¹ Recently on urban political life of the Greek East: M. Sartre, L'Orient romain: Provinces et sociétés provinciales en Méditerranée orientale d'Auguste aux Sèvères (31 avant J.-C.–235 apres J.-C.) (1991); Millar, F. G. B., ‘The Greek city in the Roman period’, in Hansen, M. H. (ed.), The Ancient Greek City State (1993), 232–60Google Scholar; Mitchell, S., Anatolia: Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor, 2 vols (1993), IGoogle Scholar, ch. 12: ‘The Development of the Cities’. On cultural identity (all without reference to visual evidence): Bowie, E. L., ‘The Greeks and their past in the Second Sophistic’, in Finley, M. I. (ed.), Studies in Ancient Society (1974)Google Scholar; Hahn, J., Der Philosoph und die Gesellschaft: Selbstverständnis, öffentliches Auftreten, und populäre Erwartungen in der höhen Kaiserzeit (1989)Google Scholar; Woolf, G., ‘Becoming Roman, staying Greek: Culture, identity, and the civilizing process in the Roman East’, ProcCamPhilSoc 40 (1994), 116–43Google Scholar; Gleason, M., Making Men: Sophists and Self-Representation in Ancient Rome (1995)Google Scholar; Swain, S., Hellenism and Empire: Language, Classicism, and Power in the Greek World, AD 50–250 (1996)Google Scholar. Two recent collective volumes, combining archaeology and history: Walker, S. and Cameron, A. (eds), The Greek Renaissance in the Roman Empire (1989)Google Scholar; Alcock, S. E. (ed.), The Early Roman Empire in the East (1997)Google Scholar. See further recent work cited in nn. 2, 25, and 35.

² Most recently, for example, Bremen, R. van, The Limits of Participation: Women and Civic Life in the Greek East in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods (1996)Google Scholar.

³ As well as Agora I, Rosenbaum, Cyrene, IR I and II, and Datsoule-Stavride, useful collections are: P. Graindor, Bustes et statue-portraits d'Egypte romaine (n.d.); Rüsch, A., ‘Das kaiserzeitliche Porträt in Makedonien’, JdI 84 (1969), 59–196Google Scholar; Jucker, H., ‘Marmorporträts aus dem römischen Ägypten’, in Das römisch-byzantinische Ägypten (1983), 139–49Google Scholar; Datsoule-Stavride, A., Rhomaika Portraita sto Mouseio tes Spartes (1987)Google Scholar; Anticki Portret u Jugoslaviji: Classical Portraits in Jugoslavia (Exhib. Belgrade, 1987); Albanien: Schätze aus dem Land der Skipetaren (1988), nos 173–82; Anticki Portret u Dalmacija i Istria (1990).

⁴ IR I, no. 185. Correct date already in Fittschen, K., GGA 225 (1973), 62Google Scholar, no. 185 (review of IR I), also ‘Ritratti maschili’, 475. See further below nn. 137–8.

⁵ Datsoule-Stavride, 84–5, inv. 419, pls 118–19 (with earlier lit.). Correct date in Fittschen, op. cit. (below n. 7), 244–5.

⁶ FZ I and III are now fundamental for the full range of imperial portraits. Other important and accessible studies are: Bergmann, M., Marc Aurel (1978)Google Scholar; Vierneisel, K. and Zanker, P., Die Bildnisse des Augustus (Exhib.Cat., Munich, 1979)Google Scholar; Boschung, D., Die Bildnisse des Caligula (1989)Google Scholar; Die Bildnisse des Augustus (1993). The importance of this kind of work and its methodology are discussed by the present writer in ‘Typology and diversity in the portraits of Augustus’, JRA 9 (1996), 31–47Google Scholar. See also below, nn. 7–8.

⁷ Fittschen, K., ‘Zum angeblichen Bildnis des Lucius Verus im Thermen-Museum’, JdI 86 (1971), 214–52Google Scholar.

⁸ Zanker, P., Provinzielle Kaiserporträts: Zur Rezeption der Selbstdarstellung des Princeps (1983)Google Scholar, 14, pl. 4.3–4; also Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 450, n. 28. An additional clear argument against the identification (besides the typology of the forehead hair and the lack of Hadrian's tell-tale crease in the lobe of the ear) is that the hair covers the tops of the ears in a way unattested on any of Hadrian's portrait types.

⁹ Zanker, P., ‘Brüche im Bürgerbild? Zur bürgerlichen Selbstdarstellung in den hellenistischen Stadten’, in Wörrle, M. and Zanker, P. (eds), Stadtbild und Biirgerbild im Hellenismus (1995), 251–63Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Zanker, P., ‘Zur Rezeption des hellenistischen Individual-porträts in Rom und in den italienischen Städten’, in Hellenismus in Mittelitalien (1976) II, 581–609Google Scholar; Giuliani, L., Bildnis und Botschaft: Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Bildniskunst der römischen Republik (1986)Google Scholar. Further, n. 164.

¹¹ Zanker, P., ‘Grabreliefs römischer Freigelassener’, JdI 90 (1975), 267–315Google Scholar; idem, ‘Zur Bildnisreprasentation führender Männer in mittelitalischen und campanischen Städten zur Zeit der späten Republik und der Julisch-Claudischen Kaiser’, in Les ‘bourgeoisies’ muncipales italiennes aux IIe et Ier siècles av. J.C. (1981 Coll.Inst.Francais, Naples, 1983); Kockel, V., Porträtreliefs stadtrömischer Grabbauten: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte und zum Verständnis des spätrepublikanisch-frühkaiserzeitlichen Privatporträts (1993)Google Scholar.

¹² Goette, H. R., ‘Das Bildnis des Marcus Vilonius Varro in Kopenhagen. Zu den Basen von Portraitbüsten und zum Realismus flavisch-traianischer Bildnisse’, Boreas 7 (1984), 89–104.Google Scholar

¹³ Fittschen, op. cit. (n. 7).

¹⁴ Fittschen, K., GGA 236 (1984), 188–210Google Scholar, at 199–202 (review of IR II); Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 463–78; idem ‘Privatportrats hadrianischer Zeit’, in J. Bouzek and I. Ondřejová (eds), Roman Portraits, Artistic and Literary: Acts of the Third International Conference on Roman Portraits, Prague 1989 (1997), 32–6.

¹⁵ Fittschen, K., ‘Zur Datierung des Mädchenbildnisses vom Palatin’, JdI 106 (1991), 297–309Google Scholar. A thorough and convincing chronological study has also now reassigned many of the Fayum mummy portraits from Late Antiquity to the middle imperial period: B. Borg, Mumienporträts: Chronologic und kultureller Kontext (1996).

¹⁶ Zanker, in FZ III, nos 64–70.

¹⁷ The best starting points for the western material are in my opinion Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, for the earlier second century, and Fittschen, op. cit. (n. 7), for the later second century. Other useful studies: K. Fittschen, ‘Ein Bildnis in Privatbesitz. Zum Realismus römischer Porträts der mittleren und späteren Prinzipätszeit’, in Eikones. Fest. H. Jucker (1980), 108–14; P. Zanker, ‘Ein hoher Offizier Trajans’, ibid., 196–202. Other useful collections of material: Daltrop, G., Die stadtrömischen männlichen Privatbildnisse trajanischer und hadrianischer Zeit (1958)Google Scholar; Stemmer, K. (ed.), Kaiser Marc Aurel und seine Zeit (1988), 38–53Google Scholar. The eventual publication of FZ II will be important for this area of study.

¹⁸ Zanker, P., ‘Herrscherbild und Zeitgesicht’, Römisches Porträt: Wege zur Erforschung eines gesellschaftlichen Phänomenons. Wissenschaftliche Konferenz, Berlin 1981, = Wiss.Zeit.Berlin 31 (1982), 307–12Google Scholar; cf. also M. Bergmann, ‘Zeitypen im Kaiserportrat?’, ibid., 143–7.

¹⁹ P. Zanker, ‘Bürgerliche Selbstdarstellung am Grab im römischen Kaiserreich’, in H.-J. Schalles, H. von Hesberg and P. Zanker, Die römische Stadt in 2.Jahrhundert n.Chr.: Der Funktionswandel des öffentlichen Raumes (1992), 339–58, at 348: ‘Wenn der Kaiser sich den Bart wachsen liess, liessen sich die Bürger im ganzen Reich den Bart wachsen.’

²⁰ Poulsen II, no. 64.

²¹ Zanker, Mask, ch. 5.

²² Hadrian's portraits: below, n. 29. Pius' portraits: Fittschen, in FZ I nos 59–60.

²³ The Louvre bust, Pl. IV, 3–4: Fittschen, in FZ I, under no. 73, n. 13d, Beil. 50; de Kersauson, K., Musée du Louvre: Catalogue des portraits romains II (1996), no. 117Google Scholar.

²⁴ ‘Nor again should he (sc. the good emperor) apply himself to philosophy to the point of perfecting himself in it (pros to akribestaton)’: Dio 2.26.

²⁵ For what follows, see the balanced accounts of Jones, C. P., Plutarch and Rome (1971), esp. chs 5–6Google Scholar; idem, The Roman World of Dio Chrysostom (1978); idem, Culture and Society in Lucian (1986). Note also: P. Brunt, ‘The Romanization of the local ruling classes in the Roman Empire’, in Assimilation et resistance à la culture gréco-romaine dans le monde ancien (1976) = Brunt, P., Roman Imperial Themes (1990), 267–81Google Scholar, and recent work on cultural identity cited above, n. 1. On euergetism: P. Veyne, Bread and Circuses: Historical Sociology and Political Pluralism (1976, trans. 1990), Pt II: ‘Greek Euergetism’; Quass, F., Die Honoratiorenschicht in den Städten des griechischen Ostens (1993)Google Scholar; most recently Lendon, J. F., Empire of Honour: The Art of Government in the Roman World (1997), ch. 2Google Scholar: ‘Honour and Influence in the Roman World’.

²⁶ The best photographic documentation for the following sketch is in FZ I and III. Aspects of it will be justified in more detail later, in Sections VI and VII. On the increased use of marble for statues and busts in the second century: Claridge, A., ‘Roman statuary and the supply of statuary marble’, in Fant, J. C. (ed.), Ancient Marble Quarrying and Trade (1988), 139–52.Google Scholar

²⁷ Bronze, for example, the Capitoline Marcus Aurelius: FZ I, no. 67; Sommella, A. M. (ed.), Il Marco Aurelio in Campidoglio (1990)Google Scholar. Silver bust of L. Verus from Marengo (Turin): Wegner, M., Die Herrscherbildnisse in antoninischer Zeit (1939), 248Google Scholar, pl. 41. Bust of Verus, Pl. IV, 3–4 : above, n. 23.

²⁸ Collection of literary sources on imperial hairstyling: Demandt, A., Das Privatleben der römischen Kaiser (1996), 101–4.Google Scholar

²⁹ Fittschen, in FZ I, nos 46–54; Evers, C., Les portraits d'Hadrien: Typologie et ateliers (1994)Google Scholar. The Terme bust, Pl. IV, 1–2: FZ I, under no. 46, Replica 4, Beil. 23; Evers, op. cit., 165–6, no. 107, figs 33, 39.

³⁰ Fittschen, in FZ I, nos 58 (Aelius), 65–71 (Marcus), 73 (Verus).

³¹ For the central ideological importance of which, see Wallace-Hadrill, A., ‘Civilis Princeps. Between citizen and king’, JRS 72 (1982), 32–48Google Scholar.

³² Nero: Hiesinger, U., ‘The portraits of Nero’, AJA 79 (1975), 113–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Domitian: Zanker in FZ I, nos 32–3. Both: Bergmann, M. and Zanker, P., ‘Damnatio Memoriae: Umgearbeitete Nero- und Domitiansporträts’, JdI 96 (1981), 317–42Google Scholar. Followers: Cain, P., Männerbildnisse neronisch-flavischer Zeit (1993)Google Scholar.

³³ ‘Nec unquam philosophum audivit’: Trimalchio's epitaph, Petronius, Satyricon 71. At Trajan's court, there are ‘et liberales ioci et studiorum honor’: Pliny, , Panegyric 49.8Google Scholar. Cf. Syme, R., Tacitus (1958), 511–12Google Scholar, ‘The customary and normal scorn of a Roman for any contemporary Greeks must now (sc. in the second century) undergo some abatement or disguise’.

³⁴ Syme, op. cit. (n. 33), 506–11; idem, ‘The Greeks under Roman rule’, Roman Papers II (1979), 566–81, esp. 572–81; idem, ‘Greeks invading the Roman government’ (S. J. Brademas lecture, 1982), Roman Papers IV (1988), 1–20. Most recently on this theme: Birley, A., ‘Hadrian and Greek senators’, ZPE 116 (1997), 209–45.Google Scholar

³⁵ G. W. Bowersock, Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire (1969); Bowie, E. L., ‘The importance of Sophists’, YCS 27 (1982), 29–60Google Scholar; G. Anderson, The Second Sophistic: A Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire (1993).

³⁶ cf. Zanker, op. cit. (n. 19), 356–7.

³⁷ The hostile literary sources about Menander's perfumed and mincing appearance (Phaedrus, Fables 5.1) should not be taken seriously. His portrait statue, for all its suave naturalism, has a plain, deliberately ‘casually’ arranged hairstyle (cf. Zanker, Mask, 78–83, with different emphasis). For the reconstruction of the Menander statue: Fittschen, K., ‘Zur Rekonstruktion griechischer Dichterstatuen. 1. Teil: Die Statue des Menander’, AM 106 (1991), 243–79Google Scholar.

³⁸ In a similar direction to that taken here, cf. P. Zanker, ‘Statuenrepräsentation und Mode’, in Walker and Cameron, op. cit. (n. 1), 102–7; idem, op. cit. (n. 9); and recently Hallett, C. H., ‘A group of portrait statues from the civic center of Aphrodisias’, AJA 102 (1998), 59–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar. More generally on statue types: Fittschen, K., BonnJb 170 (1970), 541–54Google Scholar, review of H. G. Niemeyer, Studien zur statuarischen Darstellung der römischen Kaisar (1968).

³⁹ Bergemann, J., Römische Reiterstatuen (1990).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Compare the imposing effect of the imperial chariot groups in statue landscapes of Western cities: Zimmer, G., Locus Datus Decreto Decurionum: Zur Statuenaufstellung zweier Forumsanlagen im römischen Afrika (1989), 33Google Scholar, fig. 14 and 50, fig. 22 — reconstructions of the public statuary on the fora of Timgad and Djemila.

⁴¹ Schäfer, Th., Imperii Insignia: Sella Curulis und Fasces: Zur Repräsentation römischer Magistrate (1989), 149–50, pls 16–17Google Scholar.

⁴² von den Hoff, R., Philosophenporträts des Frühund Hochhellenismus (1994), passim; Zanker, Mask, 90–129.Google Scholar

⁴³ Stemmer, K., Untersuchungen zur Typologie, Chronologie, und Ikonographie der Panzerstatuen (1978)Google Scholar. On the statue illustrated (Pl. V, 2): below nn. 88 and 92.

⁴⁴ Wrede, H., Consecratio in formam deorum: Vergöttlichte Privatpersonen in der römischen Kaiserzeit (1981)Google Scholar; Maderna, C., Jupiter, Diomedes, und Merkur als Vorbild für römische Bildnisstatuen (1986)Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ P. Zanker, ‘Zur Bildnisrepräsentation führender Männer’, op. cit. (n. 11).

⁴⁶ cf. von den Hoff, op. cit. (n. 42), 44.

⁴⁷ Rosenbaum, Cyrene, nos 135, 136, 138 (very much the minority there beside himation statues with tunic, ibid., nos 114–28); Richter, , POG III, 286Google Scholar, fig. 2043 (no good evidence, however, that this headless statue is of Herodes Atticus). On the powerful contemporary effect in the Roman period of this philosophic achitōn en himatiōi costume, which was irritating to the average man-in-the street, see Dio 72.2, in a speech Per tou Schematos or On Personal Appearance (sc. of philosophers).

⁴⁸ Copenhagen bust, PL V, 1: Poulsen II, no. 154. On the type: Zanker, Mask, 226, with figs 107 (Seneca, Berlin), 123 (Thessaloniki), 129 (Capitoline), 132 (Copenhagen), 133 (Theon, Capitoline), 136 (so-called ‘Polemon’, Athens). Others: below, nn. 109–10.

⁴⁹ Goette, H. R., Studien zu römischen Togadarstellungen (1990)Google Scholar. Good illustrated collection of Eastern examples: Rosenbaum, Cyrene, nos 107–13.

⁵⁰ Goette, H. R., ‘Mulleus — Embas — Calceus’, JdI 103 (1988), 401–64Google Scholar.

⁵¹ There is no study of the full range of himation statues of the Roman period. See provisionally: Polaschek, K., Untersuchungen zu griechischen Mantelstatuen: Der Himationtypus mit Armschlinge (Diss., 1969)Google Scholar; Bieber, Copies, ch. 11; Lewerentz, A., Stehende männliche Gewandstatuen im Hellenismus (Diss., 1992)Google Scholar. There is also no proper study of the associated footwear. Morrow, K. D., Greek Footwear and the Dating of Greek Sculpture (1985)Google Scholar is inadequate for the Hellenistic and Roman periods.

⁵² The two statues from Aphrodisias, Pl. V, 3–4: Erirn, K. T., Smith, R. R. R., ‘Sculpture from the theatre’, Aphrodisias Papers 2 (1991), 67–98Google Scholar, at 83–4, no. 18, figs 20a–b (with captions reversed). On their portrait heads: below, n. 141. For the Coan statues: Kabus-Preisshofen, nos 33–4, 36–7.

⁵³ Polaschek, op. cit. (n. 51); Rosenbaum, Cyrene, nos 114–28; Bieber, Copies, figs 625–36. On the statue, Pl VI, 1: below, n. 57.

⁵⁴ Richter, , POG II, 212–15Google Scholar, figs 1369–90.

⁵⁵ Dio 36.7. A part of good old-fashioned Hellenic manners: Plutarch, Phocion 4. This schēma or pose is called a sōphrosynēs paradeigma in Demosthenes, De Falsa Legatione, 251; cf. Zanker, Mask, 46–9.

⁵⁶ There is an example from the group of statues that decorated the stage-building of the Bouleuterion at Aphrodisias (to be published by C. H. Hallett): see provisionally, Erim, K. T., Aphrodisias: A Guide to the Site and its Museum (1989), 87, no. 38, fig 122. Menander: above, n. 39.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ K. T. Erim, in IR II, nos 186–7.

⁵⁸ For recent plans of the North Agora and Bouleuterion showing the precise location of the statues: Smith, R. R. R. and Ratté, C., ‘Archaeological research at Aphrodisias in Caria, 1995’, AJA 101 (1997), 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 3–7, figs 2 and 6.

⁵⁹ J. Reynolds, in IR II, no. 186.

⁶⁰ Below, n. 127.

⁶¹ She is PIR ² C 1071.

⁶² J. Reynolds, in IR II, no. 187.

⁶³ Julia Domna's portraits: Fittschen, in FZ III, nos 28–30.

⁶⁴ LIMC Hades 163; Smith, R. R. R., Aphrodisias I: The Monument of C. Julius Zoilos (1993), 52–3Google Scholar, pl. 30d. For joint office-holding by husband-and-wife pairs as the most common form of public prominence for women in this period, see van Bremen, op. cit. (n. 2), ch. 5, ‘Joint Office-holding’.

⁶⁵ Provisionally: Bieber, ch. 12; cf. E. A. Schmidt, Römische Frauenstatuen (1967).

⁶⁶ On crowns: IR II, 38–47; Wörrle, M., Stadt und Feste im kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien (1988), 186–8Google Scholar; idem, ‘Neue Inschriftenfunde aus Aizanoi I’, Chiron 22 (1992), 337–76, at 352–68, pls 5–6. Statues with priestly crowns are the subject of a forthcoming monograph by J. Rumscheid. Note the comments on the public prominence of such crowns of office in Dio 35.10. Similar in effect to the Aphrodisias sarcophagus is a ‘Hades’ sarcophagus from Ephesus in Istanbul with two prominently wreathed himation priests (probably a father and young long-haired son): G. Koch and H. Sichtermann, Römische Sarkophage (1982), 522, fig. 511; Bieber, Copies, figs 658–9, with details.

⁶⁷ Preliminary publication: Smith and Ratté, op. cit. (n. 58), 20–2, figs 16–18.

⁶⁸ Hannestad, N., Tradition in Late Antique Sculpture (1994), 160Google Scholar, thinks this statue should be dated in the fifth century A.D., but on several external grounds this is very unlikely. The large scale, technical handling of hair and drapery, un-drilled eyes, form of toga, and apparently detailed statement of equestrian status, in my opinion, all speak decisively against it. The statue belongs clearly in the early to mid-second century, perhaps c. A.D. 120–140. See further, Smith and Ratté, op. cit. (n. 58), 21–2. On Hannestad's chronology of Roman sculpture, see the review of Claridge, A., ‘Late antique reworking of the Ara Pacis and other imperial sculptures’, JRA 10 (1997), 447–53Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Kabus-Preisshofen, no. 33.

⁷⁰ Meyer, H., Antinoos (1991)Google Scholar. For earlier ideal portraits of Eastern youths, see further below, n. 181.

⁷¹ Preliminary publication: Smith, R. R. R and Ratté, C., ‘Archaeological research at Aphrodisias in Caria, 1995’, AJA 102 (1998), 246–8Google Scholar. For the signature: K. T. Erim and J. M. Reynolds, ‘Sculptors of Aphrodisias in the inscriptions of the city’, in N. Başgelen and M. Lugal (eds), Festschrift für Jale Inan (1989), 517–38, at 524, no. 7, pl. 201.

⁷² On a common veiled portrait statue type with the attributes of Demeter-Ceres: Bieber, Copies, ch. 13. A well preserved example from Aphrodisias: IR I, no. 230, which was paired with a statue of an unveiled younger woman (IR I, no. 229) — they were perhaps a mother and daughter.

⁷³ IR II, no. 225.

⁷⁴ IR I, no. 287.

⁷⁵ IR I, II, nos 228 and 234.

⁷⁶ cf. Swain, op. cit. (n. 1), ch. 3, ‘Past and Present’.

⁷⁷ He is Halfmann, no. 36.

⁷⁸ Stuart, J. and Revett, N., The Antiquities of Athens (1789), vol. III, ch. 5, pp. 35–40Google Scholar, pls I–XI; J. Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary of Athens (1971), s.v. Philopappos; D. E. E. Kleiner, The Monument of Philopappus in Athens (1983); Schäfer, op. cit. (n. 41), 380–1, Cat. B 13, with further lit.

⁷⁹ OGIS 411–13. The inscription below the righthand statue, like that of the righthand pilaster of the central niche (below, n. 82), are now lost but were drawn and recorded by Cyriacus of Ancona in 1436 (his drawing is known now only in a copy by Giuliano da Sangallo): see Kleiner, op. cit. (n. 78), 23, pl. XXXV. These two inscriptions are not shown in Stuart and Revett's reconstruction illustrated here, Fig.3.

⁸⁰ On the unusual iconography of a consul processing in a chariot — probably not Philopappus' inauguration or processus consularis (as usually said), but rather a metaphorical consular pompa(?): Schäfer, op. cit. (n. 41), 182–3, 380–1.

⁸¹ OGIS 409.

⁸² OGIS 410.

⁸³ OGIS 412.

⁸⁴ OGIS 389–395; Dörner, F. K., ‘Zur Rekonstruktion der Ahnengalerie des Königs Antiochos I von Kommagene’, Ist Mitt 17 (1967), 195–210Google Scholar; Goell, Th., Sanders, D. and Bachmann, H. G., Nemrud Daǧi: The Hierothesion of Antiochos I of Commagene. Results of the American Excavations directed by Th. Goell (1996), 254–355.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Kleiner, op. cit. (n. 78), 82, pl. XVI la.

⁸⁶ Below, nn. 176 (Rome), 182 (Greek East).

⁸⁷ He is Halfmann, no. 16.

⁸⁸ IR I, no. 144.

⁸⁹ Wilberg, W. et al. , Forschungen in Ephesos V.I (1953)Google Scholar; Scherrer, P. (ed.), Ephesos: Der neue Führer (1995), 132–4Google Scholar. The inscriptions also in I Ephesos 5101–15. Celsus' son, Aquila, is Halfmann, no. 37.

⁹⁰ J. Keil in Wilberg, op. cit. (n. 89), 62–6, nos 2–3; I Ephesos 5102–3.

⁹¹ J. Keil in Wilberg, op. cit. (n. 89), 71–3, nos 8–11; I Ephesos 5108–11. The statues: F. Eichler in Wilberg, op. cit. (n. 89), 47–57, figs 95–100; Oberleitner, W., Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (1978), 113–15, nos 159–62.Google Scholar

⁹² J. Keil in Wilberg, op. cit. (n. 89), 66–71, nos 4–7; I Ephesos 5104–7. On the cuirassed statue, also: F. Eichler in Wilberg, op. cit. (n. 89), 57–9, fig. 101.

⁹³ Syme, op. cit. (n. 34, 1988), 17.

⁹⁴ Scherrer, op. cit. (n. 89), 132.

⁹⁵ Wilberg, op. cit. (n. 89), 10–18, figs 18, 28, 29, 32; Schäfer, op. cit. (n. 41), 210, 374, Cat. B 2.

⁹⁶ Discussed further below, at nn. 176 (Rome), 182 (East).

⁹⁷ He is Halfmann, no. 97. See further lit. at n. 104.

⁹⁸ Bol, R., Das Statuenprogramm des Herodes-Atticus Nymphäums (1984)Google Scholar.

⁹⁹ Bol, op. cit. (n. 98), 169–71, no. 35, pls 30–1. The evidence and the possibilities for the following question are best summarized in the very useful photomontage reconstruction, ibid., Beilage 4.

¹⁰⁰ Bol, op. cit. (n. 98), 165, no. 33, pl. 26. This is one of three headless togati (ibid., 164–7, nos 32–4, pls 24–8) to be attributed to the upper register of the monument — two should be for Regilla's father and grandfather, leaving one for Herodes or his father. On the head wearing a priest's fillet, hypothetically associated by Bol, ibid., 165–9, with the fragmentary togatus, no. 34, see further below, n. 150.

¹⁰¹ Wiegartz, H., Kleinasiatische Säulensarkophage, Ist.Forsch. 26 (1965)Google Scholar.

¹⁰² Koch and Sichtermann, op. cit. (n. 66), 503–7, fig. 488.

¹⁰³ Kephisia bust (Pl. X, 1–2): Datsoule-Stavride, 50–1, inv. 4810, pls 50–3. Probalinthos bust (Pl. X, 3–4) : de Kersauson, op. cit. (n. 23), no. 132.

¹⁰⁴ Ameling, W., Herodes Atticus, 2 vols (1983)Google Scholar; Tobin, J., Herodes Attikos and the City of Athens: Patronage and Conflict under the Antonines (1997).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Richter, , POG III, 286–7Google Scholar; Albertson, F.S., ‘A bust of Lucius Verus in the Ashmolean Museum, and its artist’, AJA 87 (1983), 153–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Walker, S., ‘A marble head of Herodes Atticus from Winchester City Museum’, AntJ 69 (1989), 324–6Google Scholar. I am indebted to Thorsten Opper, who is making a full study of the portraits of Herodes and of the members of his circle, for the current extant number of replicas.

¹⁰⁶ Richter, , POG III, 287Google Scholar; Meyer, H., ‘Vibullius-Polydeukion: Ein archäologisch-epigraphischer Problemfall’, AM 100 (1985), 393–404Google Scholar, at 398–9, lists twenty-three copies.

¹⁰⁷ Richter, , POG II, 215–23Google Scholar, figs 1397–510.

¹⁰⁸ Lysias: Richter, , POG II, 207–8Google Scholar, figs 1340–5. Aeschines: above, n. 54.

¹⁰⁹ IR II, nos 116–17.

¹¹⁰ Anticki Portret u Jugoslaviji, op. cit. (n. 3), nos 113 (head from Herakleia Lyncestis), 115–16 (two imation busts from Styberra).

¹¹¹ Lattanzi, E., I ritratti dei Cosmeti (1968)Google Scholar.

¹¹² Lattanzi, op. cit. (n. III), no. 8. Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 455, figs 8.1–2, sees a specific ‘assimilation’ to the main portrait type of Aelius Verus (ibid., fig. 8. 3–4). Imperial-style period-faces are rare among the surviving portraits of kosmetai after the mid-second century.

¹¹³ Lattanzi, op. cit. (n. 111), nos 6 (Perikles-like) and 22 (Aeschines-like).

¹¹⁴ Lattanzi, op. cit. (n. 111), no. 18.

¹¹⁵ Lattanzi, op. cit. (n. 111), no. 9.

¹¹⁶ cf. von den Hoff, op. cit. (n. 42); Zanker, Mask, ch. 3.

¹¹⁷ For example, Zanker, Mask, 236–9, figs 128, 130, two portrait heads with a ‘new Antisthenes’ styling.

¹¹⁸ Hahn, op. cit. (n. 1), 33–45.

¹¹⁹ MAMA VIII, 499; cf. Hahn, op. cit. (n. 1), 161–2.

¹²⁰ Richter, , POG I, 80–1Google Scholar, figs 306–7, 310.

¹²¹ So Richter, ibid., following Lippold, G., and still Schefold, K., Die Bildnisse der antiken Dichter, Redner, und Denker (rev. edn. 1997), 360, fig. 231.Google Scholar

¹²² Zanker, , Mask, 264–6Google Scholar, fig. 143.

¹²³ Lucian, , Peregrinus, 36.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Dio 12.15, 47–25; Philostratus, Life of Apollonius, 1.32; with Zanker, Mask, 256–62.

¹²⁵ Fittschen, K., ‘“Barbaren”-Köpfe. Zur Imitation Alexanders d.Gr. in der mittleren Kaiserzeit’, in The Greek Renaissance, op. cit. (n. 1), 108–13Google Scholar.

¹²⁶ Zanker, , Mask, 248–50.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Dio 35.11; Lucian, , Alexander 3; 11; 13Google Scholar. Good examples from Aphrodisias (here Pl. VI, 1), Athens, and Cyrene: Datsoule-Stavride, 69–70, inv. 356, pl. 85; Poulsen II, no. 157 (bought in Athens); Rosenbaum, Cyrene, nos 69–70; Zanker, Mask, 262, fig. 142.

¹²⁸ IR I, no. 151 (‘Flavius Damianus’).

¹²⁹ He is PIR ² F 253. Epigraphic career outlined in I Ephesos VII. 1, p. 90, and VIII. 2, p. 206.

¹³⁰ Dillon, S., ‘The portraits of a civic benefactor of 2nd-c. Ephesos’, JRA 9 (1996), 261–74Google Scholar.

¹³¹ IR I, no. 150.

¹³² I Ephesos VII. 1, pp. 88–9; Dillon, op. cit. (n. 130), 272–3, with lit. n. 41.

¹³³ Lecture by the excavator of Loukou, Sp. Spyropoulos, London, Nov. 1996.

¹³⁴ Pindar's portrait: Smith, R. R. R., ‘Late Roman philosopher portraits from Aphrodisias,’ JRS 90 (1990), 127–55Google Scholar, at 132–5, no. 1, pls VI–VII; Bergemann, J., ‘Pindar: Das Bildnis eines konservativen Dichters’, AM 106 (1991), 157–89Google Scholar.

¹³⁵ Agora I, no. 25.

¹³⁶ IG II² 1809 (date: ‘fin. s. II p.’).

¹³⁷ IR I.no. 185 and above, n. 4.

¹³⁸ Oberleitner, W., ‘Zwei spätantiken Kaiserköpfe aus Ephesos’, Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien 69 (1973), 127–65Google Scholar, at 127–52.

¹³⁹ These observations are best controlled in FZ I and III. Evers, op. cit. (n. 29), does not give a figure for the proportion of Hadrian's c. 150 extant portraits that have engraved eyes. Fittschen, ‘Ritrattimaschili’, 448, n. 10, estimates that of the portraits of Antinous, which were for the most part probably made, it can be assumed, between 130 and 138, about half have the pupils and irises engraved.

¹⁴⁰ There are perhaps some 30–40 examples extant. Some examples, mainly Western, have been well discussed by Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 463–85, who sees nearly all of them as Hadrianic in date, placing them in the narrow time span, between the introduction of engraved eyes, c. 130, and the death of Hadrian in 138. But this does not accord well with the emphatic (later, post-140) rendering of the eyes on many of the examples; and the death of Hadrian in this context is probably a false terminus (these images are not really concerned with or connected to anything specifically ‘Hadrianic’). For Fittschen's interpretation of the phenomenon, below, n. 162. For Eastern examples, below, nn. 141–53.

¹⁴¹ From the theatre (Pl. XIII, 1): IR II, no. 194. From the bouleuterion (Pl. XIII, 2): IR I, no. 239. cf. Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 467, 470. For their statues (Pl V, 3–4): above, n. 52.

¹⁴² From the Levant, Pl XII, 2, a small herm portrait with funerary inscription for one Rhoummas: S. Walker, Memorials to the Roman Dead (1985), 61, fig. 49 (before A.D. 150).

¹⁴³ Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 485, figs 27. 3–4; idem in Bouzek and Ondřejová, op. cit. (n. 14), 34–5, with lit. n. 28, pl. 10, figs 11–12.

¹⁴⁴ Above, nn. 52, 141.

¹⁴⁵ Moiragenes (Pl XII, 1): above, n. 135. Agora wreathed head (Pl XII, 4): Agora I, no. 43 (‘ca. A.D. 235–245’, by comparison with the portraits of Maximinus Thrax). Copenhagen head (Pl XII, 3): Poulsen II, no. 61 (second century).

¹⁴⁶ Hinks, R., Greek and Roman Portrait Sculpture (2nd edn, 1976), 93, fig. 73 (‘may be as late as the fourth century’)Google Scholar.

¹⁴⁷ IR I, no. 257 (‘Constantinian’). Note also the small ‘Constantinian’ head in London from Cyrene: Rosenbaum, Cyrene, no. 99 — perhaps recarved from a second-century head(?).

¹⁴⁸ Above, nn. 4, 137–8.

¹⁴⁹ Bejor, G., Hierapolis III: Le statue (1991), no. 20, pls 22–3.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁰ Bol, op. cit. (n. 98), 165–9, no. 34. fig. 73. pl. 29 — there attributed to a fragmentary togate statue (cf. above, n. 100) and tentatively identified as M. Appius Bradua, grandfather of Herodes' wife Regilla. The head wears, however, a rolled fillet of a kind that is most easily attested for Greek priests. Of those whose statues are known from inscribed bases to have been present, it might then be more easily attributed to Herodes' father, Ti. Claudius Atticus.

¹⁵¹ IR I, no. 282 (Tetrarchic); IR II, pl. 273. 1, head joined to himation body; and esp. Frey, W., ‘Das Bildnis eines Kaiserpriesters aus Pompeiopolis in Kilikien’, Ant. Welt 13.3 (1982), 27–39Google Scholar (mid-third century). Frey's precise date of A.D. 235–54, carefully argued on external grounds from the historical interpretation of the large letters carved in relief on the front of the crown (GMAKB), may need to be reconsidered in the light of some features that seem to speak against it. The himation statue seems clearly of the middle imperial period; the small imperial busts on the crown are full-bearded, and therefore probably not of emperors after 212; and the light beard of the portrait is simply picked into the smooth, clean-shaven surface of the face — which together with the drilled eyes belongs best in the middle or later second century. It might then need to be argued that the original statue was a clean-shaven portrait of the kind under discussion, of the mid-second century, with the light beard added in the mid-third century. Such light picking of beards into the faces of clean-shaven early and middle imperial-period portraits, carried out later, in the third or early fourth centuries, is well-attested elsewhere — for example, on the early second-century togatus from Ostia (so-called ‘Maxentius’): Andreae, B., Art of Rome (1977), pl. 149Google Scholar; Goette, op. cit. (n. 49), 49, pl. 19. 5.

¹⁵² Özgan, R., ‘Ein spätantikes Porträt in Fethiye’, in Başgelen, N. and Lugal, M. (eds), Festschrift für Jale Inan (1989), 291–3, pls 129–30 (Constantinian)Google Scholar.

¹⁵³ Comstock, M. B. and Vermeule, C. C., Sculpture in Stone: Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (1976), no. 357Google Scholar; IR II, no. 215 (late Hadrianic or early Antonine). Discussed further below.

¹⁵⁴ Aurenhammer, M. in Thür, H. (ed.), ‘… und verschönerte die Stadt’: Ein ephesischer Priester de Kaiserkultes in seinem Umfeld (1997), 41–52Google Scholar. An attractive hypothetical identification as Ti. Claudius Aristion, the asiarch and princeps Ephesiorum of Pliny Letters 6.31.3, is proposed later in the same volume: P. Scherrer, ibid., 113–28.

¹⁵⁵ Evidence, mainly numismatic, for this group collected by the present writer in Hellenistic Royal Portraits (1988), ch. 13, ‘Romans and Their Friends’.

¹⁵⁶ Above, n. 153.

¹⁵⁷ Plutarch, An seni sit gerenda respublica? or Should Old Men take Part in Politics?—the answer, naturally, is affirmative; cf. Swain, op. cit. (n. 1), 183–4.

¹⁵⁸ Oliver, J. H., The Sacred Gerusia (1941), 50Google Scholar: ‘The imperial government … gave spontaneously its support to this institution wherein the membership … was drawn entirely from the aristocratic, conservative, heartily pro-Roman elements of the population.’

¹⁵⁹ Above, nn. 52, 151.

¹⁶⁰ Bulle, H., ‘Ein Jagddenkmal des Kaisers Hadrian’, JdI 34 (1919), 144–72Google Scholar; Bonnano, A., Roman Relief Portraiture to Septimius Severus (1976), 93–106Google Scholar, pls 188–200; Boatwright, M. T., Hadrian and the City of Rome (1987), 190–202Google Scholar.

¹⁶¹ Traversari, G., Museo Archeologico di Venezia: i ritratti (1968), no. 43.Google Scholar

¹⁶² Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 478, briefly evokes some kind of opposition to the Caesars as a possible interpretation of this class of portraits in the West: ‘… una forma di opposizione contro il dominio imperiale, riccorrendo a modelli repubblicani (basta pensare allo storico Tacito)’. In my opinion, this is unlikely, both as a possible goal of such images and because some of the figures who deploy this self-styling in the Hadrianic hunt tondi (above, n. 160) were demonstrably among the emperor's closest supporters.

¹⁶³ Walker, S., ‘Bearded men’, Journal of the History of Collections 3.2 (1991), 265–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar = eadem, Greek and Roman Portraits (1995), ch. 8: ‘Bearded and Beardless Men’, at p. 88; Zanker, Mask, 220; Swain, op. cit. (n. 1), 83–5, 215–16. Most recently on this text: D. Braund, ‘The Black Sea region and Hellenism under the early empire’, in Alcock, op. cit. (n. 1), 126–31.

¹⁶⁴ Smith, op. cit. (n. 155), 125–30; Giuliani, op. cit. (n. 10); cf. K. Fittschen, ‘Pathossteigerung und Pathosdämpfung: Bemerkungen zu griechischen und römischen Porträts des 2. und i. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.’, AA (1991), 253–70; P. Zanker, ‘Individuum und Typus: Zur Bedeutung des realistischen Individualporträts der späten Republik’, AA (1995), 473–81 (an earlier version of the same paper was published later in Roman Portraits, Artistic and Literary, op. cit. (n. 14), 9–15). The participants in the debate about the contemporary political meaning of the ‘republican’ portrait style have not yet quite reached an agreed formulation.

¹⁶⁵ Zanker, ‘Zur Bildnisrepräsentation führender Männer’, op. cit. (n. 11); Goette, op. cit. (n. 49), 20–8.

¹⁶⁶ Good selection: Hofter, M., ‘Porträt’, in Kaiser Augustus und die verlorene Republik (Exhib. Berlin, 1988), 291–343Google Scholar

¹⁶⁷ For example, in the portrait type of L. Calpurnius Piso(?): ibid., no. 152.

¹⁶⁸ de Franciscis, A., Il ritratto romano a Pompeii (1951)Google Scholar; Zanker, P., ‘Das Bildnis des M. Holconius Rufus’, AA (1981), 349–61Google Scholar; Muscettola, S. A., ‘Nuove letture borboniche: I Nonii Balbi e il Foro di Ercolano’, Prospettiva 28 (1982), 2–16Google Scholar.

¹⁶⁹ Kockel, op. cit. (n. 11).

¹⁷⁰ Banker, L. Caecilius Iucundus: De Franciscis, op. cit. (n. 168), 31–4, figs 17–20. Actor, Norbanus Sorex: ibid., 27–30, figs 14–15.

¹⁷¹ Galba: Kent, J. P. C., Hirmer, M. and Hirmer, A., Roman Coins (1978), nos 210–14Google Scholar. Vespasian: Bergmann and Zanker, op. cit. (n. 32), 332–5.

¹⁷² Many examples in Daltrop, op. cit. (n. 17); Goette, op. cit. (n. 12); Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’.

¹⁷³ Cain, op. cit. (n. 32), 58–78, 81–104.

¹⁷⁴ Cain, op. cit. (n. 32), 86–95.

¹⁷⁵ Nero and Otho: Kent and Hirmer, op. cit. (n. 171), nos 192–205, 216–17. Domitian: above, n. 32.

¹⁷⁶ Soldiers and lictors in Flavian and Trajanic reliefs: F. Magi, I Rilievi Flavi (1965), pls 13, 17a, 19a (bearded); Bonnano, A., ‘Imperial and private portraiture: a case of non-dependence’, in Bonacasa, N. and Rizza, G. (eds), Ritratto Ufficiale e ritratto privato: Atti delta II Conferenza Internazionale sul ritratto Romano, 1984 (1988), 157–64Google Scholar; idem, op. cit. (n. 160), 52–94. Charioteers: Giuliano, A. (ed.), Museo Nazionale Romano: Le sculture 1.9 (1987), R 115, R 126–30, R 193Google Scholar — a group of busts and herms from the sanctuary of Hercules Cubans in Rome. R 193 is bearded, and therefore usually dated in the Hadrianic period. The group may offer however not so much a lesson in linear chronology as a conspectus of broadly contemporary, first-century portrait styles. Best illustrations: Nash, E., Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome (1968)Google Scholar, s.v. Hercules Cubans; cf. Nista, L. (ed.), Sacellum Herculis (1991)Google Scholar. Other pre-Hadrianic, bearded portraits: Daltrop, op. cit. (n. 17), 60–3; Cain, op. cit. (n. 32), 100–4, with list in n. 249.

¹⁷⁷ Draped statues: Linfert, A., Kunstzentren hellenistischer Zeit (1979)Google Scholar. Portrait heads: Hafner, G., Späthellenistische Bildnisplastik (1954)Google Scholar.

¹⁷⁸ Kabus-Preisshofen, nos 36–7, 41–2.

¹⁷⁹ Aphrodisias: IR II, no. 181 (‘Trajan’). Athens: Datsoule-Stavride, 24–8, inv. 331, 3118, 4453, 353, 437, pls 6–14.

¹⁸⁰ Athens: Agora I, nos 18–19. Ephesus: Aurenhammer, op. cit. (n. 154).

¹⁸¹ For example, Aphrodisias: Erim, K. T., ‘Recent work at Aphrodisias 1986–1988’, in Roueché, C. and Erim, K.T. (eds), Aphrodisias Papers 1, JRA Suppl. 1. (1990), 9–36Google Scholar, at 20, fig. 22. Athens: Datsoule-Stavride, 49, 56–7, inv. 420, 2350, pls 47, 62.

¹⁸² Adana: Bruns-Özgan, C. and Özgan, R., ‘Eine bronzene Bildnisstatue aus Kilikien’, Antike Plastik 23 (1994), 81–92Google Scholar, pls 37–43. Athens: Datsoule-Stavride, 53–5, inv. 372, 342, 3985, pls 57–9 (three bearded portrait heads with hairstyles that could be dated anywhere between the later first and early second century). Delphi: P. de la Coste-Messeliere, Delphi (1943), pls 195–7 (‘Flamininus’ head). Lampsacus: here, Pl. III, 3. Philopappus and Celsus: here, Pl. VIII, 3–4.

¹⁸³ cf. above n. 24 (Dio on not too much philosophy for the good emperor).

¹⁸⁴ Hist.Aug., Hadrian 26.

¹⁸⁵ Rosenbaum, Cyrene, no. 34.

¹⁸⁶ cf. Wrede, H., Die antike Herme (1988), 71–8Google Scholar.

¹⁸⁷ A theme in the correspondence of Fronto – for example, Ad Amicos I.4 (Loeb, pp. 288–9), a letter of recommendation for Julius Aquilinus; cf. E. Champlin, Fronto and Antonine Rome (1980), 33–4. The language of humanitas, civilitas, and eloquentia, and their visual expression in personal elegantia and cura capillorum is boiled down to essentials in the brief verbal sketches of the appearance and characters of the Antonine emperors given by the Historia Augusta: see Hadrian 26; Aelius 5; Pius 2; Verus 10.

¹⁸⁸ ‘Non-dependence’: Bonnano, op. cit. (n. 176). Questo fenomeno della non-imitazione’: Fittschen, ‘Ritratti maschili’, 478.