Ptolemaic dynastic portraits using a combination of marble and stucco: Economy, Practicality, or Distinctive Style?

 "Beginning with Ptolemy I Soter, the Ptolemaic dynasty reigned from 305 BCE to 30 BCE, when the last Ptolemaic ruler, Kleopatra VII, committed suicide, and Octavian made Egypt a province of Rome. In their capital at Alexandria and in historically prominent Egyptian cities and sanctuaries, the Ptolemies continued the practices of their pharaonic predecessors in an attempt to integrate themselves into Egyptian society and their images into Egypt’s visual culture," explains Yale University's Susan B. Matheson. "They employed architecture and sculpture to help establish their rightful place as rulers and to present themselves as a dynasty like those that came before. This impressive display of public art featured primarily Egyptian iconography and style. Egyptian dress and traditional royal and divine attributes were typical, and inscriptions were generally in the native hieroglyphic script."

Matheson points out that Ptolemaic dynastic portraits ranged from those appearing  as purely Greek, to those styled as purely Egyptian with some portraits rendered as a blend of both elements.

"It is likely that the sculptors commissioned to carve them determined the material, iconography, and style based on the wishes of their clients and the ultimate function of the portrait, Matheson notes, "Although there may have been official portrait types that emanated from Alexandria, as was later true of imperial portrait types disseminated from Rome, the king would find it expedient to have his image correspond to the preferences of local priests and officials."

Way back in 1925, classical archaeologist A. W. Lawrence in his article "Greek Sculpture in Ptolemaic Egypt" observes "It has been said that an Alexandrian School existed with ideals markedly different from those of the rest of the Hellenistic world."  Unfortunately, he does not really seem to recognize a blending of styles of the Egyptian with the Greek. He describes the works produced in Egypt as a poorly executed impressionist technique in which less than able local sculptors "neglect detail in their modelling and trust to the soft finish to conceal the fact that they had put no more work than they could help into the different parts of the face but merely made it up of various blank planes."

Egyptian sculptures from the Ptolemaic period often featured details added separately in stucco. Sometimes the entire head was imported from Greece or Asia Minor with the hair or hair extensions, beards, diadems, veils, etc. added in stucco once the work arrived in Egypt.  Some scholars point to this practice as common then because marble had to be imported and was therefore quite expensive.

Lawrence dismisses this observation as well.  

"This habit of finishing things in stucco has been put down to a desire to economize in marble, which is not found in Lower Egypt and so was naturally expensive there.  But in most cases, the quantity saved is infinitesimal, and the practice was employed in other countries where marble was abundant," Lawrence says. "It seems therefore to have been a device to save labour rather than material."

I doubt to some extent the conservation of materials as a reason for the use of stucco as well.  But, although some portrait heads seemed to have been prepared for stucco additions only on the top part of the head, others, like the portrait of Ptolemy I Soter appear to have used marble only for the face while the entire back of the head is assumed to have been completed in stucco.  This would appear to support the economy of materials theory. 

Classicist Flavia Vanni at the University of Birmingham, in her research for her PhD thesis, "Byzantine Stucco Decoration: Cultural and Economic Implications Across the Mediterranean World, 850-1453," points out that, from a shipping perspective, big bulky pieces of marble were not divisible cargo either, so incurred more cost because of the amount of space they consumed in a cargo hold.

I also can't fully embrace the labor saving aspect of the practice either, as Lawrence proposes, at least in respect to the original production. The labor expended in crafting an ornate hair style or diadem even in stucco surely would have been roughly equivalent to carving the remainder of the marble head. Lawrence's criticisms of style and workmanship seem to cast aspersions on the skill and dedication of Egyptian sculptors in the Ptolemaic Period. Due to the date of the article (1925) I can't help but suspect that Lawrence may have allowed his British colonial perceptions of Egyptians at the tiime to bias his observations, even if he was the brother of T.E. Lawrence (of Arabia).

So if the stucco additions were not the result of economy, either of materials or labor, why was this practice employed for a number of Ptolemaic dynastic portraits? Thinking of the turbulent history of this family and the frequent fratricides and changes in succession, I wondered if stucco was used on the top or back of the head and beards so changes in dynastic succession could be more easily depicted without recarving much of an expensive marble portrait.

I've seen a number of Roman portraits where one emperor's portrait was recarved into a subsequent emperor. Recarving a portrait of Nero is always a challenge because sculptors often cannot disguise telltale remnants of his sideburns and longer than normal hairstyle.  If the hair and sideburns had been rendered in stucco, a hairstyle alteration could have been relatively easy to remove and replace. The Ptolemies, following traditional Egyptian style, also attempted to have their portraits resemble, to some extent, their predecessors as a visual reference to the enduring nature of their dynasty, so recarving would be relatively minimal if a change in succession occurred. 

However, I don't know of many monarchs modest enough that would commission artwork of themselves with thoughts as to its subsequent recarving by their successors.

Of course the use of stucco could have been a further attempt to blend Egyptian and Greek traditions. The use of lime and gypsum plasters in Egypt date back to the 3rd millenium BCE. The famous bust of Nefertiti dating to 1345 BCE is an exquisite example of stucco's extensive use in the production of  sculpture "in the round" in ancient Egypt.

Lawrence does mention portraits outside of Egypt using a combination of marble and stucco in areas with abundant sources of marble. I found one on Christies auction site. It is tentatively identified as the Seleucid King Demetrios III Eucaerus (well-timed), on the basis of comparison to his coin portraits. 

"Both portraits share the prominent hooked nose and a beard. Many late Seleucid portraits are indebted in style to contemporary Ptolemaic imagery, since they were able to maintain their hold over their territories only through Ptolemaic support. Demetrios III was the son of Antiochos VIII Grypos (Hook-nose). He was able to recover part of his father's territories in 95 B.C. with the help of Ptolemy IX Lathyrus. He was eventually defeated by the Parthian king Mithridates II, who kept him in confinement until his death in 88 B.C.E." - Christies

Such emulation of Ptolemaic dynastic sculpture may point to recognition of the use of stucco as a distinctive artistic style.

What do you think?

 

Portrait head of a late Ptolemaic ruler possibly Ptolemy IX, Hellenistic Period, Late 2nd - early 1st century BCE, marble from Paros with stucco added in Egypt, now in the collections of the Museum of Fine Arts Boston, image courtesy of the museum. "With its large eyes, long face and aquiline nose, this is a powerful and unforgettable image of a semi-divine king. It continues, while altering and exaggerating, the tradition of late third century Ptolemaic portraiture. The head was converted from a slightly earlier, beardless image. It was cut down at the sides of the neck, and a beard and new hairline were created with stucco. Egyptian sculptures from the Ptolemaic period often featured details added separately in stucco. Sometimes the entire head was imported from Greece or Asia Minor with the hair or hair extensions, beards, diadems, veils, etc. added in stucco once the work arrived in Egypt. Some scholars point to this practice as common then because marble had to be imported and was therefore not readily available.
"The three times life-sized head, found at Memphis in what appears to have been a temple or shrine of the Hellenistic and Roman periods, was carved in Greek marble, with hair, the tip of the nose, and beard finished in stucco. Reddish ground color remains in the pupils of the eyes and on the lips. There are traces of stucco on the neck and possible touches of gold on the stucco in the hair. The marble surface below the beard was smoothed and polished, then scarred by diagonal incisions to hold the stucco, suggesting the portrait did not originally have a beard. The complete statue must have been about twelve feet high if seated, and well over fifteen feet if standing. The head comprises only a marble mask and neck, the area behind being hollowed out."
Most scholars agree that the head bears closest resemblance to Ptolemy IX (reigned 116–107 and 88–80)." - Museum of Fine Arts Boston. 

Extensively restored marble portrait head of Ptolemy I Soter, 4th - 3rd century BCE, only face is original, probably the entire skull was completed in stucco, courtesy of The Louvre.

Arsinoe III portrait with missing stucco hair at the Yale University Art Gallery. By all accounts, Arsinoe III Philopater (ca. 245–204 BCE) was a remarkable woman. A highly educated member of the Ptolemaic dynasty, she reigned as Queen of Egypt after marrying her brother, Ptolemy IV, in 221/220 BCE, until she was murdered in 204 BCE in response to her role as regent for her 6-year-old son, Ptolemy V. The Greek historian Polybius reports that Arsinoe accompanied her husband into battle at Raphia in 217, an event also recorded in the ancient text, 3 Maccabees. According to the poet and mathematician Eratosthenes, the queen condemned her husband’s infamous worldly excesses, providing a counterweight to the stereotypical decadence of the Ptolemies.

Ptolemy III Evergeta or Ptolemy IV Philopator or Ptolemy VI Philometor marble portrait head that would have had additional above the hair and across the back of the skull, 4th - 3rd century BCE, courtesy of The Louvre

Marble portrait head of Ptolemy XII Aulete with traces of stucco on the back of the skull, 2nd half of 1st century BCE to 1st century CE, courtesy of The Louvre

Head of Arsinoe II at The Louvre in Paris, 250-200 BCE, missing hair and possibly headdress that would have been finished in stucco.

Marble head, portrait of the queen Arsinoe II as Aphrodite. The hair is incomplete because it was made in stucco following the Alexandrian custom, due to the rarity of Greek marble in the capital of Hellenistic Egypt. Ptolemaic period. Arsinoe II was deified in the guise of Aphrodite after her death in 270 BCE, courtesy of Ekinium Gallery

Marble head, portrait of the queen Arsinoe II as Aphrodite. The hair is incomplete because it was made in stucco following the Alexandrian custom, due to the rarity of Greek marble in the capital of Hellenistic Egypt. Ptolemaic period. Arsinoe II was deified in the guise of Aphrodite after her death in 270 BCE, courtesy of Ekinium Gallery

Portrait head of a Ptolemic queen with missing stucco headdress, 270-250 BCE, now in the collections of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York. "This monumental head gives an impression of sovereign calm and power, even though the veil that once covered the top and back of the head is now missing. Although the features are cast in a thoroughly classical style typical of the late fourth century B.C., the face is stamped with enough individuality to identify it as a portrait. In all probability, it represents a member of the Ptolemaic dynasty, that succession of Macedonian Greeks who ruled Egypt from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C. until the annexation of Egypt by Rome and the suicide of Cleopatra VII in 30 B.C. Most recently, the head has been identified as Arsinoe II, who ruled together with her brother, Ptolemy II, from 278 B.C. until her death in 270 B.C. Not only was the queen part of a dynastic ruler cult during her life, she was also transformed into an independent deity by her brother after her death. She was worshiped as an Egyptian goddess in association with Isis and also separately as a Greek goddess, with her own sanctuaries and festivals. This strongly idealized head, which resembles classical images of Hera and Demeter, was probably associated with the latter cult."

Ptolemy VIII Euergetes II with unfinished head, mid to late 2nd century BCE at the Yale University Art Gallery

Marble sculpture of Ptolemy of Mauretania from Aquae Calidae, 10-5 BCE according to Landwehr, 5-15 CE according to Fittschen - no stucco additions, courtesy of The Louvre. The use of stucco additions seems to disappear with the arrival of the Romans.

A GREEK MARBLE PORTRAIT OF A MAN LATE HELLENISTIC PERIOD, CIRCA 1ST CENTURY B.C.E. Turned slightly to his right, the short hair coarsely fashioned and completed in stucco, some stucco locks preserved above the forehead, his slender face with bulging, knitted brows and deep-set unarticulated eyes preserving extensive original pigment, including the brows and lashes, the distinctive hooked nose with a humped bridge and a drooping tip, the thin lips pressed together below the trimmed mustache, the beard shaped and roughly picked to be completed in stucco, courtesy of Christies

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

The cult of Serapis: Visions and Portents

Serapis, sometimes spelled Sarapis, is a Graeco-Egyptian deity promoted during the 3rd century BCE by Ptolemy I Soter as a means to unify Greeks and Egyptians in his realm.  Alexander the Great had attempted to use Amun for this purpose, but he was more prominent in Upper Egypt, and not as popular in Lower Egypt, where the Greeks had stronger influence. Ptolemy built an immense temple to the god in Alexandria which became known as the Serapeum.  

However, there is evidence the cult of Serapis existed before the Ptolemies came to power in Alexandria as a temple of Serapis in Egypt is mentioned in 323 BCE by both Plutarch (Life of Alexander, 76) and Arrian (Anabasis, VII, 26, 2).  In descriptions of Alexander's death, a temple of Serapis is said to have existed in Babylon at the time and Serapis was considered so important,  he alone is named as being consulted on behalf of the dying king.  Some scholars point out, though, that a Babylonian god named Ea (also referred to as Enki) was titled Šar Apsi, meaning "king of the Apsu" or "the watery deep", and perhaps he is the one meant in the diaries.

Plutarch claimed Ptolemy stole the cult statue of Serapis from Sinope in Asia Minor after being  instructed in a dream by the "unknown god" to bring the statue to Alexandria.  There, a member of the  Eumolpidae, the ancient family from whose members the hierophant of the Eleusinian Mysteries had been chosen, proclaimed it to be Serapis. Tacitus, however, stated that Serapis had been the god of the village of Rhakotis before it expanded into the great capital of Alexandria.

The statue suitably depicted a figure resembling Hades or Pluto, both being kings of the Greek underworld, and was shown enthroned with the modius, a basket/grain-measure, on his head, since it was a Greek symbol for the land of the dead. He also held a sceptre in his hand indicating his rulership, with Cerberus, gatekeeper of the underworld, resting at his feet. The statue also had what appeared to be a serpent at its base, fitting the Egyptian symbol of rulership, the uraeus.

Whatever its origins, by the second century Serapis was well ensconced in both the Greek world and throughout the Roman Empire.  Pausanias notes two Serapeia on the slopes of Acrocorinth, above the rebuilt Roman city of Corinth and one at Copae in Boeotia. At Rome, Serapis was worshiped in the Iseum Campense, the sanctuary of Isis built during the Second Triumvirate in the Campus Martius. The Roman cults of Isis and Serapis gained in popularity late in the 1st century CE when Vespasian experienced a vision while visiting the Temple of Serapis in Alexandria where he was securing Egypt's grain supply before returning to Rome triumphantly as emperor in 70 CE. Later, Vespasian  was confronted by two laborers, who were convinced that he possessed a divine power that could work miracles. From the Flavian Dynasty onward, Serapis was one of the deities who sometimes appeared on imperial coinage with the reigning emperor.

High Clerk in the Cult of Serapis, 230 - 240 CE,  at the Altes Museum, Berlin, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons contributor Ophelia2.

A fragmented statue of Serapis with a modius on the head, depicted as Pluto, next to him is standing the three headed dog Cerberus, guardian of the Hades, from the Roman Villa of Chiragan, 3rd - 4th century CE at the Musée Saint-Raymond in Toulouse, France, courtesy of Carole Raddato.  

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Identifying Ancient Art - A game of smoke and mirrors?

History resource article by Mary Harrsch © 2012

Today, I watched a fascinating lecture "Mistaken Identities: How to identify a Roman emperor" by Mary Beard recently delivered at Stanford University.  As a "fan" of Julius Caesar, I thought her critique of a number of heads identified as Caesar over the years was very enlightening.

I also found her overall discussion of the rather tenuous nature of sculpture identification particularly interesting because lately, I have been re-editing a number of images I shot of Roman sculpture at the Capitoline and National Museums in Rome back in 2005.  I had just started my crusade to photograph historical art and make my images freely available to teachers, researchers and students and had not yet developed my current practice of photographing the identification placards in a sequence with the sculpture to enable me to properly identify the artwork once I returned home to my office.  So, on that first trip to Rome, I ended up with dozens of photographs that all I could say for sure were portraits of Roman men or women until I had a chance to research them further to label them properly.

With the internet and our current technology, I naively believed that proper identification would be a relatively straightforward process.  I have since learned that not only is it not straightforward, even what is thought to be accurate identification at the time changes as different scholars apply different interpretations or museums reliant on governmental support become subject to various political agendas seeking some kind of historical confirmation through a culture's art legacy.

It gets even more confusing when identification displayed at a museum differs from the museum's own collections catalog. I recently received a request from a publisher in Denmark for an image I took back in 2007 of a fresco at the Museo Archeologico Nazionale in Naples that, at the time, was labeled "Cleopatra greets the god of the Underworld'.  But, when I looked the image up in the collections book that I purchased at the museum, I noticed that it said it was Io being welcomed upon her arrival to Egypt by the goddess Isis to her sanctuary of Canopos.  The fresco was unearthed in 1764 in the Temple of Isis in Pompeii in a room dubbed the Ekklesiasterion.

The satyr-looking creature bearing up Io looks like it could be Hades but the catalog says it is a river god.  Io is identified by the vestiges of horns she still retains from her time as a heifer.  Isis appears to be dressed in the Greek fashion and holds a cobra coiled around her arm.  The catalog tells us that the painting originated from the court of the Ptolemies in Alexandria "in order to legitimize their dynasty by rooting it in ancient Heraclean and Argive origins which embraced the dual ethnic components of the new kingdom, the Egyptian and the Macedonian".  The fresco is thus dated to the the early Ptolemaic dynasty after a 3rd century BCE prototype .  This all sounds quite carefully researched and definitive.  However, there is no mention of technical dating examinations so I must assume this is educated conjecture.  The only thing that nags at me is the prominent display of the cobra and the knowledge that the fresco was apparently once thought to represent Cleopatra VII in the role of Isis.

In the historical record, Cleopatra VII represented herself as the living embodiment of Isis and the cobra was known to be not only a sacred creature but a pharaonic symbol.  When I check the "king's list" of the Ptolemaic Dynasty, I find a few females mentioned as co-rulers, usually regents for under-age male inheritors, beginning with Cleopatra II Philometora Soteira in 131 BCE, but you really don't find a woman ruling with the trappings of pharaoh until you reach Cleopatra VII in 51 BCE.  So the possibility that Cleopatra VII as Isis is the welcoming figure in the fresco cannot be totally dismissed.  I also can't help but think the widespread publicity surrounding Cleopatra and her death by the bite of a cobra in the 1st century BCE could easily have influenced a Roman artist charged with decorating the walls of a temple to Isis in Pompeii during that period.

Another confusing identification I encountered recently was a picture of a sculpture said to be Apollo of the Anzio type at the Capitoline Museum:

Call me crazy but it looks like remnants of grapes and grape leaves in the hair which would make me think it was Dionysos.  Many sculptures of Apollo also have an iconic knot in the hair on top of the head so I am baffled by the identification associated with this piece.

Reviewing my images from the Hall of Emperors in the Capitoline Museum, I came across the following bust:

After reviewing hundreds of images of Roman emperors (or said to be Roman emperors), I cannot find a single one that looks like him.  He appears to be wearing a laurel crown and in 2005 was positioned close to the busts of  Vespasian, Domitian and Titus (based on the photo time stamp).  This would make me think he may have been one of the emperors in the Year of the Four Emperors after the assassination of Nero but I checked images of Otho, Galba and Vitellius and he doesn't resemble any images identified as them.  Although I thought the museum positioned busts in relationship to the sequence of their reigns, this may not be the case either.  So, I would appreciate any information anyone could offer that would help identify this Roman.  

If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!

Forensic pathologists claim Arsinoe's skeleton found in Ephesus

I was browsing my news alerts this morning after being gone for a couple of weeks in Rome and came across this fascinating piece of news:

"ARCHEOLOGISTS and forensic experts believe they have identified the skeleton of Cleopatra’s younger sister, murdered more than 2,000 years ago on the orders of the Egyptian queen.

The remains of Princess Arsinöe, put to death in 41BC on the orders of Cleopatra and her Roman lover Mark Antony to eliminate her as a rival, are the first relics of the Ptolemaic dynasty to be identified.

The breakthrough, by an Austrian team, has provided pointers to Cleopatra’s true ethnicity. Scholars have long debated whether she was Greek or Macedonian like her ancestor the original Ptolemy, a Macedonian general who was made ruler of Egypt by Alexander the Great, or whether she was north African.

Evidence obtained by studying the dimensions of Arsinöe’s skull shows she had some of the characteristics of white Europeans, ancient Egyptians and black Africans, indicating that Cleopatra was probably of mixed race, too. They were daughters of Ptolemy XII by different wives..."

"...The distinctive tomb was first opened in 1926 by archeologists who found a sarcophagus inside containing a skeleton. They removed the skull, which was examined and measured; but it was lost in the upheaval of the second world war.

In the early 1990s Hilke Thür of the Austrian Academy of Sciences reentered the tomb and found the headless skeleton, which she believed to be of a young woman. Clues, such as the unusual octagonal shape of the tomb, which echoed that of the lighthouse of Alexandria with which Arsinöe was associated, convinced Thür the body was that of Cleopatra’s sister..." - much more: Times Online.

I must admit I am still a little skeptical as the skeleton's age was estimated at 15 - 18 years of age - seemingly too young for Arsinoe. As the article points out, Arsinoe was younger than Cleopatra, who was about 27 at the time she ordered her sister's execution. But, such a young age would mean she was little more than a child when she assumed control of the Egyptian army during the Alexandrian Wars with Caesar and ordered the execution of Egyptian commanding general Achillas, replacing him with her tutor Ganymede. Although she may have been as precocious as her older sister, this level of political acumen would seem to be a bit of a stretch unless she was being used as merely a figure head for an ambitious Ganymede. If this were so, however, why would Cleopatra be so nervous about her potential to cause political problems in the future? If the ancient sources were more precise about her age or birthdate it would be a tremendous help but the struggle for control of the throne of Egypt during this period has left a number of conflicting documents with various dating methods to confuse the issue.

However, one cannot dismiss the implications of the age, shape, and decor of the tomb in which the skeleton was found or the DNA analysis that indicates the skeleton had a combination of European, ancient Egyptian and North African traits. If the remains are, indeed, that of Arsinoe, I cannot help but feel excited to have, at last, some physical biological remnant of a member of the Ptolemy royal house available for future study. I also found the computer reconstruction of Arsinoe interesting. Although she had a different mother than Cleopatra, surely some of her appearance could have been shared by her more famous older sister. If you enjoyed this post, never miss out on future posts by following me by email!