 

decisive importance for the form, articulation and 

decoration of the vase." It is the pulled handle which 

best creates this stream of power. Bending the handle 

by hand to the desired shape lessens the beauty found in 

the natural bend of the pulled handle, giving it an 

appearance of being worked over. Rolled handles are 

slow and ponderous to create as compared to the ease 

and spontaneity of creating pulled handles. There is a 

correlation between free-flowing thrown vases and the 

natural movement of pulled handles that brings a unity 

to the ancient Greek vase. 

In conclusion, it is the writer's opinion that the 

ancient Greek potters relied upon the pulling method of 

construction to form handles on Ancient Greek vases. 

Toby Schreiber 

Malibu 

141

CHART No. 1 

TYPE OF VASE 

DATE 

B.C. 

MICROMETER* * 

READINGS 

WIDTH OF HANDLE 

TOP TO BOTTOM 

OR LEFT TO RIGHT 

MICROMETER 

READINGS 

DEPTH OF HANDLE 

TOP TO BOTTOM 

OR LEFT TO RIGHT 

Attic olpe 

(76-AE-55) 

About 

590 B.C. 

V 

CL 

493 485 482 499 

505 485 430 

507 492 498 

Attic 

column krater 

(75-AE-80) 

510-500 

B.C. 

V 

CL 

627 678 595 635 

633 684 607 637 

644 697 614 655 

680 726 664 662 

658 708 652 677 

642 712 633 690 

Attic krater 

(76- AE- 132,1) 

Apulian 

goat rhyton 

(71-AE-380) 

Frg. V CL 

4th 

Century 

V 

CN 

680 728 

691 753 

710 

598- 

592- 

590- 

572- 

711 693 

688 713 

581 

—268 

—257 

-250 

—240 

Sicilian 

lekythos 

(76-AE-95) 

3rd 

Century V CN 

634 

638 

640 

306 270 

308 275 

Apulian 

ram rhyton 

(71-AE-195) 

4th 

Century 

V 

CN 

745— 

753— 

764— 

-297 

—305 

—307 

Apulian 

bull rhyton 

(71-AE-196) 

4th 

Century V CN 

751— 

762— 

755- 

—353 

—310 

-277 

Attic 

lekythos 

(76-AE-48) 

About 

510 B.C. V R 

385— 

380— 

375— 

—780 

—775 

—708 

Campanian 

duck askos 

(71-AE-403) 

4th 

Century V FS 

506- 

504- 

498— 

—189 

—182 

—170 

Campanian 

(71-AE-396) 

- Attic 

pelike 

(75-AE-81) 

Attic 

hydria 

(75-AE-83) 

4th 

Century V CR 

About 

450 B.C. 

About 

500 B.C. 

V 

H 

V 

CR 

CL 783-780-782 

- - 

791 

776 

768 

765 

849 

822 

855 

840 

831 806-759-790 

864 

Campanian 

Gell Krater 

(71-AE-390) 

4th 

Century 

H CL 390-385 395-400 

* CL = Cylindrical; CN = Concave; R = Ribbon; FS = Flat Strap; CR = Center Ridge; 

* * micrometer readings are in lOOOths of an inch. 

142

CHART No. 2 

TYPES OF VASE 

HOW MADE 

No. P* PI INC. R RI 

TYPES OF HANDLES 

Head Vase 1 1 

Skyphoi 

Lekythoi 

Lebes gamikos 

Duck askoi 

8 

6 

1 

3 

8 

6 

2 

3 

6 

Cups 

6 4 6 1 

Olpai 

Amphorae 

Kylikes 

3 

3 

2 

1 1 

4 

4 

Pelikai 

5 4 6 

Oinochoi 3 1 1 1 

3 

Hydriae 

Rhyta 

Phiale 

2 

3 

1 

1 

3 

2 

Calyx kraters 3 

Bell kraters 4 6 

Column kraters 2 1 2 

Total Pieces 57 

Total Handles 86 

2 1 

2 

1 

1 

No. 

Cylindrical 46 

Double 3 

Segmental-in-Section 8 

Center Ridge 7 

Ribbon 13 

Flat Strap 5 

Concave 5 

POSITION ON VASE 

No. 

Horizontal 44 

Vertical 41 

Uncertain 1 

Century No. Pieces 

3rd 1 

4th 30 

5th 10 

6th : ... 9 

8th 1 

No information 6 

AREA 

Companian 

Corinth 

Attica 

Apulia 

Sicily 

No. 

18 

2 

24 

11 

1 

P 

22 

7 

12 

1 

PI 

6 

7 

3 

HOW MADE 

INC. 

2 

2 

17 

2 

R 

2 

RI 

4 

CONCLUSION 

No. Handles 

Pulled 42 

Pulled, inconcl 16 

Inconclusive 23 

Rolled 2 

Rolled, inconcl 1 

P = pulled 

PI — pulled, inconclusive 

INC = inconclusive 

R = rolled 

RI = rolled, inconclusive 

143

CHART III 

TYPES OF HANDLES 

cylindrical double triple quadruple Segmentai- ttuisted 

in-section 

center- ribbon flat-strap concave flanged 

ridged 

144

1 East wall 

CONSERVATION OF A HELLENISTIC 

WALL PAINTING IN THRACE 

In 1965, a tumulus was excavated in Kazanlàk, circa 

6 miles east from the famous grave with wall paintings 

discovered in 1944. The exploration of the new tumulus 

started from the south where the entrance of the grave 

was discovered, followed by the dromos which had been 

entirely filled with earth after the collapse of the wooden 

ceiling. The walls of this first dromos preserved a few 

traces of a simple painted decoration suggesting that 

more paintings would be found inside of the funerary 

chamber. Immediately tests were taken for the eventual 

work of conservation. The temperature and the 

humidity were constantly monitored, in order to 

establish the rate of their changes which might have 

quickly caused the deterioration of the wall paintings. 

These were previously protected by the unchanging 

subterranean environment. After the opening of the 

trenches, the temperature varied between 12 and 32 C. 

with a median daily fluctuation of 19 C and maximum 

jump of 24 C from low to high. While the relative 

humidity oscillated between 32% and 86%, an average 

of 48% was much under the level before the excavations. 

To prevent an uncontrollable penetration of the 

external atmosphere into the grave, two doors were built 

into the entrance with the obligation for persons and 

large objects to spend 10-12 minutes in the space 

between doors before entering. Only two persons were 

allowed inside, (a conservator and an archaeologist) and 

the work was not carried on during the warmest part of 

the day, from 9:30-4:00 p.m. 

The next step was to clear the dromos from the earth 

fill. Three other small dromoi from the large hallway led 

to the funeral room. Two of them had simple painted 

walls as the first dromos. The walls of the last dromos 

were covered by well-polished tonaco. The funerary 

chamber of a simple rectangular plan was built of 

trapezoidal brick, with the lateral walls reaching a 

height of 1.5 m in order to form a false vault afterwards. 

Originally each brick protruded ca. 2 cm. over the 

preceeding one, but the edges were cut off. Then the 

surface was covered by a layer of 2-3.5 cm, composed of 

clay, sand and lime in approximate proportion of 7-2-1. 

Over this two layers of tonaco were applied. The first 

was mixed from sand, marble powder and lime (2-1-1), 

and the second from marble powder and lime (2-1). The 

surface was carefully polished before proceeding with 

the painting layer. The painting was executed in freso al 

secco; a handful of lime was applied on the tonaco, over 

which the pigment was applied. Carbon dioxide 

transformed this lime to an insoluble medium uniting 

the paint to the mortar. The palette was restricted to 

145

2 West wall 

pompeiian red (iron oxide), black (ivory black), white 

(calcium carbonade) and some touches of mineral azure. 

The background was the white layer of chalk itself. The 

colors were applied without being mixed. 

When the burial chamber was opened the temperature 

was 9 C and relative humidity 96%. The latter was 

maintained during the three months of work but the 

temperature rose to 14 C in spite of all precautions; 

it was successfully kept much lower than the outside 

temperature and the fluctuation was kept to 5 C. 

Special precautions were necessary to prevent the 

change in the balance of micro-organisms. Chemical 

146

3 Ceiling and south pediment: the funghi bloom. 

products would have been dangerous for the workers 

inside, thus bactéricide lamps were employed. A funghi 

bloom at the conclusion of the conservation was 

successfully eliminated by the applicaton of quaternary 

ammonium salts. 

The funerary chamber was used twice in Antiquity. 

When the second entombment took place, only half of 

the wall paintings remained on the walls. The rest had 

fallen onto the floor and were probably removed. Only a 

few fragments remained on the walls in the moment of 

the excavation; most of the surviving wall decoration 

was now on the floor. The detachment was produced by 

excessive humidity, by the roots of plants, and probably 

by intentional vandalism of the people entering the 

chamber later likely still in Antiquity. Thus, small 

fragments of the decoration were mixed on the floor 

with some dispersed bricks of the funerary klinai. 

To facilitate the access into the chamber a bridge was 

constructed above the fragments, carried by a metallic 

support embedded in the wall opposite the entrance. 

The floor of this bridge was movable in sections, 

permitting access to the whole area under it. 

After taking an exhaustive photo documentation of 

all the fragments on the floor and of the few remaining 

147

4 Detail of fig. 1. 

on the walls, the collection of the fragments was begun. 

The find spot of each of them was carefully registered 

on a grid plan. The fragments still in the walls were 

detached without being adhered to another support 

because of their extremely fragile surface. 

Acrylid B-72, 6% and 8%, was used to consolidate the 

tonaco and the very brittle fragments were consolidated 

before being collected. The painted surface was 

impregnated by the same fixative in lower concentrations, 

2-3%. All together, 3,000 fragments of different 

dimensions were collected, many of them without any 

painting. The total recovered surface corresponded to 

less than a half of the originally painted surface. 

The final result of the recomposition was a rather 

well-completed frieze which had covered all the East 

wall of the funerary chamber. It represents a wellrhythmed 

sequence of palmettes and amphoras. From 

the West wall only one palmette was reconstructed. All 

the painted fragments were placed in the recomposition 

but some 200 undecorated fragments remained without 

a place. 

Mounting of the painting raised several problems. 

The fragments were united together by 40% acrylic 

emulsion (primal ACC 33) and fixed onto a metal mesh, 

using as intermediary a tonaco composed of lime, sand, 

marble powder, inorganic fibers, and an emulsion of 

PVA (polyvinyl acetate). The proportion of the inert 

ingredients to the lime was 2.5-1. The fibers provided 

some elasticity while the PVA increased the level of 

adhesion and cohesion. To preserve the authenticity of 

this unique painting nothing was added to the painted 

surface. Some internal cavities were filled by tonaco 

under the level, reinforcing the cohesion among the 

fragments. The mesh presented a purely functional 

shape and was hardly visible once the fragments were 

displayed on a dark background. The unintegrated 

fragments were displayed separately from the recomposed 

frieze. The painted surface was partially covered 

by deposits of different natures: salts (carbonates, 

sulfates, nitrates), smoke, dust, and some spots of 

grease. The soluble salts, appeared not only on the 

surface but had penetrated into the tonaco. To avoid 

their dangerous crystallization they were extracted when 

the fragments were dried. The humidity of the tonaco 

was 19% in weight, i.e., 300 grams for each 1500 grams 

for the tonaco. The extraction was done with paper 

paste and kaolin under repeated control of the salts in 

the compresses. Thus, the humidity was reduced to 

1.5%. To remove the grease, the smoke, and the dust, 

solvents based on tri-chlor ethyline, carbon tetrachloride, 

and methylethylketone were used. The salts were 

removed after the mounting but before the consolidation 

of the tonaco and before the removal of other 

deposits. 

The iconography of the frieze corresponds to the 

funerary habits of the Thracians who buried their dead 

with their preferred objects, and with the necessities for 

life in the hereafter. The paintings substituted for real 

objects. In this tumulus, two Panathenaic amphoras 

were painted among the large palmettes. On one of 

these amphoras, a representation can be discerned, a 

biga with the horses leaping forward guided by a winged 

figure. Perhaps the amphoras were for the remembrance 

of some victory in chariot racing won by the 

dead man. 

The style of the paintings and the classification of *he 

archaeological material date the paintings to the first 

half of the second century B.C. 

Zdravko Barov 

Malibu 

148

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS OF MARBLE SCULPTURES: 

CROUCHING APHRODITE AND 

THE WESTMA COTT JUPITER 


1. Crouching Aphrodite. J. Paul Getty Museum, Malibu. 

Marble, even in the pure white crystalline form most 

sought by sculptors, is a complex chemical material. It 

is formed when sub-marine deposits of diatoms are 

subsequently buried and subjected to elevated temperatures 

and pressures in the metamorphizing process. 

This process produces a fine grain crystalline material 

having ideal characteristics for carving and polishing. 

As is evident from the many colors of marble, chemical 

impurities are often introduced at various stages in its 

formation, giving rise to different hues and striations. It 

This work, which comprises a portion of the Ph.D. thesis of L. 

Sangermano, would not have been possible without the energetic 

support of David Rinne, Conservator of Antiquities at the J. Paul 

Getty Museum. His realization of the importance of scientific 

investigative methods to the further study of collection pieces 

enabled us to pursue our ideas. In addition, he most generously 

provided laboratory space and staff assistance. We are also grateful 

to the Museum Curator of Antiquities, Dr. Jtfí Freí, for permission 

to work in the Museum areas and to publish this work. 

Financial support from the National Science Foundation (to Louis 

Sangermano) and the U.C. Irvine Reactor Facility Fund is gratefully 

acknowledged. 

149

2. U.C.I. Nuclear Reactor Core. 

3. Head of Aphrodite, drilled areas. 4. Aphrodite, relative sampling locations. 

150

5. Aphrodite, elemental concentrations. 

is the basis of this note 1 that such patterns and 

striations are in fact also present in the "pure" white 

forms of marble commonly used for sculpture. The 

impurities in this case are of colorless chemical 

composition, thus invisible. Discovery of such substances 

is only possible by means of chemical analytical 

procedures, and because of the small concentration 

involved, such methods must be highly sensitive. The 

impurities are not expected to be uniformly distributed 

throughout the material, since their introduction is 

postulated to have occurred via the inclusion of small 

fragments of rock or sedimentary material either before 

or during the metamorphosis stage. This mode of 

deposition imples that the concentrations of elements 

introduced may be found to vary in a spatially linear 

way, as in visible striations, or in a more complex 

fashion of swirls or blotches, or as a rapid decrease from 

a central point as a piece of marble is traversed. This 

type of variation may explain the lack of success 

encountered by previous investigators who have attemp- 

1. Miller, G.E., Sangermano, L. and Bunker, D. Trans Am Nucí. 

Soc. 21 (supp. 3), 27 (1975) 

151

6. Head of Jupiter, drilled areas. 

7. Jupiter, relative sampling locations. 

© HOLE LOCATIONS IN NECK 

O HOLE LOCATIONS IN HEAD 

ted 2 to identify quarry sites by means of simple chemical 

analyses for trace elements, without taking these 

morphological considerations into account. 

Both of the cases considered in this note were treated 

by a similar method 3 . It consists of a removal of small 

amounts of material from carefully identified locations. 

These samples are then subjected to elemental chemical 

analysis by means of the instrumental neutron activation 

method. The analytical data obtained is then 

critically examined for evidence of matching patterns on 

fragments assumed to be adjacent. The information 

obtained from this method is certainly subject to 

probability constraints and does not necessarily provide 

an unequivocal answer. 

The Crouching Aphrodite (Fig. 1) and the Westmacott 

Jupiter both had heads without a direct join to their 

respective bodies. Dr. Freí suspected that the head of 

the Jupiter did not belong to the body but that the head 

of the Aphrodite was the original, carved from the same 

block of marble as the rest of the sculpture. With the 

help of D. Rinne, the surfaces of the neck regions of 

the separate heads and of the torsos, already freed of 

adhering fill material, mostly plaster and epoxy cement, 

were rinsed with acetone and finally cleaned by a jet of 

compressed gas. At a series of carefully mapped 

locations small depressions were drilled with a 7/32- 

inch tungsten carbide drill bit to a depth of 

approximately two millimeters. The resulting powder 

was discarded to insure that no surface contamination 

would appear in the analysis. Using a freshly cleaned 

drill bit, each depression was deepened about 2-3 

millimenters, the powder being collected on a clean 

weighing paper. In this way some 30-50 milligrams of 

material was collected from each location and placed in a 

small polyethylene vial. The vial was packed and heatsealed 

as soon as possible to avoid changes in the water 

content of the material on exposure to air. 

The samples thus obtained were irradiated in the 

neutron flux of the U.C.I. Nuclear Reactor (Fig. 2) and 

the induced radioactivity determined by gamma-ray 

spectrometry using a 36 cm 3 Ge-Li detector coupled to 

a 4096 channel analyser. Peak areas corresponding to 

significant gamma rays were determined by a computer 

fitting routine. In this process the energies of the rays 

emitted from a sample after it has been exposed to a 

high neutron flux during the course of irradiation were 

identified. By comparing these to known gamma ray 

energies, the chemical components which make up the 

sample can be determined in relative form. Also, the 

absolute concentrations present can be determined by a 

simultaneous analysis of a standard of known concentrations, 

but this was not necessary in the present work. 

In order to minimize disfiguration of the sculptures, 

sampling operations were restricted to the neck area 

immediately adjacent to the large cavity in the torso. 

2. Rybard, L. and Nissen, H.V., Radiochemical Methods of 

Analysis, International Atomic Energy Authority, Salzburg, 1965; 

Craig, H., and Craig, V., Science 176, 401 (1972); Cenforto, L., 

Felici, M., Monna, D., Serra, L., and Taddeuci, A., Archaeometry 

17, 201 (1975). 

3. see note 1 for greater analytical detail. 

152

8. Jupiter, elemental concentrations. 

and to the flattened area of the head where the neck 

would have adjoined. (Fig. 3) In each of these areas 

drilling sites were selected which would allow sample 

comparison for a number of different head-body 

orientations. The real distance between these two sets of 

sampling locations, for aesthetic reasons in head 

placement, varied from 5 to 10 centimeters. This, in 

itself, required caution in forming conclusions based on 

matching of the analytical data. The sampling locations 

and the relative orientation, with the assumption of the 

original orientation of the head, are shown for the 

Aphrodite in figure 4. 

As a result of 15 second irradiations of the samples, 

concentration values were obtained for each sampling 

location for magnesium, aluminum, and vanadium. 

From a 30 minute reactor irradiation, values for 

manganese, strontium, and sodium were acquired. If 

the bottom of the head and the neck region of the pieces 

153

were originally connected within the same block of 

marble, then their respective elemental composition 

patterns must match along one specific orientation. It is 

important in comparison to bear in mind several 

features of the hypothesis of the internal structure 

variation within a marble block. The first of these is 

that the plane of sampling is a product of the whim of 

the sculptor and subsequent decay and breakage, and 

not at the disposal of the analyst. Indeed, the 

piece-to-piece separation distance of the sampling 

locations can only be estimated. Thus a vertical pattern 

repeat might be an exception rather than a rule and 

some angular shift is rather likely. This results from the 

original source of contamination being spread out 

through the marble by plastic flow. If we envision the 

original contaminants in a simple fashion as a point 

source, then as we go radially from this point source the 

concentration values would rapidly decrease. It is 

analogous to placing several drops of a colored pigment 

in a can of white paint and slowly stirring. As we stir, 

the colored pigment slowly spreads out from the point 

we originally set it, and its concentration changes as a 

function of distance. What we are comparing are the 

areas of relative high and low concentrations of 

elements in the head to the areas of relative high and 

low concentrations in the neck region of the torso. 

These regions are indicated in the diagrams in Fig. 5. 

In these diagrams, the A-Z and the B-Y axes are the 

same as those included in fig. 4 and assume that the 

head-body orientation proposed by Dr* Freí is indeed 

correct. In each portion of the separate parts of Fig. 5, 

the upper section represents the results from the head 

and the lower, those from the neck region. 

The contour diagrams, although crude in scale, reveal 

distinct areas of variability that do indeed reappear with 

some positional shifting in the matching piece. In fact, 

rather similar positional changes in going from head to 

neck are observed in the results for aluminum, sodium, 

and vanadium. These similarities are taken to mean 

that the evidence from the chemical analysis supports 

the conclusion that the head was indeed an integral part 

of the body and that the original orientation was very 

like that now adopted. 

The head of the Westmacott Jupiter 4 has no material 

links with the deep cavity of the torso. On the basis of 

the type of marble, workmanship, and proportions, it 

was thought that the head did not belong to the torso 5 . 

But the marble types seemed close enough to warrant 

the chemical analysis. Fig. 6 shows the bottom of the 

head after the drilling procedure was completed. 

The pieces were first carefully cleaned prior to 

removal of sample material. The procedures followed 

were essentially the same as those used for the 

Aphrodite. Analytical data were obtained for the 

elements aluminum, vanadium, magnesium, manganese, 

strontium, and sodium. 

Fig. 7 shows the orientation of sampling locations 

assuming a completely frontal orientation of the head. 

Fig. 8 shows the contour diagrams for the six elements 

determined. In this figure, the head is again the upper 

portion and the neck region of the torso is the lower. 

Again, if the two pieces were originally connected over a 

short distance, then matching patterns of elemental 

concentrations along one specific orientation would be 

expected. In this particular set, no one orientation 

produced a pattern match satisfactory for all six 

elements determined. As the distance between the 

sampling locations was perhaps as much as 8 to 12 

centimenters the conclusion must in this case be rather 

less certain. However, from this data there was no 

strong evidence that the head and torso were once part 

of the same block of marble. 

Louis Sangermano, George E. Miller, 

and t Don L. Bunker 

U.C. Irvine 

4. 70.AA.124 Cornelius Vermeule. The Westmacott Jupiter: An 

Enthroned Zeus of Late Antique Aspect. J. Paul Getty Museum 

Journal II, p. 99-108. 

5. David Rinne and Jifí Freí ib.108 (Fig. 1, pp. 102 shows the state 

with the restoration, Fig. 2 pp. 103, the body, fig. 3 p. 106) the head, 

separated. 

154

Fig. 1 Defendente Ferrari. Adoration of the Magi. 

Fig. 2 The painting rests on a composite support of five separate 

panels fortified by auxiliary support members. 

AN ADORATION OF THE MAGI ATTRIBUTED TO 

DEFENDENTE FERRARI: 

OBSERVATIONS ON THE SUPPORT 

Examination of the support of a painting frequently 

offers insight into its present physical state. The 

Adoration of the Magi, a sixteenth century panel 

attributed to Defendente Ferrari 1 now in the J. Paul 

Getty Museum, provides the opportunity for such 

analysis. Indeed, the current condition of the picture 

results in part from the working methods of the artist. 

Tool marks and defects in the material of this painting 

survive as testimony to the craftsman's task of 

preparing the wood and joining the supporting panels. 

Inspection of these historical clues invites conclusions 

The authors thank Donald A. Hull for the photographs. 

The terms artist and craftsman have been used interchangeably to 

indicate the person who constructed the support. 

1. J. Paul Getty Museum ace. no. 74.PA.31. The painting was 

purchased as a Defendente Ferrari Adoration of the Magi from the 

Contini-Bonacossi Collection in 1974. 

155

Fig. 3 Examination of an edge reveals 

concentric growth rings and a 

tongue and groove joint. 

Fig. 4 Diagonal grooves on the back illustrate the planning motion 

employed to flatten the surface longitudinally as well as 

transversely. 

Fig. 5 Only the second seam from the left, seen from below, exhibits 

Fig. 7 Reverse of Fig. 6. (detail) 

a glued, butt joint. 

156

egarding the need for the elaborate auxiliary support 

system attached to the back of the primary supporting 

panels. In light of what we know about the construction, 

the physical evidence facilitates our appreciation of the 

original appearance of the painting and helps to clarify 

the problems of degeneration that continually threaten 

the vulnerable support. 

The painting rests on a composite support of five 

separate panels fortified by auxiliary support members 

(Figs. 1 and 2). The structure forms an arched panel 

measuring 260.8 cm high and 185.0 cm wide. The width 

of the planks varies from 29.5 cm. to 48.5 cm. Yet, they 

do have a uniform thickness of 2.5 cm, which agrees 

with the standard for Italian wood panel paintings of 

the period. 2 The structure incorporates a secondary 

support system consisting of five transverse wooden 

battens held in place by carriers that are glued and 

nailed into the panels. Only the lowest batten, evidently 

a modern replacement, consists of two separate pieces 

of wood. The number of carriers and nails per crossmember 

varies according to the length of the battens, 

the longer struts requiring greater support. In addition, 

four newer horizontal pieces of wood (obviously more 

recent additions, judging by their color and texture) are 

nailed directly into the panel and span one of the 

central joins. The auxiliary cross-members will be 

discussed in greater detail below. 

Visible clues on the reverse of the picture reflect the 

artist's method of preparing the wood for use as a 

primary painting support. Initially, the craftsman cut 

five planks from one or more pine logs. Examination of 

the cross-sections at the ends of each piece reveals that 

none of the concentric growth rings of the tree are 

perpendicular to the surface of the boards (Fig. 3). 

Evidently a regular saw cut was used rather than the 

more advanced and more efficient method of quarter 

cutting. Once cut, the boards were left to dry and then 

individually planed on the side designated to receive the 

paint layer. Tool marks indicate that similar planing 

occurred again on the reverse after the panels were 

joined. Diagonal grooves on the back illustrate the 

planing motion employed to flatten the surface 

longitudinally as well as transversely (Fig. 4). A closer 

examination of these grooves reveals that the blade of 

the planing tool was poorly adjusted and defaced by a 

small dent. After a few strokes, either the blade was 

readjusted and sharpened or the plane was exchanged 

for another, because the defects disappear. Starting 

from the outer edge of the right board, the plane marks 

are interrupted in the center of the plank but continue 

on the adjoining board. Evidently, even after joining, 

2. Elizabeth C. G. Packard and John C. Kirby, "The Structure of 

Some South German Panel Paintings," Journal of the Walters An 

Gallery, X (1947), 92, n.4. 

Fig. 8 Roentgenograms demonstrate the wooden dowels and 

tongue and groove system used to construct three of the four 

joints of the panel. 

Fig. 6 Cracks held together by balancing dovetails appear at the top 

edge of the central board. 

the 

157

Fig. 9 Roentgenograms demonstrate that the tips of the supporting 

nails are bent. 

Fig. 10 The craftsman attached carriers on either side of the 

vulnerable seam and then hammered two nails alongside 

these carriers through the battens. 

Fig. 11 The upper curved edge of the second panel exhibits a hole 

drilled into the arch exactly where a join would have occurred 

had the panel continued. 

the boards did not present an even surface. Perhaps this 

particular problem of warpage contributed to the 

decision to incorporate an auxiliary support system. 

Further study of the marks on the reverse and edges 

of the picture indicates the technique by which the artist 

joined and strengthened the separate panels. A look at 

the edges of the boards near the joins reveals that the 

predominant method of assembling the panels is tongue 

and groove (Fig. 3). Only the second seam from the left 

exhibits a glued butt joint (Fig. 5). The inconsistency 

encourages speculation as to why the craftsman did not 

tongue and groove this one joint. Clearly, the seam 

would have been much stronger if he had employed the 

double locking system. Perhaps the craftsman faced the 

problem of constructing a panel with predetermined 

dimensions. If he was concerned with size he could 

avoid narrowing the overall width of the panel by opting 

for a butt joint, because a tongue and groove by its very 

nature would have cost him a loss of 1.5 cm in overall 

width. Examination of the edges along the flat joint 

reveals an area where bark still remains on one of the 

panels. Again, perhaps with size in mind, the artist 

chose not to plane down the uneven edge. Other 

evidence indicates that the artist strove to make the 

final support structurally sound. For instance, he 

followed a deliberate method in repairing splits. Two 

cracks held together by three balancing dovetails appear 

at the top and bottom edges of the central board (Figs. 

6 and 7). In each case, the artist inserted a pair of 

dovetails into the board from the front and another one 

into the back of the plank. Apparently understanding 

the internal stresses of wood, he counterbalanced the 

dovetails. 

Roentgenograms of the painting substantiate and 

augment the structural information already derived 

from the visual evidence. They demonstrate the tongue 

and groove system used to construct three of the four 

joints of the panel, and they verify the direction of the 

tongue as seen at the edges of the panel. Details reveal 

what the eye cannot see (Fig. 8). The groove measures 

1.5 cm while the tongue measures 1.3 cm. The slight 

discrepancy of the two measurements results in a space 

which appears as a dark vertical line in the radiograph. 

As expected, no such construction appears at the second 

seam, which is not a tongue and groove joint. Further 

study of the roentgenograms reveals wooden dowels that 

cannot be seen on physical examination. Placed 

sporadically along the length of the joins, the dowels 

add extra support to the tongue and groove joints 

between the boards, since their grain runs lengthwise. 

Incidentally, the x-rays also reveal that the artist made 

an occasional incorrect drilling where spaces appear in 

the wood but do not encase dowels. 

Additional information gathered from the roentgenograms 

and visual clues lends credence to the speculation 

158

Fig. 12 The only occurrence of a single dovetail appears on the front 

along the upper left edge of the arch. 

that the auxiliary members were attached to the 

primary support of the painting at the time of its 

original construction. As mentioned above, the reverse 

of the panel displays five transverse wooden battens that 

slip through four to six wooden carriers per batten. 

Simple visual examination suggests that except for the 

one obvious replacement, the battens are made of oak 

as are eight of the random carriers. The remaining 

carriers as well as the planks which comprise the panel 

are pine. The like appearance of the woods relative to 

age implies that four of the battens and all of the 

carriers are original. Likewise, the irregular heads and 

square stems of the forged nails that attach the carriers 

to the panels denote their age and support their early 

date. Moreover, the roentgenograms demonstrate that 

the tips of the supporting nails are bent (Fig. 9). Further 

visual and microscopic examination of the design layer 

verifies the originality of the overlying paint. Together 

these observations suggest that the tips of the nails were 

hammered down flat before the ground preparation was 

applied to the support. If so, the carriers and battens 

must have been attached to the panel before the picture 

was painted. 

The construction of the battens and carriers 

demonstrates the craftsman's understanding of the 

cross-grain expansion and contraction of wood; it 

implies a sophisticated appreciation of the problems 

created by a composite structure. Rather than simply 

nailing transverse pieces of wood across the joins in an 

effort to retard warpage, as was common in the 

sixteenth century, 3 the artist devised a system whereby 

cross-bars would move with the stress. Recognizing the 

Fig. 13 The most obvious disturbance appears in the displacement of 

the second and third boards along the singular butt joint. 

greater strength of hard woods, he constructed the 

cross-bars out of oak rather than pine. In so doing, he 

foreshadowed the modern method of cradle-making. 4 

The battens prevent the wood from twisting longitudinally, 

and their roughly regular spacing contributes to 

their effectiveness. Similarly, the placement of the 

supportive carriers at the extremes rather than the 

middle of the boards diminished the internal stress of 

each plank. Furthermore, the craftsman of the 

Adoration panel apparently realized the weakness of the 

one butt, glued joint. In an effort to strengthen only that 

joint, he attached carriers on either side of the 

3. Packard and Kirby, 92. 

4. "The Care of Wood Panels," Museum, VIII, 3 (1955), 159. 

159

vulnerable seam and then hammered two nails 

alongside these carriers through the battens (Fig. 10). At 

first glance, this final measure might appear to refute 

the contention that this craftsman understood the need 

to allow the natural movement of wood. However, by 

securing the battens only in this one area the artist tried 

to give local fortification to the weak joint without 

jeopardizing the lateral movement of the remainder of 

each batten. In short, the artist understood and 

attempted to solve the structural problems of a 

multi-panelled support. 

In light of the sophisticated approach of the artist of 

the Getty Adoration, certain peculiarities arouse 

suspicion with respect to the present format of the 

picture. Visual clues on the reverse demonstrate that the 

central part of the picture still appears in its original 

height. For instance, the battens and carriers are 

roughly equidistant from the top and bottom of the 

panel. In addition, the dovetails which join old checks 

in the wood appear sensibly spaced from the current top 

edges of the picture. Finally, nail holes appearing in a 

faded chevron pattern at the top of the central board 

imply that a metal hanging device once occupied this 

area. However, other incogruities bring into question 

the current arched shape of the picture. In particular, 

only the uppermost batten has bevelled ends to conform 

to the shape of the arch, and saw marks on the panel 

suggest that they were cut while mounted in place. Also, 

only five carriers support the top batten; the other two 

battens that span all five planks have instead six 

carriers each. Moreover, the upper curved edge of the 

second panel exhibits a hole drilled into the arch exactly 

where a join would have occurred had the panel 

continued (Fig. 11). The hole matches precisely those 

seen encasing dowels in the foentgenograms. Yet, its 

location appears to deny this purpose since nothing 

adjoins it. Finally, the only occurrence of a single 

dovetail appears on the front along the upper left edge 

of the arch (Fig. 12). Curiously, the arch cuts through 

part of this dovetail thus negating its sole purpose, i.e. 

to join separate parts of a check. These inconsistencies 

with the predetermined method of construction support 

the conclusion that the panel has been altered at its 

outermost upper edges. 

The composition and state of the design layer 

corroborate the structural evidence of subsequent 

alteration. A 1 cm border without painting exists along 

the left edge of the picture except in the area of the 

arch. Along the arch and in portions of the right edge, 

the composition continues all the way out to the end. 

We assume, therefore, that the border has been 

sacrificed. We can only speculate as to why the panel 

was cut back in these areas. Perhaps it was irreparably 

damaged in its periphery, or perhaps it had to meet the 

confines of a new space or frame. Whatever the motive, 

the physical evidence coupled with our knowledge of the 

technique of construction suggest that the current 

appearance of the picture differs from the original one. 5 

The structure of the support has a profound influence 

on the appearance of the paint layer. The most obvious 

disturbance appears in the displacement of the second 

and third boards along the singular butt joint (Fig. 13). 

Although other seams are weakened by adjacent bowed 

panels and aged glue, this seam demonstrates the 

greatest deterioration and reflects the intrinsic weakness 

of the joint. Other ruptures in the paint appear 

sporadically throughout the design layer. Referring 

again to the support, we note that cleavage occurs 

precisely in the location of the nails that secure the 

carriers to the back of the panel. Clearly, the stress of 

the expansion and contraction of the wood has pushed 

the nails through to the paint layer. The same 

movement accounts for the appearance of dovetails on 

the front of the painting (Fig. 6). Originally incorporated 

in the thickness of the wood panels, these 

dovetails eventually rupture the paint film and 

contribute to its deterioration. 

In conclusion, a methodical inspection of the 

construction of the Getty Adoration of the Magi 

provides insight into the present appearance of the 

painting and helps explain the patterns of degeneration. 

Carefully evaluated, the physical evidence on the reverse 

sheds light on the working methods of the craftsman 

who made the panel. Each of the problems of condition 

may in turn be linked directly to the construction of the 

support of the Adoration panel. 

Carol C. Mancusi - Ungaro, 

Patrice A. Pinaquy, 

Malibu 

5. In at least one other instance, a rectangular panel of this size 

attributed to Defendente Ferrari has been reçut, videlicet the oval 

Madonna with Saints of the Parocchia di S. Giovanni in Cirie. See 

Vittorio Viale, Gótico e Rinascimento in Piemonte (1939), 88, pi. 60. 

160

1 M. van Heemskerck, fol.31 r. 

HERAKLIT IN EPHESOS 

Befragt man die antiken Quellen über das Aussehen 

Heraklit, wird man ohne Antwort bleiben, war er doch 

einer der non traditi vultus. Immerhin erfahrt man aus 

ihnen einiges über seinen Charakter, etwa, dass er ein 

urreçoTmK und ôxAoAoicJoçoç 1 war. Heraklit stammte 

aus dem ephesischen Herrschergeschlecht der Basilidai, 

in dem sich die vom Stadtgründer Androklos herriihrende 

Priesterwurde fortsetzte 2 . Die Nachricht, dass 

der Philosoph diese, ais die Reihe an ihn kam, 

seinem Bruder abtrat 3 und dass er ferner eine 

Einladung des Dareios I. an dessen Hof abschlug 4 , 

lásst darauf schliessen, dass er ein Verâchter von Prunk 

und Ruhm war. Dem seit dem l.Jh.n.Chr. bekannten 

Bild des Heraklit aïs weinenden Philosophen 5 dîîrfte 

kynische Farbung zugrunde liegen, die den Pessimismus 

1) Diog.Laert.IX,!; Timón frg.43 Diels. 

2) Diog.Laert.IX,6; vgl.M.Marcovich, RE Suppl.X,250 s.v. Herakleitos; 

A.Dietrich, KIPauly II, 1046 s.v.Herakleitos. 

3) Vgl.Anm.2 

4) Ps.-Heraklit-Brief I,II, S.70 ed.Bywater; Diog.Laert.IX, 12-14; 

Klem.S/rom.1,65. 

5) VgLSQn.de ira II 10,5; de tranquilla,2 u.a. 

161

2 Grieche, Stanza dei fílosofi 3 3 A.Statius Taf.VIII 

und die sozialkritische Haltung des Ephesiers hervorkehrte 

6 . Diese wenigen von Heraklit überlieferten Züge 

lassen ein ernstes und wenig freundliches Bild des 

Philosophen vor uns erstehen, helfen aber nicht, sein 

Portràt im Kopienschatz nachzuweisen. So sah sich die 

Forschung bei der Identifizierung des Heraklit-Portràts 

vor eine scheinbar unlôsbare Aufgabe gestellt, wurde 

jedoch nicht mude in dem Versuch, Bildnisse mürrisch 

blickender Greise ais Heraklit zu benennen 7 . Einer von 

diesen willkürlich benannten Bártigen verdient besondere 

Erwáhnung: Er wurde im ló.Jh. von Marten van 

Heemskerck gezeichnet 8 . (Abb. 2-3). 

In der antiken Literatur sind von Heraklit eine Statue 

im Zeuxippos zu Konstantinopel bezeugt 9 sowie ein 

Gemàlde, das 'úmfletu oculis clausis einem Bildnis des 

Demokrit rísu labris apertis gegenübergestellt zeigte 10 . 

Letztere Nachricht veranlasste im vorigen Jahrhundert 

den italienischen Archáologen Locatelli, einen von 

Restauratorenelehrsamkeit enstellten Sophokles-Farnese-tfopf, 

der durch geschlossene Augen zu einem 

Homerbildnis des Epimenides-Typus werden sollte, auf 

Heraklit zu deuten 11 . Die fragmentarische Inschrift 

HPAKAfEITOI] auf einer Statuenbasis des 3Jhs.v.Chr., 

die beim Aphroditetempel von Paphos gefunden 

wurde 12 , erweist, dass der hohe Hellenismus ein 

Heraklit-Bildnis kannte. Wenn uns auch ein Standbild 

des Philosophen in seiner Heimatstadt nicht ausdrücklich 

überliefert ist, so lásst sich doch aus dem Wortlaut 

des 4.pseudoheraklitischen Briefes ein solches erschliessen, 

das Heraklit ais Herakles darstellte 13 . Die Gleichsetzung 

Heraklit-Herakles entspricht ebenfalls kynischer 

Tradition, wobei auch die áhnlich klingenden 

6) Marcovich a.0.255 (mit Angabe samtlicher Primàrquellen zum 

weinenden Philosophen). 

7) Vgl.z.B.G.M.A.Richter, The Portraits of the Greeks I, fig. 

308,409,411. 

8) Chr.Huelsen-H.Egger, Die rômischen Skizzenbucher des M.van 

Heemskerck I Fol.31 r. Kapitol, Stanza dei fílosofi 3; Stuart Jones 

pi. 54; AB 677/8; A. Hekler, Die Bildniskunst der Griechen und 

Rorner (1912) 34; Richter a.O.fig.311. Die nebenstehende Replik 

(Stanza dei filosofi 2; AB 675/6; Hekler a.0.35) ist stark 

überarbeitet, vgl.J.Frel, Contributions *a l'iconographie grecque 30, 

Anm.126 (der ebendort S.29 vorgeschlagene Zusammenhang mit der 

Herme im J. Stuart Gardner Museum in Boston, abgeb.bei 

Richter, a.O.fig.388/9, besteht in Wirklichkeit nicht). 

9) Christodor. ekphr. 354-356 (Anth.Pal.II). 

10) Sidon.Apoll.ep.IX.9,14; vgl.auch c.II, 170 f. 

11) Freí, Contributions 18. 

12) SEGXX,1964,Nr.l83. 

13) S.72.Z.1 u.3 ed.Bywater; vgl.Marcovich a.0.256. 

162

4/5 Herakleitos, Budapest 

Ñamen mitgespielt haben dürften 14 . Vielleicht ist es die 

Keule des Herakles, vielleicht jedoch der OXÍTTCDV, das 

knotenartige Herrscherinsignium der Basilidai 15 , der 

Familie des Heraklit, das seinem Bild auf ephesischen 

Münzen beigegeben ist 16 : Es zeigt ihn mit langem Haar 

und Bart, in einen Mantel gehüllt, der den Oberkôrper 

weitgehend freilásst, und in der Linken einen Knotenstock 

führend. Diese Münzbildnisse stellten die Grundlage 

fur die Benennung einer Portrâtstatue aus Gortyn 

auf Heraklit dar, die sich heute im Museum zu 

Heraklion befmdet 17 . Es handelt sich um eine severische 

Arbeit nach einem kaum wesentlich alteren klassizistischen 

Original 18 . Wegen ihres Knotenstockes wurde 

eine durch Verwaschung bis zur Unkenntlichkeit 

zerstôrte Sitzstatue aus dem Serapeion zu Memphis 

ebenfalls auf Heraklit gedeutet 19 . Da in der Statuengalerie 

des Serapeion neben Dichtern vor allem 

Philosophen vertreten sind, erscheint die Anwesenheit 

des Heraklit sehr plausibel. Aber auch in einer anderen 

Portrâtgalerie - abgesehen von der willkürlichen und 

ungerechtfertigten Benennung einer Bronzeherme im 

Peristyl der Villa dei papiri in Herculaneum auf 

Heraklit 20 - befand sich ein Bildnis des ephesischen 

Philosophen: unter den Hermen aus der sogenannten 

"Villa der Pisonen" bei Tivoli war auch eine mit dem 

Portràt des Heraklit. Bei den Ausgrabungen konnte 

14) Vgl.Marcovich a.0.253. 

15) Strab.XIV,633. 

16) Richter a.O.fig.313; K. Schefold, Die Bildnisse der antiken 

Dichter, Redner und Denker, 173,16. 

17) G. Lippold, AM 36,1911,153-156; G. Dondas, AM 69/70, 

1954/55, Beil.54,2; Schefold a.0.161,4; Richter a.O.fig.306 f,310. 

18) Schefold a.0.160,215. 

19) U.Wilcken, Jdl 32,1917,167; J.Ph.Lauer-C.Picard, Les statues 

Ptolémaiques du Sarapieion de Memphis, 141; Th.Lorenz, Galérien 

von griechischen Philosophen-und Dichterbildnissen bei den 

Romern, 5. 

20) Lorenz, a.0.11,Nr.IV,3,Taf.IV,2 (auch Demokrit und Solon 

genannt). AuBer dem sog.Heraklit (A) gehôrten der Hermengalerie 

noch die Büsten des sog.Demokrit (B), des sog.Pythagoras (C), eines 

jungen Mannes (D) sowie des polykletischen Doryphores und einer 

Amazone (E,F) an, vgl.Lorenz a.0.11,Nr.IV, 1,2,4-6, Taf.IV; D. 

Pandermalis, AM 86,1971,206 f, Nr.51-56, Taf.82,1,84,1. M.Bieber, 

The Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age^ (1961), 61, Abb. 192 f weist auf 

die Àhnlichkeit des "Demokrit" (B) mit dem Studniczka'schen 

Aristóteles hin. Der Bartige C, der wegen seines Turbans als 

Pythagoras gait (vgl.Schefold a.0.100), scheint "une editions plus 

mûre" des sog. Alkibiades zu sein, den V. Poulsen, Les Portraits 

163

6 Herakleitos, Aix-en-Provence 

allerdings nur mehr der kopflose Schaft mit der 

Inschrift HPAKAEITOI BAY1QNOI 21 EOEIIOI geborgen 

werden, der im 16Jh. wiederholt gezeichnet wurde 22 . 

Schliesslich war es die oft Abbildung, mit deren Hilfe 

vor wenigen Jahren die Identifizierung einer Reihe von 

Portratkopfen mit Heraklit gelang 23 : Achilles Statins 

hatte eine schône, inschriftlich als Heraklit gesicherte 

Herme aus dem Besitze des Kardinals de Medici in 

seine Sammlung "Inlustrium virorum vultus" aufgenommen, 

die 1569 in Rom erschien(Abb. I) 24 . Sie zeigt 

einen ernst blickenden Mann mit mâchtiger, gebuckelter 

Stirn, eingefallenen Schl'áfen, einem weichen 

Schnurrbart, der die Oberlippe bedeckt, und einer 

starken, unwillig vorgeschobenen Unterlippe. Zweifellos 

stellt der Stich dieselbe Persônlichkeit dar, deren Portrat 

in mindestens 7 Kopien auf uns gekommen ist 25 : 

grecs,31,pi.VI als Philipp II. von Makedonien bezeichnen mochte. 

Diese Benennung hatte schon P.Arndt, Sirena Helbigiana, 10 ff 

vorgeschlagen, vgl.auch G.Kleiner, Festschrift Schweitzer, 229 (gegen 

die Gleichsetzung des sog.Alkibiades mit Philipp II. vgl.H.v.Heintze, 

RM 68,1961, 183 ff). Da in dem sog.Heraklit (A) ein Kyniker zu 

sehen ist (E.Buschor, Das hellenistische Bildnis 2 , 1971,27,Abb.28) 

und zwischen dem Jiingling (D) und dem Alexander von Volantza in 

Olympia eine "gewisse Verwandtschaft" gegeben ist (Buschor 

a.0.26,Abb.23,24), sei folgende Benennung der Büsten vorgeschlagen: 

ArDiogenes, B:Aristoteles, CrPhilipp II. von Makedonien, 

D:der junge Alexander.Dièse "Galerie" wurde erst von dem Inhaber 

der Villa zusammengestellt. A und B sind ausgezeichnete Arbeiten, 

mit reicher Modellierung und feinen Gravierungen. Bei C and D ist 

die Oberflache summarisch gehalten und die Kaltarbeit ist 

schematisch. A und B scheinen Wachsgusse zu sein, C und D sind 

Sandgüsse, die technisch mit E und F zusammengehen. 

21) Zur Überlieferung des Vaternamens vgl.Marcovich a.0.246 f. 

22) Lorenz a.0.22 ff, Taf.XII,2; Freí, Contributions 17. 

23) Freí, Contributions 17 ff. 

24) Pl.VIII; Freí, Contributions pl.V,5; ders., C1J 66,1971,250,fig.4. 

25) Zur Kopienkritik aller Exemplare vgl.Freí,Contributions 21-24. 

164

7-8 Herakleitos, Aix-en-Provence 

165

9-10 Herakleitos, Boston 

166

167

11-12 Herakleitos, Museo délie Terme 

1. BUDAPEST, Muséum der Schônen Künste (4-5) 

Freí, Contributions 21 f, pl.IV, VI; ders., CU 66,1971, 

249,fig.2; Richter a.O.fig.369; A.Hekler, Die Antiken in 

Budapest I,Nr.45; V.Poulsen, Acta Arch. 14,1943,73-75, 

fig.8,10,12.-Der Kopf war zusammen mit einem Portràt 

des Hermarchos aufgefunden worden, was G.Lippold, 

Griechische Portrdtstatuen 72, veranlasste, ohne ikonographische 

Gründe in ihm einen Landsmann des 

Hermarchos, nàmlich Pittakos von Mytilene, zu sehen. 

Auch die Kôpfe Nr.2 und 3 sowie ein Exemplar aus der 

Sammlung Campana (s.u.) fügte er dieser Reihe hinzu. 

Durch das Auftauchen einer inschriftlich bezeichneten 

Buste des Weisen aus Mytilene (Richter a.O.fig.361-363) 

erwies sich Lippolds Benennung jedoch als falsch. 

2. ARANJUEZ, Sammlung Azara, aus Tivoli. 

AB 625/6; Richter a.0.fig.366.-Ritter Azara, der den 

schaftlosen Kopf bei seinen Ausgrabungen in Tivoli 

fand, muss noch ein gesichertes Heraklit-Portrât 

gekannt haben: Er liess das Bildnis auf eine moderne 

Herme mit der Inschrift "Herakleitos" setzen. 

3. AIX-EN-PROVENCE, Musée Granet. (Abb. 6-8). 

Freí, Contributions pl.V,l, VII; ders., CU 66,1971, 

250,fig.3; EA 1004,-Doppelherme. Vom Partner des 

Heraklit ist nur mehr die Frisur erhalten; es diirfte sich 

jedoch nicht, wie Freí, Contributions 22 f,37, vor, um 

Demokrit handeln. 

4. ROM, Villa Albani, Giardino Rialto. 

E A 4511.-Der Kopf gehôrte zusammen mit E A 4512 

zu einer Doppelherme (vgl.Frel, Contributions 23). Der 

Partner des Heraklit ist noch unidentifiziert (zu seinen 

Repliken vgl. K.Schauenburg, Antike Plastik 2, 15 ft). 

5. LONDON, British Museum 1834. 

Poulsen, Acta Arch. 14,1943,77,fig.l4; Richter a.O. 

fig.779 ("Euripides Rieti"). 

6. ROM, Thermenmuseum. (Abb. 11-12) 

B.M.Felletti-Maj,/nYraía Nr.10; Freí, Contributions 

24, pl.III,4, V, 2. 

7. BOSTON, Museum of Fine Arts (Abb. 9-10). 

Freí, CU 249,fig.l; C.C.Vermeule, CU 65,1969,53, 

fig.4; EA 5052. Greek and Roman Portraits 470 BC-AD 

500, Boston, MFA, 2. Aufl. 1072 [C.C. Vermeule] Nr. 6 

Ein 8. Exemplar, eine kleine Bronzebüste aus der 

Villa der Pisonen in Herculaneum, jetzt in Neapel, die 

schon mancherlei Benennungen erfahren hat, darf 

vielleicht ais Variante des Heraklit-Typus gelten 26 . 

26) Freí, Contributions 24; ders., CU 66,1971,248; Richter a.O. 

fig. 1294-1296. 

168

13-14 Herakleitos (modern), Louvre 

Wegen ihrer modernen Entstehung auszuschliessen ist 

die Replik aus der Sammlung Campana, die E. 

Minakaran - Hiesgen in einer jetzt im Louvre befindlichen 

Büste erkannt hat 27 . (Abb. 13-14). Das Stuck 

stammt von derselben Hand wie die Herme der 

Villa Albani Nr.81 28 , wie ein Vergleich der flachen 

Ohrmuscheln und die schematische Gravierung der 

Haarstrâhnen lehrt 29 . Diese Herme wurde einst "Eracle" 

gennannt und ist eine moderne Nachbildung des 

Hellenistischen "Archilochos-Pindaros" 30 . Modern ist 

auch die Gemme im Athener Nationalmuseum mit 

inschriftlich bezeichneter Heraklit-Herme, die offensichtlich 

nach dem Stich des Statius geschnitten ist 31 . 

Der Typus des Heraklit-Portrâts, der wegen der 

Anzahl seiner Kopien als in der Antike recht verbreitet 

gelten darf, geht auf ein Original aus dem 3.Viertel des 

4.Jhs.v.Chr. zurück, das vielleicht dem Silanion zuzuweisen 

ist 32 . Erstaunlich ist, dass sich in Ephesos, der 

Heimatstadt des Heraklit, die ihre Münzen von 

Antoninus Pius bis Saloninus mit seinem Bild schmückte 

33 , bis jetzt dein rundplastisches Portrât des Philosophen 

nachweisen liess. Kein Wunder, wenn man unter 

den reichen Funden der Artemis-Stadt danach Ausschau 

halt. 

Unter den im Garten des Museums von Selçuk 

ausgestellten Skulpturen fàllt ein marmorner Hermenpfeiler 

aus Ephesos mit dem Kopf eines bàrtigen 

Mannes auf, der mit einer Binde im Haar und über das 

Hinterhaupt gezogenem Mantel dargestellt ist (Abb. 

15-18) 34 . Er gehôrte mit einer Gruppe von mindestens 3 

weiteren Hermen zum Schmuck des Nymphaeum 

Traiani, in dessen Prunkbecken er 1957 zusammen mit 

27) Lippold, Portrûtstatuen 73.1. Fur die briefliche Auskunft sei 

E.Minakaran-Hiesgen herzlich gedankt. 

28) AB651/2. 

29) Von Richter a.0.67 aïs verdàchtig bezeichnet, von Freí, 

Contributions 30,Anm.l31 fur modern erklàrt. 

30) Richter a.0.fig.234-242. 

31) Freí, Contributions 24,37, pi.V,3,4; Richter a.O.Suppl. fig. 312. 

32) Freí, Contributions 30 ff; ders., C1J 66,1971,251. 

33) Vgl.St.Karwiese, RE Suppl.XII,355, s.v.Ephesos. Zum literarischen 

Nachweis einer Heraklit-Statue in Ephesos vgl.Anm.13. 

34) Inv.-Nr.785. Photos: G.Haas. Die Gesamthôhe des Pfeilers 

betrâgt 1,23 m, die Hone des Kopfes 0,275 m. Vgl.H.Wrede, Die 

spatantike Hermengalerie von Welschbillig, Berlin 1972, 125, 

Taf.72,4. 

169

15-16 Herme aus Ephesos, Herakleitos 

17-18 Herme aus Ephesos, Herakleitos 19 Kopf aus Ephesos, Herakleitos 

170

20 Hermeschaft, Genf 21-23 Doppelherme, Plovdiv 

zahlreichen anderen Statuen von F.Miltner gefunden 

wurde 35 . An den Seiten der Pfeiler eingearbeitete 

Einlassungen 36 erweisen dièse aïs Stànder fur Schrankenplatten, 

die entweder ais marmornes Hermengelánder 

am Rand des schmalen Schôpfbeckens aufgestellt 

waren 37 oder aïs attikaartiger Abschluss der zweigeschossigen 

Nymphàumsfassade dienten 38 . Sic gehôren 

jedoch nicht zur ursprünglichen Ausstattung des 

trajanischen Baues, sondern wurden in spàterer Zeit 

hinzugefügt: Der Stil der Hermen weist in die 2.Hàlfte 

des 4Jhs.n.Chr. 39 . Es ist anzunehmen, dass sie ihre 

Entstehung einer Erneuerung des beim Erdbeben von 

368 n.Chr.zerstôrten Nymphâums im Jahre 371 n.Chr. 

verdanken 40 . 

Zâune aus Stein, deren Pfosten von Hermen gebildet 

werden sind bereits aus dem Uh.n.Chr. bekannt, wie 

ein Wandgemàlde aus dem Hause des Lucretius Pronto 

in Pompeji zeigt 41 . Vier einzelne Hermen, die durch ihre 

Zurichtung die Verwendung aïs Hermenpfosten erkennen 

lassen, sind nachweisbar. Eine Doppelherme in 

Plovdiv aus der Zeit etwa um 200 n.Chr. (gefunden 

wahrscheinlich im Stadium, Abb. 21-23) zeigt einem 

bartigen und einen bartlosen Satyr. Eine Doppelherme 

im Garten des Thermenmuseums verdoppelt einen 

bartigen Portrâtkopf mit Dichterbinde (Abb. 24-25). 

Endlich zwei identische Hermen in Genf sind kopflos 

erhalten. (Eine Abb. 20; die nichtzugehôrigen Kôpfe 

wurden neuerdings abgenommen). Die Doppelhermen 

in Plovdiv und Rom weisen an den beiden Seiten des 

Hermenschaftes Einschnitte zur kulissenartigen Anbringung 

des Zaunes auf, wâhrend die beiden Genfer 

Beispiele Stiftlocher zur Befestigung des Gelànders 

zeigen. 

Erhalten geblieben ist weiters ein Hermenzaum im 

Theater von Perge. Das Theater stammt aus hadriani- 

35) F. Miltner, ÔJh 44, 1959, Beiblatt 339 f,356 ff, Abb.184-186; R. 

Fleischer, Festschrift Eichler 61,Abb.25; W. Alzinger, RE Suppl. 

XII, 1607, 1701, s.v. Ephesos. 

36) Unser Hermenpfeiler weist an den Seiten rechts und links oben 

Dubellôcher, rechts unten ein Klammerloch auf. Die rechteckigen 

Einlassungen konnten wegen ihrer hohen Anbringung nicht aïs 

Armlôcher, wie sie bei manchen Hermen auftreten, gedient haben. 

37) Nach Ansicht von H. Pellionis, vgl. Alzinger a.0.1607. 

38) Miltner a.0.339 f; Alzinger a.0.1607; Wrede a.0.125. 

39) Vgl.Anm.38 und Fleischer a.O.61. 

40) Miltner a.0.340;Wrede a.0.125. 

41) M. Rostowzew, Jdl 19,1904, 104 ff, Tav.VI,2; Lorenz a.O. 

(Anm.l9)39. 

171

24-25 Doppelherme, Museo délie Terme 26-27 Theater in Perge 

scher Zeit, der Zaun 1st jedoch erst tetrarchisch 

(Abb. 26-7). ET trennt die Cavea von der Orchestra und 

zeigt, dass diese in spàterer Zeit als Arena verwendet 

wurde, denn er sollte wohl Schutz vor den wilden 

Tieren bieten. Bei einer spàteren Reparatur des Zaunes 

sind zwischen die gitterartig ausgestalteten Flatten 

weitere glatte eingesetzt worden. Die Hermen sind zum 

Teil unvollendet, der Penis ist eingekratzt. 

aus Blocken herausgemeisselt, die zum zweiten Male 

verwendet sind: sie weisen auch auf der Rückseite einen 

Einschnitt auf, das heisst, sie waren in ihrer früheren 

Bestimmung Eckstücke. 

Besonders umfangreich ist jedoch die spàtantike 

Hermengallerie von Welschbilling: das Wasserbecken 

einer romischen Villa war dort von einem Steingelânder 

umgeben, dessen 112 Pfosten Hermen mit Kôpfen von 

42) Wrede a.O.Taf.l ff; Lorenz a.0.39 f. 

43) Vielleicht gehôrt auch der Kopf eines bartlosen Mannes mit 

kurzem, gelocktem Haar im Depot des Museums von Selçuk zu der 

Reihe. Die freundliche Auskunft wird Herrn Doz.Dr.W.Alzinger 

verdankt. 

44) Einst im Besitz des Museums von Selçuk. Miltner a.0.356, Abb. 

184; Fleischer a.0.60, Abb.25; Wrede a.O.Taf.72,1. Kôpfe des 

sog.Candia-Typus sind in Ephesos 3fach belegt, vgl.Alzinger 

Rômern und Germanen, Feldherrn und Philosophen 

bildeten 42 . 

Von der ephesischen Hermenbalustrade des Nymphaeum 

Traiani haben sich 3 Pfeiler samt den Kôpfen 

und von einem nur der Kopf erhalten 43 . Die Hermen 

stellen ausser unserem Bârtigen (Abb. 15-18), auf den 

im folgenden nâher eingegangen werden soil, einen 

Frauenkopf des sog.Candia-Typus 44 , einen weiteren 

Frauenkopf mit kronenartigem Kopfschmuck 45 und 

behelmten Krieger dar, dessen Pfeiler abgebrochen ist 46 . 

Allen vier Kôpfen sind eine strenge Unterteilung des 

Gesichtes durch die scharfen, waagrechten Brauen und 

auffallend kantig und breit gebildete Lider eigen 47 , 

unseren Bârtigen zeichnet als einzigen die Angabe der 

Pupillen aus (Abb. 15). Er ist aus einem Block fein 

geàderten, mittelkristallinen Marmors gearbeitet, der 

a.0.1689 f. Zu spàtantiken Umbildungen von Werken strengen Stils 

vgl.P.Noelke, RM 75,1968,182-187. 

45) Depot des Museums von Selçuk. Miltner a.0.357, Abb. 185; 

Wrede a.0.125, Taf.72,2: weibliche Gottheit; Fleischer a.0.61 

bezeichnet den Kopf aïs mànnlich. 

46) Depot des Museums von Selçuk. Miltner a.0.458, Abb. 186: 

Wrede a.0.125, Taf.72,3: Mars 

47) vgl.Fleischer a.0.61. 

172

deutlich Spur en einer Wiederverwendung zeigt: wáhrend 

der Pfeiler auf der Rückseite fein geglSttet ist - die 

ursprüngliche Oberflàche reicht bis zur halben Hôhe 

des Hinterkopfes -, wurde das über den Kopf des 

Mannes gelegte Tuch nur roh herausgearbeitet (vgl. 

Abb. 16). Auch die Vorderseite des Pfeilers ist nur mit 

dem Flacheisen behandelt und ungeglattet belassen. 

Recht derb ist auch das Gesicht des Mannes über dem 

starken Hals gemeisselt, das dennoch eindrucksvoll und 

individuell wirkt: die gefurchte Stirn und die tiefe Falte 

zwischen den Augenbrauen verleihen ihm einen düsteren, 

sorgenvollen Ausdruck, die nahe beieinander 

stehenden Augen - sie sind leicht schielend gebildet - 

scheinen unter den geschwollenen Lidern nach innen zu 

blicken, und die breite Unterlippe ist murrisch 

vorgeschoben. Ohne Zweifel ist dieser Kopf bei weitem 

differenzierter ausgeführt ais die übrigen derselben 

Hermengalerie. Auffallend ist an ihm weiters die 

asymmetrische Bildung der beiden Gesichtshàlften: das 

linke Auge liegt hôher ais das rechte, wahrend das der 

breiteren rechten Gesichtshàlfte entsprechend grosser 

gebildet ist. Der Scheitel ist zum rechten Auge hin 

verschoben, das Haar über der rechten Schlàfe 

ausladender und auch der über den Kopf gezogene 

Mantel auf dieser Seite weiter abstehend, wogegen die 

ins Haar gelegte Binde auf der linken Kopfseite breiter 

angegeben ist. 

Im Depot des Museums von Seljuk befindet sich ein 

weiteres Bildnis desselben Mannes, das offensichtlich 

nach demselben Vorbild wie unser Hermenpfeiler, aber 

viel roher gearbeitet ist (Abb.19) 48 . Der Bàrtige tràgt 

hier Lockchen über der Stirn, die Binde im Haar fehlt. 

Sicher gehôrte auch dieser Kopf zu einer Herme und 

nach der Art seiner Bearbeitung zu schliessen, war auch 

er in der Galerie des Nymphaeum Traiani aufgestellt 49 . 

Die portràthaften Züge des bàrtigen Mannes sowie 

die Tatsache, dass sich in Ephesos zwei Bildnisse von 

ihm fanden, legen den Schluss nahe, dass es sich bei 

dem Dargestellten um eine berühmte historische 

Persônlichkeit handelt, die der Aufnahme in eine 

Hermengalerie wiirdig war. Seinem Typus nach ist er 

unter den Philosophen zu suchen, und der Stadt der 

Artemis gewaltigster Denker war Herakleitos. 

48) Inv.-Nr.1032. Gefunden 1958 von F.Miltner (ohne nahere 

Fundangabe). Erhaltene Hôhe 0,285 m. Photo: G.Haas. Fur die 

Abbildungserlaubnis sei Herrn Doz.Dr.W.Alzinger herzlichst 

gedankt. 

49) Auch in Welschbillig sind 23 Hermen doppelt vertreten, vgl. 

Wrede, a.0.35. 

50) Vgl.Anm.5,6. 

51) Vgl.Anm.10. 

52) Fleischer a.0.61. 

53) Vgl.Anm.2. 

54) Wie oben. 

55) S.71,Z.18 Bywater; vgl.Marcovich a.O (Anm.2) 250. 

56) A.Krug, Binden in der griechischen Kunst 129. 

Freilich stellt unser spàtantiker Hermenkopf keine 

Kopie des wiedergewonnenen Heraklit-Portàts dar, er 

wurde vielmehr vom einheimischen Bildhauer in 

Anlehnung an den über lieferten Typus geschaffen, ihm 

nachempfunden. Vom Vorbild erhalten geblieben sind 

die gewaltige Stirn, der ernste Ausdruck und die 

auffallend üppige Unterlippe. Intéressant ist die 

Augenbildung: fast scheint es, als wollte der Stienmetz 

durch die Asymmetrie, das Schielen und die dicken 

Lider den weinenden Philosophen wiedergeben 50 , als sei 

ihm ein Heraclitus fletu oculis clausis* 1 vorgeschwebt. 

Weitere Zutaten sind die Binde im Haar und der über 

den Kopf gezogene Mantel, die zunàchst eine Deutung 

des Bàrtigen als Priester nahelegten 52 . Tatsàchlich 

stammte Heraklit aus altem ephesischem Herrscheradel, 

in dem das Priestertum erblich war 53 . Obwohl 

Heraklit dieses Amt seinem Bruder abtrat 54 , scheint die 

Vorstellung vom ephesischen Philosophen als Opferkônig 

in der Antike lebendig geblieben zu sein, denn ein 

Passus im IV.pseudoheraklitischen Brief durfte wohl 

auf seine Priesterwurde anspielen: TO> 00)^(5 o> ecp/cmjxa 

55 

Leider ist bei der mangelhaften Arbeit über die Form 

der Binde nicht allzuviel auszusagen, doch scheint es 

sich am ehesten um eine Wulstbinde zu handeln. Mit 

Wulstbinden sind die Portr'áts historischer Personen 

geschmuckt, denen nach ihrem Tode heroische Ehren 

zuteil wurden 56 , so etwa Homer, von dem eine 

Heroisierung belegt und Bildnisse mit Wulstbinde 

erhalten sind 57 . Fur Heraklit ist eine Heroisierung schon 

wegen seiner Gleichsetzung mit Herakles sicher anzunehmen, 

die Binde káme ihm dann wegen seiner 

Verschmelzung mit dem kultisch verehrten Zeussohn 

zu 58 . Auch scheint unser Philosoph in Ephesos einen 

Altar besessen zu haben 59 . So sprechen also die 

Attribute priesterlicher Wurde oder gôttlicher Verehrung 

nicht gegen eine Benennung der Herme auf 

Heraklit, ja sie bestatigen diese geradezu. 

Auch die Einordnung eines Philosophenportràts in 

eine Hermengalerie, der zwei Gôttinnen und ein Krieger 

angehôren 60 , bereitet keine Schwierigkeit: so zeigen die 

Hermenreihen im Garten der Villa der Pisonen in 

Herculaneum u.a. Minerva und eine Priesterin, Ptole- 

57) Krug a.O. 129; Richter, a.O.fig.25-57 (Apollonios-Typus). Von 

Homer ist auch ein Bildnis mit über den Hinterkopf gezogenem 

Mantel erhalten: Richter a.Ofig.67; vgl.R.u.E. Boehringer, Homer. 

Bildnisse und Nachweise Bd.I, 106 ff, Taf.63 c,d: Das Hinterhaupt 

ist zum Zeichen der Apothéose verhüllt; W. Helbig, Führer durch die 

ôffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertumer in Rom II (1966), 

161,Mr. 1335: Mantel ist Kopistenzutat. 

58) Krug a.O. 129 f. Zur Statue eines Heraklit-Herakles in Ephesos 

vgl.den IV.pseudoheraklitischen Brief S.72,Z.l u.3 ed.Bywater; 

Marcovich a.0.256. 

59) Marcovich a.0.256. 

60) Vgl.Anm.44,45,46. 

173

maios Philadelphos und einen Krieger, den sogenannten 

Pyrrhus, mit weiteren Portrats zu Gruppen vereint 61 , so 

stellt die Hermengalerie im Peristyl derselben Villa die 

Kôpfe des polykletischen Doryphoros und einer Amazone 

neben Bildnisse historischer Persônlichkeiten 62 . 

Die Zusammentstellung von jugendlichen Kôpfen und 

Philosophen zu Hermengalerien scheint sogar besonders 

beliebt gewesen zu sein 63 . So ist auch ein Heraklit- 

Portrât in der ephesischen Hermengalerie, der u.a. eine 

Gôttin aus dem 5.Jh.v.Chr. angehôrt, nicht fehl am 

Platz. 

61) Lorenz a.0.13 f, Taf. VIII-X; Freí, Klearchos 37-40,1968,69 ff; 

Pandermalis, AM 86,1971,198 f. 

62) Vgl.Anm.20. 

63) Lorenz a.0.51 f. 

Gerda Schwarz-Graz 

Jirí Freí - Malibu 

28-29 Herakleitos, Museo di VUla Giulia 30 Herakleitos, Palazzo Massimi Allé Colonnee 

POSTSCRIPTUM 

Since these lines were written another replica of 

Heraclitus was found in Italy (figs. 28, 29) on 

temporary display in the Villa Giulia, Rome. It seems 

to have been carved in the early second century A.D., 

and it is of rather good quality. G. Battaglia 

recognized it as a replica of the type, but she does not 

accept the identification as Heraclitus. (Museo di Villa 

Giulia. Nuove scoperte e acquisiti nell'Etruria Méridionale, 

Rome, 1975, p. 248, f., pi. 78.2) 

Statius fared better. His Heraclitus was considered 

authoritative by a Roman sculptor who, perhaps in the 

seventeenth century, carved a herm-bust with a head 

exactly reproducing Statius' print. Today it decorates 

the niche over the main door of the piano nobile in the 

Palazzo Massimi Allé Colonne. Heraclitus' name, 

patronymic, and origin were engraved on the shaft of 

the herm copying Statius, but with some misspellings 

(fig. 30). 

174

J. Paul Getty Museum (1-2) 

A LATE MINOAN STONE VASE 

The scarcity of Minoan artifacts in American collections 

adds importance to a serpentine bowl presented to the 

Getty Museum. 

76.AA.22, presented by Ira Goldberg 

H. 0.081 m.; d. 0.156 m.; base d. 0.068 m.; d. of 

interior opening at top 0.079 m. 

Dark grey serpentine with white flees. Bowl has flat 

base, smoothed at edges. Straight upward flaring side 

walls, rounded shoulder. Top is flattened. Interior is 

hollowed by drilling, narrowing toward the base. 

Slight restoration on top of rim: in modern times, the 

vase was adapted to an ashtray - the three holes are now 

filled with plaster; surface pitted, especially near base 

and scratched. Drill marks visible on interior sides 

indicate use of metal drill (Warren 1969: 161). Small 

depression in bottom centre (d.ca. 0.005) where drill end 

abutted. Original exterior surface was polished, interior 

left roughened except for 0.01 m. at top. Wear at top of 

cavity may indicate that the piece originally had a fitted 

lid. 

This small stone vase falls into the category Minoan 

bird's nest bowls. The name is derived from the shape 

which characteristically features a restricted base, 

curved sides, flattened top and an interior cavity which 

is small, conical and does not conform to the shape of 

the exterior. 

175

J. Paul Getty Museum (3-4) 

The earliest examples of bird's nest bowls in Crete are 

Early Minoan III (circa. 2,000 B.C.). They are 

subsequently found in great quantity in funerary 

context in Middle Minoan I and II (circa. 1900-1700 

B.C.). These early examples are small, usually under 

0.05 m. in height and 0.10 m. in diameter (Warren 

1969: 8-9). 

The shape continues to be used but is enlarged in the 

Middle Minoan III - Late Minoan I period (circa 

1550-1450 B.C.). In the later form, diameters average 

over 0.12 m., heights over 0.06 m. 

Reference: 

Warren, P. 

1969. Minoan Stone Vases. Cambridge Classical Studies. 

Cambridge University Press. 

There are twelve known published examples of this 

type catalogue by Warren (Ibid: 9). All are made of 

serpentine (frequently confused with steatite, Ibid: 138) 

and come primarily from settlement contexts. The Getty 

Museum piece belongs to the Late Minoan period by 

virtue of size and material. The closest comparative 

example is from Mallia, House E (Heraklion Museum 

#2426, Warren 1969: P. 28; D. 12; h. 0.765 m.). 

The function of such bowls is still unknown. The later 

pieces are found in settlement rather than funerary 

context (Ibid: 166) indicating a shift in their use. The 

shape is very rarely imitated in clay (Ibid: 169, Table 9) 

and ultimately derives from Egyptian predynastic and 

early examples which were probably used as unguent 

containers. 

Hará Georgiou 

UC Irvine 

176

UNE MOSAÏQUE GALLO-ROMAINE 

AU MUSÉE J. PAUL GETTY 

Au cours de nos recherches pour le Recueil général des 

mosaïques de la Gaule (1), nous avons été amenés à 

traiter d'une mosaïque trouvée en Provence au début de 

ce siècle, et qui constitue aujourd'hui Tune des pièces 

les plus intéressantes du Musée J. Paul Getty. Elle 

faisait partie à l'origine d'un groupe de quatre 

pavements mis au jour près de Villelaure, petit village 

situé à 25 kms au nord d'Aix-en-Provence, dans le 

département du Vaucluse. 

La date de découverte remonte à l'année 1832 lorsque 

l'intendant du Marquis de Forbin-Janson mit au jour 

les quatre mosaïques, dans un terrain du quartier dit de 

la "Tuilière", à 2kms du village auquel on pense que 

les restes de la villa romaine où se trouvaient ces 

pavements ont donné leur nom, Villa Laura s'étant 

transformé en Villelaure à l'époque moderne. Les 

mosaïques, recouvertes de 0 m 80 de sol arable, furent 

immédiatement réenfouies. Leur dégagement véritable 

n'eut lieu qu'en 1899 et 1900, lorsque le nouveau 

propriétaire, M. Peyrusse, fit des fouilles dans les 

substructions de la villa. Devant l'importance de la 

trouvaille, celui-ci avertit le Président de l'Académie des 

Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres 2 , qui transmit l'information 

au Ministère de l'Instruction Publique, pour être 

communiquée a la Commission des Travaux Historiques 

(section archéologie). Cette dernière envoya sur place le 

célèbre spécialiste de la mosaïque antique, Héron de 

Villefosse 3 , ainsi que G. Lafaye qui devait être chargé 

1. H.Lavagne, Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule,X Supplément 

a Gallia, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, 

Narbonnaise, II 1,2,à paraître. 

2. Comptes-rendus de l'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres, 

1900, p.222. 

3. Bulletin archéologique du Comité des Travaux historiques et 

scientifiques, 1900, p.CXIII. 

177

1. Les mosaïques de Villelaure. 

par la suite de la publication de l'Inventaire des 

mosaïques de la province de Narbonnaise. L'événement 

fit grand bruit dans les milieux archéologiques et quatre 

articles lui furent consacrés, dûs aux meilleurs 

connaisseurs de l'époque. Le premier, très succinct, de 

G. Lafaye, en 190l 4 , était accompagné d'une médiocre 

photographie de la mosaïque la mieux conservée, celle 

aujourd'hui au Musée P. Getty. De son côté, L.H. 

Labande, Conservateur du Musée Calvet d'Avignon, qui 

était en pourparlers avec le propriétaire pour acheter les 

mosaïques, écrivit une étude beaucoup plus approfondie 

5 pour relater les circonstances de la trouvaille et 

souligner l'intérêt iconographique des sujets figurés. 

Dans le même volume du Bulletin archéologique du 

Comité des Travaux historiques et scientifiques (1903), 

Héron de Villefosse ajoutait une note importante à 

l'article de Labande et donnait des mosaïques deux 

aquarelles remarquables, dues à l'architecte H. Nodet 6 . 

Ces planches en couleurs furent reprises dans l'Inventaire 

des mosaïques de la Gaule de G. Lafaye en 1909 7 . 

Les mosaïques furent déposées par les soins d'un 

mosaïste italien, et des tractations s'engagèrent pour en 

négocier la vente. La mosaïque A (cf. plan de situation 

fig. 1), très mutilée, et dont on ne possédait déjà plus 

que la bordure géométrique et un petit fragment 

polychrome 8 , fut donnée à l'Académie de Vaucluse, 

pour orner le Musée Calvet d'Avignon. En 1909 9 , L.H. 

Labande indique encore qu'elle se trouve dans les 

réserves de ce Musée en attendant de pouvoir être 

présentée dans les salles d'exposition. Elle n'a malheureusement 

pas été retrouvée. La mosaïque B, elle 

aussi très fragmentaire, qui représentait une scène 

nilotique (cas unique en Gaule), a également disparu, 

très probablement détruite. Les pavements D et E, les 

mieux conservés, furent vendus par le propriétaire à un 

antiquaire de Nîmes, après avoir été vainement proposés 

au Musée du Louvre. Ils finirent par aboutir en 1923 

chez un antiquaire parisien, R. Ancel. A cette date, le 

Conservateur des Antiquités grecques et romaines du 

Louvre, E. Michon, entama des négociations pour les 

faire acheter par son département 10 et les signala à la 

Société Nationale des Antiquaires de France 11 ainsi 

qu'au Comité des Travaux Historiques 12 . Les propositions 

d'achat n'aboutirent pas et ce fut Joseph Brummer 

qui les fit acquérir pour sa collection newyorkaise en 

1926. Passées au États-Unis, ces mosaïques restèrent un 

certain temps a la Brummer Gallery 13 ; nous savons 

4. G.Lafaye, dans Bulletin de la Société Nationale des Antiquaires 

de France, 1901, p. 117. 

5. L.H.Labande, Les mosaïques romaines de Villelaure (Vaucluse\ 

dans B.A.C.T.H., 1903, p. 3-13. 

6. ibid., pi. I et II en couleurs. 

7. G.Lafaye, Inventaire des mosaïques de la Gaule, I, Narbonnaise 

et Aquitaine, Paris, 1909, n. 102-105. 

8. Selon Labande, op.cit., une bordure en méandre de svastikas; 

peut-être un fragment de poisson polychrome dans un angle. 

9. L.H.Labande, Congres archéologique de France, Avignon, 1909 

(Paris 1910), p.81. 

10. Archives du Musée du Louvre, Antiquités Grecques et Romaines, 

A 5, 28 Février 1923. Je remercie M.F.Baratte, Conservateur aux 

Antiquités Romaines de ce département, de m'avoir fait part de ce 

document, et de m'avoir considérablement aidé dans mes recherches 

auprès de la Brummer Gallery. 

11. B.S.N.A.E., 1923, p.109. 

12. B.A.C.T.H., 1923, p.LX. 

13. D'après Mrs. Brummer, une mosaïque analogue fut vendue en 

1947 à Kleinberger lors de la Vente Parke-Bernet. Nous n'avons pu 

consulter ce catalogue. 

178

ensuite que la mosaïque D fut achetée par W.R. Hearst 

(San Simeon), qui la céda à la Collection James Evans 

(Cambria, Californie), et c'est en 1971 que le Musée 

J. Paul Getty en fit à son tour l'acquisition. On peut 

considérer que la mosaïque E, déjà en très mauvais état 

au dire d'E. Michon en 1923, n'a pas supporté ces 

transferts, et est actuellement détruite. 

Une fois retracé ce long périple qui nous a menés du 

Vaucluse à Malibu, en passant par Paris et New-York, 

il faut examiner la seule rescapée de ces aventures, la 

mosaïque D. Telle que nous la voyons aujourd'hui, sa 

surface ne représente qu'une partie du pavement 

originel. En effet, le tableau central (2m 06 x 2 m 06) 

qui est seul conservé, constituait une sorte de 

pseudo-emblema au milieu d'un tapis qui mesurait 4m 

72 de large sur une longueur d'environ 7 à 8 mètres. Il 

était composé d'une large bordure noire (0 m 46), puis 

de deux bandes blanches alternant avec deux bordures 

noires qui délimitaient un champ uni de couleur 

blanche, au milieu duquel se détachait la scène figurée, 

(cf. fig. 1). 

Celle-ci était en bon état de conservation lors de la 

découverte, sauf une lacune à l'emplacement de l'épaule 

gauche du personnage de droite et dans la partie arrière 

de sa tête. Ces deux endroits ont été habilement 

restaurés. Trois bordures différentes entourent le 

panneau central. La première est une bande de 

chevrons noirs et blancs; la seconde est un rinceau 

polychrome sur fond blanc, dont les volutes se répètent 

symétriquement sur chaque coté. Des enroulements 

végétaux jaillissent de petits carrés d'angles rouges, 

inscrits dans des carrés blancs cernés de noir. Les 

feuilles, en position tête-bêche, sont des hederae et des 

feuilles composites à cinq éléments, dont les nervures et 

les contours sont tracés en cubes noirs. Les extrémités 

sont rouges, la base des feuilles, grise. La troisième 

bordure interne est une simple tresse à deux brins 

polychromes, où se succèdent les tons rouge, bistre et 

blanc, (fig. 2). 

La scène représentée est le dernier moment du 

14 

combat de Darès et Entelle dans l'Enéide. Entelle, nu, 

barbu, s'avance de face au premier plan, les bras armés 

du ceste aux lanières de cuir. Il jette un regard oblique 

et triomphant vers Darès qui s'éloigne, le dos tourné, 

l'air furieux. Quelques tesselles rouges figurent une 

blessure à son front d'où le sang s'écoule. A 

l'arrière-plan, un taureau s'abat entre les deux lutteurs, 

la cervelle broyée par le -dernier coup de ceste que lui a 

assène Entelle. 

Le texte de l'Enéide est traduit avec une grande 

fidélité. L'attitude d'Entelle, sa satisfaction de vainqueur 

s'exprime dans une musculature puissante aux 

effets un peu appuyés, et reflète le vers 473 de Virgile: 

Hic victor superans animis tauroque superbus . . . 

Dans les détails, l'artiste a respecté scrupuleusement les 

indications du poète, et il nous donne ainsi le moyen de 

trancher entre deux interprétations possibles, par 

exemple, pour l'expression controversée: . . .velatum 

auro vittisque juvencum. Les commentateurs modernes 

l'interprètent souvent 'comme signifiant" aux cornes 

dorées" 15 . Mais le mosaïste, en figurant les cornes en 

pâte de verre de couleur bleue, nous fait comprendre 

que seules les bandelettes (représentées en cubes jaunes) 

qui ornent le front de l'animal sont dorées. Quant au 

mouvement de la bête qui s'affaisse sur ses jarrets, il 

rend avec justesse le rythme même du vers virgilien et 

l'expressivité si particulière du monosyllabe final: 

. . .effractoque illisit in ossa cerebro 

Sternitur exanimisque tremens procumbit humi bos. 

(v. 479-480). 

Mais au delà de cette fidélité de détails, l'artiste a su 

rendre avec finesse le ton même de ce combat tel qu'il 

nous est décrit par Virgile. On sait que le livre V de 

l'Enéide marque une pause dans la tension dramatique 

de poème; les luttes sportives qui s'y déroulent sont 

toutes empreintes d'une certaine gaieté cordiale, 

accentuée par la présence de la foule des spectateurs 

Troyens et Siciliens, qui acclament, applaudissent ou 

invectivent leurs champions selon la force de leurs 

prouesses. C'est toute cette atmosphère de liesse qu'il 

faut imaginer en regardant cette mosaïque pour en 

apprécier la saveur. Virgile fait naître dans l'esprit du 

lecteur une ironie très subtile en jouant du contraste 

entre le vocabulaire épique qu'il emploie 16 et l'aspect 

parfois risible de ce qui n'est finalement qu'un pugilat 

peu glorieux, où l'un des lutteurs a commencé par 

refuser de se battre et ne remporte la victoire que 

poussé par la colère et l'humiliation d'une chute 

malencontreuse. Le mosaïste, de son coté, avec les 

moyens propes à son art, suggère cette ironie, en 

grossissant le trait, et en soulignant les attitudes, les 

regards et les gestes. Il ne faut donc pas considérer cette 

mosaïque comme une oeuvre "provinciale", avec le sens 

péjoratif que l'on donne parfois à ce terme, et ne voir 

dans sa facture un peu lourde que les marques d'un 

style qui recopie un "carton" tiré d'un cahier de 

modèles. Elle nous paraît, au contraire, avoir su 

transposer de façon remarquable, l'atmosphère même 

du combat de Darès et Entelle dans le passage de 

Virgile. 

14. Enéide, V, vers 362 à 484. 

15. J.Connington, The Works of Virgil, Hildesheim,1963,II,p.365. 

16. G.Stegen, Un match de pugilat vu par Virgile, dans Vergiliana, 

recherches sur Virgile, éd. H.Bardon et R.Verdière, Ley des, 1971, 

p.354-357. Le passage est inspire' par le chant XXIII de riliade. 

179

2. Darès et Entelle. J.Paul Getty Museum 71.AH.106 

180

Est-il possible de dater cette mosaïque N. Neuerberg 

17 a propose le troisième siècle. Cette datation nous 

paraît un peu trop tardive. D'une part l'organisation du 

pavement, sa "mise en page" qui détache le tableau 

central sur un champ uni monochrome, les bordures 

noires qui l'accompagnent, rappellent encore nettement 

la disposition des mosaïques de type hellénistique qui 

mettent en valeur un emblema au milieu d'une 

composition, et dont on trouve encore des "dérivations" 

lointaines avant l'époque sévérienne. 18 D'autre part, si 

la tresse polychrome est un ornement trop communément 

répandu pour donner un indice de datation, les 

deux autres bordures sont plus significatives. Le cadre 

en chevrons, qui au troisième siècle en Narbonnaise, ne 

paraît plus utilise' que comme bordure de petits 

panneaux dans les mosaïques dites "à décor multiple" 

19 , est bien attesté à époque ancienne comme 

encadrement de tapis de plus grande taille. On en a des 

exemples a Pompéii 20 , dans un pavement aujourd'hui 

au Musée de Turin 21 , et à Reggio Emilia 22 , dans des 

mosaïques datées du premier siècle de notre ère. En 

Provence, on rappellera notamment le cas d'une 

mosaïque d'Orange 23 et des exemples analogues à 

Nîmes 24 où les bandes en chevrons figurent dans des 

compositions certainement antérieures au troisième 

siècle. Le rinceau de la deuxième bordure donne une 

indication un peu plus tardive: son aspect grêle, la 

monotonie des symétries dans les volutes à peine 

végétalisées, appellent la comparaison avec des mosaïques 

de Lyon datées de la fin du deuxième siècle 25 . 

Outre ces arguments stylistiques, on peut recourir a des 

arguments externes, en considérant les autres pavements 

qui voisinaient avec la mosaïque D, et qui, a 

priori, sont de la même époque. Celui de la pièce B est 

susceptible de fournir un etéme'nt important: il 

représentait un paysage nilotique où l'on distinguait les 

constructions et les animaux traditionnels des rives du 

Nil, exécutés dans un style classique, avec des 

caractéristiques qui orientent plutôt vers une datation 

d'avant l'époque sévérienne 26 . Il n'est pas sûr que l'on 

puisse se servir de la mosaïque de la pièce E comme 

élément de confrontation, car elle se trouvait dans une 

pièce décalée par rapport au plan de la villa (cf. fig. 1), 

et elle n'appartient peut-être pas au même programme 

iconographique. Notons cependant que même sa 

bordure en "redans" peut se situer a la fin du deuxième 

siècle 27 . Compte tenu de tous ces indices, nous 

proposons de placer la date de la mosaïque du Musée 

J. Paul Getty avant le troisième siècle, probablement 

dans le dernier quart du second siècle. 

Outre l'intérêt qu'elle présente pour notre connaissance 

de la culture littéraire en Gaule à cette époque, ce 

pavement atteste l'existence d'un atelier provençal 

installé vraisemblablement à Aix-en-Provence. On 

connaît en effet, une autre réplique du combat de Darès 

3. Darès et Entelle Mosaïque détruite. 

(Aix-en-Provence). 

et Entelle dans cette ville. Elle fut trouvée en 1790 28 et 

détruite presque aussitôt après. Une lithographie (fig. 3) 

parue en 1835 dans l'ouvrage de F. Artaud 29 nous 

montre la similitude des deux représentations, malgré la 

maladresse du dessinateur. D'un point de vue historique, 

il est frappant de constater que ces mosaïques ont 

été découvertes toutes les deux dans les limites du 

17. C.Vermeule, N.Neuerburg, Catalogue of the Ancient Art in the 

J.P.Getty Museum, n. 114,p.54,Cf. également, The J.P. Getty 

Museum, ed. Burton B.Fredericksen,1975, notice d'Helen Lattimore, 

p.55. 

18. cf.sur l'ensemble de cette évolution, G.Becatti, Alcune caratteristiche 

del mosaico policromo in Italia, dans La mosaïque Gréco- 

Romaine,\\, Vienne, 1971 (Paris, 1975), p.175-190. 

19. H.Stern, Ateliers de mosaïstes rhodaniens d'époque galloromaine, 

dans La mosaïque Gréco-romaine, I, p.233-243. 

20. M.E.Blake, The Pavements of the Roman Buildings of the 

Republic and the early Empire, Memoirs of the American Academy 

in Rome, VIII,1930,pl.VIII,a;pl.42,4; dans E.Pernice, Pavimente 

und figürliche Mosaiken, VI Die hellenistiche Kunst in Pompeji, 

Berlin, 1938,pi.30(8,4,4). 

21. Musée de Turin, dans Blake,!,pi.40,3. 

22. Reggio Emilia, Not.Scav. 1960,p.249,fig.2.Dans Blake,I,pl.37,6. 

23. Inventaire des mosaïques de la G0w/e,I,n.l08. 

24. E.Espérandieu, Les mosaïques de Nîmes, Nfrnes, 1935,n.l 1,35,et 

n.6,pl.l. 

25. H.Stern, Recueil général des mosaïques de la Gaule, Lyonnaise, 

II,l,n.46,47,116.Cf. également a Nîmes, dans Espérandieu, op.cit., 

n.299. 

26. L.Foucher, Les mosaïques nilotiques africaines, dans La 

mosaïque Gréco-romaine,!, p.141. 

27. Sur ce critère de datation,cf.H.Stern, Recueil,l,3,n.3\4. 

28. Inventaire des mosaïques de la Gaule, n.44. 

29. F.Artaud, Histoire abrégée de la peinture en mosaïque, 

Lyon, 1835,p.99-101. La planche XLVII de cet ouvrage a été 7 faite a 

partir d'une gravure de L.A.Millin, Voyage dans les départements du 

Midi de la France, Paris, 1807, Atlas, pi.XXXV. 

181

territoire appartenant, avant la conquête, à la Confédération 

des Salyens, Villelaure, aujourd'hui dans le 

département du Vaucluse, faisait partie du territoire des 

Dexivates qui dépendaient des Salyens d'Aix-en-Provence, 

(actuellement dans le département des Bouchesdu-Rh8ne). 

Le cours de la Durance qui sépare les deux 

sites ne constituait donc pas une frontière 30 , en Ton peut 

fort bien imaginer qu'un riche propriétaire de la cite' 

aixoise pouvait avoir une villa rustica dans la plaine 

fertile de la Durance, où il aurait fait représenter une 

scène qui lui était chère. 

Il reste enfin à se demander quelles sont les raisons 

qui ont pu pousser au choix de cette scène de l'Enéide, 

qui ne passe pas, aux yeux de la critique moderne, pour 

un des sommets de l'art virgilien. On peut invoquer le 

goût personnel du commanditaire, mais aussi suggérer 

derrière cette représentation une de ces leçons morales 

qui Ton trouve fréquemment dans la mosaïque antique. 

On notera que ce n'est pas la lutte des deux pugilistes 

qui nous est montrée, mais Tissue du combat qui 

consacre la victoire d'Entelle sur Darès. Or celui-ci a 

commis une faute en se croyant vainqueur avant même 

d'entrer en lice. Il a fait preuve d'une hybris coupable et 

a été condamné par les dieux. C'est précisément ce que 

lui rappelle Ene'e: 

Infelix, quae tanta animum dementia cepit 

Non viris alias conuersaque nu mina sentis 

Cède deo. 

v.465-467. 

La présence du taureau dans cette scène ajoute encore à 

cette résonance religieuse, car au lieu de garder ce prix 

du combat offert au vainqueur par Enée, Entelle en fait 

le sacrifice aux mânes d'Eryx. En cela, il répète le geste 

de désintéressement d'Héraclès, lorsque celui-ci, après 

avoir vaincu Eryx en Sicile, n'avait pas voulu conserver 

pour lui le royaume de son adversaire. Se garder de 

toute dementia, et pratiquer la vertu de desintéressement, 

gage de l'accord avec les dieux, tels pourraient 

être les deux enseignements qui ont fait retenir cette 

mosaïque. 

Henri Lavagne 

Ecole Pratique 

des Hautes-Etudes 

Paris 

30. Sur ces problèmes de géographie historique, voir G.Barruol, Les 

peuples préromains du Sud-Est de la Gaule, p.204-205. 

182

The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal Volume 5 1977

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?