Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:21:41.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Imperial Reliefs from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

R. R. R. Smith
R. R. R. Smith
Affiliation:
Institute of Fine Arts, New York
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1979, during his continuing excavation of the city of Aphrodisias, Professor K. T. Erim discovered a large temple and sanctuary complex dedicated to Aphrodite and the Julio-Claudian emperors (the Theoi Sebastoi). It had a remarkable sculptural display of which much has survived—there are about eighty relief panels. The complex would probably have been called a Sebasteion: we know from an unrelated inscription that there was one at Aphrodisias. It is of great interest to both the historian and art-historian of the early empire, giving a rare combination of buildings, sculpture, and inscriptions from a unified excavated context and providing an unrivalled picture of the physical setting of the imperial cult in a Greek city. The sculptured reliefs give a great range and combination of iconography quite unexpected in such a context—mythological, allegorical, and imperial. The myth panels seem to offer a missing link between the iconographic repertoire of the Hellenistic world and that used under the Roman empire, while the allegorical and imperial panels give a detailed plcture of the emperor and Rome as seen from the Greek East that is not available elsewhere.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 77 , November 1987 , pp. 88 - 138
Copyright
Copyright © R. R. R. Smith 1987. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 CIG 2839. There is nothing definite to connect ‘the Sebasteios naos’ mentioned in this inscription as a point of topographic reference with the complex discussed here; but they may be identical, and we may call the building a Sebasteion without misleading. Cf. Reynolds, ZPE, 317–19 and Fest. Plppldi, n. 31.

2 Esp. RG, 34. Gangra: OGIS532 = ILS 8781. See recently Wallace-Hadrill, A., ‘Civilis Princeps: Between citizen and king’, JRS 72 (1982), 32–47Google Scholar, and Price, S. R. F., ‘Gods and emperors: the Greek language of the Roman imperial cult’, JHS 104 (1984), 75–95, at 88–90 on oaths.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3 Price, S. R. F., Rituals and Power: the Roman Imperial Cult in Asia Minor (1984)Google Scholar. See also Hänlein-Schäfer, H., Veneratio Augusti: Eine Studie zu den Tempeln des ersten römischen Kaiser (1985)Google Scholar, reviewed by Price, S. R. F., JRS 76 (1986), 300–1Google Scholar; Trummer, R., Denkmäler der Kaiserkult in Achaia (Diss. Graz, 1981).Google Scholar

4 See esp. K. Tuchelt, ‘Zum Problem Kaisareion-Sebasteion: Eine Frage zu den Anfängen des römischen Kaiserkultes’, 1st. Mitt. 31 (1981), 167–86.

5 See esp. Price, Rituals (n. 3), ch. 6.

6 See recently: Roueché, C., ‘Rome, Asia, and Aphrodisias in the Third Century’, JRS 71 (1981), 103–20Google Scholar; ead., ‘Acclamations in the Late Roman Empire: New Evidence from Aphrodisias’, JRS 74 (1984), 181–99Google Scholar; and esp. for what follows, Reynolds, J. M., Aphrodisias and Rome (JRS Monograph 1, 1982).Google Scholar C. Roueché's publication of the late Roman inscriptions from Aphrodisias will appear as a JRS Monograph in 1988. For a detailed bibliography of the site and the recent excavations since 1962, see Erim, 184–93.

7 Full account: Erim, 106–23.

8 Reynolds, ZPE, 317–20, and Fest. Pippidi, n. 12; Erim, fig. 112a. The architrave dedications are not yet all published.

9 Reynolds, ZPE, 317, no. 1.

10 Reynolds, ZPE, 318, no. 2 (in fact, from S. portico).

11 Reynolds, PCPS 206 (1980), 79, no. 10; and Fest. Pippidi, n. 12.

12 Reynolds, ZPE, 319–22.

13 So, for example, the sanctuary of Asclepius on Cos and the sanctuary of Artemis at Magnesia. Greek temples can occasionally be set at one end of a sanctuary as, for example, in the sanctuary of Zeus Soter at Megalopolis and the Sanctuary of Zeus at Priene; but the effect in these (much smaller) complexes is very different.

14 For axial developments in Hellenistic sanctuary and market planning, see Coulton, J. J., The Architectural Development of the Greek Stoa (1976), ch. 9, esp. 177–80Google Scholar, on the function of some stoas as proto-colonnaded streets (as at Delos, Thermon, and Assus).

15 On the imperial fora, see esp. von Blanckenhagen, P. H., Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 13.4 (1954), 21–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kyrieleis, , in Hellenismus in Mittelitalien (ed. Zanker, P., 1976) II, 431–8Google Scholar.

16 In principle, common on both Roman monuments and in the Greek East. Roman, for example: Ara Pacis, arch of Trajan at Beneventum. Closer parallels in the Greek East, for example, the high-relief figures between columns on Hellenistic monumental altars at Cos, Priene, Magnesia, and later Miletus: cf. Sahin, M. C., Die Entwicklung der griechischen Monumentalaltäre (1972), figs 21 and 23 (Cos, Magnesia)Google Scholar; Carter, J. C., The Sculpture of the Sanctuary of Athena Polias at Priene (1983), ch. 3Google Scholar; Tuchelt, 1st. Mitt. 25 (1975), 120–40, Beil. 2 (Miletus). Formally very similar are the half-columns of the stage-building at Oropus that were cut to take pinakes mentioned in its architrave inscription: Petrakos, B., Ho Orōpos kai to hieron tou Amphiariou (1968), 84–7Google Scholar, fig. 13, pls 12b, 13—to proskēnion kai tous pin[akes…] = IG VII. 745. Similar panels between columns are probably attested in Hellenistic literature: (1) stylopinakia on the temple of Apollonis at Cyzicus (Gk. Anth. III); and (2) pinakes and eikasiai pantoiai between the columns of Ptolemy II's great festival pavilion (Athen. 5. 196e). For painted panels between columns, see the Leucadia tomb: Petsas, Ph., Ho taphos tōn Leukadiōn (1966), pl. A.Google Scholar

17 Anderson, J. C., The Historical Topography of the Imperial Fora (1984).Google Scholar

18 Not yet fully published: see Reynolds, Fest. Pippidi, nn. 14. f.; Erim, III-12, fig. 110a. Some or all of the six statue bases for various Julio-Claudians, found re-used in the theatre, may also have come from the Sebasteion propylon: Reynolds, PCPS 206 (1980), 79–82, nos 12–17.

19 Her base: Erim, fig. IIIa. The direct translation of this cult title perhaps reinforces or makes explicit a connection with the Forum Iulium where the temple was dedicated to Venus Genetrix.

20 Suet., Claud. 27. 1; PLR 2 C 856; Reynolds, Fest.Pippldi, n. 22.

21 Reliefs: Erim, 122, fig. 122a. Bases: Reynolds,ZPE, 325, nos 12–13.

22 Reliefs: Erim, 120–3, figs 121a-c; Erim, RA 166,fig. 10. Bases: Reynolds, ZPE, 325–7, nos 14–21, and Fest. Pippidi, n. 37.

23 Reynolds, ZPE, 327, and Fest. Pippidi, n. 38.

24 Compare the sixty ethnē reported as figuring on the Lyons altar (below n. 28) and the list of forty-five gentes devictae on Augustus' Alpine monument of 17 b.c.: Pliny, NH 3. 134–7; cf. Formigė, J., Le Trophėe des Alpes (La Turbie) (1949)Google Scholar.

25 Pliny, NH 36. 41.

26 Porticus ad Nationes: Servius, on Aen. 8. 721; Pliny, NH 36. 39. Augustus' funeral: Dio 56. 34. 2; Tac., Ann. 1. 8. 4. Interesting evidence of the use of such statues on arches is supplied by the Tabula Siarensis: ZPE 55 (1984), 58, frag. 1, 11. 9–11: ‘… Ianus marmoreus … cum signis devictarum gentium in [au-ratis …]’.

27 Velleius 2. 39. 2.

28 Strabo 4. 192; cf. R. Turcan, ANRW II. 12. 1 (1982), 607–42.

29 Reynolds, Fest. Pippidi, n. 39.

30 The theme of Rome and the physical world was picked up in a panel of the south portico with a less political allegory of Roma standing over the reclining figure of Earth; it is identified by an inscription on its base giving the labels Rhomē—Gē: Reynolds, ZPE, 323, no. 7.

31 Contrast, for example, the classical-style relief of Apollo with the tripod (Erim, fig. 114a) with the Hellenistic baroque-style relief of Prometheus Un-bound (Erim, figs 118b, 119).

32 For example, Achilles and Penthesilea (Erim, fig. 115c) or Leda and the Swan (Erim, RA, 164, fig. 1).

33 Cf. Erim, K. T., IV. Kazi sonuçlari Toplantisi (Ankara, 1983), 297–311, figs 4–9; and Erim, 112–14.Google Scholar

34 Erim, RA, 165, fig. 6.

35 Erim, RA, 166, fig. 8; Erim, fig. 159a.

36 Below nos 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, with Figs 4–5, 7–8, and 10.

37 For a recent, well-illustrated account of marble-carving tools in this period: Ruesch, V., Zanardi, B., in Rocca, E. La, Ara Pacis Augustae (1983), 63–5, 77–83, 110–15Google Scholar.

38 See esp., K. Fittschen, Jdl 86 (1971), 219–52.

39 Zanker, P., Provinzielle Kaiserporträts: Zur Rezeption der Selbstdarstellung des Princeps (1983), dealing mainly with the second century a.d.Google Scholar

40 Erim, 114–16, fig. 116a.

41 Ptolemaic coins, minted from c. 300 b.c.: Kraay, C. M., Hirmer, M., Greek Coins (1966), no. 799Google Scholar. Imperial statues with eagle (not common): Nie-meyer, H. G., Studien zur statuarischen Darstellung der römischen Kaiser (1968), 61Google Scholar, cat. nos 95–6 and 125, pls 34. 1–2 and 46 (Lanuvium Claudius, Olympla Claudius, Piraeus Balbinus).

42 For the Prima Porta type: Zanker, P., Vierneisel, K., Die Bildnisse des Augustus (Exhib. Munich, 1979),50–3Google Scholar; Zanker, FZ 1, no. 3; most recently, B. Schmaltz, RM 93 (1986), 211–43

43 Via Labicana: Maj, B. Felletti, Museo Nazionale Romano: i ritratti (1953), no. 97. Copenhagen 610:Poulsen, PR, no. 32.Google Scholar

44 In general, see Picard, C., Les Trophées romains (1957)Google Scholar; Janssen, A. Z., Het antieke Tropaion (1957), 82–141Google Scholar, with all permutations of general, trophy,prisoner, and Victory, and esp. 139, fig. III for closest parallel. On a similar composition with a trophy between two figures, see H. P. Laubscher, Jdl 89 (1974), 242–59; cf. also Hölscher, T., Victoria Romana (1967)Google Scholar.

45 The emperor is sometimes half-draped in the private world of cameos (e.g. Gemma Augustea, Grand Camée) but rarely fully naked. One example, in Vienna, has a similar composition showing a naked imperator with sceptre and eagle, trophy, and prisoner: Oberleitner, W., Geschnittene Steine: Die Prunkkameen der Wiener Antikensammlung (1985), 52–4Google Scholar, fig. 41. Further on imperial nudity: below n. 138. Cameos: n. 140.

46 See Janssen (n. 44), 62–6, 113–25. See, for example, (1) late classical gem: Boardman, J., Greek Gems and Finger Rings (1970), pl. 590Google Scholar; (2) coins of Seleucus I: Newell, E. T., Coinage of the Eastern Seleucid Mints (1938), pl. 23. 6–9Google Scholar.

47 A small Pompeian painting, which has been thought to reflect a Hellenistic royal painting, shows a very similar composition of Athena and a cuirassed leader with a trophy between (Naples, MN 8843): see most recently, Wenning, R., Die Galaterantheme Attalos I (1978), 39, with n. 259, pl. 9. 1Google Scholar.

48 Erim, RA, 116, fig. 7; Erim, figs 24 (detail), 115a.

49 Two examples from very many, (1) Cybele-Rhea and companion (‘Clymene’) at start of S. frieze of Pergamon Great Altar: Simon, E., Pergamon und Hesiod (1975), pl. 27Google Scholar; (2) Galatea on dolphin in mythological landscapes: Blanckenhagen, P. H. von, The Paintings from Boscotrecase (1962), pls 40. 1, 52. 2, 55. 1. Earliest perhaps for Aurae: EAA s.v. Aurae; LIMC s.v. Aurai; cf. Pliny, NH36. 29: ‘…duaeque Aurae velificantes sua veste’ (unattributed marble statues in the temple of Apollo Sosianus at Rome). See further, n. 56.Google Scholar

50 So, for example, (1) on classical vases: Arias, P. E., Hirmer, M., Shefton, B. B., A History of Greek Vase Painting (1962), pl. 183; and (2) on the Great Altar at Pergamon: Simon, Pergamon (n. 49), pl. 14.Google Scholar

51 In sculpture, see esp. Commodus' Tritons: FZ 1, no. 78; Rocca, E. La, Le tranquille dimore dei dei: la residenza imperiale degli Horti Lamiani (Exhib. Rome, 1986), 91–4, figs 61–4.Google Scholar

52 Actium type: recently, Zanker, FZ. 1, no. 1, with Beil. 1–4. Prima Porta type: above n. 42.

53 Forbes type: Zanker, F.Z. 1, no. 8.

54 J. M. C. Toynbee, Proc. Brit. Acad. 39 (1953), 80–1, pl. 13; La Rocca, E., Ara Pacis Augustae (1983), 43–8Google Scholar. A similar theme appears also on the cuirass of the Augustus (?) statue from Cherchel, where there are two sea centaurs below the main scene, one with a cornucopia, the other with the bow ornament of a warship; they do not interact with the imperial figure above (Divus Julius): K. Fittschen, Jdl 91 (1976), 175 f., figs 2–3 and 12; id., in Die Numider (Exhib. Bonn, 1979), 232–4, 530–3Google Scholar.

55 Andreae, B., The Art of Rome (1977), figs 302–4Google Scholar.

56 A cameo in Vienna shows an emperor (Augustus?)drawn across the sea in a Triton quadriga, and even here he wears a toga: Oberleitner, W., Geschnittene Steine (1985), 35, fig. 17Google Scholar. Imperial cameos: below, n. 140. Some other ‘velificans’ figures in Roman imperial art (all non-portrait): (1) Caelus on the Prima Porta statue's cuirass: cf. Jucker, H., HeftABern 3 (1977), 16 fGoogle Scholar. (2) Caelus on the Belevedere altar: below n. 151; (3) Mars Ultor on the Cherchel statue's cuirass: Fittschen, Jdl 91 (1976), 75 f., figs 2–3; (4) Jupiter on Trajan's Column, Scene 24: Lehmann-Hartleben, K., Die Trajanssäule (1926) 11, pl. 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar; (5) Danube on coins of Trajan: Kent, J. P. C., M., and Hirmer, A., Roman Coins (1978), no. 263Google Scholar; (6) Allegories (Tellus and Oceanus) in the spandrels of Trajan's arch at Beneventum: Rotili, M., L'arco di Traiano a Benevento (1972), pls 41–2Google Scholar.

57 Polis in Zoilus frieze: Erim, K. T., in Alföldi, A., Aion in Merida und Aphrodisias (1979), 35–40, pl. 23.Hemera in Sebasteion: Erim, fig. 122aGoogle Scholar.

58 Erim, RA, 164, fig. 4.

59 Cf. G. Davies, ‘The significance of the handshake in classical funerary art’, AJA 89 (1985), 627–40.

60 See C. Reinsberg, ‘Das Hochzeitsopfer—eine Fiktion’, Jdl 99 (1984), 291–317, on the iunctio dextrarum on Roman sarcophagi.

61 Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, 55–8; Zanker, FZ 1, nos 15–16.

62 Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, no. 17, with list of copies and versions; cf. Zanker, FZ 1, no. 15.

63 Erbach: Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, no. 17, pl. 19. Copenhagen 648 and 649; Poulsen, PR, nos 57–8.

64 Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, 57–8, nn. 4 and 8.

65 Copenhagen 648, Naples 6060, Louvre MA 1253, Tripoli (from Leptis), Samos, Vatican (ex-Lateran, from Caere), Vatican (Sala Rotonda, from Lanuvium): Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, 55–6, nos 4, 8, 10, 17, 18, 21; and 57, n. 4a; 58, n. 8a.

66 Riewald, P., De imperatorum romanorum cum certis dis et comparatione et aequatione (1912), 305–8Google Scholar; Reynolds, Fest. Pippidi, n. 35; Price, , JHS 104 (1984), 85–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

67 W. Trillmich, MN 15 (1974), 184–202; Zanker, F. Z. iii, no. 5. Ancona head: Trillmich, 22, pl. 39. Copenhagen: ibid., pl. 44; Poulsen, PR, no. 61.

68 BMC Augustus, pl. 37. 1 and 3; cf. pl. 34. 3. (no lock behind ear); Trillmich (n. 67), pl. 43b–c.

69 Further on Agrippina's portraits under no. 11.

70 The oak wreath may have come with the portrait type (above, n. 65), but it would probably have been familiar as an ‘imperial’ or ‘Roman’ attribute, if not with the precise meaning of corona civica, then perhaps as the prize in the imperial games (Sebasta Romaia) at Pergamon: see Robert, L., in L'épigramme grecque (Ent. Fond. Hardt 14, 1968), 267Google Scholar.

71 Two examples from many, (1) Vespasian crowned by Victory on Cancelleria B, and (2) Trajan crowned by Victory on the Great Trajanic frieze: Andreae, Art of Rome, figs 390 and 422; Strong, D., Roman Art (1976), pls 71 and 88.Google Scholar

72 On Germanicus' portraits: L. Curtius, RM 50 (1938), 266–85 (the type there misidentified as Drusus the Elder); Hausmann, U., Römerbildnisse (1975), 26–9, 122, nos 5–6Google Scholar; H. Jucker, Jdl 92 (1977), 222–8; Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, 44, n. 17 and 51–4 (on no. 16). Fittschen F. Z. 1, no. 23; Bahnemann, R., HeftABern 9 (1983), 15–20Google Scholar

73 Coins: BMC Augustus, pls 27. 9–10, 15–16, 22–3; 29. 3–6 (Gaius); pl. 37. 2 and 9 (Claudius); Kent-Hirmer, , Roman Coins (1978), nos 173 and 184Google Scholar. Pairings at: Béziers (Toulouse), Centuripe (Syracuse), Mentana (Terme), Medina Sidonia (Cadiz), Leptis (Tripoli)— H. Jucker, Jdl 92 (1977), 223; Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, 44, n. 17 i, m, o, p, v, and 47, nos 10, 18–19, 22, 24. Doubts about the Germanicus identification of the Gabii type need not concern us: see Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, no. 16 and FZ 1, no. 23.

74 Coins: n. 73. Sculpture, esp. the Erbach head:Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, no. 16.

75 Hausmann, U., Römerbildnisse (1975), 28, no. 5,figs 11, 13, 76Google Scholar.

76 Centre-partings are found, for example, on some portrait types of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and early Nero. The Velleia ‘Togatus no. 9’ is a good example of a Germanicus with ‘non-typological’ hair arrangement with centre-parting: Saletti, C., Il ciclo statuario della Basilica di Velleia (1968), no. 9, pl. 27–30Google Scholar; the Germanicus identity is certain, not from the hair, but the closeness of the well-individualized physiognomy to the Germanicus on the Gemma Claudia (Oberleitner, Geschnittene Steine, 55, fig. 38); cf. H. Jucker, JdI 92 (1977), 214–28, figs 1–2.

77 Earliest type, best seen in the basalt bust, BM 1883; Massner, A. K., Bildnisangleichung (Das römische Herrscherbild IV, 1982), 87, pl. 19bGoogle Scholar; Kiss, Z., L'iconographie des princes julio-claudiens (1975), figs 388–9Google Scholar. The Gabii type has a slightly off-centre parting; and a related type (‘Corinth 137-Stuttgart’), possibly a later Germanicus portrait, moves it to the centre: see Fittschen, GGA 225 (1973), 59–60, on no. 94; Hausmann, U., Römerbildnisse (1975), no. 6Google Scholar; Jucker, JdI 92 (1977), 226; IR 11, nos 18–19.

78 Reportedly found with a head of the boy Nero at Acerra near Formiae: Hausmann (n. 77), no. 7.

79 So, (1) Copenhagen 629: Poulsen, PR, no. 50; (2)Cadiz, from Medina Sidonia: Jucker, Jdl 92 (1977), 234, figs 7–9; (3) Tripoli, from Leptis: Kiss, Iconographie (n. 77), figs 373–4. Cf. Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, 44,n. 17 c, o, v.

80 Erim, RA, 165, fig. 5.

81 See, e.g., Kunckel, H., Der romische Genius (1974), pl. 21 (Cancelleria reliefs).Google Scholar

82 Kunckel (n. 81), 33–42, 49–52.

83 For Synkletos on Greek coins (usually beardless,sometimes bearded, sometimes female), see EAA, s.v.Senatus.

84 For example, at Aphrodisias, (1) inscribed statue of Demos: Erim, figs 85b, 105a; (2) Demos on the Zoilus frieze: Erim, in Aion in Merida (n. 57), 36, pl. 22.

85 For example, Vespasian is crowned by a togate and bearded Genius of the Senate on posthumous coins of Galba: BMC Augustus, pl. 59. 3. For a good account of the potential roles of such personifications in narratives at Rome, see Pfanner, M., Der Titusbogen (1983), 67–71Google Scholar.

86 Note the prominence of Demos on the Zoilusfrieze: above n. 84.

87 Erim, K. T., ‘A new relief showing Claudius andBritannia from Aphrodisias’, Britannia 13 (1982),277–81, pls 26–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Erim, RA, 164, fig. 3; Erim, 116,figs 117a-c; LIMC s.v. Brittania 3* (M. Henig).

88 Reynolds, ZPE, 323, no. 8, pl. 12c; Erim, , Britannia 13 (1982), 280, pl. 27B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

89 Other, more detailed versions of this helmet type are seen in nos 11 and probably 7: see n. 124.

90 Erim, figs 106a (find), 116b.

91 Reynolds, ZPE, 324–5, no. 10, pl. 12c.

92 So Reynolds, ibid.

93 Reynolds, ibid., no. II, pl. 12f.

94 LIMC, s.v. Armenia (J. Ch. Baity).

95 Bieber, M., The Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age2 (1961), 79–80, figs 278–80Google Scholar.

96 Erim, 97, fig. 98a.

97 Bieber, Sculpture (n. 95), 78–9, figs 272–7.

98 Probably similar in form to the more complete helmet at Nero's feet on no. 11; cf. below n. 124.

99 For this type, see below, n. 125.

100 I am much indebted here to a lecture by Amanda Claridge on ancient copying techniques; cf. A. Claridge, Stud. Misc. 26 (1985), 113–17. On nineteenth-century practice: Janson, H. W., Nineteenth Century Sculpture (1985), 14–16.Google Scholar

101 Compare the Augustus portraits on the statuesfrom Corinth and Aquileia: Niemeyer, Studien (n. 41),nos 1 and 9, pls 1. 1 and 4. 1; Kiss, Iconographie (n. 77),fig. 272 (Aquileia). It is worth noting that the Aquileiaportrait has sometimes been taken for Tiberius: Polacco, L., II volto di Tiberio (1955), 183Google Scholar.

102 On Tiberius' portraits: Polacco (n. 101); Hausmann, U., Eikones: Fest. H. Jucker (1980), 135–8Google Scholar; Zanker, F. Z. 1, nos 10–14; M. Aurenhammer, ÖJH 54 (1983), Beibl. 112–25.

103 See esp. Zanker, F. Z. 1, no. 10. Close coples inCopenhagen (623: Poulsen, PR, no. 45) and the Capltoline (FZ 1, no. 10).

104 Polacco, Volto (n. 102), 125–45; Zanker, F. Z. 1,nos 12–13.

105 Erim, fig. 115c.

106 Tiberius Gemellus, a.d. 19—37, and Gemanicus Gemellus, a.d. 19–23. They appear as baby boys in facing cornucopia busts on coins of 22—3; Kent-Hir-mer, , Roman Coins (1978), no. 156.Google Scholar

107 Nero Caesar, banished to Pandateria in 29, starved to death in 31. Drusus Caesar, imprisoned at Rome in 30, starved to death in 33.

108 Reynolds, Fest. Pippidi, n. 22.

109 Zanker, P., Studien zu den Augustusporträts 1: DerActium-Typus (1973), 47–51Google Scholar. Cf. Fittschen. Kat. Erbach, no. 12, on ‘Type B’ and other possible Gaiusportraits.

110 Corinth 135: Zanker, Actium-Typus (n. 109),pl. 35a.

111 Corinth 136: Zanker, ibid., pl. 35b.

112 It is possible, however, that Nero was added to the Armenia composition a little later: see no. 7 above.

113 Fittschen, Kat. Erbach, nos 18–19; P. Erhardt, AJA 82 (1978), 193–212

114 Agrippina I: Zanker, F.Z. III, no. 4. Agrippina II: see nos 3 and 11 with n. 132. Messalina: BMC Augustus, pl. 34. 8; cf. Polaschek, K., Porträttypen einer Klaudischen Kaiserin (1973)Google Scholar.

115 A more or less pure ideal hairstyle is not used again by an imperial woman till the main portrait type of Sabina, Hadrian's wife, which has a modified, lateclassical, Aphrodite hair arrangement: Fittschen, F. Z. in, no. 10.

116 On Livia's portraits: Gross, W. H., Iulia Augusta (1962)Google Scholar; Hausmann, Römerbildnisse (n. 77), 19–23, 120–1; R. Winkes, AA (1982), 131–8; Zanker, F. Z. III, nos 1–3. The main types referred to here are defined round two key pieces, (1) Copenhagen 615: Poulsen, PR, no. 35; and (2) Marbury Hall: Gross, pl. 18; on these, cf. Zanker, F. Z. III, no. 1.

117 On these portraits (of the ‘Salus’/’Ceres’ type): Zanker, F.Z. III, no. 3. Three good and varied examples in Copenhagen (NCG 618, 617, 531): Poulsen, PR, nos 36–8. The hypothetical intricacies of recent Livia typologies need not concern us; we need only to distinguish the two basic hairstyle options for her images, the ‘real’ or fashion hairstyle and the ideal hairstyle.

118 Late Hellenistic, for example, the Berlin andCherchel Cleopatras: Vierneisel, K., JhbBerlMus 22(1980), 5–33, figs 1–3 and 27–31Google Scholar; Fittschen, MM 15 (1974), 167–8, pl. 31c-d (Cherchel). Julio-Claudian,for example: Felletti, Ritratti (n. 43), nos 106 and 131;Poulsen, PR, no. 63; cf. Trillmich, W., HeftABern 9 (1983), 21–37, pls 2–7.Google Scholar

119 IR 1, no. 11 (Marmaris); IR 11, nos 5–6 (Ephesusand Aphrodisias); M. Aurenhammer, ÖJh 54 (1983), Beibl. 104—11, figs 1–3 (Ephesus).

120 Gross, Iulia Augusta (n. 116), 112—14, pl. 24;Saletti, II ciclo (n. 76), 33, no. 4, pls 11–14; cf. Jucker, Jdl 92 (1977), 206.

121 Erim, figs 4a, 21a, 32a (heads), 122b (panel).

122 Daremberg-Saglio, s.v. calceus, 816–17, fig-1016.

123 Niemeyer, Studien (n. 41), 51, nos 37 (Nero) and43 (Titus), pls 21. 1 and 13. Cf. Fittschen, BJb 170 (1970), 545, for interpretation.

124 Compare the helmet worn by, (1) Mars on the Augustus Boscoreale cup: Andreae, Art of Rome, figs 303–4; (2) Mars on the cuirass of the Cherchel statue: above n. 54; (3) Minerva on Cancelleria Relief A: Magi, F., I rilievi Flavi (1945), pl. 11.Google Scholar

125 On this Nero type: Fittschen, GGA 225 (1973), 56, on no. 24; U. W. Hiesinger, AJA 79 (1975), 113–19; M. Bergmann, P. Zanker, Jdl 96 (1981), 321–2; Zanker, FZ 1, no. 17.

128 BMC Augustus, pl. 38. 1–6, gf; Hiesinger (n. 125), pl. 17. 1–6.

127 Rome, from Palatine: Felletti, Ritratti (n. 43), no. 108; Hiesinger (n. 125), pl. 23, figs 37–8. Rome, Capltoline: F.Z. 1, no. 17 = here Pl. XXVI, 3. Sardinia (Cagliari): Hiesinger, pl. 21, figs 33–4. Asia Minor (Stratonicea): IR 1, no. 24.

128 Coins: BMC Augustus, pls 39–48. Cf. Bergmann Zanker, JdI 96 (1981), 322–32.

129 FZ 1, no. 17.

130 Felletti, Ritratti (n. 43), no. 123; Hiesinger(n. 125), pl. 24, figs 43–4.

131 See above, n. 79.

132 Versions grouped round Copenhagen 636 (herePl. XXVI, 4) and a head in Ancona: Trillmich (n. 67),pl. 39; Zanker, F. Z. III, on no. 5. Cf. Trillmich (n. 118),arguing that the related Fulda 22/Munich 316 group of sculptured and cameo portraits (formerly Messalina or a sister of Caligula) are also Agrippina the Younger.

133 The Agripplna heads grouped as the ‘Milan type’are divided from her main portrait type only or thebasis of the small curls on the forehead (so Trillmich,(n. 67), and Zanker, FZ in, no. 5, n. 4); these curls were probably an optional ‘extra’; cf. above n. 118.

134 (1) Stuttgart: Hausmann, Römerbildnisse (n. 77),no. 8; (2) Petworth: FZ in, Beil. 6.

135 Poulsen, PR, no. 61.

136 The Chiarmonti Agripplna (FZ in, Beil. 3c-d),for example, is strongly Neronian; cf. Smith, R., JRS 75(1985), 214–15.Google Scholar

137 For example, Augustus' left arm in no. I, his torso and legs in no. 2, and the legs and left hand of the imperator in no. 5.

138 Cf. Niemeyer, Studien (n. 41), 45–64; Fittschen, BJb 170 (1970), 545–6.

139 Two examples, (1) the lion and stag hunt mosaics at Pella: Andronicos, M., Pella Museum (1975), 10–11Google Scholar, figs 4 and 7, each with two naked Macedonians hunting, wearing only a chlamys; (2) the hunt painting onTomb 11 at Vergina: Andronicos, M., Vergina: The Royal Tombs and Ancient City (1984), 106–19Google Scholar, figs 57–69, where seven figures are naked, three clothed; not all the naked figures are subordinates (as they seem to be on the Alexander Sarcophagus).

140 Recently on imperial cameos: Oberleitner, W., Geschnittene Steine (1985)Google Scholar; H. Möbius, ANRW II. 12. 3 (1985), 32–88; W. R. Megow, Jdl 100 (1985), 445–96.

141 On the orb, cf. Holscher, T., Victoria Romana (1967), 41–7Google Scholar.

142 Cf. RG, 12; Toynbee (n. 54), 71–3; Torelli, M., Structure and Typology of Roman Historical Reliefs (1982), ch. 2.Google Scholar

143 Zanker, Cf., Forum Augustum(1968), 14–21, 26–7Google Scholar.

144 See Price, JHS 104 (1984), 83–5.

145 For the range of provincial adjustment or ‘interpretation’ of imperial portrait types, see esp. Zanker, P., Provinzielle Kaiserportrats (1983); cf. Smith (n. 136), 213Google Scholar

146 Erim, Aion in Merida (n. 57), 35–7, pls 21–9; Erim, 136–8. On Zoilus: Reynolds, , Aphrodisias and Rome (n. 6), 156—65Google Scholar.

147 Tuchelt (n. 16), 120–40.

148 Oberleitner, W., Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (1978), 66–94Google Scholar; cf. W. Jobst, ÖJh 56 (1985), 79–82; T. Ganschow, AA (1986), 209–21.

149 Poinssot, L., L'autel de la Gens Augusta à Carthage (1929)Google Scholar; I. S. Ryberg, ‘Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art’, MAAR 22 (1955), 89–90, pl. 27, fig. 41.

150 Louvre: Toynbee (n. 54), 81, pl. 14; L1MC, s.v. Aigyptos 9*; cf. Torelli, Structure (n. 142), 39–40. Algiers: Zanker, Forum Augustum, 18–20, fig. 47. Cf. Rostovtzeff, RM 38/9 (1923/4), 294; Wuilleumier, P., Musée d'Alger, Supplément (1928), 40Google Scholar; Krauss, T., in Studies P. H. von Blanckenhagen (1979), 245.Google Scholar

151 Belevedere altar: Ryberg (n. 149), 53–8, pls 14–15, fig. 28a-c; Helbig4 1. 255; Zanker, RM 76 (1969), 205–18, pls 65–7; on lares altars, cf. also Zanker, , BullCom 82 (1970/1), 147–55Google Scholar. Boscoreale cups: Villefosse, A. Heron de, Le trésor de Boscoreale (Mon Plot 5, 1899); Andreae, Art of Rome, figs 299–310.Google Scholar

152 Strocka, V. M., Antiquites Africaines 6 (1972), 147–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar