Phoenix Ancient Art 2018 - Crystal VIII by emyphoenix

CRYSTAL 8

1 2 3

Warrior with shield

Gudea

6 – 11

34 – 39

Black-ﬁgure amphora with two cavalrymen

Immortal horse of Poseidon

35233

34485

30122

28677

12 – 17

40 – 45

Scipio Africanus

Sarcophagus of an elite woman with scenes from the afterlife

30948

18 – 27

19071

46 – 51

The Rondossec necklace à lamelles découpées 31981

28 – 33

Kouros 33653

52 – 57

The “Hunt” man 35090

58 – 65

Group of ﬁve large Ram appliqués 12637

86 – 91

Ceremonial Oinochoe 30947

66 – 71

Hercules with Cornucopia, the horn of the river-god Achelous 35236

92 – 99

11 12

Milleﬁori bowl 12473

72 – 77

The “Hunt” woman 35091

78 – 85

Cast glass lagynos

Polychrome relief depicting the afterlife of an elite ofﬁcial

3273

100 – 103

29010

104 – 109

1 Warrior with shield Etruscan, third quarter of the 5th century B.C. Bronze H: 19.3 cm (7.59 in)

35233

This beautifully patinated and superbly modeled bronze statuette depicts a youth dressed and equipped as a warrior. Similar figures were used as decorative elements placed on the top of bronze candelabra. Most probably, this solid cast figure was an ex-voto and dedicated to a sanctuary. The image of a youth with full hoplite armor is traditionally related to Laran, the Etruscan god of war (similar to Greek Ares and Roman Mars). The moment of the action of battle is accurately captured: his left leg is advanced in an energetic broad stride, the upper torso is leaning forward, and he is brandishing the spear which was once in his right raised arm (part of it is preserved). The fingers grasped in a firm gesture are precisely modeled. He is holding a round shape shield (hoplon) in his other arm which is bent at the level of his chest; the armor protects the upper part of the warrior’s body. Advancing, the young man is looking forward and keeps the shield high at his chin. He also wears an Athenian-type helmet with a tall plumed crest on his head, as well as leather cuirass and greaves (cnemides) which cover his lower legs up to the knees. The swanshaped crest holder, epaulettes, ropelike belt and the greaves’ edges are very clearly articulated.

Although small, this bronze warrior presents an assured workmanship in modeling of details (facial features; striations on the edges of the greaves, chitoniskos, and neck protector of the helmet; long toes). The human figure is cast solid while the separately cast parts (spear, very slim shield and crest) were added and soldered. A small portion of the shield’s edge was cut out to fit the chin. Even more elaborate is the spatial arrangement of the composition based on the combination of massive shapes and sharp silhouettes. The elevated plumed crest limited to a straight line in the frontal view makes a prominent, crescent-like element in the side view. Originally, the cast work was affixed to a base, wooden or clay, as it is suggested by long, pointed tangs extended from the heels.

The back part of the helmet hides his neck entirely; the pointed and movable cheek-pieces (paragnathides) are raised and leave the face open. It is clean-shaven and looks very individual showing delicate cheeks, thin lips of a small mouth and a slightly upturned nose. The large, almond-shaped eyes are truly exaggerated but make the look very expressive. The form of the lower part of the visor placed low on the forehead echoes the line created by his eyes and substitutes the eyebrows.

CONDITION Beautiful green and bright blue patina; the ﬁgure is entirely preserved; missing are the spear in his right hand, lower back part of the crest; part of the round shield with a few cracks at the broken edges.

PROVENANCE Formerly, private collection; Ex- M.P. private collection, Geneva, collected via the Hellas and Roma association, 1980’s; thence by descent to the H.P. private collection, Geneva, 1993.

EXHIBITED Musée Rath, Geneva, 6 November 1993 - 13 February 1994.

PUBLISHED The Art of the Italic Peoples from 3000 to 300 BC., Napoli, 1993, pp. 239-240, no. 136.

BIBLIOGRAPHY CRISTOFANI M., I bronzi degli Etruschi, Novara, 1985, pp. 278-279. DE PUMA R. D., Etruscan Art in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New Haven, London, 2013, p. 151, ﬁgs. 5.9 - 5.10. HAYNES S., Etruscan Bronzes, London, New York, 1985, pp. 280-281, nos. 94, 97. MAULE Q., The Master of Florence Warrior 586, in Studi Etruschi 57, 1991, pp. 53-63. A Passion for Antiquities, Ancient Art from the Collection of Barbara and Lawrence Fleischman, Malibu, 1994, pp. 164-166, no. 76. RICHARDSON E., Etruscan Votive Bronzes: Geometric, Orientalizing, Archaic, Mainz am Rhein, 1983, pp. 180-181, ﬁg. 413.

2 Black-ﬁgure amphora with two cavalrymen Attributed to the Painter of Berlin 1686 Greek, Attic, ca. 550-540 B.C. Terracotta H: 38.3 cm (15 in) – D of the body: 26.9 cm (10.59 in)

34485

The qualities and characteristics of this vase establish the fame of Athenian vase production. The monumental shape, well-built proportions, and distinct figural and ornamental decoration are superb. It is attributed to “the Painter of Berlin 1686” and as with most ancient Greek vase artists, the real name is unknown. Scholars named him after one of his vases with that inventory number now in the Antikensammlung in Berlin. Based on the stylistic manner, about thirty other vases were assigned to this name. Here the painter, whose repertoire includes multi-figured scenes full of action and shown as friezes, keeps his attention to details but reduces the representation to a single silhouette making the figures look monumental and significant. As a black-figure panel amphora it belongs to the type B identified by the round handles, flared lip, and ample ovoid body placed on a low base. A line of red is applied around the middle of the neck, a double red line surrounds the body below the panels, and another double line runs above the rays at the bottom of the vase.

Characteristically, only a profile of the head of the second horse with the partial representation of the eye echoes the silhouette of the first horse; its body and legs are supposed to coincide with the frontal image as if both are moving in step. On the upper right part of the panel a flying eagle with spread wings appears behind the horses and riders. The side B presents almost identical images; however, the horses’ heads are pulled in instead of being raised. The first cavalryman does not wear greaves, his helmet’s crest received vertical bands in added white and the same color is used to mark the edge of the second cavalryman pilos. The shield blazon displays the forepart of a galloping horse, again in added white. The figured panels (or zones) with the unpainted terracotta background are clearly separated from the surface which is completely covered with black glaze. The narrowing top of each panel has a palmette and lotus festoon, the details which are carefully engraved and marked by the added red.

On side A, the cavalrymen departing on their horses to the field of battle are represented one behind the other in a strict profile to the left. The first cavalryman's long hair and beard as well as the large eyes and broad nostrils are engraved. He wears a Corinthian helmet painted in red with a black crest, greaves, and carries a shield emblazoned with a hind part of a horse in added white, same color is found in multiple dots arranged in two concentric lines surrounding the red edge of the shield. The second cavalryman, who is only partially visible, has a long, pointed beard, with no engraving but entirely painted in red. He wears a cap, pilos, and carries a spear. The artist’s attitude for detailing is superb and does not miss a single component such as the horse’s forelock which is combed upright and tightened into a knot.

CONDITION Complete; reassembled from large fragments with ﬁlls for missing and chipped areas; some chips on the mouth; the foot restored.

PROVENANCE Formerly, Nelson Bunker Hunt (1926 – 2014) collection, Texas; Sotheby's, New York, 19 June 1990, lot 2; US private collection, New York, 1990.

PUBLISHED SCHAUENBURG K., Zu Repliken in der Vasenmalerei, in Archäologischer Anzeiger 2, 1977, p. 197. VON BOTHMER D., et al., Wealth of the Ancient World: The Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt Collections, Fort Worth, 1983, pp. 48-49, no. 2. Sotheby's, New York, 19 June 1990, lot 2.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BEAZLEY J. D., Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters, New York, 1978, pp. 296297, 692. BEAZLEY J.D., Paralipomena: Additions to "Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painters" and to "Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters", 2nd edition, Oxford, 1971, p. 128129. BOARDMAN J., Athenian Black Figure Vases, New York, 1993, p. 63. METZGER H., BERCHEM D. Van, Hippeis, in Gestalt und Geschichte, Festschrift Karl Schefold, Antike Kunst Supplement 4, 1967, pp. 155-158. VON BOTHMER D., et al., Wealth of the Ancient World: The Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt Collections, Fort Worth, 1983, pp. 48-49, no. 2.

3 Scipio Africanus Roman, late 1st â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2nd century A.D. Marble H: 29 cm (11.41 in)

30948

Scipio the Great was best known for defeating the Carthaginian general Hannibal at the Battle of Zama (Tunisia) and marking the end of the second Punic war. He returned to Rome victorious with the distinguished name, Africanus. This extraordinary example of Roman sculpture of the Imperial period offers a unique portrayal of iconography and workmanship. The combination of highly individual features of the represented person with symbolic scenes carved in high relief on both sides of the helmet, and the presence of the drilled hole with remains of bronze in the middle of the visor, all contribute to what designates this work of art as a commemorative portrait. He wears a helmet which ﬁts close to the head. His hair is formed of long wavy locks, especially visible on the open sides similar to the portraits of Alexander the Great and the Hellenistic kings, or the Roman ancestral tradition of long and unshaped hair. The way the hair is cut at the forehead to be in the precise line with the helmet’s visor stresses the portrait’s iconography as a military person. The helmet is classiﬁed as a Romanized variant of the pseudoAttic type (type C.3, according to E. Polito). It has a hemispherical calotte, pronounced neck protection and mobile frontal visor which terminates in volutes above the ears on both sides. The cheek-guards are omitted (this happens often in the Greek representations of helmets of Classical and Hellenistic periods). The classical Attic helmet has the visor with a pointed lower frontlet; also seen in pseudo-Attic helmets, best represented in the headgear of the Ares Borghese statue at the Louvre. The sculptural representations of the Roman variant, both of mythological and real persons, is well-attested since the Domitian period, (late 1st century A.D.), by Mars’ and goddess Roma’s helmets in the Cancelleria reliefs at the Vatican Museum, or the

statue of Hadrian in the Capitoline Museum. The straight front line in the visor shaped as a projecting fillet-like strip was probably a result of a fusion of the traditional Roman helmet and pseudoAttic variant (such examples are evident in the historical marble reliefs of the Trajan and Hadrian monuments and in the image of Achilles with his name on the Thessalian League coins of the Hadrianic period (A.D. 117-138)). The richly ornamented visors are found in the parade outfits of the Roman soldiers represented on the Praetorian Guard relief, (A.D. 51-52), at the Louvre. Originally, the helmet had an elevated crest-holder surmounted by a tall and long brush carved in marble. It is evidenced by the broken area on the top of the helmet and traces of the attachments to the nape and the rim of the neck protection. This type of rich sculptural ornamentation can be seen in the surviving bronze helmets of the Roman imperial era, especially in the parade (cavalry sport type) and gladiatorial helmets (helmet with griffins from Sheik ’Ibada, Egypt, Antikensammlung, Berlin). There are traces of this artistic tradition found on the helmet of Menelaos from his figure in the group with Patroclus, where the scene of Herakles fighting a centaur fills the crest-holder surface. Each side of Scipio’s helmet represents a nude female figure leaning on a dolphin with the folds of her spread cloak beautifully following the swimming movement (similar renderings are seen in the reliefs with dolphins and Erotes found in the Canope zone of the villa Hadriana in Tivoli). The nereids face each other, and one holds a cuirass while the other holds a Corinthian helmet. The motive of the nereids is undoubtedly related to the story of Thetis and her son, Achilles. While Achilles mourned the death of his role model, Patroclus, Thetis promised to have a second set of armor executed by the god of craftsmen, Hephaistos; she returns with nereids riding dolphins each carrying a helmet, a cuirass, a shield and armor.

However, while the anatomical parts and their spatial position in the floating composition are skillfully rendered in this carving, executed with a great sense of three-dimensionality, one particular and well-articulated detail attracts the attention. The position of the cuirass held by the nereid’s arm reveals the sleeve’s aperture; an inserted rectangular socket, which makes it clear that this is not a piece of armor on its own but instead represents a trophy being prepared for the setting by horizontal poles of a trophy monument, tropaion (compared to the marble tropaion, Centrale Montemartini, Rome). This tradition was much less known to the Romans until it was revived on sarcophagi panels with mythological scenes of the 2nd century A.D. The Roman iconography of the heraldic type composition with fantastic creatures carrying attributes is related to the symbolic designs of victory over an enemy adopted for the propagandistic monuments such as monumental cuirassed statues of the Roman military leaders set as a sign of their triumph. The tradition of the sea-monsters as heralds of Augustus maritime victory at Actium was established in Latin poetry and art. On the marble relief from the Augustan Propylon in Antiochia, two tritons appear on the sides of a tropaion in the shape of a cuirass surmounted by a helmet. Compared to the typical apotropaic images (griffins) on Roman helmets, the reliefs on the present one represents the important military achievements and triumph of Scipio Africanus evoking the story of the general and his army, who crossed the sea to the African shore to defeat Hannibal at the battle of Zama in 202 B.C. and receive the triumph in Rome. The heroic context of Scipio Africanus’ deeds, beside the actual stories in the history writings by T. Livy, Appian, became an important topic in Latin literature and philosophic teachings, especially in the specific genre of visions: as a Roman hero.

With the power of Scipio Africanus’ legacy upon the Roman moral and the importance of the ancestor’s cult in the life of a Roman family, his rejuvenated, deiﬁed image with a bronze star upon his helmet was created. This could have been done by the living members of the Cornelii gens, or any other Roman citizen as his admirer. It is a well-known fact that, since the Late Republic, the ancestral portraits as wax masks (imagi) were kept in the cupboards in the atrium of a house and were presented solemnly at the most important moments of the family’s life such as funerals or weddings. They served to commemorate the ancestors and to remind the family of their achievements. As a great honor and recognition of his deeds, the mask of Scipio Africanus was kept in a public place in Rome, inside the temple of Jupiter Maximus on the Capitol (Appian, Iberica 89). One would assume that the members of the Cornelii family kept other masks, most probably, replicated after the one made already during his lifetime; one of them could have been used for the recreation of his image in this commemorative marble bust. Scipio Africanus was also famous in introducing the clean-shaven look to Rome; such a feature would not be left unnoticed in the working on his portrait as the smooth skin exposes no furrows. The face of particular narrowing oval shape terminates with a ﬁrm square chin. In present condition, the expression of the face looks concentrated and somber; it is stressed by the brows drawn together and dark, deep eye sockets. They were prepared to receive inlays (pieces of color stones or glass, copper, and sometimes gold) to reproduce the eye globe, iris, pupil, and caruncle; even bronze eyelashes could have been added in an aim to get a more vivid and natural appearance of the eyes. The absence of the idealized features characteristic for the Graeco-Roman Classicistic style in this bust exclude the mythological representation (as, for example, Achilles) and leaves no doubt of the portrait of an individual.

The head is slightly under life-size; with a reference to Pliny (The Natural History 34.24), this marks the commemorative function of the portrait. The carved edge at the back with indication of a support reveals that the sculpture work was shaped as a bust and the overall polish and use of a running drill to produce the fine grooves in the hair-locks sets the bust’s workmanship in the Hadrianic period. The remains of bronze inside the circular drill-hole in the middle of the visor are likely from the attachment of a star, probably of gilded bronze similar to the marble figures of rejuvenated Divus Julius on the relief from Carthage (Archaeological Museum, Algiers) and divinized Germanicus, with both the carved star and a drill-hole above it, on the relief showing the Augustus and JulioClaudian family (San Vitale, Ravenna). The vertical depressions of the marble visor may have been prepared for colored stone or glass inlays, or even glass with encased gold leaf to reflect the shine of the star rays. The described features found a striking parallel with the helmeted head profile on a silver denarius of Cn. Cornelius Blasio mint during his consulship in 112-111 B.C. The attribution of the image as Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (236-183 B.C.), of whom Blasio was a descendant, is generally accepted. A star positioned above the head, symbol of glory and deification (also found on Roman state denarii of 44 B.C. and Augustan coins of deified Julius Caesar, and later issues of deified Augustus) would be inappropriate for the image of the living Blasio, and, on the contrary, suitable for the reviving portrait of his legendary ancestor, Scipio Africanus.

CONDITION Excellent preservation with only the helmet’s crest broken away; eyes inlays missing; a few chips; damaged are the proper left side volute of visor, ears, tip of the nose; remains of bronze (for the attachment of the star) in the middle of visor; surface slightly weathered.

PROVENANCE Formerly with Gallery Motte, Paris - Geneva, 1966; Ex- Swiss private collection, Zurich, 1966; Ex- Jean Lions private collection, Zurich, acquired in 1977.

BIBLIOGRAPHY CRAWFORD M.H., Roman Republican Coinage, Cambridge, 1974, pp. 310311. DINTSIS P., Hellenistische Helme, vol. 1-2, in Archaeologica 43, Rome, 1986, pp. 113-133. FITTSCHEN K., Zur Panzerstatue in Cherchel, in Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts, 91, 1976, pp. 175-210. FITTSCHEN K., ZANKER P., Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom I: Kaiser- und Prinzenbildnisse, Mainz am Rhein, 1985, pp. 48-49, no. 48a. FLOWER H.I., Ancestor Masks and Aristocratic Power in Roman Culture, Oxford, New York, 1996. Hadrien: Trésors d’une villa impériale, Milan, 1999, p. 248, ﬁg. 87. HARTSWICK K.J., The Ares Borghese Reconsidered, in Revue Archéologique 2, 1990, pp. 246-249. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC), vol. 1, Zürich, München, 1981, s.v. Achilleus, p. 197, no. 914; vol. 6, Zürich, München, 1992, s.v. Nereides, pp. 810-814, nos. 339-416. POLLINI J., From Republic to Empire: Rhetoric, Religion, and Power in the Visual Culture of Ancient Rome, Norman, 2012, pp. 145-147, 414-420. POLITO E., Fulgentibus Armis: Introduzione allo studio di fregi d’armi antichi, in Xenia Antiqua, Monografie 4, Roma, 1998, pp. 48-50, 201-202, 209-211, ﬁgs. 140, 152-154. RIDGWAY B.S., Hellenistic Sculpture III, The Styles of ca. 100-31 B. C., Madison, Wisconsin, 2002, p. 80, pls. 30-31. ROBINSON H.R., The Armour of Imperial Rome, London, 1975. STEWART A., The Borghese Ares Revisited: New Evidence from the Agora and a Reconstruction of the Augustan Cult Group in the temple of Ares, in Hesperia 85 (3), July-September 2016, pp. 584-585. VOLLENWEIDER M.-L., Das Bildnis des Scipio Africanus, in Museum Helveticum 15 (1), 1958, pp. 27-45. Scientific Report 0716-OA-43N-3, CIRAM Laboratories, October 4, 2016.

4 The Rondossec necklace à lamelles découpées European, late 3rd – early 2nd millennium B.C. Gold D: 12.2 cm (4.8 in)

31981

Excavated in 1849 in the funeral chamber of a dolmen, in Brittany, France (Rondossec, commune of Plouharnel in Morbihan), this necklace belongs to a rare, although well-attested type of gold jewelry produced between the late Chalcolithic and the early Bronze Age. In the same deposit was a second, very similar adornment, now housed in the National Archaeology Museum of Saint-Germain-en-Laye. This necklace à lamelles découpées (with cut slices) was hammered from a thin, uniform gold plaque; it is bent and forms a ring, the diameter of which corresponds approximately to that of a human neck. The fastening system is very simple since the ends, folded at 180 degrees, can be easily inserted into each other. In the front, the necklace is horizontally cut up into twelve thin, ﬂexible strips. In the back, the height of the metal sheet slightly tapers in connection with the fastening system, and shows rectangular areas delineated by small dots in repoussé and lines in low relief. Known as gargantillas in Spanish, these choker-type necklaces are among the most important evidence of the regular and established contacts that would have existed between many Atlantic regions in the late Chalcolithic period and the early Early Bronze Age: this type seems to have been created on the Iberian west coast (as documented by several tombs discovered in modern-day Portugal), and was then exported to the northeast, to the sites of Atlantic France, as attested by our necklace, but also to those of SaintLaurs and Saint-Père-en-Retz. They were certainly prized items, used perhaps as “diplomatic” gifts. Gold is generally associated to male grave goods: daggers, copper awls and chisels, arrowheads made of polished stone, etc.

Compared to the Neolithic period, tombs in the Copper Age (Chalcolithic) show that gold objects were more largely widespread, especially in the form of jewelry (tubular and helical beads, ornaments, ribbon bands, etc.). This means that to human eyes at that time, this metal became a very particular good, to which was attributed a symbolic value not related to any technological use. This is a major historical phenomenon, which proves that society was profoundly modifying its structure. On the one hand, some social classes had gained more power and therefore sought to stand out with specific material signs, considered as luxury items. On the other hand, the birth of metallurgy gradually led to the formation of other specialized groups, such as craftsmen inventing innovative technologies related to the work of new materials (gold, but also copper, etc.), or traders able to find metal deposits and to organize a new type of trade exchange. Despite these considerations, it should not be forgotten that metals (and gold especially) were still very rare at that time (quantitatively, for the current French territory, the amount of gold known for the Chalcolithic Period is less than 1 kg). Later, in the early Bronze Age, the use of gold spread and diversified. Although adornments and jewels remained the most common type of objects, gold was also used for the manufacture of luxury or cult tableware.

CONDITION Complete; minor deformations and dents; small cracks in places; a small mended piece on one of the slices, an old label inside the necklace reads: JC Dolmen de Plouarnel Morbihan no.70.

PROVENANCE Formerly, Mrs. Hemon collection, France, 19th century; Ex- Mr. Costa de Beauregard collection, France-Italy, prior to 1940; thence by descent to the family collection, Switzerland, 1940’s.

PUBLISHED LE ROUZIC Z., Bijoux en or découverts dans les dolmens du Morbihan, in Revue des Musées, fouilles et découvertes archéologiques, 30, 1930, pp. 1-2. ELUERE C., Les ors préhistoriques, l’Age du Bronze en France, 2, Paris, 1982, pp. 55, 66-67. ELUERE C., GOMEZ J., Typologie des objets de l’Age du Bronze en France, VII: bracelets, colliers, boucles, Paris, 1990, pp. 113-114. LADRA L. et al., Notas sobre uma nova lâmina áurea de tiras do Norte de Portugal, in Portugalia, N.S. 24, 2003, pp. 55, 63, nos. 1-2.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BRIARD J., Flux et reflux du Bronze Atlantique vus d’Armorique. Le Bronze Ancien in Intercâmbio e comércio: as "economias" da idade do Bronze, vol. I-II, pp. 114-124. ELUERE C., Les ors préhistoriques, l’Age du Bronze en France, 2, Paris, 1982, pp. 55, 66-67, 140-141. ELUERE C., GOMEZ J., Typologie des objets de l’Age du Bronze en France, VII: bracelets, colliers, boucles, Paris, 1990, pp. 113-114. LADRA L. et al., Notas sobre uma nova lâmina áurea de tiras do Norte de Portugal, in Portugalia, N.S. 24, 2003, pp. 55 - 64. LE ROUZIC Z., Bijoux en or découverts dans les dolmens du Morbihan, in Revue des Musées, fouilles et découvertes archéologiques, 30, 1930, pp. 1-7.

5 Gudea Neo-Sumerian, Second Dynasty of Lagash, late 3rd Millennium B.C. Anhydrite H: 34 cm (13.38 in)

30122

This statuette is an outstanding Near Eastern sculpture in small scale. It was modeled by fine carving of anhydrite, a desirable whitish stone, harder than alabaster (and sought after in the glyplic art of Mesopotamia, particularly in cylinder seals). The face is that of a beardless young man with individual features; it is quite possible that this is the sculptural representation of Gudea, the ruler of the Sumerian city-state Lagash in the 22nd century B.C., who made that city an unrivalled cultural center of Mesopotamia. Gudea is known for his extended activity as temple builder and dedicator of his several statues to the gods; the inscriptions, which include his official title ensi, the ruler, express his piety and wish to please the gods. Many large statues of Gudea have survived. They represent him in two major compositions as a standing or seated figure; the use of hard stones, such as diorite, and the style, which was developed for his representations, made the images of Gudea distinguished. This statuette possesses the qualities of the contemporary style but differs from the large statues in proportions, which became slender, and in finer plasticity of the shapes. The figure has rather broad shoulders and a narrow waist; the articulated musculature of fully formed shoulders and biceps of the arms emphasize his image as a young, healthy and strong man. The expression of the figure’s face is full of remarkable serenity: the big, heavy-lidded eyes are wide-open and focused, not staring; the long and arched

brows, which are connected by a chiseled groove, follow the outline of the eyes. The full lips are sharply defined, the nose is prominent. He wears a characteristic broad-brimmed hat of tight curls. He is dressed in a long royal mantle with a fringe edge; it covers his left shoulder and arm, the other side is pulled under his bare right arm and tucked into the front. The plain fabric with only a few folds focuses attention on the clasped hands which suggest a devotional gesture. The general attitude of this personage corresponds to that of the « worshipper » which was one of the oldest and most famous motifs in all Mesopotamian sculpture. Mesopotamian temples contained numerous figurines of men and women, represented standing or seated. Such figures were commissioned by faithful individuals who dedicated them to different divinities as a sign of their devotion. The practice provided a constant reverential presence in front of the divinities. These ex-votos were left at the foot of the altar or on the offering table; they were often found in favissae (repositories), where they were deposited so that not to crowd the temple or sanctuary and to create space for new dedications. These statuettes were offered by important people who were at the core of the temple’s activities, by the elite of the society, or members of the royal family.

CONDITION No losses to the shape or form; surface cleaned; some encrustations; some erosion on the back side; a few small chips and cracks (tip of nose, edges of hat, bottom of base, arms and back); a long narrow pit on the lower mantle at the back.

PROVENANCE Formerly, Samuel Dubiner collection, Ramat Gan, Israel, 1950’s; Ex- Dr. Jean Lauffenburger collection, 1967; Ex- Dan Eban collection, Jerusalem. (Mr. Dubiner was born in Canada. His extensive art collection included works from the ancient Mediterranean, Mesopotamia, and Africa; Mr. Eban was the former curator at the Israel Museum in the 1980's).

BIBLIOGRAPHY AMIET P., Art of the Ancient Near East, New York, 1980, pp. 107-108, 378379, nos. 376-387. ARUZ J., ed., Art of the First Cities. The Third Millennium B.C. from the Mediterranean to the Indus. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; New Haven, London, 2003, pp. 424-435, nos. 304-308. BRAUN-HOLZINGER E.A., Frühdynastische Beterstatuetten, Berlin, 1977. MOORTGAT A., The Art of Mesopotamia, London, New York, 1969, pp. 62-64. PARROT A., Sumer: The Dawn of Art, New York, 1967, pp. 204-218. Scientific Report 0116-OA-4N, CIRAM Laboratories, February 11, 2016.

6 Immortal horse of Poseidon Roman, Augustan, late 1st century B.C. â&#x20AC;&#x201C; early 1st century A.D. Rock crystal, gold (chain) H: 4.6 cm (1.81 in) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; L: 6.2 cm (2.44 in)

28677

Animalistic ﬁgurines and seals of different shapes made out of transparent rock-crystal are well-known in ancient Greek and Roman art. This present masterpiece appears to be unique as a small sculpture which, at the same time, serves as the handle for a seal. Carved in a semi-precious stone, the seal presents an intricate design including the ﬁgure of the sea-god Poseidon surrounded by sea creatures. The sea-god Poseidon was also the god of horses who created them; he himself rides the chariot led by horses over the waves (Homer, The Iliad XIII 15-31); a pair of immortal horses was received from him by Peleus and given to Achilles (Homer, The Iliad XVI 148150). The Isthmian Games in ancient Greece and the Panhellenic music and athletic competitions, which included chariot races, were held in honor of Poseidon. Thus, several associations with Greek literature and mythology would contribute to the complex perception of the images on this extraordinary work of art, no doubt appreciated by a learned and cultivated Roman who commissioned and used it as his personal seal. The anatomy is faithfully rendered in the shape of the horse’s head and neck; the meticulously engraved wavy lines reproduce the parted and well-groomed hair of the mane. An interesting feature in this sculpture is the horse-trappings. They represent the metallic brit in the mouth, leather straps, and metallic junctions. The sides of two circular junctions have holes, which accommodate a gold bar with the attached chain and suspension double loop, the holder for the piece which imitates actual reins. The chain is made of gold wire; it is composed of four individual loop to loop chains combined to produce a single chain.

There is one incredible characteristic of this horse, and that is the presence of the clearly undercut circular shapes on the sides of the head below the ears that qualify this as an ancient Greek automaton. In the Hellenistic period, the automata of different kinds were very popular at the Ptolemaic court and described in length by ancient authors. One could recall a mythological story of Hippoi Kabeirikoi - Hephaistos, the god of blacksmiths, crafted four bronze horse-shaped automata, “breathing defiant fire between their teeth”, to draw the adamantine chariot of his sons (Nonnus, Dionysiaca 29, 193-205). Another association could be with the legendary Trojan Horse described in the tales from the Trojan War (a story of the constructed wooden model of a huge horse was referred by Homer in The Odyssey (VIII 512-515), and later by Virgil in the Aeneid (II 1-56) in the time of Augustus). The base of the piece has a rounded edge to mark the transition to the bottom; its oval surface was transformed into a seal. The figural carving (intaglio) represents the naked figure of a bearded Poseidon and six sea-creatures: octopus, squid, shrimp, conch, fish, and turtle, which are precisely rendered according to their physical shapes and particular attitudes; they appear as swimming in the sea. The powerful god, a perfectly built muscular figure crowned with a diadem is depicted in a majestic pose holding his trident as a scepter. The only piece he is wearing is a short mantle placed over his arms as a shawl. The edges are arranged in a characteristic pattern with the zig-zag pattern like a short tale which denotes the Archaistic style (imitating the folds of the garments of the Archaic period). Poseidon has stylized long locks of the traditional hairstyle and the stance - with both feet placed firmly on the ground, the three-quarter turn of the torso and the profile view of the head - are the features belonging to the Archaistic style.

The representations of horses in Greek and Roman art are abundant reflecting the role of this noble animal in the life of the ancients. The horse could not be substituted by any other living creature to carry a warrior in battle: speed, strength, and intelligence are the major qualities that made it irreplaceable and unique of all other animals. The same qualities were necessary when the horse was used as a means of transport with a variety of purposes (riding in civilian life, travelling, ceremonial, hunting, and drawing of vehicles). Horses served in the athletic games, gladiatorial shows, and circus racings, not telling about the farm and factory. Rock crystal is a pure, transparent variety of quartz found naturally as large pieces or crystals in rock clefts and caverns, or as geodes and pebbles in gravel. The hardness of this stone makes it particularly difficult to carve, but it is still highly desirable because when it is polished, the glossy surface resists scratches. The name for rock crystal is derived from the Greek, krystallos and kryos, meaning “frost, cold, icy,” which encompasses the concept expressed by ancient authors that rock crystal is a form of petrified ice (Pliny the Elder, Natural History 37.9.23) or ice hardened through intense freezing. Such a seemingly miraculous stone was believed to have the powers of an amulet and therefore was highly valued. Pliny records that Romans originally learned to appreciate rock crystal from cultures of the Near East, and that sources of the mineral come from Asia Minor, Cyprus, the Alps, Arabia, India, and Portugal. Due to the limited availability of rock crystal and the intensive labor process of making such objects, those made from it were considered rare and expensive objects of luxury in the ancient world. The artful composition and fine engraving, the specific stylistic preferences revealed in this beautiful, exquisite work allow to assign it to one of the best productions executed by Roman gemengravers in the Augustan period.

CONDITION Highly translucent rock crystal; excellent state of preservation; complete with no restorations or repairs; natural internal fractures in the stone; some deposits inside the engraved grooves; a few chips on the edge of the seal; one end of the gold chain detached.

PROVENANCE French art market, Paris, before 1985.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BECK H., Notes on Glazed Stones, Glazed Quartz II,” in Ancient Egypt and the East, New York, 1935, pp. 19-28. HELCK W., Bergkristall, in Lexikon der Ägyptologie I, Wiesbaden, 1975, cols. 709-710. TOYNBEE J., Animals in Roman Life and Art, London, 1973, pp. 167-185. Scientific Report 93932, Conservation and technical services Ltd.; November 13, 2013

underside

7 Sarcophagus of an elite woman with scenes from the afterlife Egyptian, Dynasty XXI, Third Intermediate Period, ca. 1070 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 950 B.C. Cartonage, stucco, linen H: 166 cm (65.35 in)

19071

This highly decorated sarcophagus presents a complex and elaborate work of art displaying both canonic and unique features of ancient Egyptian iconography. During the course of the Third Intermediate Period, tombs in which these sarcophagi were interred habitually lacked two-dimensional scenes on their walls. As a result, those scenes were transferred in somewhat abbreviated fashion to the bodies of these anthropoid sarcophagi. The delicate features of the face are typical of the period and are characterized by hieroglyphically-shaped eyes, separated by the nose beneath which is a wide mouth with thin, narrow lips. The absence of a false beard attached to the chin, as well as the ears being concealed by a wig and held in place by a wide, floralpatterned hair band and no indication of hands or arms resting on the body are all intentional indices that identify the deceased as a woman of elite status. Contemporary anthropoid sarcophagi of elite men include a false beard and the presence of both ears and hands. The decoration is composed of eight horizontal registers, or rows. The lappets of the wig rest on a broad collar, termed wsXt in the ancient Egyptian language. Its floral forms symbolically convey the powers of resurrection upon the deceased on analogy with the characteristic of plants in general which die, only to sprout again after a period of dormancy. A protective genius of the hereafter, holding an ostrich feather of truth, suggesting the deceased has successfully adhered to the requirements specified in Chapter 125 of the so-called Book of the Dead, occupies the triangular space at the left and right of the broad collar. A winged sun disc occupies the third register, beneath which is a procession of the Four Sons of Horus, each of whom holds an ostrich feather of truth. These sons traditionally protected the soft organs of the deceased which were removed and placed into canopic jars. These sons can be identified, from left to right, as the jackal-headed Duamutef who protected the stomach, the falcon-headed Qebehsenuef who protected the intestines, the baboon-headed Hapy who protected the lungs, and the humanheaded Imsety who protected the liver. A falcon with outstretched wings and a sun disc from which a uraeus, or sacred cobra, is suspended, is depicted in each of the squares to the left and right of the Four Sons. Each is identified by a caption in hieroglyphs as bHdty, the winged sun disc, who offers protection.

The central panel of the fifth register shows a trussed falcon resting atop a stylized depiction of a tomb with a wadjet, (sacred eye), resting on a wicker basket in the field to the upper left. The trussed falcon is a depiction of Sokar, god of the Memphite necropolis, who, as the counterpart of Osiris, is often associated both with the protection of the deceased and resurrection. The sacred eye to the left is a rebus, or visual pun, which may be translated as all protection [for the deceased]. That protective wish is reinforced to the left and right by two pairs of composite, snake-headed genii, some of whom are bearded, who hold the ostrich feather of truth as well as bolts of linen cloth, symbolically intended for the wrapping of the deceased. The central panel of the sixth register contains a depiction of the Abydos fetish, a cult object which was considered to hold the severed head of the god Osiris, after his body was dismembered by Seth in their famed battle. This depiction of that fetish is perhaps the most detailed of all of the principal vignettes on this anthropoid sarcophagus. Notice how the two vertical feathers of that fetish are adorned with a sun disc, the center of which is occupied by a uraeus, or sacred cobra. Beneath those two feathers is a most unexpected detail of a two-stranded swag to which are attached two amuletic uraei, adorned with the White and Red Crowns of ancient Egypt, respectively. The fetish associates the deceased with Osiris and that god’s resurrection. To the left and right of this panel are depictions of bHdty, described above. The central panel of the seventh register contains the bottom portion of the Abydos fetish flanked by two pairs of protective genii. The eighth, or lowest register, contains the foot zone, but the balms and unguents used in the mummification of the deceased obscure its figural decoration. Nevertheless, the presence of those balms and unguents are a powerful reminder that during the Third Intermediate Period, the craft of mummification attained heights of perfection never before and never afterward attained by the embalmers of ancient Egypt. The carefully mummified body of this deceased elite female member of Egyptian society was then carefully enclosed within her anthropoid sarcophagus which was then sewn closed, as an examination of its back reveals.

There are numerous cartonnage anthropoid sarcophagi of the Third Intermediate Period which have survived and are on display in collections worldwide. This sarcophagus is one of the very few known examples of that group which contains such a detailed panel as the Abydos fetish in sixth register as well as the complete system of lacing by which the mummy was enclosed within. This extraordinary work once resided in the well-known collection of Pierre Vérité (1900- 1993) who became a pioneer collector of African and Oceanic art since the 1920’s. He founded his gallery Carrefour in Paris in 1937 which was visited by many prominent people of Parisian cultural scene such as P. Picasso, A. Breton, H. Rubinstein. His son, Claude Vérité, joined the gallery in the 1950’s. They undertook several travels and expeditions in search of rare pieces, presented exhibitions at the gallery and participated important museum shows. Their own collections remained unknown; its outstanding quality surprised the connoisseurs and specialists when it was sold at several auctions (the collection of 514 objects of primitive art sold at the Hotel Drouot in 2006 brought € 44 million).

CONDITION Majority of the vibrant colors of the paint preserved; few areas of restoration; some ﬂaking and faded paint throughout; laced with original string on the back.

PROVENANCE Formerly, Pierre Vérité (1900-1993) and Claude Vérité private collection, acquired between 1930 and 1960, Paris. .

BIBLIOGRAPHY COULON L., Les uræi gardiens du fétiche abydénien: un motif osirien et sa diffusion à l’époque saïte, in DEVAUCHELLE D., ed., La XXVIe dynastie, continuités et ruptures: actes du Colloque international organisé les 26 et 27 novembre 2004 à l'Université Charles-de-Gaulle – Lille 3, Paris, 2011, pp. 85108. D’AURIA S., et al., Mummies and Magic. The Funerary Arts of Ancient Egypt, Boston, 1988, pp. 14-19. TAYLOR J.H., Egyptian Coffins, Aylesbury, 1989, pp. 41-46.

8 Kouros Greek, Late Archaic Period, mid 6th century B.C. Bronze, solid cast H: 27.5 cm (10.82 in) (excluding tenons) Weight: 3203.49 gr (7 lbs. 1 ounce)

33653

Parallels can be drawn between this bronze male figure and monumental Archaic Greek kouroi of the 6th century B.C., which are made mostly of marble or local stone. In the origin, this sculptural type was influenced by Egyptian art forms that presented the male figure in a rigid frontal position, usually with the left leg extended slightly forward and with arms at the sides. The ancient Greeks, following their own conventions, presented the figure nude rather than clothed. As such, the kouros plays a seminal role in the development of early Greek art and is important for its influence upon the development of the male figure in sculpture of the Classical and later periods. The kouros form is highly significant and demonstrates the very beginnings of figural sculpture in Western art. Large scale statuettes of kouroi cast in solid bronze, like this one, are extremely rare. Most known examples are half the size. Likely representing a mortal youth, one well-acquainted with the gymnasium and palaestra, the bronze kouros exhibits a full and robust body while maintaining an aesthetically pleasing contour to his musculature. Subtle anatomical details were added by tooling with incision and punch-work during the final finishing and “cold working” of the bronze after it was cast. The technique was used to indicate the details of the eyes, eyebrows, fingernails of the youth’s thumbs, the navel, and the exquisitely executed parallel striations for treatment of the youth’s hair. Special attention is also paid to the youth’s muscular anatomy: well-defined pectoral muscles above the thoracic arch, fully formed shoulders, biceps of the arms, thighs, well-formed genitalia and muscles surrounding and defining the knee; and at the back, the rounded muscles of the buttocks, thighs, and calves. All of this contributes to the figure’s aura of masculine strength and physical beauty, which to the

ancient Greeks would clearly reflect their concept of arête, that is, the embodiment within an individual of both physical and spiritual beauty, as well as the performance of civic duty to the benefit of social order. Besides his full and muscular build, the short hair of the figure may mark him as an athlete, as seen on the life-size marble kouros from Paros and now in Munich (Glyptothek, Munich, no. 169, ca. 540 – 530 B.C), which, as R. Wünsche points out, is a new and unusual hairstyle for kouroi of this period but a customary hairstyle for athletes at that time. The long bronze tenons extending downward from the soles of the feet would have served to mount the kouros in place, likely in a sanctuary setting to represent the athletic devotee and functioning as a votive for a deity, most likely Apollo. Bronze figures similar to this example have been found in situ, for example, the statuette of a kouros (Apollo?) found upright and secured into an offering table in the sanctuary of Apollo and Artemis at Kalapodi (Phocis) during excavations. Although kouroi are dedicated at a number of different sites sacred to different gods and goddesses (the temple and sanctuary of Poseidon at Sounion, the Heraion and associated temple dedicated to Hera on Samos) they have long been associated primarily with the god Apollo. A number of marble kouroi were found deposited in the sanctuary of Apollo on Mt. Ptoon in Boeotia. Having an expressive “archaic smile,” the rounded and full face of the kouros, as well as the softly rounded contours of the chest, muscles of the arms and legs, and the buttocks associate it with the similarly distinctive features prominent in Greek Island and Ionian works. Such aspects would support an East Greek origin for the sculpture. The kouros may be compared with a masterwork of

Samian sculpture, the bronze figure of a draped woman (Samos Museum, Vathy, inv. 1441, ca. 560-550 B.C., H: 27 cm) from the Heraion on Samos. Although clothed, the woman exhibits similar facial characteristics, and is similar in both size and workmanship. Both bronze figures possess expressive rounded faces with similarly formed chin, mouth and prominent narrow and elongated lips; both have a long narrow bridge for the nose with spreading nostrils that give the end of the nose a triangular shape; and both figures share the similar hair treatment of finely and precisely incised parallel lines. The eyes of the both figures are also treated similarly, with the upper part of the nose modeled into an outward arc on both sides to form the arching eyebrows of the figures. A number of East Greek and Ionian masterworks in marble suggest the ancient sculptor’s sources of inspiration for this kouros. Attic parallels in marble are among the kouroi designated by G. Richter as part of the “Anavysos-Ptoon 12 Group” dating ca. 540 – 530 B.C., which includes the Munich kouros previously mentioned as well as the masterwork of sixth century kouroi, the perfectly formed and justly famous image of Kroisos from Anavysos, the “Anavysos Kouros” (National Museum, Athens, no. 3851, ca. 530 B.C.). The muscular surfaces flowing into each other and the softly articulated anatomy, however, robust and heavily muscled, illustrate the fundamental contributions of Ionian sculpture to the portrayal of the kouros in Greek art. This remarkable kouros, as a unique and outstanding work of the Archaic period, is both beautiful in its simplicity and profoundly important – it stands out among other significant forerunners in the development of Classical Greek sculpture, and indeed Western art.

CONDITION Intact with a heavy patina; no repairs or restorations.

PROVENANCE Formerly, Mr. Gounaris collection, Switzerland, 1969; Ex- Professor Goumaz, Switzerland, 1972; Ex- private collection, Switzerland, 1981.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BOARDMAN J, Greek Sculpture: The Archaic Period, Oxford, 1978, pp. 2224, fig. 81, 106. COMSTOCK M., VERMEULE C.C., Greek, Etruscan, and Roman Bronzes, Boston, 1971, pp. 29-31, nos. 27, 28, 29. Greek Art of the Aegean Islands, New York, 1979, pp. 186-188, no. 151. KALTSAS N., Sculpture in the National Archaeological Museum, Athens, Los Angeles 2002, pp. 58-59, 62, nos. 68, 69, 80. KOZLOFF A., MITTEN D., The Gods Delight: The Human Figure in Classical Bronze, Cleveland, 1988, pp. 66-69. MATTUSCH C.C. Greek Bronze Statuary, Ithaca, 1988, pp. 51-85. MATTUSCH C.C., Classical Bronzes, Ithaca, 1996, p. 23, figs. 1.16a, 1.16b. MATTUSCH C.C., Enduring Bronze: Ancient Art, Modern Views, Los Angeles, 2014, pp. 79-85, fig. 59. MITTEN D., DOERINGER S., Master Bronzes from the Classical World, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1967, p. 51-52, nos. 33, 34. RICHTER G.M.A., Kouroi: Archaic Greek Youths, New York, 1988, pp. 113125, p. 118, no. 135. RIDGWAY B.S., The Archaic Style in Greek Sculpture, Princeton, 1977, pp. 45-83. ROLLEY C., Greek Bronzes, London, 1986, p. 32, fig. 7, p. 95, no. 64, p. 124, no. 100. STEWART A., Greek Sculpture, New Haven, 1990, pp. 109-110, 116-119, 122-127. WÜNSCHE R., Glyptothek, Munich: Masterpieces of Greek and Roman Sculpture, Munich, 2007, pp. 26-29.

9 The “Hunt” man Roman, Augustan, late 1st century B.C. – early 1st century A.D. Bronze H: 34.9 cm (H: 13.74 in)

35090

This outstanding portrait of an elite man is exceptionally well preserved. The noble red-brown patina covers the face while the hair locks have a brown-green color; a beautiful contrast which grasps the viewer’s attention. The head is life-size; the shape of the chest suggests that it was ﬁxed on a herm made of marble, white or color, with his name most likely inscribed on the shaft. The combination of the realistically rendered features and serene expression create a striking attraction. Similar features and qualities are found in the Roman portraits of the Augustan-Tiberian period that are in line with the portraits of the last decades of the Roman Republic. Their style would be typical of that of Caesar’s portraits, so art historians would describe the images as the Caesar Zeitgesicht, the period face. The closest parallels to this present bronze head are the marble bust of an ancestor on the right side of the Barberini Togatus (Centrale Montemartini, Rome) and the bronze bust of a man in the Cleveland Museum of Art. The truthful manner to represent the particular features of an individual, very often not ideal ones, and the age were considered important to the conception of the exemplary man as they display their trustworthiness, fides, dignity, gravitas, and moral dutifulness, severitas. The represented person appears to be middle-aged with thin and long wrinkles at the corners of his eyes and furrows across his forehead. The eyebrows are thin forming a sharp brow line. Originally the eyes were inlayed with white and dark stones or glass paste which reproduced the irises and pupils to achieve an intense gaze. The other facial features are reproduced in a highly individual manner: the long nose is crooked and the thin-lipped mouth is dry and straight. The protruding, well-articulated ears are noticeable too, as well as the three creases at his left ear. They correspond to the furrows on the neck which are the result of the head’s delicate tilt as seen by the slight asymmetry in the shape of the bust with the proper left shoulder and clavicle slightly higher than the right.

The hair arrangement is characteristic with rows of sickle-shaped locks of almost equal size. They are precisely rendered; and the differentiated treatment of hair in the eyebrows and head suggest a careful choice of tools, chisels, pronged instruments and punches, in the cold work after the bronze was cast. The creation of a portrait of an individual (imago in Latin) was securely established in Roman art in the Late Republican period of the 2nd century B.C. Besides the existing Hellenistic tradition of portraiture (with both idealizing and naturalistic trends) and the fact that images of Romans were mostly created by Greek sculptors, the roots of Roman portraits are deeply Italic. It was based on the ancient custom to venerate a bust of the ancestors. These bronze busts were cast from their funerary masks, which is how they achieved such precise details of their faces. Polybius (Histories 6.53) in the 2nd century B.C. and Pliny the Elder (The Natural History 35.2) in the 1st century A.D. give testimony to this practice: “The faces made from wax were placed in individual chests, so that there were masks, which were carried in the funeral of the clan”. The portraits were not only designed for the family tombs, they ﬁlled the gallery of ancestors in the house and could also be found in the garden setting. In Republican Rome, the series of precise legislative norms (ius honorum et imaginum) regulated the right to publicly display private portraits, such as honoriﬁc busts or statues. The images of famous persons were installed in public places (a forum, sanctuary, library, theatre, or baths) in the aim of political propaganda or promotion of the image of the family (gens) to which the person belonged; the state, family, or the clients of patrons were customarily the commissioners.

CONDITION Excellent state of preservation with beautiful red-brown and dark green patina; complete except for the missing inlays in the eyes (there is a hole in each eye for ﬁxing); surface is mostly cleaned of oxides but pitted in places; a small hole in the hair at the back.

PROVENANCE Formerly, William Herbert Hunt collection, Texas; Sotheby’s New York, June 19, 1990, lot 47; US private collection, 1990.

EXHIBITED Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, June 25 - September 18, 1983; Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, Richmond, October 19 - December 11, 1983; Detroit Institute of Arts, Detroit, February 1 - March 22, 1984; Dallas Museum of Art, Dallas, April 25 - June 10, 1984; High Museum, Atlanta, December 10, 1985 - February 9, 1986; The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, February 14, 2001 - April 15, 2003; The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2001 - 2003, 2007 - 2017.

PUBLISHED VON BOTHMER D., et al., Wealth of the Ancient World: The Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt Collections, Fort Worth, 1983, pp. 128-129, no. 44. Sotheby’s New York, June 19, 1990, lot 47. LAHUSEN G., FORMIGLI E., Römische Bildnisse aus Bronze, 2001, pp. 4446, no. 12.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BALTY J.-CH., CAZES D., Sculptures antiques de Chiragan (Martres-Tolosane) I, Les portraits romains, I.1 Époque julio-claudienne, Toulouse, 2005, pp. 128145, no. 4. FITTSCHEN K., ZANKER P., Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom II: Die männlichen Privatporträts, berlin, 2010, pp. LAHUSEN G., FORMIGLI E., Römische Bildnisse aus Bronze: Kunst und Technik, 2001, pp.48-51, no. 38; pp. 110-111, no 56. VERMEULE C.C., Greek and Roman Sculpture in America, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London, 1981, pp. 284-285, no. 241. VON BOTHMER D., et al., Wealth of the Ancient World: The Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt Collections, Fort Worth, 1983, pp. 128-129, no. 44. ZANKER P., Das Bildnis des M. Holconius Rufus, in Archäologischer Anzeiger 2, 1981, pp. 349-361. ZANKER P., Roman Portraits: Sculptures in Stone and Bronze, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2016, pp. 119-121, no. 37.

10 Ceremonial Oinochoe Greek, Hellenistic, 3rd â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1st century B.C. Banded Agate H: 17 cm (6.69 in) - D: 12.5 cm (4.92 in)

30947

A limited number of vessels of similar shape and size cut of agate survived from the Classical Antiquity. This extraordinary vessel was cut from a single block of precious agate. The shape of the jar – oinochoe – is characteristic with the tall handle and a pronounced trefoil mouth. The form is marked by well-measured proportions: the lower part corresponds to the shoulders and neck; the circular base to the rim while the lower, scroll-like connection of the handle is reflecting in the shape of the beak. However, the beauty of the vessel is the stone itself; the exotic pattern of irregular but concentric bands of milky white, light amber color and dark brown create a striking decorative effect. The carving technique is remarkable: one can admire the exquisite taste of the carver in his appreciation of the natural structure while working on the shape. The carving follows the natural layers of the stone so that they reveal the particularities of the vessel’s shape. On the contrary, the diagonally crossing lines of the stone in the handle make this part appear more distinguished in the design and the semi-translucency of the agate is also a very attractive characteristic. The Hellenistic date for this agate oinochoe is assured by the comparison to similarly shaped jars of the late antique period. Here, the oinochoe is faithfully modeled with a great sense of plasticity of its complex shape (especially found in the trefoil mouth) compared to the heavy and somewhat amorph forms of the later vessels. The famous agate ladle in the Medici treasury in Florence, a work of 1st century A.D, if not earlier, was found in Rome in the imperial Mausoleum of Maria, wife of Honorius, 5th century A.D. The impressive late antique-Byzantine agate jars are still housed in the treasuries of the most important Christian churches such as the Basilica of San Marco in Venice and Saint-Denis in Paris.

In the Mediterranean world agate was popular since the Minoan period. Theophrastus (On Stones V 31) mentions that the name of the stone is derived from the river Achates in Sicily where it was first found, and that it is sold at a high price. Pliny (Natural History 37.54) reports on its many varieties and their markings found in different locations, at this time moss agate was known among the stones brought from India. It is assumed that workshops in Antiochia and especially in Alexandria manufactured most of the agate vessels in the Hellenistic and Roman period. Egypt did not have its own agate mines, so the raw pieces of stone were mainly brought from India as well. Agate vessels of various shapes were highly appreciated by the members of the ruling houses, priests and wealthy international clientele. Specific jugs and ladles were used during religious ceremonies to make libations. Drinking vessels with or without handles such as cups, bowls, goblets, skyphoi, kantharoi made up part of the most prestigious table services and often served as diplomatic gifts. Historians left records of such sumptuous possessions: when the Romans took the treasury of Mithridates VI, the king of Pontus, in the city of Talauri in 65 B.C. (Appian, Mithridatic Wars XII 115), they found 2,000 drinking-cups made of onyx welded with gold; and Cleopatra impressed Antonius and his officers, arranging a royal banquet in his honour, “in which the service was entirely of gold and jewelled vessels made with exquisite art” (Athenaeus, Deipnosophists IV 147f). Pliny, who lived in the 1st century A.D., also states that agate was highly valued in older times but was cheap during his time. Seneca, his contemporary, includes gemstone cups in the “trophies of Luxury” and complains about the wealthy Romans’ excessive extravagance in their use: “for luxury would be too cheap if men did not drink to one another out of hollow gems the wine to be afterwards thrown up again” (On Benefits VII 9). This probably should not be taken for granted as vessels made of agate, sardonyx, and rock crystal were highly treasured as a part of prestigious art collections and family inheritance.

CONDITION Excellent condition with a beautifully polished surface; complete; mouth re-attached; a small ﬁll on the shoulder; a few cracks and chips.

PROVENANCE Formerly, European private collection, acquired in Switzerland 1997.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BALL S. H., A Roman Book on Precious Stones, Los Angeles, 1950, pp. 95, 102, 172-174. BÜHLER H.-P., Antike Gefässe aus Edelsteinen, Mainz am Rhein, 1973, pp. 48-49, 50-51, 53-54, 64, 69, 73, 75-76, nos. 22, 24, 26-27, 32-33, 39-40, 64, 71, 80, 95, 102-103, 106. HABACHI L., BIERS J. C., An Agate Bowl from Egypt, in Muse, Annual of the Museum of Art and Archaeology, University of Missouri-Columbia 3, 1969, pp. 29-34. LAPATIN K., Luxus, The Sumptuous Arts of Greec and Rome, Los Angeles, 2015, p. 125. PARLASCA K., Neue Beobachtungen zu den hellenistischen Achatgefässen aus Ägypten, in The J. Paul Getty Museum Journal 13, 1985, pp. 19-22. Il Tesoro di San Marco. Vol. 2. Il Tesoro e il Museo, Firenze, 1971, pp. 9-10, nos. 11-12, pls. 8-9. Le trésor de Saint-Denis, Paris, 1991, pp. 177-178. VENTURELLI P., Il tesoro dei Medici al Museo degli Argenti: oggetti preziosi in cristallo e pitre dure nelle collezioni di Palazzo Pitti, Firenze, 2009, p. 64, no. 19. WALKER S., HIGGS P., eds., Cleopatra of Egypt, From History to Myth, Princeton, 2001, p. 92, nos. 100-102.

11 Milleﬁori bowl Roman, late 1st century B.C. – early 1st century A.D. Mosaic Glass D rim: 12.7 cm (5 in) – D bottom: 5 cm (1.96 in) – H: 4.6 cm (1.81 in)

12473

An exquisite example of ancient mosaic glass, this bowl presents an even rarer case of the shape and technique called millefiori (thousand flowers). Such vessels were highly desirable but very expensive items of tableware which only the wealthiest buyers could afford. Many known vessels are distinguished as parabolic or hemispherical bowls and dishes with or without a ring base. This particular shape, which is both elegant and simple, presents a slightly concave bottom and lower wall; it is a variant of the hemispherical shape. It was designed, most probably, as a drinking vessel as it is attested by similar bowls executed in other materials such as terracotta and precious metal. Mosaic glass belongs to the category of mold-casting and required great skill of the glass-worker and several graduated steps in the work. The first step was to produce several canes (or rods) of polychrome glass, which were then sliced into small, discoid or polygonal sections: their chromatic composition determined the coloristic effect of the final result. Such sections were fused together; then the vessel would be lathe-cut and polished from both sides. Most of the known mosaic bowls are formed with discoid sections which produce a spiral pattern. This bowl was fused with prefabricated sections which include a few polygonal sections (opaque emerald green, blue, honey brown and white) and several other ones resembling small flowers with petals. The latter are of two kinds. One has a yellow spiral heart, opaque turquoisegreen petals with white divisions; the second is formed with an opaque white heart, turquoise petals, white divisions and honey brown outlining. The result of such coloristic combination is highly decorative; the multi-colored polished surface imitates the quality of semi-precious stones. The mosaic technique transforms a simple bowl into an extremely attractive and precious object.

CONDITION Intact; some weathering and slight iridescence.

PROVENANCE Formerly, European private collection, Zurich - Munich, before 1965.

EXHIBITED Auguste, exhibition organized by the Louvre Museum, Grand Palais, Galeries nationales, Paris, 19 March â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 13 July, 2014.

PUBLISHED Auguste, exhibition catalogue, Paris, 2014, p. 220, no. 169.

BIBLIOGRAPHY GOLDSTEIN S. M., Pre-Roman and Early Roman Glass in the Corning Museum of Glass, Corning, New York, 1979, pp. 178-179, nos. 463-464, 466. GROSE D. F., The Toledo Museum of Art, Early Ancient Glass, Core-formed, Rod-formed, and Cast Vessels, and Objects from the Late Bronze Age to the Early Roman Empire, 1600 B.C. to A.D. 50, New York, 1989, pp. 189-193, 198-199, no. 184. HARDEN D. B., Glass of the Caesars, Milan, 1988, p. 35, no. 12 MATHESON S., Ancient Glass in the Yale University Art Gallery, Yale, 1980, p. 19-20, no. 53. OLIVIER A., Millefiori Glass in Antiquity, in Journal of Glass Studies 10, 1968, pp. 48-70.

12 The “Hunt” woman Roman, Augustan, late 1st century B.C. – early 1st century A.D. Bronze H: 30.1 cm (11.8 in)

35091

This stunning masterwork is an extremely rare work of Roman portraiture, as the number of the surviving ancient bronze female portraits is considerably less than male images. Its distinguished features are the quality of bronze with noble red-brown and green patina and the assured modeling of shapes. The image of an old woman possesses the characteristics of the Late Republican portraits which were continuing still in the Augustan and JulioClaudian periods. Cast in bronze and once ﬁxed on a marble herm; her name would have been seen inscribed on the shaft. The upper edge of the bust included a few folds of drapery (a part of it is preserved on the proper lower left side of the chest). The life-size head is positioned straightforward; the sitter’s advanced age is unmistakably marked by the deep furrows over the face, sunken skin revealing the high cheek bones and bony chin. Her straight nose has an upturned tip. In the eyes, the outlines of the irises, which may have been silvered, were marked by incised lines. The expression is calm and solemn, with a hint of a smile on the left side of her mouth. The hairstyle is close to that of Antonina the Younger, mother of Claudius and grandmother of Caligula. The long thin hair is parted in the middle, put along the sides in undulating masses that partly cover the ears, rolled up at the back and gathered into two braids and collected in a double bun tightened by the braid’s ends. The strands of hair were cold chiseled after the bronze was cast. The creation of a portrait of an individual (imago in Latin) was securely established in Roman art in the Late Republican period of the 2nd century B.C. Besides the existing Hellenistic tradition of portraiture (with both idealizing and naturalistic trends) and the fact that images of Romans were mostly created by Greek sculptors, the roots of Roman portraits are deeply Italic. It was based on the ancient custom to venerate a bust of the ancestors. These bronze busts were cast from their funerary masks, which is how they achieved such precise details of their faces. Polybius (Histories 6.53) in the 2nd century B.C. and Pliny the Elder (The Natural History 35.2) in the 1st century A.D. give testimony to this practice: “The faces made from wax were placed in individual chests, so that there were masks, which were carried in the funeral of the clan”. The portraits were not only designed for the family tombs, they ﬁlled the gallery of ancestors in the house and could also be found in the garden setting.

In Republican Rome, the series of precise legislative norms (ius honorum et imaginum) regulated the right to publicly display private portraits, such as honoriﬁc busts or statues. The images of famous persons were installed in public places (a forum, sanctuary, library, theatre, or baths) in the aim of political propaganda or promotion of the image of the family (gens) to which the person belonged; the state, family, or the clients of patrons were customarily the commissioners.

CONDITION Excellent state of preservation with beautiful red-brown and green patina; some oxides on the back and left side; minor damage to the tip of the nose and chin; two tiny holes on the crane and left eye; scratches on the right cheek and neck; damage along the lower edges; rectangular patches on the neck from original casting in antiquity.

PROVENANCE Formerly, William Herbert Hunt collection, Texas; Sotheby’s New York, June 19, 1990, lot 48; US private collection, New York, 1990.

PUBLISHED VON BOTHMER D., et al., Wealth of the Ancient World: The Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt Collections, Fort Worth, 1983, pp. 126-127, no. 43. Sotheby’s New York, June 19, 1990, lot 48. LAHUSEN G., FORMIGLI E., Römische Bildnisse aus Bronze, 2001, pp. 4446, no. 13.

BIBLIOGRAPHY FITTSCHEN K., ZANKER P., Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom III: Kaiserinnen- und Prinzessinenbildnisse, Frauenporträts, Mainz am Rhein, 1983, pp. 41-41, no. 47; p. 45, no. 54 (hairstyle). LAHUSEN G., FORMIGLI E., Der Augustus von Meroe und die Augen der römischen Bronzebildnisse, in Archaeologischer Anzeiger, 1993, pp. 655674. LAHUSEN G., FORMIGLI E., Römische Bildnisse aus Bronze; Kunst und Technik, 2001, pp. 44-46, no. 13. JOHANSEN F., Catalogue Roman Portraits I, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhague, 1995, pp. 180-181, no. 78 ; pp. 188-189, no. 82. KERSAUSON K. de, Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des portraits romains: I, Portraits de la République et d’époque Julio-Claudienne, Paris, 1986, pp. 174-175, no. 81. VON BOTHMER D., et al., Wealth of the Ancient World: The Nelson Bunker Hunt and William Herbert Hunt Collections, Fort Worth, 1983, pp. 126-127, no. 43.

13 Group of ﬁve large Ram appliqués Greek, early Hellenistic, 4th – 3rd century B.C. Silver gilt Average L: 10.5 cm (4.13 in)

12637

These five silver-gilt couchant rams present one of the most remarkable groups of figures known from the animalistic art of the Late Classical - Hellenistic period. It is possible to call them monumental as the dimensions of other known appliqués are much smaller. Images of rams in Greek art reached their zenith during the Hellenistic period, when they were commonly incorporated into jewelry and vessel designs. These present rams are unique artistic productions, both in their relatively large scale and impressive use of gilding, most of which has been well preserved. As the volume of the relief is high and includes almost three quarter of the entire body, each animal looks like a work of sculpture in the round. To this naturalistic representation, the precision of anatomical reproduction and fine detailing were added by a skillful silver and gold-smith. Each ram was probably originally used as an appliqué, attached to a piece of furniture prominently displayed (a large chest or throne) or, most probably, to a large vessel, as suggested by their very light weight and curving inner profile. The spectacular silvergilt Derveni krater (Archaeological Museum, Thessaloniki) has a frieze of walking animals including a ram, each figure made separately in a repoussé technique and placed around the neck of the vessel. Some present appliqués preserve the attachment holes or rivets on a portion of the silver sheet. Produced from a single, thin sheet of silver in a repoussé technique, each ram was hammered into shape over a mold of either wood or bronze. The finer details, including the facial features or fleece, were all created with great care and delicacy, being hand-chased into the surface (remarkable is the detail of the animal’s fur which runs down the chest indicated by a series of chase marks). A thin layer of gold was then applied to the entire outer surface of each animal, adding to the decorative nature of the pieces. Although no doubt created as a group, the features, proportions and details of each ram do vary slightly, adding to the overall charm of the animals.

Although all five are depicted in profile, three of the rams face right, while the remaining two face left. Each ram rests with their legs tucked underneath them, with rippling musculature, particularly their powerful hindquarters and ribbed torsos, depicted beneath their cropped, wool coats. All five turn their heads to the front; they are depicted with powerful horns that curl around their ears and frame their elegant faces and prominent muzzles. The style of the treatment of the horns and facial features of these rams are found in fourth century examples. A spectacular pair of gold and copper-core bracelets display terminals in the shape of leaping rams and are a strong stylistic and thematic parallel. Now in the Hermitage Museum, this pair dates to c. 330-300 B.C. and are from the Great Bliznitza kurgan. A related pair of bracelets with rock-crystal hoops and gold ram-heads, which are said to be from near Thessaloniki and date to c. 330-300 B.C., are now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. A similar silver bracelet with ram head finials, said to have been found at Pella in Macedonia, is in the Norbert Schimmel collection, and dates to the fourth century B.C. There are no exact parallels for these wonderful appliqués, which, as a group stand as a testament to the high level of artistic and creative skill of the late Classical - early Hellenistic silver and gold-smiths. However, the closest stylistic parallels are found in Macedonia, Thrace, and the Northern Black Sea area. The iconographical tradition of the couchant ram goes back to Achaemenid silver drinking vessels, known as rhyta, terminating in a half-figure of an animal with tucked legs or just the animal’s head, the shape adopted by the Greeks artisans in the late 5th century B.C. (Kul-Oba kurgan, the Hermitage Museum).

CONDITION Thin and delicately applied gilding very well preserved; some tarnish and weathering; a few tiny holes; a few cracks and minor losses of metal on the edges; added reinforcement material on the back side.

PROVENANCE Formerly, private family collection, London, 1993; imported to the US, November 27, 2000.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Alexander the Great: Treasures from an Epic Era of Hellenism, New York, 2004, p. 125, no. 5d, p. 133, no. 25. ANDRONICOS M., Vergina: The royal tombs of the ancient city, Athens, 1984, p. 213, no. 181-182. ARTAMONOV M. I., The splendor of Scythian art: treasures from Scythian tombs, New York, 1969, p. 77, fig. 313; fig. 250. BARR-SHARRAR B. The Derveni Krater: Masterpiece of Classical Greek Metalwork. Ancient Art and Architecture in Context 1. Princeton, 2008. P. 36-38, 163, figs. 32-37, pls. 19b, 20a. HOFFMANN H., DAVIDSON P., Greek Gold Jewelry from the Age of Alexander, 1966, p. 163, no. 58. МАРАЗОВ И., Тракия и древният свят XV – I в. пр. Хр. Коллекция Васил Божков. Sophia, 2011, pp. 62-64, no. 47. REEDER E. D., ed., Scythian Gold, New York, 1999, p. 326-327, no. 172. WILLIAMS D., OGDEN J., Greek Gold-Jewelry of the Classical World. New York, 1994, p. 77, no. 32, pp. 182-183, no. 118.

14 Hercules with Cornucopia, the horn of the river-god Achelous Roman, 1st century B.C. â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 1st century A.D. Marble H: 56.2 cm (22.13 in)

35236

An important masterwork of Roman sculpture, this impressive image of Hercules demonstrates a skillfully designed composition, fine execution in marble, and masterful attention to detail. The upper half of the figure is entirely preserved along with its attributes. According to the scale, it belonged to an under-lifesize statue which represented a standing figure of the hero in a frontal position, with the turn of the head slightly upward and to its left. Hercules is depicted nude except for the lion skin (leontè), which is draped over his left arm, with the paws knotted in the middle of the chest and the voluminous lion’s head forming a parade helmet over Hercules’ head. The cult of deified Hercules had many aspects in ancient Greece and Rome, among them, worshipping him as a giver of abundance and fertility was very important. The horn of abundance became a significant attribute in his iconography. In this sculpture, the lion skin put over his shoulders and head reminds one of Hercules famous deed, the first of his twelve labors - the slaying of the Nemean lion, while the cornucopia tells the story of his further adventures. Known in several versions described by the Greek and Latin writers (Sophokles, Apollodorus, Ovid) the story narrates that while courting Deianira, daughter of Oeneus, the king of Calydon, Hercules struggled for her hand in marriage with the river-god Achelous. During the wrestling contest, Achelous turned himself first into a serpent and then into a bull. Hercules succeeded to break one of the bull’s horns thus slaying the river-god. As Ovid concludes the story told by Achilous himself: “He knotted his fingers round my throat. I was suffocating, as if my throat was gripped by a vice, and struggled to tear his thumbs away from my windpipe. Overpowered in this form, only my third, fierce, bull-shape remained. So I fought on, my limbs those of a bull. From the left he threw his arms round my bulging neck; and followed me as I charged off; dragging at me, my horns piercing the hard ground

as he pulled me down; and toppling me into the deep sand. As if that was not enough, holding the tough horn in his cruel hand, he broke it and tore it away from my mutilated brow. The Naiades took it, filling it with fruit and scented flowers, and made it sacred: the Goddess of Abundance is rich now because of my horn of plenty” (Metamorphoses IX, 62-88). The ancient cult of Hercules in Italy remained enormously popular in the Roman Empire. Many clans claimed the hero to be their ancestor. The funerary portrait statues are known representing an individual in the guise of Hercules. His bronze images are frequently found in home shrines, lararia; the presence of the cornucopia, symbol of bounty, would qualify Hercules as guarantor of a family’s prosperity. Hercules was worshipped in Rome in the cult of Hercules Invictus, Magnus, Triumphalis, and Augustus (patron of the Imperial family). There is a famous story that the emperor Commodus established his own cult as Hercules; he “issued orders that he was to be called not Commodus, son of Marcus, but Hercules, son of Zeus” (Herodian, History of the Empire, 1.14.8). The marble bust of the emperor in the Musei Capitolini depicts him in the guise of the hero, with the lion skin over his head. The numismatic and sculptural material of the Hellenistic and Roman periods helps to visualize the entire composition. Hercules was often depicted holding a club in his right hand: the arm bent and the top of the club leaning against the shoulder, or, the arm stretched down so the club rests on the ground and serves as support for the standing ﬁgure. In the variant of composition, the ﬁgure could include the club placed on the left side below the hand with the cornucopia (horn of plenty). In this case, Hercules’ right hand was either holding his club in the downward position, or, holding a bowl in the act of libation pouring the wine over a lighted altar at his right side. The attributes situated on both sides (altar/ bowl and cornucopia/club) would be positioned symmetrically to create a well-balanced composition.

This figure belongs to the group of marble statues which constitute the same iconography, among them one lists a piece in the Museo Nazionale, Rome, however, without the leontè over the head, the figure formerly in the Hermitage Museum collection (today in the Far Eastern Museum of Art, Khabarovsk), or the one in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Musei Capitolini, Rome, both latter heavily restored. The present sculpture demonstrates a superior quality making it an important example in the study of the statue’s type. This Roman masterpiece has been regarded as a work after the Greek original of the 5th century B.C. (Myron, Polykleitos) or 4th century B.C. (Skopas, Lysippos). As attested by the sculptural images reflected on Greek coins, the statue of Herakles holding the club and cornucopia could have also been created during the Hellenistic period, however, art historians debate the topic. The major full-size statues of Herakles that are recognized in the history of the prototype are the Lansdowne Herakles (J. Paul Getty Museum), the Hope Herakles (LACMA), and, in terms of the lion skin over the hero’s head, the New York Hercules (the Metropolitan Museum of Art). They represent a figure in a relaxed stance similar to the Classical contrapposto. While the first two statues are major works of the museums, they are identified today as Roman pastiches (heavily restored), a characteristic not shared by the present sculpture. However, the same style can be seen in this Hercules: the wellarticulated anatomy and athletic musculature, the proportions of the torso, the slight twist which affects the curve of the median line, the opposite direction of the head suggest the influence of the Lysippean work, with the differentiation of movements in a single composition. Also, the type of hairstyle, with the short, close-set curls and specifically their first row combed upward from the forehead, belongs to the 4th century B.C.

Otherwise, the sculpture retains the traits of the Hellenistic style. Preserving the traditional frontal composition, the work is characterized with the strong sense of three-dimensionality for which the deep carving was employed to separate the shapes. It creates the transition of several planes and a strong chiaroscuro; this would place the prototype of statue within the mature phase of the Hellenistic period. The proportions of the head with the exaggerated, high forehead, its somewhat bulged shape, the pronounced and angular outer shapes of the eyebrows, equally thick upper and lower eyelids suggest the Hellenistic attitude to render a more individual, rather than generalized appearance. The picturesque effect is observed in the treatment of eyes and brows, and a very special effect is found when one looks at the lion’s skin behind the hero’s ears to discover the translucency of the marble. The deep carving below the row of lion’s teeth projected over the human head was made with the intention to frame and outline the noble beauty of Hercules. One cannot miss the workmanship in the detailing of such things as the texture of the horn, locks of Hercules’ hair and beard, or that in the lion’s mane. It is not impossible that the white marble was also painted with color pigments. The size of this sculpture indicates its use in the private sphere, appropriate for a setting within a wealthy house or a villa. It possesses the qualities of a highly decorative and valuable art work, which, however, did not miss the signiﬁcance either for the family history or even the Imperial cult.

CONDITION Surface cleaned with some remaining encrustations; a few chips and scratches in places; slight damage to the tip of Hercules’ nose, edges of lion’s jaws, and the right paw; parts of the disk and tip of the cornucopia, and the index and middle ﬁnger of the left hand are broken off.

PROVENANCE Formerly, Jan Mitchell (1913-2009) private collection, New York, acquired May 31, 1966; US private collection.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BECATTI G., Una statua di Eracle con cornucopia: problemi iconografici e stilistici, in Bollettino d’Arte 53, 1968, pp. 1-11. GIULIANO A. et al., Museo Nazionale Romano, Le sculture I, 5, Roma, 1983, pp. 156-159, no. 66. GIULIANO A. et al., Museo Nazionale Romano, Le sculture I, 8, 2, Roma, 1985, pp. 515-518, no. X,7. HOWARD S., The Lansdowne Herakles, Malibu, 1978. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae (LIMC), vol.4, Zürich, München, 1988, s.v. Herakles, pp. 746, 753, 757-758, nos. 574-578. LIPPOLD G., Die Skulpturen des vaticanischen Museums III, 2, Berlin, 1956, pp. 124-125, no. 30. PALAGIA O., The Hope Herakles Reconsidered, in Oxford Journal of Archaeology 3 (1), 1984, pp. 107-126. RICHTER G.M.A., Catalogue of Greek sculpture in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Oxford, 1954, pp. 73-74, no. 121. STUART JONES H., A Catalogue of the Ancient Sculptures Preserved in the Municipal Collections of Rome: The Sculptures of the Palazzo dei Conservatori, Oxford, 1926, p. 230, no. 1, pl. 87. WALDHAUER O., Die antiken Skulpturen der Ermitage 1, Berlin, 1928, pp. 36-37, no. 18.

15 Cast glass lagynos Greek, Hellenistic, 1st century B.C. Glass H: 10.1 cm (3.97 in) â&#x20AC;&#x201C; D base: 2.7 (1.06 in)

3273

100

102

The wide and squat shape, long narrow neck and handle bent at a right angle categorize this flask as the type known as a lagynos, most probably used for perfume or oils. Although the shape was popular with the contemporary ceramic, and the grooves suggest the imitation of a metal prototype, the semi-translucent dark blue glass makes this vessel unique and extremely attractive, a true luxury object. This exceptional glass vessel was cast, lathe-cut and polished. It has a carinated body based on a circular foot with two wheelcut grooves and a cylindrical neck terminating in a flaring mouth and rim which has a single wheel-cut groove within. The handle, rectangular in cross-section, is attached to the shoulder and neck, at the right-angle are two grooves, a diamond-shaped step cut at the base of the handle. The famous cameo glass vase, the Portland Vase in the British Museum, has handles which are cut with shaped steps at the base in a similar fashion. There are two glass lagynoi in the Corning Museum of Glass with mouths and feet that have similar lathe-cut grooves. The handles of both are closely related in technique and style to the handle on this flask.

CONDITION Intact except for a small fragment on the rim re-attached; some weathering; two tiny chips on the base.

PROVENANCE Sotheby’s, London, 14th July 1986, lot 29; Ex- Benzian collection, Lucerne, Switzerland; Sotheby’s, London, 7th July 1994, lot 48.

BIBLIOGRAPHY GOLDSTEIN S.M., Pre-Roman and Early Roman Glass in The Corning Museum of Glass, Corning, 1979, pp. 136-137, nos. 280-281. OLIVER A., Jr., Glass Lagynoi, in Journal of Glass Studies 14, 1972, pp. 17-22, ﬁgs. 1-4.

16 Polychrome relief depicting the afterlife of an elite ofﬁcial Egyptian, “Polychrome Group”, First Intermediate Period, ca. 2200 – 2000 B.C. Limestone with Polychrome L: 64 cm – H: 51 cm (25.2 in x 20.08 in)

29010

104

This elaborately painted limestone relief is inscribed for Count Henni, an elite official of the court who served as a royal treasurer and who identifies himself as pharaoh’s sole companion. Henni himself, facing right, is depicted bare-footed and bare-chested, wearing a plain, flaring kilt, secured at the waist by a belt. He wears a short wig coiffed into tight, ringlet curls. His accessories include a three stranded necklace and a bracelet. He holds a staff of authority in his raised hand and a scepter in his lowered hand. Both are emblems of his authority and elevated status in society. The overall shape and arrangement of its component parts— inscriptions, figural decoration, and preserved paint— indicate that this relief belongs to the “Polychrome Group,” created after the fall of Dynasty VI during the First Intermediate Period (about 2200-2000 BC), the center of manufacture of which was localized at the site of Naga el-Der. The extensive use of red paint conveys solar associations, appropriate for a funerary monument, the objective of which is to insure the continued existence of Henni in the Hereafter. The extensive use of yellow, intentionally suggesting gold, gives the undeniable impression of excessive wealth which accords with Henni’s principal title, Count. One recognizes that that title was held by a number of powerful, wealthy oligarchs who oversaw vast tracks of land and the personnel who worked on them. A visual index of that advantaged status may be inferred by the importance of the two dressed ducks that appear at the top of the offerings piled on the table in the tenth, or leftmost, vertical column. Their prominence among offerings of the Polychrome Group appears to refer both to their origin at Naga el-Der and to the importance of the individuals commemorated on them. The funerary inscriptions on this relief repeat both visually and textually that it is imperative that Henni receive the funerary offering, termed the prt xrw, by the “living who love life and despise death.” If the living do not actually have bread and beer, Henni exhorts them to open their mouths and simply pronounce the words. That exhortation is in keeping with Egyptian religious tenets that the spoken word metaphorically materializes into the object voiced so that the spoken word becomes the actual object. Henni further exhorts the living to provide him with these same provisions on a number of religious festivals, some of which remain obscure, which

106

punctuate the annual religious calendar of the ancient Egyptians. He ends by stating that he should be the recipient of such offerings each and every day of each and every year. Beneath a broad, yellow band at the top are three horizontal lines of hieroglyphic inscriptions. As well as nine columns of hieroglyphs framed by a wide, yellow band on the right side and separated by vertical divider lines. The wider, tenth column to the far left depicts numerous offerings intended to sustain Henni in the Hereafter. Each of the offerings are designed slightly larger than the hieroglyphs in the inscriptions. These are placed upon an offering table but are shown elevated and floating in space in keeping with ancient Egyptian design tenets which avoid overlapping in order to insure the visual integrity which contributes to the viewer’s immediate recognition of each and every offering represented. To the (spectator’s) right beneath the offering table is a Hs-vase, used for ritual purifications. The offerings on the table begin with (romaine) lettuce, a bunch of leeks or onions, a haunch of beef, a head of an ibex, a head of a gazelle, a head of a calf, seven vases containing various beverages, and two dressed ducks. Note how those offerings are framed on their left side by the tall staff of authority that Henni holds in his upraised hand. The presence of an ibex and a gazelle are important as there seems to have been a famine at the end of the Old Kingdom which forced the Egyptians to seek alternative sources of meat. To achieve that objective, the Egyptians attempted to domesticate those African horned animals. The offerings depicted in that column are captioned by a rectangular panel, divided into five vertical pairs which contain the names of some of those offerings and their uniform quantity. These can be translated from (the spectator’s) right to left as 1,000 loaves of bread together with 1,000 jugs of beer, 1,000 head of cattle, 1,000 ducks, 1,000 vessels of alabaster, and 1,000 bolts of linen. Each of these offerings are habitually enumerated in the standard funerary offering prayer, the prt xrw: bread and beer represent the staples of the ancient Egyptian diet; beef and fowl were expensive

food stuffs; alabaster, privileged because of its permanence as stone and its overtones of purity because of its white color, was the stone of choice for funerary vases, and the bolts of linen cloth represent the bandages in which the mummiﬁed body of Henni was wrapped. The three horizontal lines of hieroglyphs at the top of the stele may be translated as: An offering which pharaoh grants to the gods Anubis and to Osiris, who is the lord of the city of Busiris, and to Khenti-imentiou, who is the lord of the city of Abydos, that they may in turn provide the traditional prt xrw offering prayer consisting of bread and beer within the tomb in the necropolis which is located in the Western mountain, for the one who is united with the earth, for the one who is able to traverse the celestial ocean, for the one for whom the great god serves as a guide to the pure places, for the one who is revered under the great god, for the one whose titles include count, royal treasurer, sole companion of pharaoh, and lector priest, for the one whose name is Henni. Count Henni says, “O you who are living upon the earth and who love life but despise death, O you who pass by this way and who desire to be favored by the god Onuris in the place where you happen to find yourselves, may you please give me bread and beer! But if in fact you have no bread and beer to offer me, simply open your mouth and say, “Here is bread and beer as well as oxen and fowl for Count Henni! Make a prt xrw offering for me, Henni, the count and royal treasurer, whose mother is Ouhat because I am the one who is revered under the god Anubis in all of his sacred sites in the celestial sky. Those prt xrw offerings, consisting of bread and beer, should be made for me during each Wag-festival, during each festival in honor of the god Thoth, during each festival celebrating New Year’s Day, during each festival of the flame, during each festival celebrating the New Year, during each festival celebrated during the five epagomenal days, during the celebration of the jubilee, during the festival of the departure of the god Min, during the celebration of each and every beautiful festival, during the course of each and every day!

CONDITION Polychrome preserved on majority of the carving; superﬁcial wear to the surface; some damage on the corners and edges with part of the ﬁgure and hieroglyphs now lost.

PROVENANCE Formerly with Girgis Gabrial (d. 1930), Qena, Egypt; Ex- Clère collection, Paris, acquired in 1964 from the grandson of Girgis Gabrial; thence by descent.

PUBLISHED VANDIER J., Quatre stèles inédites de la fin de l'Ancien Empire et de la Première Époque Intermédiaire, in Revue d'Égyptologie 2, 1936, pp. 43-64, pl. I, 1.

BIBLIOGRAPHY BROVARSKI E., Inscribed material of the First Intermediate Period from Naga el-Der, Thesis, 1989. DUNHAM D., Naga ed-Dre stelae of the First Intermediate Period, London, 1937. LUTZ H.F., Egyptian tomb steles and offering stones of the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnology of the University of California, Leipzig, 1927. EYRE C., How relevant was personal status to the functioning of the rural economy in pharaonic Egypt?, in MENU B., ed., La dépendance rurale dans l'antiquité égyptienne et proche-orientale, Cairo, 2004, pp.157-186. PILLON A., La stèle polychrome d’un notable thinite de la Première Époque Intermédiaire, in Revue d'Égyptologie 62, 2011, pp. 115-137.

107

Credits

110

Selection of objects Ali Aboutaam and Hicham Aboutaam Project manager Alexander Gherardi, New York Research Phoenix Ancient Art, Geneva Antiquities Research Center, New York Aaron J. Paul, Washington D.C. Graphic design mostra-design.com, Geneva

New York Hicham Aboutaam Alexander Gherardi Alexander V. Kruglov Electrum, Exclusive Agent for Phoenix Ancient Art S.A. 47 East 66th Street New York, NY 10065, USA T +1 212 288 7518 F +1 212 288 7121 E info@phoenixancientart.com

Photography Stefan Hagen, New York André Longchamp, Geneva

Geneva

Printing CA Design, Hong Kong

Phoenix Ancient Art S.A. 6, rue Verdaine - P.O. Box 3516 1211 Geneva 3, Switzerland T +41 22 318 80 10 F +41 22 310 03 88 E paa@phoenixancientart.com

Print run 800 English ISBN-13: 978-0-9906200-2-0

Ali Aboutaam Michael C. Hedqvist

111

www.phoenixancientart.com

PHOENIX ANCIENT ART SA NEW YORK Electrum, Exclusive Agent 47 East 66th Street New York, NY 10065 - USA T +1 212 288 7518 – info@phoenixancientart.com GENEVA 6 rue Verdaine 1204 Geneva - Switzerland T +41 22 318 80 10 – paa@phoenixancientart.com

www.phoenixancientart.com

ISBN-13: 978-0-9906200-2-0