^{page 414 note 2} See, e.g., the text quoted in Misener, G., ‘Iconistic Portraits’, Cl. Phil. xix (1924), 97–123; a papyrus of 145 B.C.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 414 note 3} See the historical survey and treatises in R. Forster, Scriptores Physiognomici. I use the term ‘physiognomy‘ and related words in the technical sense.

^{page 414 note 4} See especially the following: Misener, G., op. cit.Google Scholar; Evans, E. C., ‘Roman Descriptions of Personal Appearance in History and Biography’ in Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, xlvi (1935), 43–85;CrossRefGoogle ScholarEvans, E. C., ‘The Study of Physiognomy in the Second Century A.D.‘, TAPA lxxii (1941), 96–109;Google ScholarPack, R. A., ‘Artemidorus and the Physiognornists’, TAPA lxxii (1941), 321–351Google ScholarJ., Coussin, ‘Suétone Physiognomiste’, REL xxxi (1953), 234–56;Google ScholarMegow, R., ‘Antike Physiognomielehre’, Das Altertum ix (1963), 213–21.Google ScholarSchmidt, Johanna (R-E, s.v. Physiognomik 1071) rightly expresses scepticism about the validity of interpreting historical writers as indebted to physiognomical theory.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 5} For comments on this see Richter, G. M. A., ‘Greek Portraits’, ii (Collection Latomus, xxxvi), 29 ff.Google Scholar

^{page 414 note 6} The practice was already known to Cicero, , ad Att. 6. I. 26.Google ScholarCf. Plutarch, , Antony, 60,Google Scholar and Pausanias 2. 17. 3. A statue of Alexander (by Lysippus) was obliged to wear the head of Julius Caesar (Statics, Silvae 1. 1. 86-1 owe this reference to Weinstock, S., in HTR 1 (1957), 233).Google Scholar Painting, as well as statuary, was endangered: according to Pliny, NH 35. 94, Claudius replaced an Alexander in Apelles’ picture by ‘imagines’ of Augustus. Statues could be reallocated by simple change of inscription (‘metagraphe’); or by ‘metagraphē’ and alteration to fabric (‘rnetarrhythmesis’). For examples see Blanck, H., Wiederverwendung alter Statuen als Ehrendenkmäler bei Griechen and Röman, Köln, 1963, pp. 23–24 (also pp. 3–22 for a survey of the literary tradition on the subject).Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 1} See Dio Chrysostom 31, passim, and 37; Dio 31. 20 seems to be largely concerned about the survival of name and fame, though he does say (31. 47) that the preserves not merely the name but also the . The Athenians are said (ibid. 123) not to practise reallocation of statues, a remark which should perhaps be treated with reserve.

The findings of Blanck, H., op. cit., pp. 94Google Scholar f indicate that the custom of reallocation was at its peak in the last century B.C. and attained a second acme in the third and fourth centuries A.D.; Athens was well supplied with statues and the instances of reallocation attested for Athens (Blanck, , op. cit., pp. 75–83) show that Dio's remark should not be taken seriously.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 2} See especially the remarks in DarembergSaglio, s.vv. Imago and Statua. Also Schubart, J., Philologus, xxiv. 561 f.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 3} Pliny NH 34. 70.

^{page 415 note 4} Pliny NH 34. 88, on Myron, ‘who seems to be the first multiplicasse veritatem’. There are several stories in Pliny about art being taken for real objects; see esp. 35. 79f., on Apelles. See also Austin, R. G., ‘Quintilian on Painting and Statuary’, CQ xxxviii (1944), 17–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 415 note 5} Plutarch, , Lysander 1.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 6} Plutarch was aware that the epigoni imitated the Lysippean pose of Alexander; Alexander 4. 1; cf. Lucian, , adv. Indoct., 21.Google Scholar

^{page 415 note 7} Plutarch, , Marius 2. i. See the edition by E. Valgiglio, 1956, p. 7.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 1} Plutarch, , Themistocles 22. 3. PausaniasGoogle Scholar

^{page 416 note 1} 8. 3 mentions statues of Miltiades and Themistocles which had been reallocated, to a Roman and a Thracian respectively. Further references in Richter, G. M. A., ‘Greek Portraits’, Collection Latomus, xx, 19 ff., who thinks that the Ostia Themistocles is of later date than the statue mentioned in Plutarch.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 2} Plutarch, Aratus 3. 2. Cf. Porter, W. H., Life of Aratus, 1936, p. 51. There were statues of Aratus at Corinth, Sicyon and Olympia; Polybius 39. 14. to; Pausanias 2. 7. 5 and 6. I2. 5.Google Scholar

^{page 416 note 3} Plutarch, Titus. For his appearance in general terms cf. ibid. 5. 7.

^{page 416 note 4} Plutarch, , Sulla 2. I.Google Scholar Plutarch thought that the name Sulla referred to the colour of his hair. Cf. Plutarch, , Coriolanus II. 5,Google Scholar and Quintilian I 4. 25.Google ScholarMacrobius I. 17.Google Scholar 27 derives the name from Sibyl. Both versions were given by Epicadus, , Sulla's freedman; Charisius, , ed. Barwick, i 110.Google ScholarBernoulli, J. J., Röimische Ikonographie, i. 86 ff., points out that the features described by Plutarch are suited to representation in painting, not sculptureGoogle Scholar

^{page 417 note 1} Plutarch, , Pericles 7.Google Scholar For statues of Pericles see Pausanias I. 25. 2 and 1. 28. 2; Pliny, NH 34. 74. For the helmeted portrait see Richter, G. M. A., ‘Greek Portraits‘, iv (Collection Latomus, liv), Plate 3, Nos. 7–8.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 2} Plutarch, Agesilaus 2; Dio Chrysostom (?Favorinus) 37. 43 exploits the story rather differently, and suggests that Agesilaus could easily have had his physical handicaps idealized in plastic art. The best-known authentic and case of sitter's reluctance is that of Plotinus; Porphyry, Vita Plotini 1 f.

^{page 417 note 3} Plutarch, Phocion 5. The statue is mentioned ibid. 38.

^{page 417 note 4} Plutarch, , Alexander 4. 1.Google ScholarCf. de Alexandri Magni Fortuna aut Virtute 2. 2. Pompey 2. 1 refers to comparisons between Pompey and Alexander, but describes them as verbal rather than apparent. For the portraiture of Alexander see especially M. Bieber, Alexander the Great in Greek and Roman Art (1964); eight groups of Alexander-portraits can be distinguished, three of different periods in his lifetime and five of later art-periods. Lysippus‘ conception of Alexander is discussed there, pp. 27–38. The Lysippean style affected life as well as art; Plutarch, Pyrrhus 8. 2.Google Scholar

^{page 417 note 5} For a study of this topic see Ward-man, A. E., C.Q. N.S. V (1955), 96–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 418 note 1} : Plutarch, Lysander i. The term ‘iconic‘, carrying with it the idea of exact portrait-likeness, occurs also in Suet. Cal. 22, and in Pliny, NH 34. 16; on this last see Jex-Blake, K. and Sellers, E., The Elder Pliny's Chapters on the History of Art (1896), pp. 14–15;Google Scholar and Hyde, W. W., Olympic Victor Monuments etc. (1921), pp. 54 f.—‘Iconic and Aniconic Statues’.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 2} Plutarch, , Brutus 58. The statue was at Milan.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 3} Plutarch, , Tib. Gracch. 2. I.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 4} Plutarch, , Philopoimen 2.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 5} There are some useful remarks on the term , and on some of the difficulties confronting the translator, by Harmon, A. M., ‘Lucian’, LCL iv. 255.Google Scholar

^{page 418 note 6} Other portrait-details than those mentioned in the text can be found in Plutarch, Cato Maior 1; Pyrrhus 3; Cimon 5; Alcibiades 1; Cato Minor 1; Antony 4.

^{page 418 note 7} There is a useful illustration of this in Suet, . Galba 21.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 1} Suetonius, Vesp. 20. Aug. 79, as explicit sources, has a story about a Gaul and a report from Julius Marathus. Julius 45 has ‘fuisse traditur’; and the baldness of Julius seems to come from the ‘jests of detractors’.

^{page 419 note 2} Suetonius, Dom. 18, especially ‘Usque adhuc certe animum meum probastis et vultum. Calvitio ita off endebatur, ut in contumeliam suam traheret, si alii ioco vel iurgio obiectaretur.’

^{page 419 note 3} e.g. Suetonius, Aug. 97. 2; Dom. 15. 2; and Galba I.

^{page 419 note 4} Suetonius, , Jul. 79.1 and 80. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 5} Suetonius, , Aug. 31. 5; 59; Tib. 13. 1 (overthrow of his statues by the Nemausenses); Cal. 34. 1; Nero 24.1 and 25. 2; Galba 2 and 23; Otho 7. I; Vit. 3. I.Google Scholar

^{page 419 note 6} Plutarch, , Sulla 2.Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 1} Pliny, NH 35. 88.Google Scholar This is metoposcopy by the evidence of art, not from the study of the living features, as in Plutarch, , Sulla 2,Google Scholar and Suet, . Titus 2.Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 2} Suet, . Tib. 68. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 3} Plutarch, , Cimon 2. See also Cato Maior 7. 3 for the view that is far more apparent in a person's than in his .Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 4} Plutarch, , Brutus, i The reference here is to imagines, in the technical sense used by the Romans. Cf.perhaps Cic. Verr. 2. 4. 123. But Plutarch may have had recourse to art because of the saying that ‘painting is silent poetry while poetry is speaking painting’ (Moralia 17 f. and 346 f.); the meaning is that the two are correlative to each other. For Posidonius see also Marcellus 30; epitaph on a statue of Marcellus.Google Scholar

^{page 420 note 5} See, Jex-Blake and Sellers, , op. cit., p. lxviii.Google Scholar