1. This is still the case in Künzl 1989, a relatively brief overview of the cups' program. [BACK]

2. For color plates, details, and montages of three sides (BR I:1, BR II:1 and 2), see Baratte 1991, 25-33. The only complete set of views available outside MonPiot 5 (1899) is Andreae 1978, fig. at p. 381; the usefulness of this record is limited by the tiny size of the plates. S. Reinach published sketches after each photo, and a montage of each cup, in Répertoire de réliefs grecs et romaine (Paris, 1909), 1: 92-97. For those trying to teach the cups to English-speaking undergraduates, some plates occur in Vermeule 1968. Zanker (1988, figs. 93, 181) gives Tiberius triumphator and the victim group from the panels of BR II, as well as the center shots from BR I (figs. 180a-b). The new Augustan handbook by Simon (1986) gives only the left end of BR I:1 (fig. 187), though this is useful since rare; Simon (pp. 143-44) describes only the allegory BR I:1; the sole datum given about BR II is that Tiberius is prominent on it. Henig (1983, 143) notes Tiberius' triumph, and figure 108 there gives the central shot of BR I:2, but the only bibliography is the MonPiot publication. Bianchi Bandinelli (1970, fig. 223) gives an enlarged detail of Augustus from the allegory scene; figure 208 in Bianchi Bandinelli notes only that Boscoreale was a source of precious objects. Hannestad (1986, 95, fig. 58) illustrates only Tiberius in his chariot in his chapter on Tiberian monuments, without informing the reader about the Augustus cup. Typical is Strong 1988; the complete text in Strong on the two center shots of BR I (figs. 43-44) consists of the following: "The silver cups with imperial scenes found in the villa at Boscoreale . . . reflect major paintings and sculptures of the time" (89); "Some of the best silversmiths worked for the imperial Court, producing such works as the historical cups found in the Boscoreale Treasure" (92-93). Ling's 1988 annotations to Strong's Roman Art (p. 344) cite only MonPiot and a plate in Rostovtzeff's Social and Economic History of the Ancient World . As for the great scholarly exposition at Berlin in 1988, the Kaiser Augustus show and its scholarly essays left out the cups altogether. [BACK]

3. Hardie (1986, 368), for example, invents women in the "child-giving" scene BR I:2; for correction of published descriptions of the triumph BR I:2, see p. 284 n. 2 below. More common is omission of detail, such as Roma's weapon pile, Augustus' "rusticated" sella curulis, Hispania's wreath, the portrait figure of Drusus, etc. [BACK]

4. For literature see Künzl 1989, 78-79; Kleiner 1983; Zanker 1988, 229-32; Hölscher 1967, 181f.; Hölscher 1980, 281-86, at 281 n. 58; Pollini 1978, 285-92; Küthmann 1959, 76f.; Gabelmann 1984, cat. 41 at pp. 127-31, 133; Ryberg 1955, 78f., 141-43, 197, 201; Byvanck van Ufford 1974, 203-4. The original description and analysis by Héron de Villefosse in MonPiot 5 (1899) is still one of the best available, though more often cited than read. [BACK]

5. See chap. 1, n. 107. Its structure is related to Julio-Claudian cuirass compositions on the one hand (earth goddess below, sky god above, symbolic figure in center), its framing devices (divinities on rocks flanking sacrificant) to High Classical and classicizing votives; its overload of religious "statement," and some of its figure types, recall Hellenistic court pieces like the Tazza Farnese and the Apotheosis of Homer (fig. 58). It is variously assigned to the first century B.C. or A.D.; identifications with panegyric for Antony seem most plausible. [BACK]

6. No one has surveyed Arretine ware with political iconography; I hope others expand my list. There is a handle with "Germania," and two cups with nude imperatores and personifications (figs. 65-67; chap. 14, pp. 85-86). A matrix of M. Perennius Tigranus (chap. 3, p. 97) portrays Antony and Cleopatra, either in compliment or caricature. A fragment shows a bust of Augustus holding a globe (left) and a lituus (right); behind him is a laurel tree or branch (Hölscher 1967, 23 n. 121); compare, among other examples, a mid-Augustan issue (see p. 242 n. 129 below) in which Victoria crowns a laureled bust of Augustus on a globe (Hölscher, 10f., 23 n. 121, pl. 1.6). An emblema in Tübingen (two examples, inv. 1928, 2349) has a Hellenistic silver-style composition of a seated goddess—here, Roma syncretized with Venus and Fortuna. Roma (helmeted) holds cornucopia and wreath and is saluted by Amor with a palm; behind her arm, a pedestal for a winged globe; left, unidentified objects; between the throne legs, more blobs (armor?). Dragendorff 1948, nos. 652.a-b, pl. 32. [BACK]

7. E.g., Gabelmann 1984 and Byvanck van Ufford 1974. [BACK]

8. So Künzl 1969, 364: the relief style of the BR cups cannot be used to date other silver (which implies also the reverse), as they are simply too different, in the crowding of the relief ground, handling of drapery, deep undercutting of relief, etc. (but in "L'argenterie," Pompeii 79 [1979]: 220-23, he says Claudian-Neronian); followed by Zanker 1988, 392; contra Gabelmann 1984. For Küthmann (1959, 79) the relief style comfortably fits the last quarter of the first century B.C. [BACK]

9. Contra, for example, Gabelmann (1984, 130 n. 537), who exploits Künzl's statement (see n. 8) that the cups can hardly be paralleled even in monumental relief. [BACK]

10. As recognized by Sahin (1972, 43, 73, fig. 17). Note that its paratactic figure friezes (chap. 3, pp. 88-89) correspond also to the decoration of such monumental complexes. The rich evidence for miniaturization of major public monuments, in the late Hellenistic and Roman world, deserves exploration. [BACK]

11. A good account of the major Roman hoards through the first century A.D. is Barr Sharrar 1987, chap. 4 (pp. 29-30 Boscoreale). [BACK]

12. PAMPHILI CAES L.; Küthmann 1959, 62 n. 34; Oliver and Luckner 1977, cat. 87-88. The hoard is clearly a ministerium; Oliver and Luckner, cat. 97: "In a complete set of Roman silver tableware (a ministerium ) there was eating silver ( argentum escarium ) and drinking silver ( argentum potorium )." The importance of displaying silver is attested by depictions of such displays; see Oliver and Luckner, s.v. cat. 95. [BACK]

13. Küthmann 1959, 72f.; the male emblema, MonPiot 5 (1899): pl. ii. Other possible owners' graffiti on the BR silver: Oliver and Luckner 1977, cat. 87-90. [BACK]

14. MonPiot 5 (1899): pls. v-vi, skyphoi, in each panel Amor on a beast (elephant, lion, ass, panther); pls. vii-viii, the skeleton cups discussed below; pls. ix-x, large ring-handled, stem-footed cup; pls. xi-xii, kantharos pair, storks in a marsh; pls. xiii-xiv, matching pair; pls. xv-xvi, low-footed "seasons" skyphoi, see p. 217 n. 25; pl. xvii (here fig. 1), ring-handled skyphos, olive garland; pl. xviii, ring-handled kantharos, oak garland. [BACK]

15. Héron de Villefosse 1899, pls. xxxi-xxxv (three shots of each cup panel: left, right, center); pp. 134-40, cat. 103 (BR I); 141-47, cat. 104 (BR II); 150ff. (discussion). [BACK]

16. For details of physical damage (tear outlines, cracking, etc.) see the photographs in Baratte 1991. I outline here the "iconographic" losses.

BR I:1 (Augustus cup, allegory) (pl. 28): From the right of Roma's body up to the left edge of Mars' body, all repoussé decoration is missing except for Augustus' right forearm holding a globe, and one wing and a palm branch of the Victoriola engraved onto a bit of the background. The destroyed figures include Augustus and his throne, Venus, Amor, the Genius of the Roman People, and Roma's weapon pile. Roma is missing her right leg, left foot, and left arm; Mars has lost both legs. In the province behind Mars, the high-relief figure of Gallia is totally gone, as is the body of the figure following her.

BR I:2 (Augustus cup, Gallic audience) (pl. 27): A great diagonal tear from upper left has removed from the crowd before Augustus all the Gauls and their children and the figure of Drusus with them. One detail remains, of the Gaul farthest left: his upper face, and most of the child riding his shoulders. This tear arcs under the central group of Augustus and his lictors and continues across the lower bodies of the crowd behind the emperor, damaging their lower bodies; Augustus' military chair and dais are gone. The lictor in high relief behind the throne group has been scissored neatly away, leaving only his extended right forearm.

BR II:1 (Tiberius cup, sacrifice): The central figure of the sacrificing imperator had already been partly damaged. The right edge of this hole has widened, to include the table altar and the bodies of the attendants behind it (though not their heads). This widened hole has also taken the head of the left-hand servant in the bull slaying at right; the cranium of the right-hand servant is missing also.

BR II:2 (Tiberius cup, triumph): The necks and heads of the horses pulling Tiberius' quadriga had already been damaged. This hole has now widened slightly, and the associated corrosion visible on the silver shell above this zone has now worsened, obscuring the faces of the three foremost attendants standing behind the team. [BACK]

17. See now Baratte 1988, and 1991, 24, with bibliography; the key publication is Il tesoro di Boscoreale: Gli argenti (1988), a documentary exhibition by the archeological superintendency of Pompeii. [BACK]

18. The late Donald Strong, for instance, broke his usual practice of direct examination of material when he discussed the cups in his 1966 survey Greek and Roman Gold and Silver Plate . This is evident from the fact that he omitted description atop the thumb-plate decoration of these skyphoi (garlanded bucranium ), even though he elsewhere used such decoration as a dating criterion (133f., 139); this detail is of course invisible in the 1899 photographs. [BACK]

19. For interim mention of the cups' fate, before the 1991 republication, see, for example, Oliver and Luckner 1977, 134; Hannestad 1986, 378 n. II; Baratte in Pompeii: Leben und Kunst (1973), 105; Simon 1986, 143, 245; Zanker 1988, 362. From various American-based sources, this author heard rumors in the 1980s that the Tiberius cup had, as it were, "resurfaced," but that the Augustus cup was unrecoverable. [BACK]

20. Roman silver, esp. late Republican and Julio-Claudian: see most recently Baratte et al. 1989, 15ff., and the catalogue to individual pieces, and also Baratte 1986. See also Simon 1986, 137-52; Henig 1983, 140-48. Oliver and Luckner 1977 has valuable discussion and bibliography for individual pieces. See too Künzl, "Le argenterie," Pompeii 79 (1979): 211ff.; Strong 1966; the excellent survey of early Roman silver by Küthmann (1959) lacks index and plates but has a useful chronological table of pieces with their subjects indicated. The more famous early imperial pieces with figural decoration are shown by Vermeule (1968), 134f.); cf. his 1963 survey. Bühler 1973 gives fine cross-references to metalwork. [BACK]

21. See, for instance, the table of hoard contents in Baratte et al. 1989, 16. Services displayed on a table were often depicted, especially in Dionysiac landscapes—for example, "Coupe des Ptolemées" or a mosaic from Daphne (Henig 1983, 141, 120). Berthouville centaur skyphos: Baratte et al. (1989, 82-84, cat. 17) cite Goudineau ( MEFR 79 [1967]) on this motif. It occurs in banquets painted in Etruscan and Roman tombs; T. Querciola, T. dell' Orco: Blanck and Lehmann 1987, figs. 134, 148, 159; T. of Vestorius Priscus: see p. 303 n. 23. Greek texts call drinking services ta ekpomata, often coupled with trapeza, the portable tables on which they were set. [BACK]

22. So Kirchner on the early imperial category of emblema cups in Baratte et al. 1989, 19; 84, s.v. the Berthouville centaur skyphoi. [BACK]

23. There is a tendency to spot portraits of the Julio-Claudian house in almost any gem or piece of silver extant. Typical are Vermeule 1963 and 1968, 134f.; H. Meyer 1983, 102-6. The mythological cups in question (the Hoby cup of Achilles and Priam [ Kais. Aug. 1988, cat. 396-97] and the Orestes cup, among others) are read as veiled satire on tensions in the Julio-Claudian house or as scurrilous libels (e.g., Vermeule 1963, 39, accepted in Henig 1983, 140, on a cup with homosexual and heterosexual copulating pairs). These readings see individual portraits in the idealized features of the subjects portrayed. I would recognize no such portraits, except possibly Augustus/Bocchoris on the Meroe cup (Gabelmann 1984, cat. 40 at pp. 126-27). [BACK]

24. Künzl 1979, fig. 135; Simon 1986, s.v. fig. 194. [BACK]

25. Linfert 1977, 22-25; cf. Baratte et al. 1989, 84, 87. On a BR skyphos pair whose still-lifes delineate the round of the seasons, see Schumacher 1979, pls. 58-59 ( MonPiot 5 [1899]: pls. xv-xvi); other BR cups listed on P. 215 n. 14. See Henig 1983, 147-48, on Sabinus who signed the seasons cups in Greek ( sabeinos ), and the artist M. Domitius Polygnotos, also known from our hoard. Greek or Italian, such artists worked in Italy for Roman masters; see Gabelmann 1974, 305, on the role of East Greek slaves imported to Italy in the formative stages of the Arretine ware factories. [BACK]

26. See the masterly iconographic survey by Dunbabin (1986, 224f., figs. 37-42) ( MonPiot 5 [1899]: pls. vii-viii). [BACK]

27. Baratte et al. 1989, 86-87 cat. 19; Baratte 1985, s.v. fig. 10; Vermeule 1968, 139. [BACK]

28. Dunbabin 1986, 226, 230, 233. [BACK]

29. Cf. the so-called Vicarello goblet series, decorated with a schematic itinerary of the route from Gades (Cadiz) to Rome, deposited from 7 B.C. (opening of the Cottian Alps) to ca. A.D. 47 at Aquae Apollinares (Vicarello) in thanks to Apollo for healthy passage on this trade route; see Dilke 1985, 122-23, figs. 9.5, 25. A contemporary patron's instruction to a silversmith: Cicero dedicated a silver piece on which he had the technites engrave his name in rebus form (a chickpea) (Plut. Mor. 204e, Cic. 1.4). (Add to the list of rebuses Brommer, AA 1988: 69-70.) [BACK]

30. Only in the late Empire is Silver giving formalized in a largitio ceremony. The distribution of luxury goods to subordinates, practiced already in Hellenistic courts, is difficult to trace in the sources. "Gifts" of silver as a standard requital for service in the early Empire: Juv. 9.31. [BACK]

31. Compare Cn. Pullius Pollio of Forum Clodii, comes Augusti in Gallia Comata et Aquitania, later Augustus' legate in Athens; ILS 916 = CIL XI.7553 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 198; Ehrenberg 1953, 943; Halfmann 1986, 152, 252 (92f. on the comites Augusti omits Pollio); Maurin 1986, 110 n. 7. [BACK]

32. This family kept heirlooms: for example, a kylix of ca. 300 B.C.; Barr Sharrar 1987, 29-30. Her sources (145) for Roman collecting of antique silver refer to "famous name" Greek and late Republican decorative pieces. Certainly, the owners of the BR collection consciously valued a choice set of Augustan commemorative pieces. Wiseman (1987, 10) suggests that legionaries similarly treasured their Arretine ware; its iconography must sometimes have been relevant (cf. pp. 85f). [BACK]

33. As regards time-damaged art, consider a Late Antique ekphrasis on an "antique" silver cup in high repoussé, worn by use, with thinned bits of relief torn off. See Theodulf of Orléans Contra iudices 195-96 (MGH Poetae, vol. 1, 499): "at pars exterior crebro usu rasa politur/effigiesque perit adtenuata vetus"; effigies means "figure," not ( contra Nees 1987, 443) ''scene." For a late imperial connoisseur, as for us, repoussé work signaled an early imperial origin. Consider also an equestrian bronze of an Aemilius in the vestibule of the family house, one eye missing and its spear bent (Neudecker 1988, 76 n. 754), and portraits missing shoulders, ears, noses, etc., in formal ancestor portrait assemblages: Juv. 8.1f. [BACK]

1. The reference is to Hor. Carm. 3.5.1: "Caelo tonantem credidimus Iovem/ regnare, praesens divus habebitur/Augustus adiectis Britannis/imperio gravibusque Persis" (italics added). See below on the seated Augustus and men with gods. As for correspondence between art and literature, and the problem of iconographic and stylistic categories: although art historians typically review textual evidence, literary historians are rarely trained to address visual sources. Thus Hardie (1986), for example, does well to look at the visual evidence, even if one must qualify his statements (see the Introduction and chap. 4, nn. 3 and II). Hardie frets (89 and n. 12) over a lack of visual images corresponding to "the baroque imagery of Hellenistic ideology" found in Vergil and Ovid; there is more evidence than he knows, and also a "documentary mode" (as on the Ara Pacis) is not a rejection of panegyric but simply an alternative choice (as in literature). [BACK]

2. They can also all wear the same shoes, high boots with a lion-skin liner; Goette 1988a, 405f. [BACK]

3. On Honos and Virtus see most recently Schäfer 1989, 168. [BACK]

4. Hölscher 1967, 181; Pollini 1978, 286; Ryberg 1955, 141; Simon (1986, 143, 241, 245) takes the Gemma Claudia to allude to Honos and Virtus because it has overlapped busts, but that motif is not so restricted. [BACK]

5. Héron de Villefosse 1899, 136; Kaschnitz von Weinberg 1961, 92-93; Jucker 1978, 93, s.v. the Arch of Titus archivolts with Roma and the Genius; Baratte 1986, 69 (Genius and Roma/Virtus); Zanker 1988, 231; Schäfer 1989, 234 n. 12 (mistakenly called the Tiberius Cup). [BACK]

6. On the definitive status of the patera cf. Bieber 1945, 31. See now Kunckel's 1974 book on the Genius; for the BR Genius, pp. 33-34, pl. 13. [BACK]

7. Zwierlein-Diehl 1973, Vol. 2, s.v. cat. 1070, 1440; Boissac 1988, 318 n. 48. Vermeule (1959) omits Republican and early imperial types. Compare the Roma of the Augustan/early Tiberian Temple of Roma and Augustus at Ostia (Vermeule, pl. 9). Contra Richardson 1978, among others (Roma coinage begins only in the first century B.C.), her image is among the earliest Roman types. Strong 1988, 29, figs. 3.E-F (230-226 B.C.); cf. p. 31, fig. 3.Q (113/112 B.C.); bibl.: Classen 1986, 260. [BACK]

8. Issue of Q. F. Calenus and M. Cordus. Bieber 1945, 31, fig. 12a; Torelli 1982, 38. Like Hannestad (1986, 372 n. 109), Richardson (1978) names Honos and Virtus; by error (e.g., Honos on Republican coins wears a fillet) and omission (e.g., of Roma coin types [cf. p. 218 nn. 6-7], gems, and sculpture) he sets up a spurious iconographic and religious stemma for Honos and Virtus, making them the source of cult and imagery for Roma and the GPR. [BACK]

9. BMCRR 233-35, nos. 1704-24, pl. 32.9-11. Obv., bust of young Hercules; in exergue, ROMA. Grueber (i.234, 406; ii.359) notes that the gens Cornelia seems to have felt a special attachment to the Genius of the Roman People, as this and the two other Republican Genius representations were minted by that gens .

P. Corn. Lent. Spinther in 74 B.C. ( BMCRR nos. 3329-30; CRR 122) and Cn. Corn. Lent. Marcellinus in 76-72 B.C. ( BMCRR Spain nos. 52-60; CRR 130) observably depict the same special version of the GPR, at the same point in time. The first (fig. 44) shows a bearded Genius on a sella curulis with globe, scepter, etc.; obv., Hercules as in 89 B.C. The second excerpts the full figure, giving, obv., the Genius's bearded head (inscr. GPR); rev., his attributes (esp. globe and rudder). It is this version of the 70s B.C. that seems a Cornelian redaction of the GPR, transmuting the Genius in a special allegorical version. Such mutation itself argues that the divinity altered was firmly established. The Cornelian redaction might be tied to the allegorical celebration of some particular politician (Sulla ?), as the beard hints, for the full-figure type ( RRC 393) is paraphrased in the same year as a togate beardless figure (74 B.C.; RRC 397). CRR 86, 122, 130, dated to 96-94, 76-74, and 72 B.C. [BACK]

10. These disprove Riemann 1987, 142, claiming as the first standing Amazon Roma the 70 B.C. reverse to the Honos and Virtus issue RRC 403. [BACK]

11. Honos of 45 B.C. struck by Lollius Palicanus in a series with Libertas and Felicitas, inscr. HONORIS; Classen 1986, 273, pl. 126.9; Schäfer 1989, 94-95, pl. 10.8-9. I note that it commemorates the occasion reported by Cicero in De legibus 2.58: a temple of Honos was "rediscovered" when digging at the Porta Collina revealed an altar and a votive plate inscribed "Honoris," whereupon a shrine to Honos was built at the spot. The coin inscription, unique in identifying the divinity honored in the genitive, must refer to this event; it dates the event and the new shrine near the time of the coin and of De legibus, in the early 40s. [BACK]

12. L. Aquillius Florus reissues other types also of Mn. Aquillius, see figs. 52-53 (Sicilia) and chap. 3, p. 77. According to Schneider (1986, 31, 35, pl. 17.5-6) the series to which they belong accompanies coinage referring to the return of the standards; Honos and Virtus here link up to the fact that the Ara of Fortuna Redux, with which the Senate rewarded Augustus' proud return in 19 B.C., fronted the Temple of Honos and Virtus at the Porta Capena, a location Augustus ( RG 11) took pains to point out. Kais. Aug. 1988, 516-17, cat. 345 (Trillmich). [BACK]

13. Koeppel 1987, 113-15, cat. 4, figs. 4-7. Contra all but Hölscher ( Kais. Aug. 1988, 377, s.v. cat. 208d) the Sorrento base does not depict the Genius (fig. 15b) before Augustus' door. This mutilated seated male wears a Roman sleeved tunic, not a mantle. Seated between Mars and Amor on the right and (Venus) on the left, on the Palatine, he will be Romulus. [BACK]

14. Simon 1967, 29-30, pl. 29; Simon in Helbig ⁴ II, 693. Roma on the Temple of Mars Ultor: Simon 1986, s.v. fig. 52; Zanker 1973, 13; Koeppel 1983a, 101, cat. 12, no. 15, figs. 14-51 Torelli (1982, 38-39), followed by Hannestad (1986, 73), identifies the BR Genius as Honos; his nn. 48-49 omit Kunckel and Bieber. [BACK]

15. See below p. 22 and chap. 2, p. 61 nn. 105-6. [BACK]

16. Vitr. De arch. praef. 17, 3.2, 5.7. See n. 11 for sources on the problematic temples of Honos and Virtus; Richardson 1978, 242-45; Richardson 1987, 123; Bieber 1945, 31; Platner-Ashby, s.v. Pompey's theater shrines: Hanson 1959, 52, citing the fasti ( CIL I.2, p. 324). [BACK]

17. On the second-century revival of Honos' cult, principally by soldiers and officers, and its connection with the equites, see Reinsberg 1984, 294, 304-5. [BACK]

18. See p. 219 n. 9. Weinstock (1971, 206) even claimed that the Cornelii Lentuli invented the GPR. [BACK]

19. Fasti Anit. Arv., s.v. vii id. Oct.; CIL I.2, pp. 214-45, 323, 331; sharing also, Fausta Felicitas. [BACK]

20. Ad hoc use: for Classen (1986, 276-77), a general principle in numismatic depiction of "abstractions" and "personifications" (e.g., Pax, Concordia, Salus, Libertas, Fortuna P.R., Bonus Eventus); these very limited representations tended to be one of a kind, converting preexisting numismatic iconographic conventions (e.g., the Virtus and Honos issues, 71 and 45 B.C., respectively, discussed above). Classen notes that abstractions can have temples (e.g., Caesar's Clementia, never shown on a coin) long before they turn up at the mint (e.g., Virtus, Pietas). [BACK]

21. The Aphrodite from Epidauros, Athens, NM 262, and related copies: Brünn-Bruckmann, pl. 14; Einzelaufnahmen nos. 629, 630; a figure from the Mausoleum at Halikarnassos, EAA 352, s.v. "Halicarnassus." The Capuan Aphrodite type (mantled but with naked torso) was converted to Venus Genetrix with a slipped-strap chiton in the Brescia Victory (wings added later) according to Hölscher, followed by Zanker (1988, 200-202, 347, figs. 152-53). For the comparable case of the "Fréjus Aphrodite" type see Karanastassis 1986, passim, though she remains silent on the meanings of such reuse or the relation of the type to Rome and the West. Similarly, LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite," sec. 4, discusses various figure types with chiton and mantle replicating or synthesizing High Classical sources, but does not address the circumstances of Roman transmission. As many of the Aphrodite types throughout the LIMC entry are Roman-era variants and creations, it is a pity that the catalogue did not thoroughly cover Roman Venus types, though Amor gets in under Eros, and Mars under Ares. [BACK]

22. Statue: Weinstock 1971, 85-86; Gros 1976a, 141-42. Venus Victrix: Hölscher 1967, 26, 80f., 155, 163; Weinstock 1971, 83f., pointing out that the cult application of Lucretius' epithet is new; Galinsky 1969, chap. 5, esp. 233ff.; Hanson 1959, 50f. [BACK]

23. Compare how the Augustan cult of Venus Victrix on the Capitol linked Venus to the Genius of the Roman People and to Fausta Felicitas—a programmatic celebration of victory, pax, and prosperity. See Purcell 1986, 89; Platner-Ashby, s.v. The arrangement recalls that in Pompey's theater and also the great triple cult dominating the hill. [BACK]

24. In the Pantheon are "statues of many gods, including one of Ares and one of Aphrodite. . . . Agrippa wished to set up there a statue of Augustus and to name the building after him. But when Augustus would accept neither honor, he set up a statue of the former Caesar there and put statues of himself and Augustus in the pronaos." Dio must single out Mars and Venus because they were especially prominent in the "pantheon" within; the location meant for Augustus/Caesar must have been in their company; as the temple was to be dedicated to Augustus, his statue would have held central place, on the main axis through the doors. Thus, a cult group of Augustus/Caesar flanked by Mars and Venus.

Hänlein-Schäfer (1985, 19-20), noting Hellenistic use of pantheia as settings for ruler cult; cf. RE 18.3 (1949) 697ff., s.v. "Pantheion" (Ziegler); Zanker 1983, 25; Coarelli 1983a, 44; Gros 1976a, 146f., 160f. [BACK]

25. Location of statues in a near plane to frame statues in a farther plane, for symbolic and esthetic effect: Bartmann 1988, 215, 219. [BACK]

26. Hommel 1954, 22f; Zanker 1973, 13f., fig. 46; Zanker 1988, 199, fig. 150; Koeppel 1983a, cat. 12; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite," no. 591; Simon 1986, 49-50, fig. 51; Strong 1988, fig. 57. [BACK]

27. Bibl.: Rose 1987, cat. Ravenna 01; Simon 1986, s.v. fig. 102; Strong 1988, 109, figs. 55-56. The disputed flanking figures I hold still to be Antonia, Drusus (cf. the Caere portrait), and their son Germanicus. [BACK]

28. Langlotz 1954, 318f., pl. 66.3; Hölscher 1984c, 32, fig. 61; bibl.: Karanastassis 1986, 277 n. 312; Simon 1986, s.v. fig. 282; Picard 1982, 189; Zanker 1988, 199-200, 204, 347, fig. 151. Compare the Amor, Mars, and (Venus) on the Sorrento base; see fig. 15b. [BACK]

29. The Cività Castellana base (figs. 28-30) has Venus in her genetrix mantle but with naked torso, Amor on her shoulder; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite," no. 598. [BACK]

30. Andreae 1983, 54-56, 63, figs. 122-24, 126-30, showing the Ravenna relief (fig. 8) at fig. 132; Andreae 1982, 203-6, fig. at p. 205; identical crown, dress slightly modified to the diva type developed by Caligula for Drusilla (i.e., the triangular "apron"; see Rose 1987, s.v. Drusilla), but Amor here stands upon Antonia's hand at hip level, leaning on her left shoulder and looking up in her face. [BACK]

31. See pp. 33, 228 n. 92. The Venus: Gros 1976a, 162, 168; the Mars: Gros 1976a, 166-68; Zanker 1988, 199, 201-3, 347. [BACK]

32. The problematic Belvedere and Vicus Sandaliarius altars are sometimes held to depict Venus. Belvedere altar: Fullerton 1985, 482; Zanker 1988, 222, s.v. fig. 17. Vicus Sandaliarius altar: Zanker 1988, 129, fig. 101; Rose 1987, cat. Rome 03; Hölscher 1984c, 27f.; p. 242 n. 126 and p. 247 n. 38 below (epiphany compositions). On both also Pollini 1987, 30f, nn. 65f; Zanker 1969, 209-10. The Belvedere female who watches a chariot apotheosis may be Venus, but Rose has convinced me that the Vicus Sandaliarius female is a human priestess rather than Ceres, Vesta, etc. [BACK]

33. Fittschen 1976, 175-21O; Zanker 1988, fig. 178. [BACK]

34. Zanker alone in 1969 noted the BR Venus, grouping it with the Temple of Mars Ultor pediment (fig. 9b), the Ravenna relief (fig. 8), and the Belvedere altar "Venus," not distinguishing between chiton and tunic figures. [BACK]

35. The list in LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite," sec. 19.A.I.d, is too brief., like the rest of the Aphrodite section, it is arbitrary in citing Roman (Venus) types. [BACK]

36. The tunicate Venus type was adapted on the Augustan "Actium relief" series now in Budapest for the figure of a goddess with cornucopia, baby, and slipped sleeve; Simon 1986, fig. 35. [BACK]

37. Not adduced by Fittschen 1979. Fittschen's important article established that the half-naked hero seen here, on the Algiers relief (fig. 6), on Augustan coinage is Divus Julius, quoted for Germanicus on the Ravenna relief (fig. 8). This figure Fittschen and others attribute to the Temple of Divus Julius in the Forum; however, on coins of 37-34 B.C. that statue is visible in its temple as a figure capite velato holding up a lituus . RRC 540/1-2; Kais. Aug. 1988, cat. 308 (Trillmich); Kent 1978, cat. 118; Simon 1986, fig. 108. [BACK]

38. Thus also the Venus to be restored on the Sorrento base cannot have had Amor on her shoulder, as he stands by Mars; see fig. 15b and p. 220 n. 13. [BACK]

39. Zanker 1972, 9-10; Zanker 1988, 81, 97, 266, and figs. 62b (coin), 65 (terracotta antefix), 208 (lamp), 214 (bronze stand); Weinstock 1971, 50-51; Hölscher 1967, 9-17 (the BR cup at p. 9); Hölscher 1984a, 26; and Hölscher in Kais. Aug . 1988, 374 and figs. 170-72, s.v. cat. 207 (Campana plaque series from around Rome showing Augustus' Victoria with a standard and Capricorns). Hölscher (1984a, 9-10) notes: "Sie . . . müssen eher als Ausdruck loyaler Gesinnung gewisser Privatpersonen gedeutet werden"; cf. also Zanker 1988, 265-78. [BACK]

40. See Hölscher 1967, 100f. [BACK]

41. The animated kore, moving in procession with perfume jug and (lost) patera on an Augustan Neo-Attic relief in Atlanta, handles her vessels in identical fashion; Emory Mus. 1986.9.15; see the cover to The Fragrant Past (1989). [BACK]

42. Kais. Aug . 1988, 276-82, cat. 130; Anderson 1987-88, 16-32; Smith 1988a, 10, 33 n. 35. Venus panel: Fittschen 1975, 98-99, fig. 63; Andreae 1975, 82-84, fig. 56; Anderson 1982-88, 26, fig. 32; Kais. Aug . 1988, figs. at pp. 276-77, 279. Fittschen (1975, 98-99) assigns the painted room's commission to a Caesarian; this is especially plausible since, as Weinstock showed, Caesar created Venus Genetrix's worship (see p. 221 n. 22 above). No one discusses this Venus' iconography. She is plainly a Roman creation, as opposed to the copies of Hellenistic royal painting on the side walls.

The goddess looms in the foreground between two buildings on rocky outcrops: left, a temple foreporch on whose column podia stand figures with cornucopiae; right, a round temple on whose porch stand Victories between two stripling Amores. Damage above obscures Venus' nude torso; she wears the heavy rolled mantle about the hips. From the way that the baby Amor on her right hip arches up with outstretched arms, and from Venus' stance, it is clear that she held something up in her left hand at which the baby grabbed, as she inclined her head toward him; cf. the Praxitelean Hermes and Dionysos type and Kephisodotos' Eirene and Ploutos. The panel's iconography and that of the rest of the cycle (see p. 245 n. 19) make plain that this is a genetrix type with strong Victory associations. The compelling figural reminiscence of the famous Eirene and Ploutos group must have been deliberate; compare the Ara Pacis Venus (Eirene = Pax). [BACK]

43. A verbal reference is CIL II.3270 from Castulo/Cazlona; Hanson 1959, 52: "signa Veneris Genetricis et Cupidinis ad theatrum." [BACK]

44. Erotes/Amores serving the "high" gods: Flory 1988, 355 n. 29. [BACK]

45. Louvre S 2643; Besques 1986, D 3850, pl. 90a. [BACK]

46. Flory 1988, 356f.; Slater 1974, 133-40. [BACK]

47. The wearer would appear flanked by little flying Amor attendants, like the Aphrodite of traditional Greek mirror stands. Earring from a votive stipes to Mefis at Rocca S. Felice; Colucci Pescatori 1975, 38, pl. xiii. Many have certain or probable Tarentine provenance: from Bari, Ori di Taranto 1984, cat. 88 a-b (Taranto M.N.A. inv. 40.105 a-b), 125-100 B.C. from Tarentum, cat. 95 (inv. 12.021-022) and cat. 96 (inv. 12.013), late fourth/early third century; cat. 98 (inv. 40.183), third century; cat. 119a-b (inv. 119.352-53), early second century. In The Search for Alexander 1980 cat. 72 (Houston M.F.A. 37.42), Herrmann notes examples from Abdera, Amphipolis, and Pella; these may be Tarentine exports. Cf. below, the Tarentine Eros and shell-basin statue type. See also Athens, Benaki Mus. 1578 ( ex Antoniades Coll.); Gold of Greece 1990, pl. 24 (calls the object in hand a rabbit-hunting stick). [BACK]

48. Reeder 1988, cat. 119 (Walters inv. 57.1498-99), gold and enamel (calls alabastron a "torch"), and the matching pair she cites ex Coll. Guilhou (R. Zahn, Festschr. Schumacher [1930], pl. 22.1-2); Athens, Benaki Mus. 163115; LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros," no. 309. [BACK]

49. Cairo Mus. JE 38077 (CG 52093), gold, dia. 9.2 cm; ex Tuch el-Karamus treasure. Amor stands in a Hercules-knot; alabastron lost. Götter-Pharaonen 1978, cat. 79. [BACK]

50. Simon 1986, s.v. color pls. 32-33. [BACK]

51. See below p. 262 n. 6. [BACK]

52. Baratte et al. 1989, 19; on shell dishes, see appendix A, p. 208. [BACK]

53. Similarly the famous silver shell box from Canosa, Tomba degli Ori, bears nymphs riding sea monsters; Ori di Taranto 1984, 58-62, cat. 8, ca. 225-200 B.C. [BACK]

54. Compare the bronze mirror-handle attachment Leningrad Hermit. 1868.23, ca. 400-350 B.C. of Eros seated with an alabastron; LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros," no. 542. [BACK]

55. S. Fabing in The Gods Delight 1988, 258-62, cat. 48, winged female with alabastron (Cincinnati Mus. of Art, Fleischmann Coll.), and 263-66, cat. 49, wingless girl (Boston M.F.A. 98. 679). Attributed to workshops in the area Todi-Orvieto-Bolsena. Each has on her head the shell-hinge motif, into which fitted the patera bowl, thus turned symbolically to a shell. As neither bowl survives, perhaps real shells were slotted in. On Hellenistic shell dishes, simulated and real, see pp. 303-4 nn. 25-26. On the back of the BMFA bowl mount, a palmette motif "carved" into the shell, a practice attested in texts. [BACK]

56. Compare the Italian engraved mirror Brit. Mus. 634, on which Venus is attended by two nymphs, one winged, one wingless with alabastron; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite/Turan," no. 38. [BACK]

57. Garland sarcophagus, Louvre MA 459, from Rome (Torre Nuova; ex Coll. Borghese). Two Amores flank and bathe Diana (crouching Aphrodite type), right with a vase, left catching water from a jetting spring in a large fluted shell dish (cf. the Aldobrandini Wedding). Herdejürgen 1989, 23, pl. 8.1; p. 25 on possible prototypes; Baratte 1985, 49f., cat. 15, detail on p. 52. [BACK]

58. Rome, Mus. Nuovo inv. 2101, Domitianic, scene set in shell held by Tritons; Boschung 1987a, cat. 763, pl. 31. Brit. Mus. 2360, late Flavian; Boschung, cat. 189, pl. 41.b; Herdejürgen 1989), pl. 8.2. Herdejürgen's n. 34 attests an example from Nazzano Romano. Scene: Venus bathes between two Amores, at left pouring from a vase, at right holding a shell dish. The garland sarcophagus seems to give the root composition, reversed here; the standing Amor echoes popular Roman garden figures of nymphs or Amores propping a shell basin. On these, J. Papadopoulos in MNR I.1 (1979): 87, s.v. cat. 68, inv. 113190, from Rome, citing Leningrad Hermit. inv. 855—the type is converted, perhaps at Tarentum ca. 300 B.C. from the Lysippan Eros Stringing a Bow; LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros," no. 303. [BACK]

59. Cf. LIMC II (1986), s.v. "Aphrodite," nos. 1036-37; examples in Brussels ( ex Coll. Loeb) and London (Brit. Mus., ex Townley Coll.). [BACK]

60. Terracotta baby with shell; Louvre CA 1270 from Boeotia, ca. 200-175 B.C.— LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros," no. 306. Terracotta Eros with alabastron: in a set of Erotes of the third century B.C. in Budapest, Mus. Beaux Arts 59.9, and Brussels, MR A 895— LIMC, s.v. no. 539; Louvre Myr. 86, early second century (Myrina)— LIMC, s.v. no. 540; Berlin, Staatl. Mus. TC 6808, fourth century B.C.— LIMC, s.v. no. 541 Cf. the painted Eros with alabastron on a lekanis lid from Ruvo, Lecce Mus. Prov. 802, late fourth century B.C.— LIMC, s.v. no. 538. Bronze Eros standing with shell and alabastron: Louvre BR 357 (Egypt); Cairo, Mus.Eg. CG 27661— LIMC, s.v. no. 308; Brit. Mus. 1128— LIMC, s.v. no. 543; Paris, Cab. Méd. 283 (Syria) Roman— LIMC, s.v. "Eros in per. or.," no. 16. Bronze Amorino with shell: Paris, Cab. Méd. 2990; Brit. Mus. 1129— LIMC, s.v. no. 308; Cairo, Mus.Eg. JE 88756— LIMC, s.v. no. 543. With alabastron: Brit. Mus. 1127— LIMC, s.v. no. 308; with alabastron and bird: Louvre BR 608— LIMC, s.v. no. 543. [BACK]

61. So the relief Delos Mus. Arch. 4017, dated to the late second century B.C.; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite," no. 400, cited LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros," no. 301: Eros with shell dish and alabastron stands by a Capitoline-type Aphrodite, by a herm. Already an early fourth-century plastic Attic lekythos carries Eros alighting with shell dish and jewelry box, literally onto one's dressing table; Hamburg, Mus. KG 1899.95 (Methana); LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros," no. 305. On a superb Hellenistic gold pin-head ornament Aphrodite crouches to bathe on a finial over a base with four lounging baby Erotes, one certainly with an alabastron; Athens, Benaki Mus. 2062, said to be from Thessaly; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Aphrodite," no. 1038 ("late 2nd c.'') = "Aphrodite in per. or.," no. 189 ("4-3rd c."); Gold of Greece 1990, pl. 28; cf Greek Gold 1965, cat. 72, on this and related pins. Roman is the bronze group from Syria, Paris, Cab Méd. 250, nude Venus with mirror on exedra basis, flanked by Amores, one with shell dish and alabastron; LIMC s.v. "Eros in per. or.," no. 81. The LIMC authors mislead in filing many of these images under "Eros and the marine world," lumped together under "Eros with shell" (nos. 301f.) with images of Eros in a shell boat, etc. [BACK]

62. This, as Flory and others recognize, was the context for Livia's statue in her bedroom of her (adoptive) son Gaius as Amor. [BACK]

63. Rome, Via Quattro Fontane 13-18; CIL VI.38916. Boschung (1987a, cat. 852) calls the alabastron a mappa, but its lip is clearly visible. [BACK]

64. LIMC III (1986), s.v. "Eros/Amor," no. 698; Simon in Helbig ⁴ II, cat. 1672; Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, fig. 290. Luna marble. Frag., now Pal. Cons. (Br. Nuovo). [BACK]

65. For the way Amor gazes openmouthed at Augustus, who stares ahead with mouth closed, see the divinities and Augustus on the Gemma Augustea (fig. 16). [BACK]

66. His (much-disputed) bare feet with armor may indicate that he has just completed a nuncupatio votorum and is about to set off on campaign (metaphorically at least); see chap. 5, p. 142. [BACK]

67. Ghedini 1986, bibl., 39 n. 1; 38, Antony's children; accepted by Künzl 1989, 73. [BACK]

68. Villa Medici, Rome. Koeppel 1983a, cat. 28, fig. 32, p. 122. Ill. (by mistake for a relief in the Uffizi): Boatwright 1987, 234-35, fig. 57. Two fragments of a squarish panel, slightly wider than high; the shield, recut for Diocletian's vicennalia (inscr. = CIL VI.3138 and wreath border). Venus wears a chiton with slipped strap, over it a heavier mantle slung below the hips, falling from the left shoulder and arm; personifications: see p. 227 n. 82 and p. 250 n. 57.

This panel has always been associated (see Kleiner 1985b, 60-61) with a set of two reliefs found with it, also reused on the Arcus Novus: fragment with ethnic personifications (see p. 236 n. 70 and p. 250 n. 58 below); fragment of another scene that included soldiers and a military personification. Laubscher 1976, 68, 78-107, pl. 3.10; Koeppel 1983, cat. 26-27, fig. 31. Not convinced that the three reliefs formed a set originally, I discuss the Venus panel separately. [BACK]

69. Cf. the Conclusion, p. 205. Koeppel, Laubscher, and Boatwright opt on stylistic grounds for a Julio-Claudian, specifically Claudian, date. Kleiner (1985b, 60-61) effectively disposes of Koeppel's attempt to assign these and other pieces to an Arch of Claudius postulated for the vicinity; his unexplained rejection of Koeppel's and Laubscher's redating for the older date of the second century A.D. (e.g., Vermeule 1968, 109, after Toynbee) is odd. It has Julio-Claudian iconography (Venus Genetrix/Victrix) and drapery; the implied Amor-on-shoulder motif is Julio-Claudian too. The entire composition (Venus manifests herself flanked by antithetic female personifications of geographic extent) recalls the Ara Pacis Venus panel (fig. 74). The shield on a squarish pillar with a Tuscan molding "capital" is Augustus' own shield in the Curia and its special support (fig. 11); cf. the Augustan coin types BMCRR pl. 60.18-19 (27-17 B.C.) and BMCRE I. 140, no. 141, pl. 1.1 (20-19 B.C.). Similar types were used by Tiberius at his accession. See Hölscher 1967, 103ff., pls. 11-12; Zanker 1988, fig. 80b. [BACK]

70. The Forum Augustum portraits, for example, monumentalize a patrician atrium; the Ara Pacis enclosure interior monumentalizes domestic wall-painting schemes, and its acanthus frieze draws on silver patterns; see pp. 129-31 below on landscape conventions from decorative relief, on Augustan monuments. [BACK]

71. Simon 1967, pls. 13, 15-17. [BACK]

72. On Mars-Venus iconography: Zanker 1973, 18-20; Hölscher 1967, 100f; Fittschen 1976, 187-94; Meyer 1983, 144-48. [BACK]

73. Koeppel 1987, cat. 1 (Mars), cat. 4 (Roma and Genius), cat. 3 ("Tellus"). I think this figure is Venus; most recently with this opinion, Rose 1990, 467. [BACK]

74. Other metaphors of victory by land and sea: chap. 3, n. 136. [BACK]

75. Fittschen 1976, 175-210; Simon 1986, s.v. color pl. 8. Found at Cherchel in North Africa within the ancient domains of one of Augustus' most devoted client-kings, the intensely cultivated philhellene King Juba. Simon sets the statue in the context of Juba II's artistic and architectural programs at Iol Caesarea (Cherchel); on these see also Picard 1982, 189-90, dating the cuirass statue (pl. 74.2) late Augustan at the outside; Pensabene in the same volume (1982, 116-18) delineates how Juba imported workers, models, and finished pieces from Rome. [BACK]

76. Date: see now Goette 1988a, 411-13, comparing the boots to fragments (pre-2 B.C.) from Augustus' Forum. Stemmer (1978, 11-12, cat. I5, pls. 2.1-2, 3.1-5) critiqued Fittschen's date for the copy but accepted an Augustan bronze prototype. Meyer (1983, 141-50) developed Fittschen's arguments but did not address Stemmer; Zanker (1988, 192, 223) calls it an Augustan, posthumous Gaius portrait. Simon (1986, s.v. pl. 8, 223-25) sees it as a Mauritanian original, "probably Augustus," representing Mauritania's thanks to Rome; somewhat implausibly she takes the Tritons to refer to Cherchel/Caesarea's status as a port city with an agricultural hinterland. [BACK]

77. Kais. Aug. 1988, 472, cat. 276 (cast in Würzburg), 463 (C. Maderna-Lauter). [BACK]

78. Hesberg (1980, 353) correctly deduces (from the remains of the pulvinars on top of the altar) the original front: a standing togate figure, namely, Augustus, to whom Victory (left) brings her laurel and whom Venus (right) attends. On this altar a panel composition has been "wrapped around" the rectangular altar mass; cf. the circular wrapping of a similar composition on the Cività Castellana base (figs. 28-30). See p. 241 n. 115 and p. 248 n. 39 below. [BACK]

79. Vermeule 1980b, 48, fig. 10; Vermeule 1959, 17, with bibl. Now in Palermo; one of two or more reliefs associated with a "throne," more likely with a paratactic frieze on a votive or a votive base. Compare also the Augustan marble ship's beak in Leipzig, on one side of which Victory crowns a general (Agrippa?), cited by Zanker 1988, 81 (fig. 63 is, alas, the other side). [BACK]

80. Weinstock (1971, 98ff.) discusses how Caesar linked Venus and Victory (not a new concept for the late Republic), ending at p. 102 with the remarks quoted here. [BACK]

81. See Fittschen 1976, 183-88. On his treatment of this Divus Julius type, which I would correlate with the Pantheon, see chap. 1, n. 37. [BACK]

82. Eichler and Kris 1927, 65, pl. 7.25. Compare the mural-crowned goddesses who offer something to Venus on the Arcus Novus panel (fig. 12). This composition may find a late echo on a fourth-century gold issue where "Constantinople" brings Victory to the emperor, shown as a mural-crowned goddess adapting the Venus-with-hip-roll figure type; Hölscher 1967, pl. 14.9. I am preparing an article on Constantinople-Venus and other syncretic Venus types on Constantinian coinage. [BACK]

83. Meyer 1989, pl. 23, cat. A 70 (Athens, NM 1474; 355/354 B.C.), A 75 (destr.; 360-350 B.C.); pl. 25, cat. A 93 (Athens, Acr. 2437-3001; ca. 340 B.C.); pl. 33, cat. A 129 (Berlin, Staatl. Mus. K 104; ca. 330-320 B.C.). In the earlier redaction of the composition, A 70 and 75, the tiny leaning Nike is held out toward the mortal; in the later variant, A 93 (superb!) and 129, the Nike is held so as to drape a garland right over the honorand's head. [BACK]

84. Héron de Villefosse 1899, 128. [BACK]

85. See Zanker 1988, fig. 17. [BACK]

86. Sardonyx lekythos, Berlin, Staatl. Mus.: Bühler 1973, cat. 68 at pp. 59-63, pl. 20, drawing at p. 61; broken away above and below. This splendid piece is little known, possibly because it is so difficult to photograph. I agree with Bühler that this must have been made as a gift for an imperial princess at or near her time: compare Crinagoras' gift poem (Gow and Page 1968, 12) for his friend and patroness Antonia, the wife of Drusus, invoking Hera and Zeus on her behalf as she nears delivery. Ghedini (1987) proposes that the piece was made in A.D. 39 to celebrate the birth of Julia Drusilla to Caligula and Caesonia, but the theme of conquest foretold seems unapt to a female birth. [BACK]

87. The Villa of P. Fannius Synistor: pp. 222-23 n. 42. Note that the captive on the Berlin sardonyx lekythos (p. 32; fig. 7) is also an Oriental. This kind of messianic composition seems tied to dreams of Eastern conquest; so interpreting the Grande Camée de France, Jucker 1976, 240-41. [BACK]

88. Poulsen (1973, Pl. clxxxvii, cat. 112 [inv. 2580] at p. 132) calls it an "officier remain" but ties it to the BR Mars, the two together constituting a figure type based firmly on fifth-century Athenian (relief) prototypes—that is, his piece is a Neo-Attic creation for the Roman market, in (imported) Greek marble. [BACK]

89. Kais. Aug. 1988, 382-83, cat. 213 (Hölscher); Felletti Maj 1977, fig. 66.a-b, pp. 190-91; Strong 1988, 50-51, fig. 18. [BACK]

90. Compare the helmet with upright side feathers, also an old Italic type familiar from Lucanian tomb paintings, among other examples, worn by Mars with Venus in a late Augustan painting from Pompeii (Casa del Amore Punito; Simon 1986, fig. 261); by Roma in coinage of 113/112 B.C. ( RRC 292/91; Strong 1988, fig. 3.Q). [BACK]

91. Compare Roccos 1989, 507, on Caesar's Venus Genetrix, and 582-85, on Augustus' Apollo Palatinus, discussing creation in this period of authentically Roman cult types from Classical sources. [BACK]

92. The face is eroded, but the beard area is plain. On the Temple of Mars Ultor figure and Augustan Mars types, see Gros 1976a, 166-68; Pollini (1978, 22-23) adds a third type: an ideal youth in a Hellenistic (cavalry) cuirass, with a high-plumed Corinthian helmet, spear, and bare feet, represented by the Mars on the so-called Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus and by the Mars in the Cività Castellana scene (fig. 27f.). Add the Mars of the terracotta pediment from Via S. Gregorio, ca. 130-100 B.C.; see p. 58 and p. 238 n. 92 below. The BR Mars, however, differs from Pollini's third type in helmet and cuirass. Ara Pacis: Koeppel 1987, 108-10, cat. 1, fig. 1. [BACK]

93. Kais. Aug. 1988, 376. Compare the framing composition on the late Republican tomb panel: Roma-General-Genius (fig. 3; chap. 2, p. 61). [BACK]

1. Gabelmann 1986, 285. To him this would also have in the Augustan period putative connotations of divinization and/or excessive glorification. [BACK]

2. See p. 239 n. 100 below [BACK]

3. I.e., magnified stone images of curule chairs, with the front bar carved in relief. Felletti Maj 1977, 214-15, figs. 84-85, three relief-carved bisellia (there are others differently decorated) from tombs on the major roads (Via Appia near Rome (fig. 23b); Via Cassia, Aquatraversa; Via Claudia, Pracerano). On the main panel on the seat front the deceased, with three lictors on each side, receives a togate petitioner who comes right up to him, once even bending the knee (Via Cassia) (fig. 23c). Cf. the Via Casilina limestone sella (fig. 23d) (Rome, MN 124483), where the enlarged magistrate stands at center, next to his giant chair: Kais. Aug. 1988, 436-37, pat. 234, discussed as cat. 6, pl. 28 by Schäfer in an essay expanded in his 1989 book; and see also Schäfer, cat. 7, pl. 27 (Aquino, Cathedral) (fig. 23e); cat. 8, pl. 30 (Rome, MN) (fig. 23c); cat. 11, pl. 31 (Rome, Pal. Colonna) (fig. 23a); cat. 12, pl. 29 (Manziana, Coll. Tittoni). [BACK]

4. The Augustan Palazzo Colonna example (fig. 23a) is striking, as it incorporates the spatial devices used for the group around Augustus on the Ara Pacis for the depiction of the magistrate and his entourage; ill. now also in Carinci 1990, 258-60, cat. 39; DAI negs. 82.2375, 82.834-36. [BACK]

5. Eichler and Kris 1927, 50, pl. 7.5; Laubscher 1974, 250; Zanker 1988, 102, fig. 81; bibl.: Kais. Aug. 1988, 466-67, cat. 246 (C. Maderna-Lauter). Contrast the purely allegorical BMFA cameo from Hadrumetum: divinely nude, Octavian/Neptune drives a sea quadriga as Antony/S. Pompeius founders in the waves. See Laubscher 1974, 248-50, fig. 9; Meyer 1983, 98; Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 82; Kais. Aug. 1988, 467, cat. 247. [BACK]

6. On these Spanish issues see Kleiner 1989, 244-45; ill.: Fuchs 1969, pl. 8.99-98; Sutherland 1987, 28, no. 11b; BMCRE I.75, nos. 432-36. [BACK]

7. Smith (1988a, 33) remarks a similar absence of the seated type from Hellenistic royal portraits. No one at all has dealt with seated cuirassed statues! Besides the colossal Constantine from the Basilica of Maxentius, now on the Capitol, I know only the statue restored with an Augustus head, Villa Albani inv. 87; Vermeule 1980b, ill. on p. 73, cat. 108; Stemmer 1978, 572. Coins, however, indicate that there may have been more. [BACK]

8. Niemeyer 1968, 59ff.; cf. Zanker 1988, 314, figs. 249-50. [BACK]

9. This hypothesis is based on two things. First, in Republican ceremonial the consul rose after other magistrates, all of whom approached him standing, and it was a special privilege (voted, for example, to Caesar) to be allowed to remain seated in the presence of all other magistrates. Second, there is the anecdote that Caesar provoked outrage in 45 B.C. when he received while seated a delegation of senators bringing him honors, even though he enjoyed this privilege officially; Dio 44.8.1-4; App. BCiv. 2.107; Livy Per. 116; Suet. Iul. 78.1; Nic. Dam. frag. 130.78-79; Plut. Caes. 60. The anecdote may only echo contemporary slander, but those who first spread it must have thought they could damage Caesar by making an issue out of the event. Consider here Roman fixation on the chair of office itself, displayed in precious metals as an honor or carved in stone (enlarged and decorated) as a grave monument. [BACK]

10. Fittschen 1977, 71 n. 7; echoed by Schäfer 1989, 139; Schäfer notes Macrinus' group (135) and the Andematunum inscription (139; see also below); Goette (1988a, 457) looks at funerary seated magistrates with senatorial/patrician calcei . Niemeyer (1968, 43) merely says that aside from two fragmentary Late Antique porphyry examples, only coins and reliefs (Arch of Constantine, Anaglypha Traiani) document such statues and that they can have attributes (the scepter) not seen in standing figures. Lahusen (1983, 43) gives one paragraph, adding the Gallic testamentary inscription and the Lucus Feroniae inscriptions and citing the Vita Macrini (50 n. 37). Pekáry (1985, 37, 148) omits the seated togate type. [BACK]

11. Hammond (1953, 158-76) investigated coin portrayals of seated emperors, including goddesses as portraits of empresses, to derive lost statues. He adduces actual statues and reliefs, all of the seminude Jupiter type (173f.); otherwise he cites only (162-63) the Puteoli bases/Forum Julium monument of Tiberius (see p. 41). [BACK]

12. Fittschen 1977, 69-72, n. 7, cat. 7, pls. 25-26; Heintze in Helbig ⁴ II, cat. 1255; cat. 1370 in Helbig is an early Augustan example of the philosopher statue types copied by Romans. Cf Cic. Fin. 1.39: "statua est in Ceramico Chrysippi sedentis porrecta manu." Compare the togatus on a klismos on a Flavian grave altar (Vat. Gall. d. Maschere); Boschung 1987a, fig./cat. 970. The importance of shoes to distinguish Romans in Greek guise from Greeks: Coarelli 1981, 240-43; cf. Goette 1988a, 452. Romans in Greek dress: Zanker 1988, 30, 346 (sources), figs. 23-24. [BACK]

13. "Poseidippos": Zanker 1988, 30, 346, fig. 23; Heintze in Helbig ⁴ I, cat. 129, with cat. 130. Pentelic marble, from the Viminal within an ancient round structure. See Hafner 1967, 105-11 (bibl., 105; specifics of reworking, 105-6, 110), pl. 32.1-2. Hafner identifies the recut figures as Plautus and Terence. However, neither would ever be shown in senatorial calcei with a knight's or senator's seal ring; and why not show Plautus in the old-fashioned mode without tunic, to save carving it in? Scholars keep suggesting famous duos, literary or political (e.g., Marius and Sulla). This is unnecessary. Some Roman noble bought them in Greece or took them (probably from a much larger series) and brought them home to install in his gardens, carved to resemble himself and/or his ancestors, or perhaps himself and a friend: compare the transfer, alteration, and mass copies of Lysippos' Granikos group by the Metelli, Scipiones, Licinii, etc., to which Roman portrait heads and footwear were added (p. 276 n. 15). The point will have been, as in comparable grave statues, to proclaim himself a homo Musarum . To my mind this is confirmed by his playfully leaving intact the inscription "Poseidippos," which he could easily have had removed. [BACK]

14. Richardson 1988, 185-86. [BACK]

15. Goette 1988a, 457, with bibl. [BACK]

16. Mus. Arch. (no inv.); .87 X .68 X .69 m; top of chair and draped lap. Local limestone, once painted; Scrinari 1972, fig./cat. 88 (ca. 100-50 B.C.). [BACK]

17. Schäfer 1989, cat. 43, pl. 60.2, fragments of the base. [BACK]

18. Frova 1956, 36-37, pl. 13.3. Este, MN. Local stone. [BACK]

19. Frova 1956, 38f, pl. 14; Goette 1988a, 457. Local stone (breccia di Carrara). Milan, priv. coll. [BACK]

20. Cf. Louvre MA 1267 ( ex Coll. Campana), found on the Aventine, now falsely restored with a head of Caligula. Kersauson 1986, cat. 83. [BACK]

21. A superb figure on the Villa Massimo grounds; Schäfer 1989, 149f., pls. 16-17; Fittschen 1977, 71 n. 7. The elaborate chair of office alludes to provincial command (Victory caryatid legs; seat carved with kneeling barbarians); Schäfer takes the toga as the governor's uniform appropriate specifically to a senatorial province. Head and arms missing; left arm was bent at side, right arm up. Both this and the Palazzo Falconieri figure are in Luna marble. [BACK]

22. Palazzo Falconieri; wears patrician calcei . Schäfer 1989, 168, 171, pls. 19-20; drapery dated Antonine by Goette. [BACK]

23. Chieti, Mus. Naz.; Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, 60, 401, figs. 62-63; Goette 1988a, 457, fig. 39; Schäfer 1989, 398-99, cat. C 53, pls. 106, 122. Compare the portrait of Vestorius Priscus as magistrate on a tribunal elevated above a crowd (a composition similar to the Concordia panel of the Manlius altar), painted on one side of his tomb, A.D. 75/76; Schäfer 1989, 389, cat. C 14, pl. 15.3 (modern drawing). (For the table setting painted inside, see p. 303, n. 23.) [BACK]

24. Daut 1975, 38; Lahusen 1982, 102; Schäfer 1989, 139 n. 63. Compare the triumphal arch at Saintes (to Tiberius, Germanicus, Drusus II) decreed in the testament of the noble Gaul C. Julius Rufus, priest of Rome and Augustus. [BACK]

25. One recognizes the force of this instruction when one notes that most Gallic funerary sculpture is of local stone, as are most of the seated statues from northern Italy named above. [BACK]

26. Espérandieu 1911, 326, no. 3361 ("femme assise"!); headless, .65 m in height. Paris, Mus. Ste Germaine. [BACK]

27. Trimalchio wants himself shown as a kind of super- eques: "me in tribunali sedentem praetextatum cum annulis aureis quinque et nummos in publico de sacculo effundentem." This resembles the Chieti relief; it is an interesting precursor to the pompous largitio self-portraits on ivory diptychs of fourth-century Roman consuls. Such monuments show influence from lost images of emperors presiding at state occasions and distributing largesse to the plebs Romana . [BACK]

28. For example, only an arm holding a globe of the seated statue of Augustus in a shrine at the Pompeii macellum was found; Kockel 1986, 456, n. 75; we cannot know if it was togate or half-naked (Jupiter type). [BACK]

29. The inscription specifies medium and placement for four other types: triumfalis (bronze, in the Forum Augustum and in the Templum Divi Augusti), consularis (marble, in the Templum Divi Julii, on the Palatine, before the Curia), auguralis (marble, at the Regia), equestres (marble, by Rostra). Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 367; Lahusen 1983, 43, 50; Eck 1972, 463. Eck (473) sees in the residens a praetor urbanus, thus the earliest evidence of city prefects' right to the curule chair. The location, near a site of Senate meetings, may mark a precise locus of this magistrate's audiences. The bisellia panels too (p. 228 n. 3; fig. 23) are held to depict a praetor and his six lictors. [BACK]

30. Macrinus writes the Senate to ask them to confirm his decree of statues in Rome for Caracalla and Septimius Severus. The sorts of statues are equestres (equestrian), pedestres habitu militari (standing cuirass statues), triumphales (standing cuirass statues with a triumphal crown and tituli ), and, as if the type were as recognizable as the first three, statuas sedentes civili habitu (seated togate statues). To be erected in Rome and credited to a senatus consultum, they are emblems of Macrinus' legitimate succession to the Severans. [BACK]

31. Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, fig. 200; Kähler 1964, pl. I. 1-2; Torelli 1982, 98, parallel location to that of the (fragmentary) figure of a goddess on the old rostra depicted in the tax-burning panel of the Anaglypha Traiani (fig. 38). [BACK]

32. Delbrück 1932, 96f., pls. 40-41 (Alexandria) = Niemeyer 1968, 43, 89, cat. 28, and 98f., fig. 36 (Istanbul). [BACK]

33. Composite figure with exposed flesh in (lost) marble, 2.45 m in height, excavated in 1951. See Holum and Hohlfelder 1988, 125-26, color figs. 82 (statue) and 136 (setting, with pendant); earlier see M. Avi-Yonah, "The Caesarea Porphyry Statue," Israel Exploration Journal 20 (1970): 203-8. Reused in the sixth to seventh century A.D. with a seated emperor in marble (Jupiter type) to frame the entrance at one end of a formal esplanade to some public building. This display is strikingly similar to the iconic structure (fig. 36) of the Arch of Constantine panel. The columnar entrance the figures framed must have led to an official hall for the local head of government; he would have appeared in state in the entrance at ceremonies, framed by these earlier emperors, who must have been rescued when Christians at some point tidied away the Hadrianeum shrine. [BACK]

34. Kähler (1964, 17) describes the archeological evidence, remains of basis foundations at the corners of the Rostra. To him these indicate that the statues did not face a spectator before the Rostra but rather were turned toward the center of the platform; still, the Anaglypha Traiani Rostra statue (fig. 38) faces "front" also. Kähler notes that the commissions if contemporary would be appropriate for Septimius Severus, who claimed descent from the two emperors portrayed and who did much construction and restoration in this end of the Forum; Kähler continues by dilating on the difficult chronology of late imperial work on the Rostra. [BACK]

35. Torelli 1982, 68, pl. II. 14; BMCRE I. 130, nos. 74-75, pl. 23.17. Tiberius' cult of divus Augustus: Schrömbges 1986, 95-111; its imagery: Zwierlein-Diehl 1980, 12-53. [BACK]

36. Cf. the hypothesis that a seated statue of Augustus or Tiberius sat upon the so-called Sorrento base, which is decorated on four sides with commemorative reliefs (fig. 15); Roccos 1989, 573. [BACK]

37. BMCRE I. 129, nos. 70-73, pl. 23.16. Puteoli monument: Eck 1984b, 148 and n. 156; 146-47 (the monument of Aelius Lamia); (1984a) 208 nn. 19-22; Liverani (1989, 147-48, figs. 146-52) has all sides; Pekáry 1985, 6-7; Hölscher 1984a, 32-33, fig. 55; Vermeule 1981a, 85-101 passim; Platner-Ashby, s.v. "Forum Iulium"; Strong 1988, 113, fig. 58; Brünn-Bruckmann, pl. 575. [BACK]

38. Schäfer 1989, 74f., 130, pl. 9.8; Gabelmann 1986, 282-83; Kent et al. 1973, fig./cat. 69; RRC 426/1; persistently associated by Hölscher (most recently in Kais. Aug. 1988, 383-84, fig. 177) with the crowning statue group of the San Omobono reliefs. Obv., FAUSTUS, bust of Diana left with crescent on diadem, lituus behind; rev., FELIX. On the senatorial monuments see also chap. 3, p. 75. [BACK]

39. Trillmich 1978, 146 n. 546, pl. 15.5. Issued for the retrospective celebrations of Augustus and Livia held throughout the East, under influence from celebrations in the capital when Claudius deified Livia. The akrostolion indicates that the statue was carved immediately after Augustus' naval victory at Actium, when the league initiated its cult of Rome and Augustus with a temple at Gortyna. For dates of this cult, see Kienast 1982, 203-4, 379. Gortyna temple, epistyle fragment with (Latin) inscription to Roma and Augustus: IGGR I, no. 960; listed in Vermeule 1968, 442. Most early Julio-Claudian dedications from Crete are from Gortyna; it has another dedication by the koinon kreton, to Hadrian (Vermeule, 442). Compare the nude akrostolion holders on coins of Sextus Pompey and Octavian against Sextus; ill.: Zanker 1988, fig. 31. [BACK]

40. BMCRE I. 190, nos. 88-92, pl. 30.7-8; CONSENSU SENAT. ET EQ. ORDINUM P.Q.R., misidentified as Divus Augustus, as noted also by Emmons Levy and Bastien 1985, s.v. cat. 866. [BACK]

41. BMCRE I. 186-87, nos. 157-59, pl. 35.7; 192, nos. 208-11a, pl. 36.8; see p. cli. Trillmich 1978, 64, pl. 11.16-17; Kaenel 1986, 241, s.v. no. 57.72. Images of the emperor upon a weapons pile begin at least with Tiberius; cf. the Niederbieber signum (fig. 120). [BACK]

42. Kähler (1964, 6, 30, 39, 45) discusses the suovetaurilia's links to the ceremonial and iconography of "Regierungsfeier," the celebrations marking the onset or completion of significant spans of time (typically a decennium), here as on his Diocletianic monument; such monuments seem to cluster at this end of the Forum (Kähler, 29-30). Cf p. 48 on how the documentary panels fit patterns of "accession" behavior narrated by Appian for Octavian. [BACK]

43. Torelli 1982, chap. 4, 89ff., pl. IV.1-15; Boatwright (1987, 182-90, figs. 40-42) judiciously reviews the scholarly controversies; see the plates on pp. 143 and 154 and the fold-outs at the back of Hammond 1953. [BACK]

44. This statue is recognized only by Torelli (1982). [BACK]

45. These reliefs stood in the Forum well into the late Empire; they seem to have been deliberately dismantled and carefully defaced by Christian iconoclasts, thus well after the Constantinian period. It seems to me that the draftsman for the complementary oratio (fig. 36) and largitio panels almost certainly used this monument as a prototype: he set similar themes (address, and benevolence connected with the Treasury), in similar frames (a long, friezelike panel) against a continuous architectural backdrop; in his single Forum scene he combined the topographic and statuary references of the two Anaglypha Forum panels, standing Constantine on the Rostra, flanking him with seated statues of bygone emperors, and showing him patronized by a benevolent deity (Jupiter, immediately above him, on the central column of Diocletian's five-column Tetrarch group). Note too that he uses the same togate/paludate pairing (see text below) as on the Anaglypha, though here it is in the address that the emperor is in military costume, and in the benevolent action scene that he is togate. Ill.: Bianchi Bandinelli 1971; both panels, L'Orange 1972, figs. 35-36; congiarium scene, Strong 1988, fig. 209.2. [BACK]

46. Hammond 1953, 127ff.; detail: Boatwright 1987, 188. fig. 42; Torelli 1982. 91, nn. 18-19. [BACK]

47. CIL VI.967 = ILS 309. 5-10: "qui [ sc . Hadrian] primus omnium principum et solus remittendo sestertium novies milies centena milia n. debitum fiscis non praesentes tantum cives suos sed et posteros eorum praestitit hac liberalitate securos." [BACK]

48. Boatwright 1987, 189, fig. 43. [BACK]

49. Smith 1985; Boatwright 1987, 189; Torelli 1982, 107. [BACK]

50. Smith 1985, 227. [BACK]

51. Boatwright 1987, 185-86, back to Hammond 1953, 132 and 143 (an enlarged illustration of the real emperor). Torelli notes the statue but does not look for the emperor. [BACK]

52. See p. 233 n. 45 above. [BACK]

53. Hammond 1953, 144-45, with figures; BMCRE III.417-18, nos. 1206-10, pl. 79.4-6; Torelli 1982, fig. IV.12 (crowd at left); Schäfer 1989, pl. 13.17 (lictor alone). [BACK]

54. CIL VI.967, the inscription from the Forum of Trajan recounting this remission, must have accompanied an honorific statue. That statue is highly likely to have been represented on Hadrian's "lictor" sestertii (fig. 42). [BACK]

55. App. BCiv . 5.130: Octavian arrives at Rome, and the Senate votes him timas ametrous, going out garlanded to meet and escort him into the city (to the temples, then to his house). The next day Octavian eboulegorese te kai edemegorese, reciting to Senate and people his erga and his politeia up to that date, which speeches he published as a biblion . In them he announced eirene and euthumia, proclaimed the civil wars ended, kai ton eisphoron tous eti opheilontas apelue kai phoron telonas te kai tous ta misthomata echontas hon eti opheloien, that is, remitted unpaid taxes and canceled the outstanding amounts due from tax farmers and holders of public leases. In association with this he celebrated an ovation and received an honorific image that showed him as when he entered the city, on a columna rostrata inscribed "He reestablished civil peace, long disturbed, by land and sea." [BACK]

56. Identified by Torelli (1982, 92ff.); Maier (1985, refs. at p. 272) omits many buildings shown on the Anaglypha, esp. the Rostra; Kähler 1964, 31f., an evocative discourse on the Augustan and later Forum Romanum. [BACK]

57. While the artist created a recognizable and persuasive simulacrum of the Forum, he had to be selective, both in his point of view, which would dictate his architectural backdrop, and in his choice of what smaller monuments to include out of the mass crowding the Forum. His chosen point of view included the upper Forum, from left of the Temple of Divus Julius. The emperor is thus seen completely surrounded by political and dynastic monuments built by or under Augustus: the rostra of the Temple of Divus Julius, both erected by Augustus; the Temple of Castor and Pollux, erected under Augustus de manubiis in the names of Tiberius and his brother Drusus; the Basilica Julia, completed by Augustus, then burnt in 12 B.C. and rebuilt by him in the names of his sons Gaius and Lucius. The artist even strained his otherwise veristic representation to fit in the Arch of Augustus, which spanned the Sacred Way between the Temple of Divus Julius and the Temple of Castor and Pollux. This arch was in fact at right angles to the two temples, touching corners with the Temple of the Dioscuri and running into the middle of the podium of the Temple of Divus Julius. Yet our artist, wishing to make use of its symbolic resonance, showed it in almost completely frontal view at a totally false angle to the temples that it linked. [BACK]

58. Eck (1980, 266-70), discussing the alimenta coinage with boy and girl (270), notes the base's eagle scepter is paralleled on the coins, though ignoring the Anaglypha and Beneventum Arch (figs. 41, 37, 91). [BACK]

59. See Torelli 1982, 102ff. [BACK]

60. Contra Torelli 1982, 91: ''This group . . . appears in our relief just as one of the monuments of the Forum." [BACK]

61. Sestertius of A.D. 118, titulature of emperor and SC LIBERTAS RESTITUTA; RIC 568. [BACK]

62. It is just possible that Augustus' artists, such as the transplanted Athenians responsible for the Ara Pacis and Marcellus' portraits, derived the figure scheme of a baby held toward a seated person from a small class of fourth-century grave stelai that commemorate mothers who died in childbirth. On some a standing maidservant holds a baby toward the seated mother, who, however, does not respond to the baby's outstretched hands. Cf. Rühfel 1984, 151-52, fig. 62 (stele of Phylonoe, Athens NM). [BACK]

63. The figure group of a goddess and baby derives ultimately from a Greek genre of the fourth century B.C. in which divinities or Dionysiac figures dandled infants. Very prominent would have been Kephisodotos' group of Eirene (Peace) with the baby Ploutos (Wealth; cf. the cornucopia) in the Athenian Agora; it is no accident that the bulk of Roman versions of this group are Augustan; cf. La Rocca 1974, 136; Jung 1976, 110, 131-32.

The Forum/Anaglypha group, goddess with baby on hip, conforms to the Eirene and Ploutos type; a very different effect is achieved in groupings that sound similar on paper, on the Beneventum alimenta panel where city goddesses hold children of four to five years rather than infants (fig. 91). The Greek prototype has been mediated through Caesarian and Augustan transformations, on which see chap. 1, p. 29f. Compare the syncretistic female divinity balancing baby and cornucopia on her hip, in the Budapest Actium relief series; Simon 1986, fig. 36. Neo-Attic also is the way the boy in the Anaglypha group is posed, pressing against the goddess's leg, as in the Acropolis Procne and Itylos group attributed to Alkamenes, for example. [BACK]

64. Ill.: Nash 1968, 457-61, figs. 558-67; Toynbee 1934, 152-59; Simon in Helbig ⁴ II, 243-47, cat. 1437; I, 724, cat. 1009; Pais 1979, 33-35, cat. 41-82 (adds the twenty-first panel), 83-95 (trophies). The Conservatori set: Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, figs. 282-83; Strong 1988, figs. 116-17 (fig. 126a-g are Hadrianic province coin types). [BACK]

65. Pais 1979, 35, 39. [BACK]

66. Pais 1979, 101, 118-19. [BACK]

67. Often compared is the placement of bronze figures of Athens' colonies ( apoikoi poleis ) before the facade columns of the Olympieion in Athens (Paus. 1.18.6, 8). [BACK]

68. See chap. 3, p. 81. For a personification on a socle projection, cf. Naples, NM 6715; see pp. 253-54 n. 89. [BACK]

69. It can be said of Augustan practice that while grouped personifications were not at all restricted to posthumous commemorative, they seem to have been felt especially appropriate for such recognition. See pp. 80-81 on Augustus' designs for his funeral (and probably for Agrippa's); compare the funerary arches decreed under Augustus to the dead Gaius and Lucius and under Tiberius to the dead Germanicus; see p. 254 nn. 90-92. The Hadrianeum's association of grouped personifications with a divus is imitated for an Antonine magistrate's sarcophagus; this Roman notable was evidently so taken with the arrangement of the Hadrianeum that he had his own funeral edifice, that is, his sarcophagus, decorated with that temple's province series, arranged in a row on its lid (see p. 290 n. 29). [BACK]

70. For a Julio-Claudian personification series on a large-scale monumental relief: one of the Arcus Novus relief fragments (Parthia and Armenia; fig. 12) belonged to a row of paratactically disposed personifications, which accompanied a narrative panel with a military scene preserved in another fragment. [BACK]

71. The influence of the Ara Pacis personifications can be seen elsewhere in Hadrianic/Antonine art; the Ara Pacis's apposition of province frieze and documentary relief seems to be the prototype for such juxtaposition on the Antonine altar at Ephesos. The latest reconstruction (Ganschow 1986, 216-17, 220, fig. 3) shows that two short sides of this altar complex were taken up with provincial and civic personifications, framing the great battle frieze in which the emperor could be seen fighting for the preservation of their peace; the long "adoption" frieze within, a static parade of togate figures linking Hadrian with Antoninus Pius and the young Verus and Marcus Aurelius, was cognate with the Ara Pacis's procession frieze (whose primary subject at this date would have seemed to be a display of dynastic continuity). [BACK]

72. A late second-century wall-painting fragment from the Caelian may come from a room whose painted decor was inspired by the Hadrianeum: in an ornamental field under a garland is a province personification very like the Hadrianeum "Mauretania." If only one knew whether this was the sole personification in its room, or whether it belonged to a series! Rome, Pal. Cons. Br. Nuovo inv. 2692; Andreae in Helbig ⁴ II, 432, cat. 1639; Mielsch 1981, 226, pl. 19.27. [BACK]

73. BMCRE I, pl. 15.16. Zanker 1988, 63-64, fig. 44; Pollini 1978, 266; Weinstock 1971, 101, Pl. 10.1. [BACK]

74. So illustrated (fig. 202) for Schäfer's discussion of the symbolism of the sella curulis in Kais. Aug. 1988, 427ff., and in Schäfer 1989, 125-26, pl. 13.1. Compare his interpretation (1989) of the fine Julio-Claudian funerary portrait of a togate magistrate on a sella curulis whose front bar is carved at each end with bound barbarian captives (one nude, one in breeches) kneeling in submission. (The rest of the bar is obscured by the seated figure himself.) The sella curulis here seems at the side also to be covered with a fringed seat cover, like that used for the military stool. Schäfer notes that these reliefs excerpt from typical submission scenes, so that the observer would have filled in the "hidden" bits for himself; what has in fact happened is that the "hidden" seated consul is embodied in the actual statue, to whom the relief figures now kneel. This interplay between figures in an ornamental supporting zone with the full-scale portrait they carry provides an interesting early parallel to the conceit of the famous Hercules-Commodus in the Conservatori, whose bust was shouldered by little kneeling Amazons. [BACK]

75. The Republican coin (74 B.C.; RRC 397), which depicts a seated togate figure, plainly shows some divine abstraction (fig. 44; see also chap. 1, n. 9); as it resembles the type RRC 393, which celebrates the Genius of the Roman People, it seems also some kind of genius . It refers to the fertile dominion of the Republican state over the inhabited world. If it should portray a particular individual (which is remotely possible), then the composition would be a forerunner of BR I:1. [BACK]

76. Seleucid numismatic prototypes: Weinstock 1971, 100, pl. 9.19-21. Apollo types of L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi, 90 B.C., have Seleucid prototypes; Boissac 1988, 330-31. [BACK]

77. See Weinstock 1971, 101; Pollini 1978, 266. [BACK]

78. On this herm see Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 44. [BACK]

79. Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 42. See pp. 53, 85. [BACK]

80. Rome, Pal. Cons. inv. 2749-52; Rome, Mus. Cap. inv. 3517; Vienna, K.h. Mus. inv. 1576; "Sullan": Hölscher 1967, 100-101, pl. 12.2; Hölscher 1984a, 17-18, pls. 14ff.; and Hölscher in Kais. Aug. 1988, 384-86, figs. 178f., cat. 214; Strong 1988, 48, figs. 16-17. [BACK]

81. The arguments presented below are expanded in A. Kuttner, "Some New Grounds for Narrative: Marcus Antonius' Base (the 'Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus') and Republican Biographies," in Narrative and Event in Ancient Art, ed. P. Holliday 1993. See still Kähler 1966, passim; Torelli 1982, chap. 1; Hölscher 1984a, 16-17, fig. 20 (Hölscher thinks the thiasos Roman); Meyer 1983, 87-88; Zanker (1988, 22-24, fig. 10a-b) recognizes the thiasos as East Greek work reused but thinks (like Wiseman) that its purpose is to establish a mythological genealogy for the censor/patron. [BACK]

82. Separated in 1816 by Klenze; on their nineteenth-century history, see Wünsche 1985, 45, 47, 49-51, figs. 30-31. [BACK]

83. Torelli (1982, 8) and Zanker (1988, 22) briefly suggest a votive base. Traditionally seen as the base for a cult statue group (and so assigned to a group by Skopas known from Pliny to have stood in the Temple of Neptune), it is nothing of the sort. Neither Greeks nor Romans ever erected statues of their gods on bases portraying scenes from the life of the patron. [BACK]

84. Thiasos marble: A. Stewart, in consultation with Wünsche, cited now by Meyer 1983, 87 n. 346. Zanker (1988, s.v. fig. 10) posits a Greek/Asia Minor workshop source without mentioning marble. Strong (1988, 51) calls both sections Pentelic. [BACK]

85. Torelli (1982, 15) lists previous identifications. Coarelli and Kähler, followed by Hölscher and Meyer (see n. 81), propose M. Antonius, because of the triumphal associations of sea- thiasos iconography. M. Antonius fought the Cilician pirates as praetor and proconsul in 102 and 101-100 B.C. with imperium over the relevant seacoasts; he was censor in 97; he died in 87. He was known in his censorship to have spent his manubiae to proclaim his sea triumph, by adorning the rostra in the Forum out of his manubiae . [BACK]

86. This is a standard biographical structure in Republican texts of all kinds: categorizing a career under the linked headings in toga et armis, in foro et belli, etc.; see Kuttner, cited above, n. 81. In the same genre, a base from the Sanctuary of Fortuna at Praeneste paraphrases the program of Alexander the Great's funeral car; Hölscher 1979, 342-45, figs. 1-2, in Kais. Aug. 1988, 363-64, cat. 198-99, assigned to Mark Antony. [BACK]

87. See Kuttner 1991 on the lid of the Villa Giulia cist 13 133. [BACK]

88. .71 m in height, 1.45 in width, .10 in diameter. Local stone (marble?). Simon in Helbig ⁴ IV, cat. 3103; Kähler 1954a, 124-25, pl. 79; Felletti Maj 1977, 168-70, fig. 58; Zevi 1976, 54-55, figs. 5-9; Meyer 1982, 268-71, fig. 13; Riemann 1987, 132-36, on sortes rite and imagery. [BACK]

89. Cf. Zevi 1976, 55. [BACK]

90. A similar extraurban paraphrase is the episodic painted narrative of Marius' adventures at Minturnae and its sacred grove, dedicated in the temple by Marius' point of embarkation by a local, Bebaeus, who supplied the ship on which Marius finally escaped; Plut. Mar. 40.1-2. [BACK]

91. Felletti Maj (1977, 170) stresses the relief's links to Rome. Pompey's coinage: Meyer 1982, fig. 14; BMCRR I, 436; II, pls. 44.23-24. [BACK]

92. Rome, Pal. Cons. inv. 1127, 1153, 1152, 2745, 1150. See the archeologically exact, authoritative analysis by T. Dohrn in 1966 in Helbig ⁴ II, 408-11, cat. 1605; Felletti Maj 1977, 140f., fig. 41, with additional bibliography; Coarelli 1968, 345, figs. 20-22; Bianchi Bandinelli and Torelli 1976, fig./cat. 48, still with the modern head on the central goddess. Temples in Rome Etrusco more with terracotta sculpture: Dohrn in Helbig ⁴ II, 411. [BACK]

93. This gradation seems a characteristic option for temples in the Tuscan mode, and to have been picked up for at least some Augustan commissions, perhaps meant as a recognizably conservative feature. The pediment of the Tuscan Temple of Quirinus (restored 16-15 B.C.) has large divinities in the center, then slightly smaller "important" human and other figures, and in the corners smaller figures yet; Koeppel 1984, 52-53, cat. 21, figs. 30-31; Hommel 1954, 9-22. Similarly, the Temple of Mars Ultor, fig. 9b. [BACK]

94. See the Mars type described above, pp. 32f and p. 228 n. 92. [BACK]

95. Felletti Maj (1977, 141) interpreted this as a sacrifice ritu Graeco with uncovered head. But the gods depicted are not appropriate recipients of this rite, on which see now Reinsberg 1984, 291f. [BACK]

96. Most authors (Felletti Maj 1977, 140 n. 14) take Mars' presence to mean that the pediment belonged to a temple of Mars in the Campus Martius near the Caelian or the Circus Flaminius (Coarelli); they call the sacrifice a suovetaurilia . The temple could equally well belong to the female divinity at center, namely, Venus, shown with Mars and, say, Fortuna. Dohrn identifies the victims, which are not a suovetaurilia (pig, ram, bull) but do fit the triad of large goddess and god, small goddess. [BACK]

97. Thus, the literature specifically on this pediment, mostly Italian, concerned with the later stages of Etrusco-Italic art; outside of Italy it is mostly ignored in discussions of Republican art. [BACK]

98. See Beschi 1982, 33, 40-41, fig. 8 (side A), which supersedes an intermediate 1975 reconstruction by Mitropulou, which formed the basis for the discussion by Ridgway 1983, 198. She based her fig. 13.7 on Beschi's earlier version (1968, 381ff.), which restored a two-figure relief. [BACK]

99. Kais. Aug. 1988, 446, fig. 203; Vollenweider 1974, 14-15, pl. 7.8. [BACK]

100. The Cività Castellana base (figs. 28-30) certainly exploits the votive composition of the Paris census, but it remains unclear whether it shows a living or legendary figure (e.g., Romulus or even Aeneas). Compare in this respect the Castel Gandolfo relief; see p. 239 n. 100. The Paris census composition (fig. 27) is also imitated for a patron of very low standing on the primitive, but interesting, Ara Borghese (Felleti Maj 1977, fig. 59). [BACK]

101. Meyer 1982, 247ff., fig. 7 at p. 259. [BACK]

102. Vermeule (1959, 17) says the Pergamene-style panther-skin boots give him a divus character. [BACK]

103. RRC 470/1c-d, pl. lv; for flanking compositions see of course the others in the series, figs. 55-57. For the Selinus relief (fig. 10) see chap. 1, n. 79; compare the paratactic arrangement of patron divinities on the Cività Castellana base, figs. 28-30. [BACK]

104. Sydow 1984, passim; Hölscher in Kais. Aug. 1988, 363-65, fig. 165, cat. 199. [BACK]

105. Schäfer in Kais. Aug. 1988, 434-35, cat. 232 (drawing in Braunschweig), and Schäfer 1989, pls. 20 and 21 (the first an engraving by B. de Montfaucon, the second by G. B. Piranesi), 233-38, cat. 1. Known since the sixteenth century, formerly in the Villa Casali at Rome, it ended up in Munich and was lost in the 1920s. Schäfer believes it commemorates a Spanish or Gallic campaign, assigning it to Domitius Calvinus, procos. Spain 39-36 B.C. tr. 36 B.C. after the taking of Osca on the Ebro. [BACK]

106. The centaur-archer in the left field is enigmatic. This zodiac figure might indicate a region, a time for the event, or signify the natal star of the dead general (in the manner of the zodiac figure over Augustus on the Gemma Augustea; fig. 16). The interest in astrological metaphor is typical of the late Republican and Julio-Claudian aristocracy. [BACK]

107. A common motif is the draping of the mantle in a skirt about the hips, over armor or bare flesh, seen not only on the Aquileia Antony and the Caelian relief general (figs. 17, 3) but also on freestanding triumphal portraits like the Tivoli general (first century B.C.; Strong 1988, fig. 9) and the Primaporta Augustus (fig. 64). This must be an iconographic convention specific to triumphant general portraits of the later Republic. [BACK]

108. Only noted by Pollini 1978, 264. [BACK]

109. The triumph types begin with Marius in 101 B.C. and are continued by Sulla, who introduces Victory, and Pompey. Höscher (1967, 82-84) traces the composition's development from Sicilian coin types showing divine triumphs (75). See chap. 6, pp. 149f. [BACK]

110. Pollini (1978, 263-64) notes the Republican triumph coins, discussing men with gods; he brings in (265) the issues of Mark Antony, which show him and his wife Octavia (Augustus' sister) as Neptune and Amphitrite in a hippocamp quadriga. This nice image falls into the category of outright symbolic allegory and not the mix of levels I am interested in here. CRR 1255, 1261, 1265; BMCRR II, 510, 515, 517, nos. 151-53, pls. 114.14, 115.1-2; parodied, to emphasize Octavian's superior claims to semidivine status on the Vienna and Hadrumetum gems. Just so the gem of Octavian-Dionysos and Livia for Actium, with crocodile exergue (Vollenweider 1984, 173, cat. 293), parodies the Antony-Octavia coinage of 39 B.C. ( BMCRE II, pl. 114.3). [BACK]

111. Such victory groups (cf. chap. 6, pp. 149f) go back to what Romans thought of as their early Republican heritage, and ultimately to Greek forms of victory anathemata for victories in the Olympic games (e.g., the chariot group for Battus of Cyrene; see Paus. 10.15.6). Hellenistic kings would stage public displays where mechanically animated gold Victories came and crowned them (e.g., Mithridates at Pergamon; see Plut. Sull. 11.1). A contemporary Metellus could stage such a display in an ostensibly private context, holding banquets, where he sat in triumphal robes to be crowned by such automata; see Plut. Sert. 22.2; Sall. H. frag. ii.70; Coarelli 1983a, 214-16. On arch statuary see most recently Kleiner 1989 with bibl. [BACK]

112. Pompey/Janus: BMCRR II, 371-72, nos. 95-96, 97-103, pl. 101. 13-14 (not understood); RRC 487, cat. 479.1; Zanker 1988, 55-56. [BACK]

113. Compare Octavia's coiffure on an Antonian issue of 38 B.C., RRC 533/3, pl. 63 (rev., Antony). [BACK]

114. Cf. the pointed remarks by Millar (1984, 56-58); Kienast (1982, 202ff.); Weinstock (1971, 287f.) on Caesarian precedents for association with Jupiter. Augustus' lifetime cult in Rome and its material aspects: Hölscher 1984c, 27-31; Hesberg 1980, 351f., on his cult altars in Italy and Rome. [BACK]

115. Hesberg 1980, 353: Augustus togate on the main face, Victory bringing him laurel on one flank, Venus attending him on the other, and a togatus offering him sacrifice on the back. As Hesberg shows, it is a wraparound version of an epiphany composition seen in one field on other altar faces; compare also the Cherchel cuirass composition (Venus, Caesar, Amor; fig. 5). Cf. the Lares cult epiphany on the Mainz Jupiter Column (fourth drum): the togate emperor sacrifices between Lares, opposite Bacchus; Espérandieu 1918, cat. 5887 at pp. 386-87; 1928, 93ff. at p. 103. [BACK]

116. Suet. Aug. 59: "Statuam aere conlato iuxta signum Aesculapi statuerunt." [BACK]

117. Zanker 1983, 21-24; Zanker 1988, 59-60, plan fig. 40; Kais. Aug. 1988, fig. 154. Intriguing in this connection is the possibility that there may be an Augustan imperial residence associated similarly with the great sanctuary of Hercules at Tibur; cf Coarelli 1987, s.v. [BACK]

118. A case in point is that of city foundations in one's name, which we think of as very Roman. Cf. Knapp 1977, 108 n. 15: this practice of Hellenistic monarchs was first picked up by the elder Gracchus, who founded Gracchuris in Spain in the early second century, though not as a citizen town. Names of those were reserved for gods (e.g., Narbo Martius) until Marius set up Mariana (Corsica) at the turn of the first century B.C. Such foundations became "natural" overnight for successful generals; Caesar's and Augustus' numerous foundations differ in quantity, not in kind. [BACK]

119. Weinstock 1971, 287-305, at p. 292 and n. 9. [BACK]

120. And cf. Cic. Off. 3.80: for his currency reforms (!) statuae of Gratidianus were erected in every street and received offerings of incense and candles ("ad eas tus, cerei"). [BACK]

121. Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 227; Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, figs. 182, 195; Die Bildnisse des Augustus 1979, 15; MNR II. 1 (1982), pl. 200, inv. 1074. Contra Bragantini in MNR, 294 n. 14, I cannot see how the wealthy Romans who commissioned and displayed the many divinizing gems of Octavian/Augustus would have revolted at seeing such iconography on a ceiling. The corollary to this identification is that the pendant Ceres panel probably included a Livia-Ceres.

Compare the ceiling of Caius Caesar's reception room (stucco or paint) described by Antipater of Thessalonika to frame a propemptikon, ca. 1 B.C.; Gow and Page 1968, xlvi (= Anth.Pal. 9.59): the young general is compared to Athena, Aphrodite, Ares, and Heracles carried by Victories (cf. the Farnesina Victories). One imagines pairs, Venus-Mars (dynastic!) and Minerva-Hercules. Pace Gow and Page, bouphagos (1. 6) does fit Hercules, that is, Hercules Victor of the Forum Boarium. [BACK]

122. Anderson suggests imperial portraiture at the "imperial" villa of Boscotrecase, where in the "Black Room" ( disiecta membra, New York, Met. Mus.) two (gem or blue-glass cameo) portraits of "imperial" females crown columns in a fantastic aedicula on the main wall; I believe these are cameos but am not sure he is right to identify them as historic persons (Anderson 1987, 127-35; Anderson 1987-88, 54-57, fig. 48). [BACK]

123. Augustus-Jupiter: Schneider 1986, 37f. n. 156, 85f., on his identification in the East with Zeus Olympios. [BACK]

124. Ryberg on the "divinization" of the emperor in official art from Augustus to the Flavians: "The remains of early imperial relief are perhaps too fragmentary to show fully or reliably how far the emperor's pretensions to divinity were reflected in monumental art. But it is noteworthy that in private works of art [ sc. the BR cups, Sheath of Tiberius, Vienna and Paris cameos] the expression of the Hellenistic concept of divine monarchy runs a fairly steady course, presenting the emperor with the full attributes of divinity even under the severely restrained Tiberius; and there is no indication of greater fluctuation in the policy followed by monumental relief" (1955, 208). [BACK]

125. See p. 7 on Augustus' (visually stated) identity with Aeneas; if the Sorrento base (fig. 15) did carry a seated statue of the emperor, he would have been equated in comparable fashion with the seated Romulus enthroned at one end (fig. 15a). [BACK]

126. Cf. the epiphany structure evident on altars of Augustus' cult in his lifetime: the emperor is frontal at center, and side figures turn to him as if to a divinity; the imperial figure's relationship to the viewer, as to the others in the scene, is that of an icon for reverence. However, in this epiphany the emperor is himself a priest, that is, a special intermediary hallowed by his privileged function and standing vis-à-vis the gods. Hesberg 1980, 351-53; see main faces on the Vicus Sandaliarius altar (Augustus as augur with lituus ); Zanker 1988, fig. 101; mutilated marble altar face, Canosa, of equally fine workmanship (Augustus as priest between priests of his own cult), which like the former has statuelike figures, each on a little "plinth"; Tarentum altar (fig. 31), on which see pp. 240-41 n. 115 above. [BACK]

127. ILS I, 137 from Acerra (Campania), the verse dedication of a monument to Augustus and some princes by a primipilaris of Legio XVI: nam quom te, Caesar, tem[pus]/exposcet deum caeloque repetes sed[em, qua]/mundum reges, trans. Price 1987, 81. It clearly echoes poetry like that of Horace (cf. also Carm. 1) and Ovid. [BACK]

128. On Augustan minor arts propaganda see now Maderna-Lauter in Kais. Aug. 1988, 441ff. [BACK]

129. Relevant gems and coins: Vollenweider 1974, 211ff., pls. 152.12 (glass paste: Octavian with diadem holding Victory on a globe, who crowns him), 152.17 (bronze of M. Acilius Glabrio, 25 B.C.; Augustus' bust right, before Victory crowning him), 152.19 (mid-Augustan dupondius: Augustus' laureled bust on a globe "crowned" by Victory behind, who holds cornucopia), 156.1 (carnelian: Octavian with Pegasus shield shoulders a rudder), 156.2 (obv., my togate Augustus coin, see fig. 21, pp. 53f; rev., pl. 160.7), 156.6 (denarius, 29-27 B.C.: Octavian-Mercury = BMCRE I, pl. 14.15), 160.1 (gem cast: Octavian-Jupiter), 160.2 (denarius, post-Actium: Octavian nude with lance and parazonium (sword) on columna rostrata = BMCRE I, pl. 15.15), 160.4 (denarius for Actium: naked Octavian-Neptune with chlamys, right foot on a globe, holding right an aplustre (ship prow ornament), left, a scepter = BMCRE I, pl. 15.5), 160.5 (similar but globe in right hand). See chap. 3, p. 85 and n. 114 (discusses Octavian on columna rostrata type) for the derivation of such images from freestanding statuary; on which point see, for example, Zanker 1983, 25 n. 21. [BACK]

130. Kienast 1982, 119-20, 201-2. The Gemma Augustea Augustus as augur: Pollini 1978, 189. The dissemination of the central composition of the Gemma Augustea: see a chalcedony cameo in Vienna, of which an ancient blue-glass cast exists at Dumbarton Oaks. Richter 1956, 66f., cat. 47, Pl. 47; Kyrieleis 1970, 492-98: the Vienna cameo "Augustus" is slightly recut to resemble Caligula, the glass cast even more touched up. Richter (67) says the glass cast is not actually taken from the Vienna cameo. The two then are independent but parallel Caligulan copies, undoubtedly part of the same commemorative project (accession gifts?). [BACK]

1. Hölscher (1988, 523-31) essays a historical typology but does not distinguish between images put up by cities of themselves and ethnic personifications put up by Roman leaders, for example, and omits series like the Aphrodisias reliefs and the consular monuments of Augustan Rome (see p. 75 below). Hesberg (1988, 349f.) lumps landscape, polis, and nation personifications under the rubric "landscape" as merely topographic signs. [BACK]

2. Toynbee 1934, 11-12. [BACK]

3. L'inventaire du monde (1988). Thoroughly reviewed by Millar in JRA 1 (1988): 137-41. This work appeared too late for me to assimilate it completely; where Millar notes particular points, they receive notice here also. Nicolet (25ff.) looked over key aspects of the monumental record. [BACK]

4. Brit. Mus. 2191. Pinkwart 1965, 55f., pls. 28-35, esp. pl. 31; Havelock 1970, 200-201, cat./fig. 170; Onians 1979, 105; Vermeule 1968, 47-48, fig. 16. [BACK]

5. Hölscher (1988, 527) says only the figure with the elephant skin has a distinguishing attribute! [BACK]

6. St. Bertrand de Comminges. Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 195-96; Picard 1957, 270f., pls. 9-11, fig. on p. 273; Espérandieu 1928, 147-48, cat. 7488-89, 7503; Espérandieu 1938, 5-11, cat. 7653-56, 7658; Wesenberg 1984, 178. Gaul and Spain wear sleeveless tunics fastened at the shoulder, undone to bare one breast; like the Primaporta pair they vary but slightly (Gallia, torque; Hispania, long, rough hair). Three bases in the Forum: center—Victories flank a trophy set on a prow, on which a Tritoness raises a globe bearing an eagle (cf. the Vienna gem; fig. 19); flanking groups—trophy, naked bound kneeling captive, personification. [BACK]

7. Black and white mosaic: dolphins, heads of provinces and trade winds. Toynbee (1934, 103) cites Claud. Cons. Stil. 11.228f.; bibl.: Henig 1983, 122 and n. 52. [BACK]

8. See n. 6 above. The Hispania head from Munigua in Baetica (Seville, Mus. Arq.), identified by long hair and earlocks, probably comes from a similar forum tableau. The excavator dates it Hadrianic or later; it is probably early imperial, connected with Augustan activity attested here—drill work in hair or eyes is lacking, and its mode of stylized classicism compares well with early imperial statues from Gaul. EAA 253, s.v. "Munigua," fig. 348; Grünhagen 1961, 53f., figs. 2-4, 9. [BACK]

9. Toynbee 1934, 103. [BACK]

10. Pollini 1978, chap. 1. See p. 255 n. 102 below. [BACK]

11. Elephant-mask headdress: Sauer 1964; Boeselager 1983, 109-12, pl. xxv, fig. 68, on a mosaic of Africa from Catania (now Castello Ursino), comparing the Ostia mosaic (p. 243 n. 7 above) as a private use of province iconography to celebrate the patron's (presumably economic) activities in the region represented. Crawford ( RRC 459) thus interprets a pavement showing a boar at Pompeii commissioned by an L. Coelius Caldus as representing the patron's involvement with Gaul. [BACK]

12. So Zwierlein-Diehl 1973, no. 1089, pl. 83, with comparanda . It was by now typically Roman to set an object under the foot of the figure portrayed to express that figure's mastery over the entity symbolized by the object underfoot. Depictions of Roma, the Genius of the Roman People, Caesar/Augustus with foot on a globe: Hölscher 1967, 43 (starts on coins of the mid-70s B.C.); Weinstock 1971, 41-43; see p. 19 n. 91 above. The type literally translates a poetic image: cf. Bömer, s.v. Ovid Fast . 4.857. [BACK]

13. Egypt iconography: Toynbee 1934, 29f. BR emblema dish: MonPiot 5 (1899): pl. 1; Baratte 1986, 77-81 (Africa). Cf. n. 14 on later imperial Africa examples with the elephant headdress, often holding a tusk; cf. the Africa who watches Dido, Aeneas, and Ascanius on the Via Cassia sarcophagus, Terme 168186, MNR I.1 (1979) 318-24, cat. 190. [BACK]

14. Barr Sharrar 1987, 73, cat. C 159 (Brit. Mus. inv. GR 1772.3-2.152); like the BR emblema it nestles attributes, a lion and elephant tusk—so, Africa. Barr Sharrar's disputed C 146 (Naples inv. 118192), early first century A.D., seems a beaten personification (disheveled hair, chin on hand). [BACK]

15. An East-West metaphor for the oikoumene ruled by Rome is one of the "points" made by this grouping. The other is the special prominence in the context of these cups of the foremost figure, Gaul. Compare the apposition of Western and Eastern children on the Ara Pacis; cf. chap. 4, pp. 100-105. This East-West theme in Augustan arts is a fertile topic; the only specific address is Fittschen 1976, 205ff., and now Rose 1990, 461. See the Index. For other metaphors of the concept, see pp. 89-91 (globe, the personification Oikoumene, the metaphor terra marique, etc.). [BACK]

16. Cf. Fleischer 1983, 539-41, fig. 1, on one of the Trajanic Ephesos ivories. These ivories await full publication by M. Dawid; for description, bibliography, and an overview of the assemblage see Jobst 1977, 77, fig. 137. I thank B. Rose for this reference. The ivories (from a chest?) seem, like the BR cups, to copy an official monument; they intersperse documentary panels (e.g., Trajan meeting with a barbarian leader) with figures of Victories and of provinces or peoples. One hopes that Dawid's final publication of the restoration (cited by Jobst) will not take ten more years. [BACK]

17. Other major Greek cult sites exhibited similar monuments; their remarkable concentration at Delphi must reflect Delphi's special status as diplomatic center. At Olympia, Panainos' base for the Zeus, arguably the most famous cult statue in the Greco-Roman world, showed Hellas with Salamis, who held an akrostolion in reference to the battle that saved Greece from the Persians (Paus. 5.11.5); here also, Philip V of Macedon put up a group where Hellas crowned him and Antigonos Doson, while Elis crowned Demetrius Poliorketes and Ptolemy I (6.16.3). The Spartan sanctuary of Amyklai had a fifth-century (?) Sparta with a lyre by Aristander of Paros (3.18.8). At Messene, the local Hellenistic sculptor Damophon included Thebes in a group honoring Epaminondas (3.18.8). [BACK]

18. Similarly quoting Hellenistic regal modes, the tomb paintings of the second century B.C. at Ashkelon for Apollophanes (who led a Sidonian colony at Marissa/Maresha) included a (destroyed) ''Ethiopia." Hadas 1959, 227-29, 126 n. 8 (bibl.); Vermeule 1981a, 32 n. 7. [BACK]

19. See chap. 1, n. 42. LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Asia," I.4 (Balty); Fittschen 1975, 94-95, 99-100, pl. 71; Kais. Aug. 1988, 281 (Andreae); Anderson 1987-88, fig. 33. Left, Macedonia sits on a crag (Anderson, 26, says "standing"), holding a lance and balancing a gold shield that bears the Macedonian royal star burst, wearing a kausia (Macedonian military headgear) bound with a royal diadem, a long-sleeved chiton, and a mantle. She is twisted around to glare at Asia/Persia, seated at right much lower down, slumped with chin in hand (a sign of dejected submission). Like Macedonia, Asia has generic female dress (mantle, sleeveless chiton) and is "identified" by her headgear (a Persian tiara). [BACK]

20. Rome, Pal. Chigi. Hardie 1985, 29-30, fig. 2 (drawing); Moreno 1981, 187, fig. 32 (detail: shield); LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Asia," I.2 (Balty). The personifications stand flanking a round altar, on which are carved the Muses. In their near hands are paterae; they hold up the shield with their far hands. In the space over the altar is a kind of epigram in which Alexander claims world rule and states his divine genealogy, though without reference to the battle on the shield. Moreno relates the battle composition to the figure types of Lysippos' Granikos group (taken to Rome in 148 B.C.; see p. 275 n. 15 below). In the frame are labels of the personifications, and of the battle on the shield (two lines: the Battle of Arbela). [BACK]

21. Contra Hardie 1985, 31 and n. 123, this traditional date is correct. The symmetrical composition, of facing (female) figures in archaizing dress and pose (i.e., on tiptoe), is late Republican and Augustan. Compare the San Omobono base reliefs, on which archaistic Victories hold up a shield emblazoned with victory symbols: Strong 1988, fig. 16; Hölscher 1984a, 17-18, fig. 21; and Hölscher in Kais. Aug. 1988, 384-86, cat. 214; the archaizing Victories on the frieze of Augustus' aedes divi Julii: Hölscher 1984a, 20, fig. 28; Kais. Aug. 1988, cat. 206; and the compositions of the archaizing Campana reliefs from Augustus' Palatine Temple of Apollo: Kais. Aug. 1988, cat. 120-24. [BACK]

22. LIMC II (1984), 857-58, s.v. "Asia" (Balty). The pairing of Europe and Asia personified goes back to Aes. Pers. 176ff., the vision of Atossa; Broadhead 1960, 78. Cf. the South Italian Darius vase, which adapts some great Hellenistic painting or paintings—Hellas and Persis appear at Darius' court; Gabelmann 1984, 79, cat. 29; Moreno 1981, 187, fig. 6; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Asia," I.1. [BACK]

23. Cf. Europa's nightmare in Moschus Eur. 8-9: Asia (in foreign dress) and "she who lies opposite," namely, the continent of Europe (in Greek dress), hold Europa between them as they quarrel over her. Text: Bühler 1960; Hesberg 1988, 352. [BACK]

24. Kat. Albani 1988, 192-97, cat. 60, pl. 110 (Cain). 24.5 X 25 cm. Under the thiasos, a sacrifice scene. [BACK]

25. Meyer (1989, 191-94) remarks how these have such vague visual markers that only inscriptions identify them; relationship is shown by dexiosis (handshake), later by simple juxtaposition. Pl. 7.1, cat. A 17: "Messene" with polos; cat. A 46: Aphytäe ("the citizens of Aphytis") with phiale; pl. 16.2, cat. A 51: "Corcyra," peplophoros unveiling; pl. 11.2, cat. A 38: Sicilia with torch; pl. 5.2, cat. A 15: "the Neapolitans at Thasos'' (fig. lost); cat. A 77 and pl. 46. 1, cat. A 157?: Salamis. [BACK]

26. On the pompe's contemporary political symbolism, see Badian 1967, 51, nn. 57-58. [BACK]

27. Ael. VH (ed. Dilts 1974) 13.22: Ptolemaios ho Philopator kataskeuasas Homeroi neon, auton men kalos ekathise, kukloi de tas poleis periestese toi agalmati, hosai antipoiountai tou Homerou; RE 23 (1959) 1691, s.v. "Ptolemy IV Philopator" (K. Ziegler). Onians 1979, 105; Hesberg 1988, 355. [BACK]

28. Schober 1933, 76; Lippold 1950, 375; Havelock 1970, cat./fig. 110; Onians 1979, 101, fig. 1031 (detail with Roma); Hesberg 1988, 359. Comparable is Sardis's imperial cult temple, Julio-Claudian or early Flavian; its tympanon had a series of inscribed personifications of the cities of the Communis Asiae that worshipped here. Ratté et al. 1986, 54-55, 64, 67, pl. 33 (frag., "Adramyteon"). See p. 249 n. 52 below. [BACK]

29. Lagina, the sanctuary of Stratonikeia, was the cult base of the association of poleis depicted on the temple frieze. Pro-Roman in the second century and loyal in the Mithridatic Wars, Stratonikeia was rewarded by Sulla. His benefaction, the senatus consultum confirming it, and the city's acts of gratitude were recorded on the walls of the sanctuary. Sherk 1969, cat. 18 at pp. 105-11. [BACK]

30. Strabo (4.3.1) describes the inscription and refers to statues that may portray the cities listed. Turcan 1982, 608-10 (sources), 616f. (coin images), 636 (reconstruction); coins: Kais. Aug. 1988, 524-25, cat. 369; Ratté et al. 1986, 67; Fishwick 1989, 111-12. The enclosure frieze was patently carved by artists from the capital; see Simon 1986, fig. 286; Espérandieu 1910, III.1 18-19, cat. 1758; this oak garland with sacrificial axes links Augustus' cult to that of Jupiter. On the political context of altar and cult, see chap. 4. Maurin 1986 lists its priests; add Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 120 = ILS 7041, a statue dedication for an early priest by his civitas Divona Cadurcorum. [BACK]

31. CIL V.7231. 9-8 B.C. Prieur 1982, 451f; Ward-Perkins 1981, 171-72, fig. 101. [BACK]

32. See chap. 2, n. 37. Monument of P. Aelius Lamia: Eck 1984a, 146, 148, comparing Rufus' monument of the same period, on which see further pp. 208-9. Pekáry (1985, 90) thinks Aelius' monument consisted of nine statues of him in a row. [BACK]

33. Luna marble. Vat. Mus. Greg. Prof. inv. 9942. Fuchs et al. 1989, 54-57, figs. 24-26, cat. 1; Fuchs 1987, 80, cat. C I3; Liverani 1989; Hölsher 1988, 523f.; Simon in Helbig ⁴ I, cat. 1054; Giuliano 1957, 34, pl. 23. The dynastic portraits: Rose 1987, cat. Caere 01; Fuchs 1987, 77-84; and see now Fuchs et al. 1989, cat. 1ff. [BACK]

34. Fuchs et al. 1989, 89-91, s.v. the Manlius altar (on which see pp. 40-41 below). [BACK]

35. Fuchs in Fuchs et al. 1989, 21, contra the altar hypothesis of Liverani in the same volume, is right. [BACK]

36. I do not find convincing Fuchs's suggestion (Fuchs et al. 1989, 56) that the frieze decorated the top of the main stage-set door, the porta regia . These little figures would barely have been legible to the audience in such a position—who would ever clamber up on stage to read their little inscriptions? Even the statues put in niches in such theaters were often made larger than life-size for visibility. Fuchs's only parallel is a Severan pulpitum frieze of the late second century A.D. at Sabratha, on a much larger scale—the great front of the stage platform proper—where the emperor is shown with the Tyche of Hierapolis and some personified agones (the contests proper). There are no parallels in Roman theater construction (on which Fuchs is an expert) for a frieze of political import and of this scale incorporated into the scaena backdrop. [BACK]

37. I think they are definitely base reliefs. They may have ornamented something that had an unconventional profile, that is, something bracket-shaped in plan, as in Fuchs's reconstruction; but I wonder very much if this could not be the elaborate base for an aediculated construction housing a statue, perhaps a less-than-life-size figure in precious metal. [BACK]

38. Compare the "statue" conceit of the Vicus Sandaliarius altar and other Augustan altars (on which see p. 242 n. 126), and also of the Augustan ornamental base (for a tripod), Louvre MA 358, on which a statue of a wreathed quindecemvir sacrifices in a laurel grove at a portable altar on a garlanded base. Ill.: Zanker 1988, fig. 99a. Liverani (1989, 150f.) discusses representations of statues in Roman relief, noting early imperial candelabra and Campana relief production as well as political monuments. For garlands at the top of a frame as an Augustan motif, compare the friezes from Merida; see p. 280 nn. 47 and 48. [BACK]

39. See chap. 2, p. 41. As on the Puteoli base (fig. 62), figures that once stood around a portrait are transferred to a basis supporting it. Cf. the transfer to the temple podium in the Tiberian forum adiectum at Arles of the Jupiter- clipei that surrounded the temple in the Forum Augustum here quoted. Gros 1987, 357-64, fig. 20. [BACK]

40. On the particular images see Liverani 1989, figs. 144-52, analyzing the city sequence and the historical evidence for Augustan interest in Etruria, as well as the iconography of individual figures (of which three survive). Though Liverani cites as comparanda the Augustan great altars in the north (at Lugdunum, and the Ara Ubiorum) he did not know the personification groups on the BR cup, the Ara Pacis altar, or the senatorial monuments of Rufus and Aelius Lamia. [BACK]

41. Bibl.: chap. 5, n. 62. [BACK]

42. On cura, Halfmann 1986, 17 and n. 18. Eck (1984a, 203) discusses the legal standing of such honors awarded to Roman senators by foreigners; extremely useful are his tables (212-17) of inscriptions (Rome, Italy, provinces). [BACK]

43. Hölscher 1988, 530-31, fig. 5. Louvre Mus.; three figures extant, wearing laurel; the central one holds a sprig. [BACK]

44. Though Hölscher's broad redating is correct, his specifically Claudian date is shaky. His criterion is that the figures exhibit a submersion of individual differences in general neoclassicism, compared with the monuments described above. This is, however, because they are not separate Greek city-states or foreign gentes, but municipia with a common institutional and "Roman" character; the Trajanic relief (fig. 92) is an illuminating parallel. [BACK]

45. Most recently on the trend to autobiography on late Republican coin types, Classen 1986, 267ff., adducing the naissance of autobiography as a literary genre in the same period (early first century B.C.). His exemplar (pl. 127.2) is Pompey's triumphal aureus of 71 B.C. ( RRC 402/1b) whose obverse—Africa bust, with augural symbols—explains its triumph reverse (Pompey in quadriga). I omit it here as a purely triumphal province depiction. Perhaps, though, the augural symbols mean that Africa herself is supposed to have granted the triumph, something like the female apparitions described on p. 77. [BACK]

46. Cf. the mosaics discussed on p. 243 n. 7. Hence also personifications at home as career mementos. Cf. the inscribed stand in Assisi for an inserted bust of Hispania from a house courtyard at Vettona (Grünhagen 1961, 57); CIL XI. 5172: Hispania hanc/Proculus/proconsule/optinuit. A splendid fourth-century example is the "Great Hunt" corridor mosaic of the Piazza Armerina villa: the patron (center) supervises importation of animals for the arena from Africa and Asia/India, personified at the ends; Wilson 1983, 24-25, fig. 12 (drawing), 13 (detail: India). Cf. the annona sarcophagus from the Via Latina, Terme 40799: Africa and Sicilia with a praefectus annonae who imported grain from them; MNR 1.8 (1985), 46-50, cat. II.1. [BACK]

47. BMCRR Rome no. 2839; rev., A. Post. A. f. S. n. Albin . The pendant is RRC 372/1, pl. 48: Diana on the obverse; on the reverse she receives sacrifice at a terrace sanctuary (?) from Albinus. [BACK]

48. Note Aquillius' Hellenistic linen-and-metal cuirass. Hannestad (1986, 23, fig. 10) is wrong about pacification iconography here; Kais. Aug. 1988, 517, cat. 346 (Trillmich). [BACK]

49. Obv. of Augustus CAESAR AUGUSTUS replaces VIRTUS. BMCRR III, pl. 47.4; II, 67, 71; I, 416; omitted in BMCRE, which assigns (p. ci) this moneyer to 18 B.C. Lucius also restored Manius' road from Ephesos to Sardis with Manius' name on the milestones; Degrassi 1962, 202. [BACK]

50. The mythological (?) figure group also turns up on contemporary Arretine ware. Ashmolean fragment: Pucci 1981, 115, fig. 21; the wounded figure's gender is unclear. [BACK]

51. Compare the late Julio-Claudian slabs from the Aphrodisias Sebasteion, which, as Smith observes, couple Claudius with Britannia (1987, pl. 14, cat. 6 at p. 117; see also Zanker 1988, fig. 234), in a garbled version of this stock warrior-and-wounded-comrade figure group, and Nero with Armenia (Smith, pl. 16, cat. 7 at pp. 118-19), in a more carefully rendered conflation of the Pasquino type with an Achilles-Penthesilea type. In the light of my discussion, the Aphrodisias sculptors may perhaps be recognized as quoting Hellenistic figure motifs in a version already assimilated to Roman iconography for imperatores and their provinces, rather than as inventing these compositions themselves by direct inspiration from Hellenistic sources. [BACK]

52. Roman "reissue" of Hellenistic compositions adapted to imperial iconography: Smith 1988a, 65 n. 65. For official Roman propaganda reflected at Aphrodisias, see pp. 81-82. Sardis may provide a parallel, being connected, like Aphrodisias, to imperial cult. Its fragmentary Sebasteion pediment (cf. p. 246 n. 28) had at the corners enthroned figures facing and framing the center; for this typical Italian pediment composition (e.g., the pediment of the Temple of Mars Ultor), Classical and Hellenistic Greek parallels seem lacking. [BACK]

53. Vermeule (1981a, 95) says this aes composition copies a rare aureus of 14-13 B.C. of Cossus Lentulus; Sutherland (1987, 8, 10; no ill.) seizes avidly on the legend of "the now very rare aureus." It is in fact unique. Fullerton (1985, 478 n. 39, pl. 56.17-18) rightly urges caution. Much as I would like it to be authentic, I feel doubts. On the reverse a togate figure reaches a hand to a partly clad female personification kneeling on a ground line; in the exergue RESPUB(lica) must be a label, like AUGUST(us) behind the togate figure. These identifying names are oddly located above and below the ground line, the drapery of "Respublica" is unconventionally arranged, the portrait style of the Augustus bust on the obverse is very odd, and the moneyer's title is usurped after COSSUS LENTULUS by the "Augustus" label. The composition seems too felicitous as a unique illustration of the now-problematic Augustan tag "Respublica restituta. [BACK]

54. I avoid here the problematic clay frieze plaques from the "Tomb of Nero" on the Via Cassia, where an imperator often identified as Caesar (see esp. Weinstock 1971) is about to raise up or is being greeted by a kneeling Roma. Tortorella 1981, p. 69 n. 49; Kais. Aug. 1988, 435-36, cat. 233 (T. Schäfer). The date is disputed because the style is so primitive and idiosyncratic; the plaques have been held, for instance, to refer to the building of the Aurelian Walls. Until a comparable piece is found, I reserve my opinion on their date. [BACK]

55. Cf the situation in Republican Spain; Knapp 1977, 106-7 and 43. Knapp notes that "it was only under duress that Rome used equal treaties as a diplomatic means. Treaties of any kind between sovereign Iberian states and Rome were eschewed after the 2nd Punic War, and the only acceptable basis for a relation between Roman and native was a recognition of Roman superiority" (43). [BACK]

56. See now Künzl 1988 passim; Versnel 1970, 95ff. A good sample in English of Roman sources for the late Republic is Pollitt 1966, 63f. [BACK]

57. The mural-crowned personification kneeling to present a shield (or a wreath?) to the imperator foreshadows the Augustan or Tiberian Arcus Novus relief (fig. 12), where two such goddesses offer something to Venus. [BACK]

58. RRC 470/1c, pl. lv; reverse: here both cities stand, again "male" left and "female" right (compare the Arcus Novus gentes, fig. 12), on either side of the general; the figure left holds a caduceus, sign of alliance, and offers a branch to the general, while the right figure crowns him. The general, unusually, stands facing, looking out from the coin. [BACK]

59. Weinstock 1971, 37; Bedon et al. 1988, I:174; its basement—37.6 m long on one face—seems to have been identified at the pass of Panissars near Perthus. Earlier dedications in temples of res gestae are implied by the anecdote that Cato the Censor's votive in the Temple of Salus stood out because it did not list military commands or triumphs, only the glories of his censorship (Plut. Cat. mai. 19.3). [BACK]

60. Domitius at Vindalium, the confluence of the Sorgue and Rhône; Fabius at the confluence of the Isère and Rhône. Marius' trophy of 102 B.C. at Aix is not known to have been permanent. Bedon et al. 1988, I:173-74; Rolland 1977, 39. Before Pompey stole his command against Mithridates, Lucullus set trophies of unspecified form in Armenia at the Parthian border, as well as at Tigranocerta and Nisibis (Plut. Luc. 36.7). For Florus/Livy, the consuls of 121 innovated in leaving permanent triumphal monuments in the territory of peoples conquered: "utriusque victoriae quod quantum gaudium fuerit, vel hinc aestimari potest, quod et Domitius Ahenobarbus et Fabius Maximus ipsis quibus dimicaverant locis saxeas erexere turres, et desuper exornata armis hostilibus tropaea fixerunt, cum hic mos inusitatus fuerit nostris. Nunquam enim populus Romanus hostibus domitis victoriam exprobavit" (ha!) (Florus 1.37.6). [BACK]

61. Pliny and Dio described different dedications: Prieur 1982, 442-75. La Turbie: Ward-Perkins 1981, 171, 476 n. 20; Bedon et al. 1988, I:174-78. [BACK]

62. On geographic listing in Augustus' Res gestae, a hypertrophied development of this tradition (fifty-five geographic or ethnic labels!), see Nicolet 1988, 25f. [BACK]

63. Pliny HN 36.41 ex Varro; Suet. Ner. 46. These were fourteen nationes (Pliny) in the form of simulacra gentium (Suet.) at the Theater of Pompey, made by the Roman(ized) sculptor Coponius (for his name as Roman: Cic. Cael. 10.24, Balb. 253)—that is, separate ethnic personifications in some kind of symbolic grouping, possibly in Neo-Attic style. Fuchs 1987, 8-9, amending recent work by Coarelli; Gabelmann 1986, 294. [BACK]

64. Servius ad Aen. 8.721: "For Augustus made a portico in which he assembled images of all peoples [ simulacra omnium gentium conlocoverat ], on which account it is called the Porticus ad Nationes." Here also was put at some early imperial date, possibly by Augustus, a "Carthaginian Hercules" (Pliny HN 36.39)—a Melkart? Pollitt 1966, 58; Gabelmann 1986, 294-96. Compare the supporting terrace figures of Ephesos' Flavianeum (various Oriental deities); Waelkens 1985, 650. [BACK]

65. Dio 75.4.5: walking between the choristers and guild representatives, ta ethne panta ta hypekoa en eikosi chalkais, epichorios sphisin estalmena . Price (1987, 59, 65, 83-84) omits the Augustan parallel. [BACK]

66. Knapp 1977, 175, on the Iberian contingent; 163, 175-76, on the establishing of clientelae by conquerors and governors in Republican Spain, for example. [BACK]

67. Bibl.: p. 239 n. 104. Cf. Gaius' arch at Pisa; see p. 254 n. 90 below. [BACK]

68. Titulus for atrium portraits and commemorative statues: cf. Juv. 1.129; 5.110; 8.69, 242; 10.143; 11.86; Courtney 1980, 110, 242. [BACK]

69. Some slabs (one of the three extant) had a graffito to assist assemblage to their bases. Slabs sans graffito are difficult to match to surviving base inscriptions, as their Greek dress and attributes are allusive rather than ethnically explicit. See Smith 1987, 95-96; Smith 1988a, passim. Erim 1986, figs. at pp. 120-21 (slabs and two bases); Erim 1982, 166, fig. 10 (figure with little bull, Doric peplos ). The inscribed ethnoi: Crete, Cyprus, Sicily, the Dacians, Bessi, Rhaeti, Trumpelini, the Balkan tribes of the Iapodes, Dardani, Andizeti, Pirystae; a people referred to as --- bon and identified as Suebi or Perrhaebi (Reynolds 1981) or as Arabians ( Arabon: Reynolds' opinion cited by Bowersock 1983, 49 n. 15, after a suggestion by M. Speidel); Illyrians, Judaeans, and Bosphorans. Reynolds noted in a 1985 lecture that the group Sicily-Crete-Cyprus represents territory regained in the civil wars, making the assemblage a personal record of res gestae by Augustus. [BACK]

70. Against this is the parallel with Pertinax's funeral (see p. 80), which would establish for Augustus' funeral figures like those on the BR cup, instead of more loosely symbolic types as at Aphrodisias, which recall instead Late Classical Attic canons as seen on the treaty reliefs (p. 246 n. 25 above). [BACK]

71. The Forum Augustum was imitated in various aspects elsewhere in the Empire, at Merida in Spain ( clipeus order) and at Assisi in Italy ( elogia of the summi viri ); Hölscher 1984c, 31. Merida (Ammon and Medusa clipei, caryatids, etc.): bibl.: Trillmich 1986, 281. Arles: Gros 1987, 357-64 (on the forum adiectum ). [BACK]

72. Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 63, from Eresos (Lesbos), bilingual dedication to Julia, daughter of Augustus: in Latin Iuliae Caesarius f. Veneri Genetrici, in Greek Ioulia Kaisaros thugatri Aphrodita Geneteira . Another dedication assimilating one of Augustus' womenfolk to Venus Genetrix is Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 123 (Anticaria in Baetica), to Livia as genetrix orbis; for Livia-Venus with her sons, see figs. 114-15 and chap. 8. [BACK]

73. Photograph: Erim 1986, 111. Smith (1987, 95-96) describes the rest of the propylon decoration (portrait statues of Julio-Claudians), tentatively suggesting reference to the Forum Julium; he asserts a set of fixed prototypes from Rome for the Aphrodisias ethnoi . [BACK]

74. I think it probably translates a description with titulus list of the Roman complex into local visual norms, or Forum Augustum figures might deliberately have been depicted in a very Attic mode, to harmonize with the garland bearers and (fig. 68) caryatids there. [BACK]

75. Wilkinson 1969, 169f.; Drew 1924. [BACK]

76. Kais. Aug. 1988, 192-94, cat. 77-78 (Ganzert and Kockel); Zanker 1973, figs. 27-28. [BACK]

77. So Nicolet 1988, s.v. the Velleius passage. [BACK]

78. Kais. Aug. 1988, 186 and fig. 78 (Ganzert and Kockel). The extant Jupiter shields would do very well as a repeating series: the (doubtless) gilded horns and torques would have made a nice alternating pattern of arcs, directed up and down. [BACK]

79. In 19 B.C. the Temple of Apollo Sosianus gave a preview of such a symbolic structure, based similarly on iconographic elements significantly located in an architectonic matrix. The interior column capitals have a Delphic tripod around which Egyptian uraeus snakes weave a Hercules knot; the pilaster capitals framing either row took a cuirass framed in date palms. These refer to the conflict of Octavian (Apollo) and Antony (Hercules) and Cleopatra (Egypt), resolved after Actium in a reknotting of civil ties among Romans, framed by reference to the Judaean victories the manubiae from which the triumphator Sosius used to construct the temple in Augustus' honor. Cf. Kais. Aug. 1988, figs. at pp. 140-41, cat. 33, 34a (= La Rocca 1985, figs. 19, 21) and plan fig. 44. [BACK]

80. On this passage, most recently Gabelmann 1986 passim. He holds that the lines do not reflect contemporary submissio ritual and its representation in the arts, as Augustus avoided receiving proskynesis or being shown receiving it. Vergil's scene may be fantasy rather than a paraphrase of an actual event staged on the Palatine for the triple triumph after Actium, as Gabelmann says; but it cannot be proved, any more than the reverse. In any case his key text is not analogous: the distaste many felt at seeing Antony kneel to Caesar at the Lupercal is not proof that Romans would mind seeing a non-Roman kneel to a consul or general. Gabelmann posits Augustan avoidance of proskynesis images in submissio depictions by using the Lugdunum "son-giving" coinage and Rhoemetalkes' rex datus, but these are not actual submissiones; see chap. 4, Pls. 107f, n. 61. [BACK]

81. Bibl.: Schneider 1986, 27 n. 79. See p. 251 nn. 63-64 above. Caryatids: Schneider, 27ff.; Schmidt-Colinet 1977, passim, esp. for figures. [BACK]

82. See Schneider 1986, 115ff., cat. SO 1-22 at p. 200, pl. 25; this series of larger-than-life-size statues in pavonazetto and giallo antico marble, like the bases (Schneider, 117 n. 978), awaits publication by L. Fabbrini, who would not release photographs to Schneider. Hölscher 1984c, 76 n. 19. Zanker (1973, 23 n. 149) and Coarelli (1985, 296) said Fabbrini's study was still in progress. Thus it has been at least eighteen years since these came into the hands of a scholar who has yet to publish them. For symbolism compare Naples, MN 6715; see pp. 253-54 n. 89 below. [BACK]

83. Schneider 1986, 27, 109f. [BACK]

84. Waelkens 1985, 650 and n. 73, on the tradition of ethnic caryatids ( comparanda for the Dacians of Trajan's Forum). [BACK]

85. MNR II.1 (1982), 298, inv. 1174, pl. 168. The crown of the pediment is a fantastic Dionysos with cornucopia and ivy crown; from his lower body curl out acanthus branches terminating in swan heads, on which stand these Orientals, each with a long hasta; below are the Moon and Sun. On the ceiling are Apollo giving audience to Phaethon, and emblematic suns. [BACK]

86. Pfuhl and Möbius 1977, 1: 85, cat. 137, pl. 31; detail: Schneider 1986, pl. 15.3-4. The deceased stands in an elaborate porch between Corinthian columns before slightly open doors; the "podium" has a bucranium and garlands, a sphinx at either corner; in the pediment, a shield. In the frieze between the telamones, rosettes flank an urn. The patron is portrayed with naked torso and mantle round the hips, a hero type borrowed directly from commemorative statuary. one arm resting on a fine herm, between two slaves [BACK]

87. Pentelic marble. Early Julio-Claudian, probably Augustan, head later recut (to Caligula?). Borda 1943, 24-25, cat. 12, pls. 25f.; Vermeule 1959, 237; Stemmer (1978, 107-8, cat. VIIIa3) calls it a Trajanic copy of an Augustan prototype. [BACK]

88. The blurred available plate shows that the nine front pteryges of the statue are decorated with seated, slumping figures, like those on the Primaporta Augustus; like those and the BR Gaul, they are women (long hair in a chignon) in male ethnic dress. Unfortunately, no author describes any attribute of these figures; it may even be that rather than nine different types there are only two, repeated. This statue appears in no discussion of the Primaporta provinces. [BACK]

89. It seems apt here to describe a unique piece, Naples, MN 6715, from Puteoli (or Avellino), cited by Zanker 1988, fig. 142; bibl.: Schmidt-Colinet 1977, 236, cat. W 54, fig. s.v. The facing for a basis or socle projection (.87m), it may have carried a trophy. At its corners peplophoroi caryatids raise their outer arms to hold the crowning molding (modern heads, raised arms, inscriptions). Between sits in profile a provincia capta, slumped chin in hand, one breast bare; "from" her rises an acanthus trunk with curling shoots. The province, a nonspecific, allusive "classical" type, will once have been identified by a lost attribute and/or inscription. Zanker derives the symbolism from Augustan use of fantastic acanthus plants to symbolize the Golden Age, here used to convey the Roman ideal of peace as guaranteed by conquest. Compare now the acanthus bases of the Augustan Basilica Aemilia Persians; see p. 252 n. 82 above. Like much in Naples, the piece has not yet been carefully studied. It has been thought a work of the second century A.D., but drill work in the plant is the only tangible datum cited; Zanker does not explain his own, early imperial, date. I am unwilling to choose between Hadrianic and Augustan classicisms on the basis of photographs. [BACK]

90. Decreed in A.D. 4 ( CIL XI. 1421; ILS 140; Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 69), from the Augusteum in Pisa's Forum. It was to be decorated with spoils of the devictarum ant in fidem receptarum ab eo [sc. Augustus ] gentium, a standing statue of Augustus in triumphal dress, and flanking equestrian statues of Gaius and his brother Lucius. It must echo honors decreed by the Senate in Rome for the dead princes; the Tabula Siarensis (González 1984, 58, 11. 9-11) describes the arch decreed by the Senate under Tiberius for the dead Germanicus cum signis devictarum gentium in [ auratis . . .]. Compare the emblematic Eastern/Western captives on the Augustan exedra tomb in the Campus Martius; see p. 61. [BACK]

91. Cf. Juv. 10.136: "summo tristis captivus in arcu." [BACK]

92. Kienast 1982, n. 195 at 114-15, with bibl. on other honors to Gaius and Lucius; Pollini 1987, 74 and n. 155, 93 and n. 3. The attic statuary: Kleiner 1985a, 162; Kleiner 1989, 245; Gualandi 1979, 99f.; Rose 1987, cat. Pisa 01. The confused Latin of the inscription is generally translated as referring to statues of Gaius and of Lucius on foot flanking a statue of Gaius on horseback. Knowing no parallel for such reduplication in a single commission of a unified group, I envision a statue of Augustus as triumphator flanked by statues of Gaius and Lucius on horse-back; so also Gualandi, 107-8. Cf. the funerary arch at Saintes (A.D. 15-18): on the attic the "brothers" Germanicus and Drusus II flanked Tiberius ( CIL XIII. 1036); Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 196-97, 2: 222. [BACK]

93. The many Julio-Claudian victory monuments in Gaul and the Gallo-Roman grave monuments that copy "official" iconography: Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 173ff., s.v. Orange, 184-93; Kleiner 1985a, 162f.; Gros 1976b, 1979. Most think that in the capital relief-covered arches developed only later, but Gallic compositions and iconography are based on relief, etc., from Rome. See an early Julio-Claudian marble panel from Rome (Mus. Greg. vestibule) on which a bound Gaul stands flanked by spears and a boar standard: Simon in Helbig ⁴ I, cat. 603; Lippold 1936, III.1, 55f., pl. 28, no. 605. The Lugdunum Convenarum statue group is certainly Roman work, and cf. the Arretine ware in figs. 65-67. Cf. Gros 1979, 65, s.v. the Cavaillon arch; Johannowsky and Zanker on Gros in Hellenismus in Mittelitalien 1976, 312-14. [BACK]

94. See p. 243 n. 6 above. [BACK]

95. A.D. 10-20, Rolland 1977, pls. 22-23 (east and west faces, male and female captives). But the arch front (fig. 85) has a different message: see pp. 109-10. [BACK]

96. For Tiberius (Carpentras was originally Forum Neronis); Augustan or Tiberian. Bedon et al. 1998, 1: 178-80, 2: 116. On the short sides, an Asian and a Germanic captive flank a trophy; one Asian wears Iranian dress (Parthia/Armenia); the other is a Greco-Oriental king (diadem, chlamys, long hair, plumpness). See p. 86 below. [BACK]

97. Bedon et al. 1988, I:175. See pp. 80, 250 n. 61. [BACK]

98. Triple arch and propylaion; the central arch spandrels have bound male Pisidians, one nude and one draped ("real" captives); compare the similar pair on a governor's chair at Rome; see chap. 2, n. 21. See Vermeule 1968, 78-79; Fittschen 1976, 192-93; D. M. Robinson in AJA 28 (1924): 438f. and fig. 4 (nude Pisidian); Art Bulletin 9 (1926): 5-69. [BACK]

99. Campana reliefs are mold-made terracotta revetments for house walls. One or more patterns would be bought in bulk and lined up in a repeating series to form a molding. They seem to have been made, and almost exclusively utilized, for domestic architecture in central Italy in the near orbit of Rome. Like the Arretine ware described below they document diffusion of a given iconography and message (see pp. 85, 200). Campana reliefs in general, and their relation to models from the capital: Tortorella 1981, 61-80, esp. 70-73 (themes from imperial ideology), 69 (figs. 9-11, Gallic prisoners-and-trophy type); Gabelmann 1981, 453-56 (triumph types). [BACK]

100. Ward-Perkins 1981, 23, fig. 1; Zanker 1988, fig. 55, 339 (bibl.); La Rocca 1985, 94-95, figs. 22, 24; Kais. Aug. 1988, cat. 42-44 (Viscogliosi). [BACK]

101. Kähler 1959, passim; Pollini 1978, chap. 1; Schneider 1986, 91 and passim, for Augustus' Parthian propaganda; Zanker 1988, figs. 148b, 192-96. [BACK]

102. Fittschen (1976, 205-8) misidentified the provinces to set up a typically Augustan East-West pair but could have saved trouble by remembering that the central emblem is already "Eastern." Simon 1986, 237-38, 253 ( contra Fittschen), color pl. 1, figs. 55-56 (Hispania and Gallia); Zanker noted Gallia but waffled on calling her sister either German or (under Fittschen's influence) Oriental.

The long argument about these figures could largely have been resolved by the following sound methodological rule: like the original patron and viewer, interpret a given iconographic occurrence in the light of past and contemporary imagery ( not, like Alföldi, for example, in the light of images more than a century younger). The Primaporta figures have, respectively, a boar standard and carnyx (Gallic boar trumpet (fig. 64d)), and an eagle-headed sword (fig. 64c). Boar standards and carnyxes up to the Augustan period were associated exclusively with Gaul (cf. the many coins of Caesar and others in the late Republic celebrating Gallic victories; Crawford, RRC at 459 and 297). Among the many relevant monuments are the relief from Rome cited in n. 93 on p. 254, Campana reliefs with Gallic prisoners cited in n. 99 on p. 255, and an early imperial relief from the Moselle region in Gaul, a goddess with patera and boar standard (Metz Mus., from Betting les Avold; La civilisation romaine [1983], 142, cat. 72, fig. at p. 44). If one personification is Gaul, her companion is Spain; and compare Horace's coupling of Spanish and Armenian victories; see p. 256 n. 103 below. [BACK]

103. Pollini 1978, 37-38. Simon (1986, 55, 253) thinks that Gaul, Spain, and Syria (i.e., the locus of the central transfer) commemorate Augustus' imperium (given in 27 B. C. , renewed in 17 B. C. ), as frontier provinces under his immediate control; and the sphinxes on the shoulder tabs signify Egypt. Meyer (1983, 136) rejected Pollini in favor of what he saw as Fittschen's hermeneuticism; he ignored Pollini except to taunt him for not citing Fittschen: ''Werden die Publikationen des Berliner Instituts in Berkeley nicht gehalten?" (p. 210 n. 64). Highly apposite in tone (cf. Zanker 1988, 189) is Hor. Epist. 1.12.25-29, which in praise of Augustus links the submission of the Spanish Cantabri by Agrippa, of Armenia by Tiberius, and of Phraates personally to Augustus with the gushing of fruit from Italia's cornucopia. [BACK]

104. Compare an early imperial base from Delminium (Gardun) in Split: right of the central tabula (missing left) is a trophy flanked by Eastern prisoners (Phrygian cap) and Western (Celt in bracae ); Picard 1957, 252 (possibly Augustan), pl. 12. The relation of motif to tabula recalls the frieze of the Augustan Tomb of Caecilia Metella at Rome, which preserves a trophy with Celtic captive left of the inscription (right, lost); Eisner 1986, pl. 9. Picard (220f., pl. 7) discusses the Western and Eastern trophies painted on either side of the gate of the Armamentarium at Pompeii and (345-46) the possibility of a similar pair installed at Pompeii flanking an Isis shrine. On the East-West theme Rose (1990, 461) notes how Vergil ( Aen. 8.652-713) apposes Gauls (defeated in 387) to Orientals (Actium) on Aeneas' shield. [BACK]

105. Vermeule (1980b, 23, cat. 15C) cites H. W. Catling, Brit. Sch. in Athens Archeological Reports for 1976-77, 48-49, fig. 82, where one can see flanking a trophy a bound male in a Thracian helmet and a seated female personification in a tall headdress on a cuirass. Even the blurred plate bears out Vermeule's observation that this is a very fine cuirass statue, its workmanship on a par with that of the Primaporta Augustus (fig. 64). [BACK]

106. Müthmann 1936, 347-52, fig. 1, pl. 49 (best ill.); Poulsen 1973, cat. 31, pl. 46; Vermeule 1959, 233 n. 79, 237 (miscalls the figure with a child "female"). Compare the following: a Hadrian from Hierapytna in Crete (Vermeule, pl. 73, fig. 17) has a bound Oriental (Parthian cap) on one flap. Mansuelli (1958, 99) mentions a fragment of a cuirass statue from Pola, on which (right hip) appears a kneeling barbarian in a torque. Conquest iconography on cuirass statues: Vermeule's article explores the Augustan iconography revived in this genre by Trajan and his successors; see p. 258 n. 117. [BACK]

107. Marble, 40 X 68 cm, broken at right. Hölscher 1984a, 209ff., fig. 12, n. 112 (bibl.). Egypt/Africa has female dress, a long and long-sleeved gown (and mantle?), and an elephant headdress the trunk of which rears up, as on the BR cup. The imperator has cropped hair and wears a Hellenistic-style cuirass (form possible from ca. 70 B. C. - A. D. 70); he steps left in three-quarter view, cradling a lance in his left arm. Behind him at right was another figure, whose right hand is visible gesturing as if in presentation, presumably a divinity "presenting" and sponsoring him. Dates vary. Hölscher points out the connection with Augustus' Actium imagery; I cannot see how in fact the allusions to Egypt/Africa and sea victory could fit anyone else. [BACK]

108. Pucci 1981, 101-19; Wiseman 1987/1963, 6-14, 373. Official imagery disseminated in "private" media, including Arretine ware: Hölscher 1984a, 211-13, s.v. Actium imagery. [BACK]

109. See the Introduction, pp. 3, 214 n. 6. [BACK]

110. Reported by Simon 1957, s.v. the blue-glass cameo fragment (an Oriental in mitra and long-sleeved tunic), fitted as bottom to the Portland vase. This is so far the only fragment of a Republican or early imperial glass vessel that may have politically significant iconography. [BACK]

111. Standing in a kind of frame, she has thick, loose hair, a long, unbelted dress, a spear in her lowered right hand and the hilt of a sheathed sword in her left (the thick object is not a mantle roll, as she has no mantle). Weapons fill the side extensions of the handle plate to frame the label below. Pais 1979, 125; Smith 1988b, 71 n. 50; AA 1889: 166, drawing on p. 167. Compare the deployment in an isolated rectangle and lack of formal specificity with the province at the base of the early Tiberian "Sheath of Tiberius" (fig. 118). [BACK]

112. The loose-haired Germania (cf. pp. 71, 144 n. 8) is identified by the tropaeum details. Berlin inv. 4772: other sherds in Arezzo, Tübingen, Munich, Berlin. Dragendorff 1948, 160-61; Oxé 1933, 98, pl. 52, no. 220a-b. and 308 n. 1; other sherds in Heidelberg. Laubscher 1974, 253; Pollini 1978, 284-85; Simon 1957, 36. [BACK]

113. Dragendorff 1948, no. 506 (= Tübingen 2575), pl. 33; no. 505 is a piece of a trophy from one of these cups. Dragendorff recognized a possible third composition involving Armenia in two Munich fragments with the lower part of an Oriental body (trousered and slippered) and the ends of two spears (?) (i.e., spears attached to a trophy arm). Armenia has a long-sleeved (i.e., Oriental) gown and an elaborate stiff tiara known from coinage to be a specific Armenian crown type; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Armenia," sec. 9. J. Herrmann in The Gods Delight 1988, 290, fig. 51c, publishes a fragment in a private collection identical to the personification of Tübingen 2575 and attributes it for some reason to an Iliadic scene of the dragging of Hector's body [BACK]

114. Laubscher 1974, 253 (depictions of the lost monument on Actian commemorative coinage); Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 32 (the 31 B.C. coin type), If. (Republican nude portraits). [BACK]

115. Smith 1987, cat. I, pl. 4 (Augustus, eagle, trophy, Nike); cat. 4, pl. 10 (trophy, captive, Germanicus); cat. 5, pl. 12 (trophy, female captive, prince, Genius). Smith (103, 135) rejects direct inspiration from Roman statuary group types for the Augustus group or any other panel because the imperial males are shown heroically nude. He notes similar compositions (n. 45: Vienna gem, nude imperator with scepter, eagle, trophy, prisoner) and allows single statues of Augustus and others heroically nude but rejects the possibility of "narrative" historical compositions with nude imperator because in such compositions the emperor and others are always at least partly clothed or armored. This avoidance of full heroic nudity may perhaps have been true of commemorative relief in Rome (though Smith cites no specific allegorical reliefs), and indeed a collection of reliefs like those at Aphrodisias would be very startling if excavated in Rome. However, there is no reason to assume such avoidance for multifigure narrative or symbolic statue groups any more than for individual statues; indeed triumphal arch statuary is very likely to have deployed freestanding groups of this type. The Aphrodisias panels throughout plainly draw on freestanding models. [BACK]

116. See p. 243 n. 6. [BACK]

117. Compare an Augustan cuirass statue from Civitavecchia (Vat. Mus.), the type copied in antiquity (Brit. Mus.): Victory with palm and cornucopia floats between two bound barbarians, one Celtic and one Oriental, each by a trophy, with Terra Mater under all. Heintze in Helbig ⁴ I, cat. 150; Vermeule and Haufmann 1957, 237 ("Flavian"); Stemmer 1978, 61, cat. V9, pl. 37 (Civitavecchia, "Claudian"). Cf. an Augustan cuirass statue from Susa in Torino cited by Mansuelli 1958, 98-99, fig. 53. The Amphipolis cuirass statue (p. 256 n. 105) may juxtapose a Thracian and Armenia (the tall headdress of the female would be a tiara). East-West imagery: see p. 244 n. 15 above and the Index. Apposition of separate, far-flung frontiers is a staple of Augustan panegyric poetry, echoed in other empires (''Dominion over palm and pine"; "From the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli"). [BACK]

118. On this question see Hölscher 1984C, 24, 26; compare the Arretine fragment discussed in the Introduction (p. 214 n. 6). Pollini (1978, 284-85) abandons these cups as being in "an entirely private sphere." [BACK]

119. A good example of dissemination of personification iconography is a relief of abominable local workmanship from Kula (Lydia): Caligula rides down a female personification labeled "Germania"; Gaio Germaniko autokratori Kaisari kathieroutai pas ho domosios topos ( IGGR 4.1379; Smallwood 1967, no. 34). Pais 1979, 123-25; Kais. Aug. 1988, 544, fig. 223. [BACK]

120. Contra Zanker 1987, 231: "unterworfener und befriedeter Provinzen" (= 1988, 230: "subject and pacified provinces"). Add an early imperial gem from Aquileia depicting a female provincia capta in a landscape; Sena della Chiesa 1966, I: 338, cat. 990 (inv. 50598); vol. 2, pl. 50.990. [BACK]

121. A.D. 2-4. ILS 147 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, 79: Ti. Claudius Ti. f Nero pont. cos. II [imp. I] I trib. potest. V] Nero Claudius Ti. f Drusus Germa[ nicus ] augur c[ os.] imp. [ . . . ]/murum portas turris d. [s. p.] f c. Zanker 1988, fig. 258 (view); Schneider 1986, 133-34; bibl. in n. 972; detail of German, pl. 38.4. [BACK]

122. So Nicolet (1988) and his reviewer Millar (1988) are bothered by Augustus' propaganda. Millar observes with regard to Parthia: "Augustan ideology in general, however, shifted uneasily between the notion of an already achieved universal domination and that of a major Eastern enemy whom it was Rome's destiny to confront" (138). [BACK]

123. So an inscription at Messene ( SEG 23, no. 206) congratulates Gaius, who moved against Parthia, for "fighting against the barbarians for the safety of all men." This inscription motivated Millar's comment quoted in the preceding note. [BACK]

124. Identified and reconstructed by Kähler 1954b, 38-39, fig. 2, and 1954a passim, when the fragments were still in the Terme basements; he has been ignored in most subsequent interpretations of the program of the Ara Pacis as a whole. Exceptions: Simon in Helbig ⁴ II, 676; Zanker 1988, 129-30. Now catalogued by Angelis Bertolotti 1985, 232-34, Pls. 90-95. She notes that these Amazon-type personifications are serene and expressive of the pax Augusta, thus not the gentes victae of, say, Verg. Aen. 8. 1103f ("incedunt victae longo ordine gentes . . ."), which are so typical of contemporary art. A good account of the fragments: Smith 1988a, 72-73; Smith thinks they represented "new conquests" (doubtful: Gaul itself was not Augustus' conquest!) and states oddly that "this does not constitute a major gentes monument.'' Catalogued by Koeppel 1987, 148-51, figs. 43-54, cat. 13; the other altar frieze, of female virtues or abstractions, 146-48, figs. 38-39, cat. 12. [BACK]

125. One can identify fragments of an Amazon with a bare breast and an axe (compare the "Sheath of Tiberius" figure; see fig. 118), a Celtic female in a fringed gown and cloak with spear and shield, another figure with such armor by her legs, and a Celtic (?) female with soft boot and trousers, and at least one in female dress with chiton and mantle. See Smith 1988a, 73 n. 58; Koeppel 1987, cat. 13; Kähler 1954a, no. 2, fig. 20; no. 7, fig. 25; no. 11, fig. 29. [BACK]

126. Koeppel 1987, fig. 13/10. [BACK]

127. Koeppel 1983a, 120, cat. 26-27, fig. 31; see pp. 225-26 nn. 68-69. [BACK]

128. Halfmann 1986, 20-21, omitting the monuments. For Zanker 1988, 234, the Gemma Augustea is Augustus' "first step" at a view beyond Rome to the Empire: in his Forum (2 B.C.) the Empire is only an object of "ständiger Eroberung"; on the cameo (ca. A.D. 14) Oikoumene and Italia take an active part in honoring Augustus (fig. 16). But the BR provinces do the same, and the Ara Pacis pacati and provinces bring this imagery back into the teens B.C. [BACK]

129. Compare the terminology in Vell. Pat. 2.98.2; L. Piso's bloody crushing of the revolt in Thrace means he "pristinum pacis redegit modum [ sc. eos]." [BACK]

130. The definition of pax in Roman terms has yet to be fully assimilated by modern art historians. In 1983 La Rocca (52) still claimed that the Ara Pacis fragments could not possibly show personified provinces or defeated peoples, because this would contradict the ideology of the altar; compare Torelli's comments (1982) on figures in the enclosure friezes; see chap. 4, n. 26. [BACK]

131. See p. 70 n. 104 above. [BACK]

132. On various literary images of Augustus' world rule see p. 260 nn. 135-37 below. Symbolism of world rule in the Forum Augustum complex: Zanker 1973, 12ff. The globe in general and Augustus' exploitation of that symbol: Hölscher 1967, 6ff., 116ff., and 148-63 passim; Buchner 1976, 347f.; Hardie 1986, 367-68. Republican globe symbolism: Crawford, RRC at nos. 393, 397, 403, 409.2, 426.4. The globe atop the obelisk that formed the gnomon of Angustus' Solarium: Buchner in Kais. Aug. 1988, 240-45, at cat. 110. [BACK]

133. Compare the monument put up at Aphrodisias ca. 30 B.C. by Zoilos, a wealthy freedman of Octavian: greeted by Demos, Zoilos is crowned by Polis; Zoilos is crowned by Time; on individual slabs, Andreia, Aion, Mneme, and Roma seated with a shield. Erim, Aphrodisias (1986), 137-39; Erim and Reynolds in Alfäldi 1979, 35-40; Vermeule 1968, 20-21, 505, no. 4 ("Antonine"). [BACK]

134. On Caesar, Pompey, and the Demetrios painting see Weinstock 1971, 38-39, 41f; Hölscher 1967, 13-17. Compare, for imitation of Hellenistic regal prototypes, the monument at Praeneste that paraphrases the decoration of Alexander's funeral car; Hölscher 1979, 342f., and in Kais. Aug. 1988, 363-64, cat. 198. As regards the transmission by image and by text, consider the case of Protogenes' painting of Ialysos (Rhodes): taken by Demetrios Poliorketes (Plut. Mor. 183), seen by Cicero ( Orat. 2[5]), later installed in Vespasian's Templum Pacis in Rome and so described by Pliny ( HN 35.36). This installation can perhaps be attributed to imitation of the Ara Pacis's linking of personifications with pax . On the Theocritean panegyric for Ptolemy and its exemplary quality, see Ganger 1984, 269f.; Weinstock (1971, 41) omitted this parallel to Caesar's hemitheos inscription. [BACK]

135. See p. 244 n. 12 above on subjection imagery. Zwierlein-Diehl 1973, vol. 2, s.v. cat. 1089. The corresponding poetic image: Bömer ad Ov. Fast. 4.857. [BACK]

136. Terra marique: for the literary evidence and its Greek precedents, see Momigliano 1942, 53ff.; Ganger 1984, 269, 277-82. The images: Fittschen 1976, 189f.; Stemmer 1978, 152-62 (world rule at 157-58). For this and other images of Rome's preeminence, Ganger's gold-mine article is to be read with Bowra 1957, 21-28; Rowland 1983, 749ff. [BACK]

137. The comparanda for Vergil's parcere subiectis ( Aen. 6.853): Fordyce's commentary ad loc. ; Polyb. 18.37.7: polemountas gar dei tous agathous andras bareis einai kai thumikous . . . nikontas ge men metrious kai praeis kai philanthropous; Cic. Off. 1.35: "suscipienda quidem bella sunt ob eam causam ut sine iniuria in pace vivatur, parta autem victoria conservandi ii qui non crudeles sunt in bello, non immanes fuerunt . . . et cum iis quos vi deviceris consulendum est, tum ii qui armis positis ad imperatorum fidem confugient . . . recipiendi," etc.; Aug. RG 26.2: "Alpes a regione ea, quae proxima est Hadriano mari, ad Tuscum pacari feci nulli genti bello per iniuriam inlato"; Livy 30.42.17 (Hasdrubal on Romans): "plus paene parcendo victis quam vincendo imperium auxisse," and 37.45.8f. (ambassadors from Antiochus to Rome, 190 B.C.): "maximo semper animo victis regibus populisque ignovistis; . . . positis iam adversus omnes mortales certaminibus haud secus quam deos consulere et parcere vos generi humano oportet''; Hor. Carm. saec. (on Augustus): "bellante prior iacentem/levis in hostem." Compare the Augustan imagery common on cuirass statues and elsewhere, of Arimaspes (emblematic barbarians) either eaten by griffins ( superbi ) or feeding them ( subiecti ); Stemmer 1978, 152-53. [BACK]

138. Consider here Caesar's policy of clementia toward foreigners as well as toward his Roman political enemies. On this idea of patronage, one of the main themes of BR I:2, see chap. 4. [BACK]

139. P. 242 n. 129 above. This is the tone of most numismatic representations of barbarians; cf. Levi 1952. Subjected barbarians on cuirass statues: Stemmer 1978, 156-57. [BACK]

140. Millar 1988, 137. [BACK]

1. Armor types: Waurick 1983, 265ff. At pp. 277, 288, and 292 (the BR cup) Waurick characterizes this armor as a Hellenistic-style Lederpanzer worn by higher-ranking military personnel, though unsure whether this is just artistic convention; I see no reason why it should not reflect actuality. As for the possible Praetorian identification, the same armor is worn by the figure in the central group on the Primaporta Augustus cuirass. One can reasonably suggest that he is one of the emperor's special Praetorian attendants. Héron de Villefosse compares Trajanic coins with a similar figure behind the seated emperor at a military audience ( BMCRE III, pls. 20.10, 19.19; MonPiot 5 [1899]: 139). Primaporta Augustus soldier: Kähler (1959, 17-18, figs. 11, 16) wavers between Tiberius and a personified populus Romanus, two dominant opinions; Simon 1986, 55, s.v. pl. I, "Mars." Although Kähler et al. call the band across his cuirass a general's band ( Feldherrnbinde ), the BR guard, clearly no general, has one too. The dog does mark the figure as symbolic of, for example, the Praetorians (?), as do his shoes: see Goette 1988a, 410 ("Mars"). Not the personified Roman people: there is no parallel, nor can I see why the available personification of the Genius of the Roman People should have been superseded in this one instance. Not an imperial prince: all such portraits known are bareheaded. The profile rendering and plain helmet rule out Mars. [BACK]

2. An early example of a favorite spatial device of later historical relief, e.g., the Domitianic Cancelleria adventus panel; Strong 1988, fig. 71. Cf. the Julio-Claudian Arcus Novus fragment (fig. 12) and the figures flanking Augustus on the Ara Pacis. [BACK]

3. A thick shaft terminates in a rounded knob over the figure's left shoulder. Not the right shape or length for a standard or a weapon, perhaps it is a trumpet; the Gallic carnyx has a similar profile, though with an animal-head bell. [BACK]

4. A similar contrast is evident between the documentary and allegorical relief fragments from the Arcus Novus, from Ravenna, and on the Ara Pacis and Sorrento base (figs. 8, 12, 15, 71f.). [BACK]

5. Arretine ware matrix: of M. Perennius. Compare the tableau-like quality and comparative lack of meaningful narrative structure in the Aquileia dish (fig. 17). There is a matrix for this cup in the Metropolitan Museum and another in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, as well as an impression in the Louvre. Fragments are common in museum catalogues. The New York matrix illustrated by Zanker (1988, figs. 45a-b) has been shown now by Francesca Porten Palange to be a forged version, but she assures me that the scheme does exist in authentic versions; the examples of this important scheme need a full investigation. I thank Joan Mertens of the Metropolitan Museum for directing me to Dr. Porten Palange's work, which tries systematically to distinguish original Arretine from modern reproductions of what remain, however, authentic schemata. See F. P. Porten Palange, "Fälschungen in der Arretinischen Reliefkeramik," Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt, RGZM-Mainz 19 (1989): 91-99. [BACK]

6. LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Ares/Mars," 383. [BACK]

7. Drusus: Héron de Villefosse in the original publication ( MonPiot 5 [1899]: 134-40, 154), cited only by a few who are likewise predisposed to see individual portraits (see Kiss 1975, 96). Vermeule (1963, 35) and Pollini (1978, 289-90) speculate on Drusus very briefly; Küthmann (1959, 77) (after Willers) saw Gaius Caesar, taking the scene as the submission of the Sugambri and stretching Dio 55.6.4 to imply that Gaius was present with Tiberius and Augustus at that formal submission in 8 B.C. and presided over it (!) (on modern bias toward Gaius and Lucius see chap. 8); Simon (1986, 245) sees also a Julio-Claudian prince (cf. his bare head) but proposes Germanicus by comparision with the Gemma Augustea (Augustus-Germanicus-Tiberius). Most make no portrait identification nor report earlier attempts (Hölscher, Gabelmann, Kleiner, Ryberg, Zanker). [BACK]

8. The cuirass type and its significance: Waurick 1983, 298-99. [BACK]

9. See pp. 165f. Due to his premature death, portraits of Drusus are rarer than those of his brother Tiberius. Many are products of retrospective by his son Claudius, though based on prototypes from his own lifetime; cf. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, 29. Also, identification of Julio-Claudian princes is notoriously difficult, as their features are often very similar. Identification often hinges on close observation of little locks of hair fringing their faces in different, set patterns. This tool cannot be used here, given the scale of the cup. Nevertheless, the features here outlined do correspond to typical portraits of Drusus the Elder. [BACK]

10. Ex Coll. Albani. For thorough plates (front, back, and both profiles), see Kaisersaal 1986, 60-61 (Tiberius), 62-63 (Drusus). See Fittschen and Zanker 1985, cat. 10, 22; Fittschen 1977, cat. 13, n. 16; Jucker 1977, 217f., fig. 4; Rose 1987, chap. 2, "Drusus the Elder." [BACK]

11. My work, now quoted by Rose 1990, 460. "Submission": Zanker 1988, 229; Baratte 1986, 72; Simon 1986, 144; Gabelmann 1984, 127-31, 133, cat. 41; Gabelmann 1986, 285f.; Hölscher 1980, 282f.; Pollini 1978, 285-86. The most recent work on imperialism in Vergil adduces the panel as "Augustus receiving the homage of a varied group of conquered barbarians, men, women [ sic ] and children" (Hardie 1986, 368). Baratte says the children throw themselves at Augustus' feet! See pp. 99-100, 164-65 below. On the Torlonia relief, not part of this debate, see chap. 7, pp. 166-67 and p. 289 n. 19 (fig. 89). [BACK]

12. Ryberg 1967, 61f., fig. 44; Gabelmann 1984, cat. 80; Strong 1988, fig. 132. This relief in its own way "ennobles" the barbarian father and son, by borrowing a composition developed to show the wounded Aeneas; the mourning Ascanius and stoic Aeneas have, however, been crumpled and twisted into anguished figures of defeat. The prototype Aeneas panel or painting must have been in Rome; the extant 4th Style copy from Pompeii would of course not have been available to the second-century artist. Casa di Sirico VII 1.23, Naples, MN 9009; Coll. Napoli (1986), 63 (col.), cat. 209; Alinari P.2.N. 12012. [BACK]

13. Gabelmann 1984, 182-88; Brilliant 1963, 157, on fig. 3.132; see chaps. 5 and 7. These sarcophagi, like the Antonine panel, try to exemplify the virtus and clementia of the emperor/protagonist toward "zumeist besiegten Feinden" (Gabelmann, 128, on the BR scene). [BACK]

14. See chap. 7. This naked emphasis on conquest characterizes other Julio-Claudian depictions of barbarians with their women and/or children; cf. the lower exergues of the great cameos (Gemma Augustea, fig. 16; Grande Camée de France). This is also true of cuirass statues, as they are by nature triumphal monuments. See p. 166 for the three Julio-Claudian cuirass statues (Copenhagen, Grosseto, Pal. Colonna) with child captives. [BACK]

15. In triumphal processions captives may walk calmly, but the context here is not exactly benevolent. Consider the Julio-Claudian architrave (?) fragment from Rome in figure 84 ( ex Coll. Farnese; Naples MN 6722 [7516]; all heads restored; see also pp. 166, 289 n. 23): in a triumphal procession walk two Celtic captives (tunic, sagum, braccae ), each with a hand on the shoulder of a boy (tunic, sagum ) before them in the foreground plane; Koeppel 1983a, cat. II, fig. 12. Children were in fact sometimes led in triumphs—the infant Juba II, for example, in Caesar's North African triumph (App. BCiv . 2. 101). [BACK]

16. Several claim that something like the BR scene is allegorized on the so-called Hoby cup, where Priam begs Achilles for the dead body of Hector—Vermeule 1968, 136; Gabelmann 1984, 142, cat. 46, pl. 14.1; 143, cat. 47, pl. 14.2, an Arretine ware reproduction. [BACK]

17. Cf. the similarly deviant lid panel of the Ludovisi sarcophagus (fig. 88), which paraphrases the prototype of the BR scene; see chap. 7. [BACK]

18. Simon 1967, 21, pls. 3, 17-19, 21; Simon in Helbig ⁴ II, 686. Simon (1986, 73, fig. 90a) called the south wall child simply a "Barbarenprinz," a hostage (74) to guarantee peace as in RG 32. [BACK]

19. Contra Pollini (p. 264 n. 27) this is not an exomis ; the sleeve shoulder strap has simply slipped. [BACK]

20. For this unpublished detail see the negatives DAI neg. 8817-18. [BACK]

21. Picard 1957, pl. 9. Infants' dress in many cultures mixes aspects of the adult dress of either sex. [BACK]

22. The relief may quote the Ara Pacis; the baby staggers toward his mother with arms out and head (now mostly gone) thrown back, in a not dissimilar fashion. His mother's hairstyle seems Tiberian or Claudian. Espérandieu 1938 (suppl. XI.2), cat. 7649. [BACK]

23. A Gallic cult-figure type is a bearded male divinity with a child across his lap; one elaborate example shows a torqued male baby; Espérandieu 1911, cat. 2882, Auxerre (compare, for instance, cat. 3017). In Augustan art: a torque frames some of the Jupiter shield images of the Forum of Augustus, alternating with the better-known Jupiter-Ammon heads (fig. 69); see p. 82. On children: cf. a marble torso of a naked baby in Providence (RISD Mus. inv. 26.158); Ridgway (1972, 93-94) links Simon's Ara Pacis "princes" to this torso, identified as a barbarian child resident in Rome. This piece may exemplify friendly interest in northern children but might also belong to a trophy group of captives. [BACK]

24. Some Hellenistic females wear a bracelet on the upper arm, but for males it seems a Gallic trait, observable on Gallic honorific statues in the Greco-Roman period. See the fine Augustan warrior (1.9 m; headless) with sagum and shield from Mondragon (Avignon, Mus. Calvet), and two right arm fragments from a multifigure limestone warrior group at Entremont. Espérandieu 1907, cat. 271; 1966, cat. 8662, 8665, pl. 12; Eydoux 1962, fig. 63 (Mondragon). [BACK]

25. Simon (see p. 263 n. 18) followed by Ridgway 1972; Gercke 1968, 136-40; Rose 1987, chap. 2, "Gaius Caesar." My own arguments were presented at the AIA-APA 1986-87 meetings as "Lost Episodes in Augustan History"; at the same convention Rose accepted my identification of the Gallic child, identifying the other as from Pontos. Simon called both Eastern. Pollini (1986a, 453 n. 3) now calls both Gallic and (1987, 27 n. 49) publishes the agreement with my views that he had previously given in conversation, citing my evidence, though without acknowledgment. Dodging the issue are Kleiner (1985, 110: "a boy") and Syme (1984), who does locate Gaius in the north wall boy with Julia (426-27). See now Rose's definitive 1990 article sorting out the "Princes" Gaius and Lucius from the "Barbarians''; for Koeppel 1987 and 1988, see p. 264 n. 29. [BACK]

26. Torelli 1982, 60 n. 72: "It is perfect nonsense from the Roman point of view to imagine (as Simon . . . does) that these boys were barbarian (?) princes, 'guests' (?) of Augustus." He was then commended by his reviewer, Smith (1985, 226). Compare La Rocca on the inner altar personifications; see p. 265 n. 29. On Roman definitions of pax see pp. 88-93 above. [BACK]

27. The view that Gaius (south wall Oriental) and Lucius Caesar (north wall BR child) are here costumed for the Lusus Troiae (cf. Vergil's two-line description of these games as conducted under Aeneas) was especially promulgated by Pollini's 1978 dissertation (retracted; see n. 25), which is often cited; cf., still, Zanker 1988, 217f.; La Rocca 1983, 24, 30-31; Gabelmann 1985, 522; Torelli 1982, 48 n. 72. One need not belabor here the fallacies of this reconstruction (or Pollini's hypothesis [1987, 27 n. 43] that this is Vipsania Agrippina): the BR comparison makes it clear that "Lucius" is a Celt. Gaius' portrait can be identified on the camillus on the north wall; Rose 1990; Pollini 1986a, 453 n. 3, 454 n. 8; Pollini 1987, cat. 4 Type I, 42-43 and 21ff.; Rose 1987, S.V., 280. The Oriental has no bulla (which would not be removed for the dangerous Lusus Troiae!), completely non-Julio-Claudian features, and a mother who wears a diadem. [BACK]

28. Note that the scanty dress of this high-ranking baby definitively sets the occasion of the procession frieze at a very warm time of year! [BACK]

29. Cf. Koeppel's catalogue articles on the Ara Pacis in his Bonner Jahrbuch series; Koeppel (1988, 104-5) notes that Rose's "forthcoming" article settles the question; the 1987 catalogue of figures (cat. 5.30, 31, south frieze; cat. 6.35, north frieze) had asserted the foreign status of the children and mother as probable. [BACK]

30. Well visible in the color photo essay on the Ara Pacis in FMR 10 (January-February 1983): 106. The diadem: Smith 1988a, 34f., 38 (its adoption by the non-Greek rulers of Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Pontus), 43 (its use by queens). [BACK]

31. See RE 2.70 (1961) 1226-75 (R. Hanslik). [BACK]

32. Most recently on Agrippa's activities: Halfmann 1986, 26, 163-64, 165-66. He made a stay at the Hellespont in 16 B.C. and sailed through the Bosphoros to Sinope and Amisos in 14 B.C. Rose 1990, 453, 457f. [BACK]

33. Gem portrait in Beazley 1920, cat. 98 and pl. 6; and see Rose 1990, n. 13, [BACK]

34. Large torque with finely striated tubes, large round finials. With a Cybele dish, Berlin, Charlottenburg Antikenabt. 3779.3-4. Barr Sharrar 1987, 138H, 14-15, pl. 70; LIMC II (1984), S.V. "Attis," no. 345 (compare no. 368). In the Hellenistic period a torque was also used for the iconography of "Asiatic" religious figures, like the syncretic Dionysus-Amor wearing a braided torque with ram's-head finials on a gold medallion now in the Louvre, ex de Clerq Coll.; Hoffmann and Davidson 1965, 228-31, cat. 93, pl. VI, fig. 93a-b. [BACK]

35. See Smith 1988a, pl. 77, esp. 6, 11-12, 13-15; 16-18, of Pharnakes II, Asander, and an unidentified Bosphoran king, are closest to our period. For this comparison see also Rose 1990, 459. [BACK]

36. As pointed out by Rose (1990, 459) with reference to the colossal polychrome tripod bearers catalogued by Schneider 1986, KO 1-3 (Naples, MN 6117, 6115; and Copenhagen 1177) and assigned by him to a monument on the Palatine. In these, however, the tongue flap is long, narrow, and straight, ending in a single point; it seems to be a double flap; the top piece is bent up over the shoe knot and tucked into the top of the shoe; the one underlying it is left dangling; see especially Schneider, pl. II. (He did not discuss shoes.) Other Parthian figures are KO 9 (Vatican Mag. delle Corazze 3330), a rectangular flap; KO 11 (Madrid, Prado 366), flap tapers to a point; SO 24, a long, narrow tongue; SO 53, an oval flap; pl. 37, unnumbered figure, a flared trapezoidal flap. [BACK]

37. Cf. Hor. Carm. 3.21.20, regum apices burlesqued in this symposiastic mock hymn for Messala Corvinus. [BACK]

38. They transform the genre of decorative Attis figures. As Rose (1990, 459) noted, Attis' Oriental dress can include shoes with flaps (as it can include the Oriental torque; see n. 34), but again none have the same profile: cf. LIMC III (1986), S.V., nos. 46, 117, 126 (rectangle), 90, 128 (rounded, straight tongue), 262 (narrow, pointed leaf). Only 115 (a small bronze from Thrace, Louvre Br 493) flares and has three points, where scallops are cut into the edge. [BACK]

39. New York, Met. Mus., Edith Perry Chapman Fund 1949, 49.II.3, .64 m; Baltimore, Walters Art Gall. 54.1330, .62 m. Said to be from Egypt in 1912. See now Herrmann in The Gods Delight 1988, 282, 288-93, cat. 51, and 294-25, cat. 52. I cannot see that these figures wear, as Herrmann asserts, two tunics, a sleeveless one over a long-sleeved one; they seem rather to wear a single, very voluminous garment caught at the shoulder and other points, having but a single skirt. For its volume untucked, see the dexiosis reliefs from Commagene (n. 40). Note the arrangement of secondary folds under the belt, and the central knot of cloth over it: these indicate a date in the 30s, by comparison with Augustus' Apollo Palatinus, which had the same drapery mannerisms; cf. Roccos 1989. [BACK]

40. Arsameia sculptures: Smith 1988a, 102-4, pls. 58.1-4, 59.3-5; dexiosis relief: pl. 59.1; see "Kommagene," Ant. Welt 6 (1975): fig. 78; cf. pl. 59.2, dexiosis relief from Sofraz Köy (Smith, 104), where the sun-god greeting Antiochos wears this mantle too. Depictions of Armenia and Asia (e.g., Herrmann in The Gods Delight 1988, 290, fig. 51c, Arretine "Asia" by L. Avillius Sura, priv. coll.) tend to have a centrally pinned mantle. [BACK]

41. See Herrmann in The Gods Delight 1988, 290-91. [BACK]

42. On philhellenism in the Commagenian dynasty, see Sullivan 1978, 793. On Antiochus IV's later attempts to try to Orientalize his image, see Smith 1988a, 104 (Nimrud Dagh as "a . . . synthetic Greek version of Oriental dynastic art"). [BACK]

43. See Herrmann in The Gods Delight 1988, 293. [BACK]

44. Proposed by Rose 1990, 458-59. [BACK]

45. Dio 54.24.4. Roddaz 1984, 463-75; RE 5.2 (1905) 1879-80, s.v. "Dynamis" (Stein), suggests that she may be the daughter of Pharnakes, who was sent in 47 B.C. to Caesar in token of peace (App. BCiv. 2.91) [BACK]

46. RE, s.v., notes that Polemo lived to 8 B.C. at the latest and in the interval had time to marry Dynamis' sister Pythodoris. [BACK]

47. The dynasty of Commagene: Sullivan 1975; Sullivan 1978, 781f. I have not seen his Near Eastern Royalty and Rome, 100-30 BC (Chicago, 1989). [BACK]

48. Dio 59.4.3 calls him a paidiskos ( paidiskoi et' onti ). A paidiskos could be a young teenager; Polybius (30.26.9) says Ptolemy VII Philometor was a paidiskos when Antiochos IV attacked him in 170 B.C., and he is likely to have been at least twelve if not older, for he was a young child already in 180 B.C., when he acceded with his mother as regent. [BACK]

49. Sullivan (1975, 35) accepts this date in his authoritative stemma of the house of Commagene. [BACK]

50. Iotape, wife of Antiochos IV, in chignon and diadem, on the only coins of a queen of Commagene: Tasyürek 1975, 43, no. VII, fig. 47; her head at Nimrud Dagh: Smith 1988a, cat. 100, pl. 59.5. [BACK]

51. Weinstock 1960, 53: "Why then should one wish to part company with so many distinguished scholars? They have not so far produced one valid proof and, indeed, they did not realize that proof was required. And yet neither is Pax represented on the altar nor her symbol, the caduceus, nor is her name inscribed on it. . . . Pax ought to have been conspicuous"; see PP. 45-46 in Weinstock on the etymology of pax and its two meanings for Romans in the Republic and early Empire. [BACK]

52. Further on war celebrated here: Gruen 1985, 61-62. [BACK]

53. Compare the arrangements of the positions of Gaius and Lucius on the altar, put on the north frieze with their mother, Julia, partly to avoid the awkwardness of including them on the south frieze, where both their natural and adoptive fathers are present; Rose 1990, 464-65. [BACK]

54. Cf. Cic. QFr. 1.134: Rome's imperium guarantees pax sempiterna and otium to its subjects, protecting them from external and civil war, as long as they are loyal and pay taxes. Compare Augustus' work in Gaul, pp. 118, 121 below; Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 42 (p. 76 above): imp. Caesari Augusto pp. Hispania ulterior Baetica quod beneficio eius et perpetua cura prouincia pacata est; also Cic. Prov. cons. 39; later, Tac. Hist. 4.74, Ann. 13.56.1, and the cruel parody by a victim of empire in Agr. 30 ("They make a desolation and call it pax "). [BACK]

55. These correspondences to Venus/Amor imagery bestow approval upon the visual evocation of "barbarian" fecundity—again, not what one would expect in the representation of a people that has just left off being hostile. On the role of children on the Ara Pacis see now also Rose 1990, 453: "In addition to serving as illustrations of Augustan social policy and legislation, the children were used to signify the establishment and future maintenance of the Pax Augusta "; see also his conclusion. [BACK]

56. Cf. Zanker 1988, s.v. figs. 19, 245a-b; La Rocca 1974; see chap. 2, P. 51, s.v. the Anaglypha Traiani; Kleiner 1985, 116-17; p. 223 n. 42 and p. 235 n. 63 (Venus and babies, late Republic and early Empire). [BACK]

57. Drusus' presence in a paludamentum is part of the proof that the procession is not for an augury, nor for an animal sacrifice to Pax or any other deity, but rather for a supplicatio: see chap. 5, pp. 124-25, 136ff, on the limitation of the sacrifice paludatus to certain military oath-taking ceremonies. Drusus' costume also strongly implies what one would anyway expect, that the ceremony shown is taking place outside the pomerium in the Campus Martius near or at the Ara Pacis's site. [BACK]

58. Simon 1967, pls. 16, 23 (detail of head); clearly the features and hair cap of Gaius. See p. 264 nn. 25, 27 (Pollini, Rose). As son of Augustus and camillus, Gaius is cognate with the camillus Iulus/Ascanius on the end panel serving Aeneas' sacrifice; see Rose 1990. [BACK]

59. Correspondence noted most recently: Rose 1990, s.v. fig. 8. The correspondence between coins and cup is noted by Banti and Simonetti (after von Bahrfeldt) in CNR (1974), 142, there described as depicting the surrender of the German Sugambri in 8 B.C. Banti and Simonetti cite L. Cesano, who did recognize "son-giving" but identified the barbarian as the Parthian Phraates handing over one of his sons. Müthmann 1936; Gabelmann 1984, cat. 38, 121-22, pl. 12.6; Gabelmann 1986, 282; Trillmich in Kais. Aug. 1988, 523-24, cat. 366; Burns and Overbeck 1987, 48: the coin "undoubtedly" documents the Sugambri's surrender after 8 B.C. Omitted by the two most recent commentators on the cups, Hölscher (1980, 282) and Kleiner (1983, 291). [BACK]

60. This image qua submission: Gabelmann 1986, 282-83 [BACK]

61. Rex datus types commemorate those occasions when Rome formally confirmed a client-ruler in his position or gave a new king to a foreign people. Cf RIC 419 (61 B.C.), the "crowning" of Ptolemy V of Egypt by M. Aemilius Lepidus in 201; BMCRE I, pl. 28.1 (A.D. 38), Germanicus crowning Artaxias of Armenia. Josephus describes such ceremonies in our period, stressing the gracious reception of the client-ruler: 40 B.C., Herod before the Senate with Antony and Caesar ( BJ 1.284-85, details of presentation to Senate); 30 B.C., Herod before Augustus in Rhodes ( BJ 1.386-93, details of crowning ceremony at 387 and 392-93); 4 B.C., Archelaus before Augustus ( BJ 2.25 and 37, details of supplication and of meeting before Augustus' council). A rex datus ceremony is probably shown on Gaius' cenotaph at Limyra (A.D. 4); see chap. 8, n. 66.

Thracian coinage of Rhoemetalkes III uses the formulae of Roman state iconography to narrate Rhoemetalkes' confirmation by Caligula: Rhoemetalkes stands before a tribunal on which Caligula sits, togate on a sella curulis . By the Caligulan period, then, if not before, this rex datus type (emperor on tribunal, candidate below) was set for the later Empire, when it was the normal formula. Gabelmann 1986, 282 n. 7 (" submissio "). [BACK]

62. E.g., Burns and Overbeck's apposition of the two types (1987, 42, cat. 100-101). All identify the coin with the submission of German tribes conquered by Tiberius in his campaigns of 8 B.C. against the Germans in general and the Sugambri in particular, whose rulers went to Lugdunum to negotiate with Augustus, were taken hostage, confined in various cities, and killed themselves (Dio 55.6 supplies this detail); cf. RG 32. So CNR IV, no. 129 and pp. 131-32; Mattingly, BMCRE I, cxiii, cxvi; Gross 1985, 43; Hölscher 1980 and Kleiner 1983 (see n. 59); Simon 1986, s.v. fig. 90a. Gabelmann (1984) notes that the child seems freely offered, remarking the barbarian's dignified upright stance; since he mistakes this for a submissio, it becomes for him evidence that representations of "proskynesis" were deliberately avoided in Augustan submission scenes, to prove that the BR submission scene is too flattering to have been formulated in Augustus' lifetime (128-31). Contra see, among others, Price 1987, 85: acts of obeisance and cult on the part of foreigners and provincials are fine. [BACK]

63. This fills the gap asserted by Blamberg 1976, 4: "The pacification of Spain and Gaul ( RG 26) received no direct numismatic advertisement." Rose (1990, n. 40) notes that the issue is pendant to a type with a young equestrian Gaius, signaling his visit to the Gallic legions at this time; he sees them as complements, showing Gallic children going to Rome and Roman children going to Gaul, this free movement of children being itself a sign of pax . [BACK]

64. Gros 1981, 160-65, fig. 1; Rolland 1977, pl. 24 (drawing), 50f. The arch: Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 178-80, 2: 116 (bibl.); Rolland 1977. [BACK]

65. Cf. the mix of Italian tomb and Celtic rite by a Gaul loyal in opposition to Civilis' rebellion; p. 229 n. 10 above. Strabo 3.3.6: good Spaniards, loyal and Romanized, are " togati (or as you might say, peacably inclined), and have been transferred, clad in their toga robe, to their present gentleness of disposition and their Italian mode of life" (Knapp 1977, 160); Dio 46.55: Narbonensis is called "togata" since, being more pacified ( eirenikotera = "pacatiora''), its cities use Roman dress. A proud Rhaetian auxiliary under Augustus or Tiberius had his stele carved to show a statue of himself in military dress on a pedestal, next to it his son wearing a Roman toga; stele of Montanus from Andernach (Bonn); CIL XIII.7684; Espérandieu 1907, cat. 6207. [BACK]

66. Rolland 1977, pl. 25 (drawing), 47f. Most call her Roma, but her fringed sagum and long gown make her Gallia. Because she sits upright and at ease atop (instead of among) a weapon pile—like Roma—she is not devicta but triumphans, cognate with the good Gaul opposite. [BACK]

67. Stemmer 1978, 19, cat. I.19, pl. 10.1. Compare the Gemma Augustea exergue; see fig. 16. [BACK]

68. See chap. 3 on the equation in status made in the province group of BR I:1, between Gaul and Spain on the one hand and "civilized" Africa and Asia Minor on the other. [BACK]

69. Aymard 1961, 136-42; at p. 141 distinguished from royal offspring "freely" come to Rome. [BACK]

70. Phraates' sons: Augustus RG 32.2; arena story: Suet. Aug. 43.4; cf. ILS 842 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 183, a dedication by two of them. Cleopatra Selene: Dio 51.15; Plut. Ant. 87; Crinagoras (Gow and Page) 25, 28. Herod's sons—Agrippa: Joseph. AJ 18.143; Archelaus and Philippos, paideuomenoi in Rome: Joseph. BJ 1.602. Such children of client-kings, listed also by Kienast 1982, 407-10, are distinguished by Braund (1984, 16) from massed child hostages (p. 270 n. 76 below). [BACK]

71. Cf. Juvenal's cruel parody in 2.162f., on the corruption by actual Roman upper-class mores of a young Armenian hostage, who had become the lover of an officer: "venerat obses,/hic fiunt homines. . . . mittentur braccae cultelli frena flagellum,/sic praetextatos referunt Artaxata mores" (165-69). Compare Caligula's seduction of hostages described in Suet. Gaius 36; Courtney 1980, 149-50. Courtney takes referunt to mean "bring back," as if the mores were spoils of war; it refers rather to the process of Romanization and transfer of Roman ways back home, expected of such hostages. [BACK]

72. Episodes from the Social Wars of 90 B.C. demonstrate that the practice of sending highborn children as hostages and tokens of fides had become embedded in Romano-Italian political thinking. Adolescents were exchanged as obsides by the members of the Italian League as part of their initial moves toward covert confederation, namely, the meirakios homeros of App. BCiv. 1.38; Appian also narrates ( BCiv. 1.44) how the rebel general Popaedius pretended to ally himself with the Roman general Caepio by sending him his two infant children (actually slaves) dressed like Roman children of rank in the toga praetexta . To send one's own child (or pretend to!) as a token of pax occurs again in the context of civil war: Antony, in the tense period succeeding Caesar's assassination, sent his little son (who was about two years old) to the Senate as a pacis obses; Cic. Phil. 1.13.31, 2.26; Plut. Ant. 14.1-2, cf. Brut. 19.2; App. BCiv. 2.142. As Pelling (1988, 151) remarks, they "doubtless found their hostage a handful." Antyllus was sent again to Octavian after Actium (Dio 51.8)—not, contra Pelling (297), "implausible." [BACK]

73. In another episode from Appian's account of the Social Wars Of 90 B.C., BCiv. 1.42, a rebel general makes opportune use of such a hostage to create a " rex " to seduce the loyalty of the prince's countrymen serving his Roman opponent as auxiliaries. Gaius Papius took Oxynta, son of Jugurtha, away from his Roman guard at Venusia, put him in the royal purple, and displayed him to the Numidian horse of Sextus Caesar, most of whom promptly went over "as if to their own king." [BACK]

74. Livy 2.32.9-12, the apocryphal speech of Menenius Agrippa after the secession of the plebs, made to induce them to return to their place under the guidance of the Senate. Cicero ( Off. 3.5.22) uses the metaphor to demonstrate that natural law demands harmony rather than violence from the members of society toward each other. See ultimately Xen. Mem. 2.3.18: Socrates compares the fighting of friends or brothers to a pair of hands or feet whose twin members fight one another. Note how the Augustan Livy twists this model of concord into a model of hierarchy. [BACK]

75. Cf. Knapp 1977, 108, 111f., and pt. 3, chap. 1, on Romanization and its mechanisms in Spain before 100 B.C. [BACK]

76. Sertorius' institution of special schools for the children of native elites is an interesting tool to direct Romanization. Augustus and Tiberius were to maintain this practice in Gaul; see their school for young Gallic noblemen at Augustodunum (Tac. Ann. 3.43) and the ludus litterarius for the education of obsides near the Rhine, whose students were paraded by Gaius (Suet. Calig. 15). (Related, in effect if not purpose, according to Braund 1984, 14, was the characteristic stipulation in late Republican and Augustan treaties that hostages should be replaced with a fresh batch at fixed intervals of a few years' duration, thus exposing as broad a cross section of the elite as possible to Roman mores .) By the Flavian era the institution of such schools was a recognized tool of imperial expansion and the creation of new provinces: Tacitus ( Agr. 21.2) portrays Agricola's creation of such schools in Britain as part of the typical repertoire of devious imperialist tools for subjugation. For Kienast (1982, 403 n. 173a) the school foundations in Gaul and Britain were meant to combat Druidism, as counterweights to Druidic schools. [BACK]

77. See n. 78. Strabo 4.3.1; Livy Per. 137; Dio 54.32.1; Suet. Claud. 2.1; Juvenal 1.43; Turcan 1982; Hänlein-Schäfer 1985, 14 and cat. A64; Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 236. See Knapp 1977, 160: Republican generals in Spain tended to "lead natives away from their fractionalized political organizations" by encouraging tribal confederations and the coalescing of smaller into larger settlements. [BACK]

78. Habicht (1972, 65-67) discusses the Western comparanda to the Greek East (55-64); organized imperial cult, like the provincial assemblies of the West, was not based on native tradition nor freely invented, but rather was inspired (66) and even directly overseen by the members of the imperial house (Drusus and the Lyons altar; 2 B.C., L. Domitius Ahenobarbus and the Elbe altar, Dio 55.109.2; A.D. 9, Varus and the Ara Ubiorum for Germany). Thus the imperial house established a dependence on themselves by the native elite, and a patron's responsibility toward such elites on their own part. According to Hänlein-Schäfer 1985, 14 n. 32, the imposition of such assemblies was an Augustan innovation, which was carried out in those areas most recently acquired or least integrated into the Empire; compare the regions listed by Augustus as made to take a special oath to him ( RG 25; 32 B.C.: Gaul, Spain, Africa, Sicily, Sardinia); Hänlein-Schäfer's cat. A65, the Ara Ubiorum. Cf. Zanker 1988, chap. 8. Replication the other way, from West to East: Oliver (1958, 475, 494-96) suggested that gerusiae in the East were encouraged as a sort of counterpart to western Augustales, formulated to strengthen the cities' loyalty to the Roman government; cited by Sherk with regard to Agrippa's letter to the Gerousia Argiva (1969, 324, cat. 63). [BACK]

79. Though Braund (1984, 16) records the demanding of child hostages by Augustus, he sees it as part of the phenomenon of the mass taking of hostages, initiated by Caesar in Gaul (600 obsides: BGall. 2.15; 200: 5.4; 100: 6.4); this was a Roman response to the typical west-European societal structure of tribal elites with their widely available chieftainships, in perceived contrast to Hellenized political structures. Augustus took at one time 700 child hostages in newly conquered Dalmatia (App. Ill. 28). The BR event may indeed have been closer in inspiration to this phenomenon than to other distinct traditions of royal "son-giving"; what matters for us is that Augustan propaganda distinguished the BR event from an event like that in Dalmatia. [BACK]

80. Its disruptive effects were aggravated by German subversion. Livy Per. 139; Dio 54.32.1; ILS 212.11.36-39. The loyalty of Gallia Comata and the Aedui in the face of this discontent earned them Claudius' commendation, discussed on pp. 120-21 below. The problem with the census was that it was a tool for tax assessment; Tacitus ( Ann. 3.40ff.) depicts resentment over taxes and tax debts as the spark kindling the revolt of Sacrovir in A.D. 21 following Germanicus' death (in which revolt, as Claudius diplomatically omitted to say, many Aedui took part). [BACK]

81. Maurin 1986, 110f., noting that this is the only provincial assembly to cross province lines; Gallia Comata is the official term for the tres Galliae up to ca. the reign of Vespasian. [BACK]

82. Census and altar cult were combined again as mechanisms for the pacification of the new province of Germany around A.D. 9; Tac. Ann. 1.39, 57. Cf. the combination of an altar ( bomos ) to Augustus with treaty alliances ( philia ) in regard to the trans-Elbe tribes immediately before 2 B.C.; Dio 55.10a.2. Cf. Vell. Pat. 2.107: a German crosses the Elbe to get a look at Tiberius, whom he knows so far from cult worship. See also pp. 270-71 n. 78. [BACK]

83. The census: RE 3.2 (1899) 2703-19, at 2708-10, s.v. "Claudius" #139 (E. Groag) (Drusus). Drusus' mandate in Gaul: Rösger and Will 1985, 37f. The council of the primores Galliarum: Bellen 1984, 386-87, noting Drusus' special position as patron to the Gallic primores . The assembly was first organized in 12 (Dio 54.32.1), that is, for the initial consecration of the altar complex at Lugdunum prior to construction. It will have met again in 10 B.C. for the dedication of the completed complex, the award of the first priesthoods, etc. Bellen primarily examines the obsequies for Drusus voted and enacted by this assembly (in conjunction with the Rhine legions), on which see further Frenz 1985a, 395-97; Frenz satisfactorily identifies Drusus' cenotaph with the so-called Elchelstein at Mainz. [BACK]

84. For details of his encounters with individual German peoples see Will 1987; he notes (46) how contemporary opinion at Rome treated Drusus' victories in battle as meaning successful, permanent incorporation of the territory traversed; cf. Livy Per. 140. [BACK]

85. Just so Tiberius worked to consolidate Gallic affairs before moving against Germany itself when he later was sent to repair the effects of Varus' fall; cf. Vell. Pat. 2.120.1: "Gallias confirmat." [BACK]

86. These connections are stated generally by Halfmann (1986, 27) in relation to the role of Augustus' "Stellvertreter" Drusus, Tiberius, and Germanicus. He notes Drusus' and Germanicus' census; Claudius' speech on the Aedui; a circuit by Tiberius of Gaul in A.D. 4 when he resumed his Rhine command; an ancient formulation of the role played by these imperatores, i.e., the commendation of Germanicus by the Senate at his death as "ordinato statu Galliarum" (Tab. Siar.; González 1984, 59, l. 15). [BACK]

87. Dio 54.36.2 says that when the Dalmatians and Dacians attacked in 10 B.C., Tiberius was sent against them from Gaul, where he had gone with Augustus; 54.36.4 has Augustus start for Rome with Drusus and (cf. Suet. Tib. 7.3) Tiberius, the emperor having been in Lugdunum most of the time watching the Germans from near at hand. POxy. 3020 (Sherk 1969, no. 100) refers to an embassy from Alexandria that had to go to Gaul in 10 to present its case to Augustus. CIL VI.457 (Chisholm E.16) and ILS 92 (Chisholm J.1e) are altar dedications made by the emperor back in Rome from gifts given to him during his absence in 10.

See now Halfmann 1986, 158-62, for Augustus' visit in the winter 11 B.C. through 10 B.C. One hopes that historical literature in English, especially basic texts, will soon begin to supply more accurate chronologies and will cease to maintain the indifference of so many ancient sources to Augustus' physical and administrative interventions in the Western provinces. As an instructor of undergraduates, I note with disfavor that the otherwise laudable 1987 Penguin translation of Dio's Augustan book supplies in the category "The West" in its "Chronological Table" on pp. 304-5 no mention of any of Augustus' journeys nor of Drusus' census nor of the institution of the Lugdunum altar cult; the index on p. 335 notes only the first visit to Gaul, in 16-13 B.C. [BACK]

88. Halfmann (1986, 159, 162) posits a last visit of Augustus to Gaul in 8 B.C.: Dio 55.6.1, when Tiberius crossed the Rhine Augustus stayed in the oikeia, the "hinterland"; Augustus returned to Rome in 7 B.C. an event documented by ludi votivi given for his return ( CIL VI.4, fasc. 3, no. 36789 and VI.1, no. 385; cf. Dio 55.8.3). However, oikeia can indicate North Italy as well as Gaul. [BACK]

89. These will be identical with the families, and even with particular individuals, supplying the summus magistratus who led Gallic civitates through the early Tiberian period, when a less personal system of magisterial rule by councils of duoviri was instituted; see Will 1987, 12. [BACK]

90. Dio 46.55: ekaleito . . . haute de de Komata hoti hoi Galatai hoi tautei es komen to pleiston tas trichas anientes episemoi kata touto para tous allous esan . [BACK]

91. Neither physiognomy nor dress could be those of Orientals, contra Simon 1986, 143. [BACK]

92. Brussels, Mus. Roy. inv. A 1145. Hölscher 1984b, figs. 1-4, 284 n. 44, attributing the head to a victory monument of Marius. An actual North European with such hair is the "Osterby Man" from a Danish bog: Glob 1969, the fifth plate after p. 112. Cf. a bronze of the second century A.D. in Romans and Barbarians 1972, cat. 4. On a stele from Worms, this chignon seems to have fallen down on a naked German being speared by an auxiliary—a long tail of hair falls down his back; Espérandieu 1922, 92-93, no. 6014; CIL XIII.6233. [BACK]

93. RRC 448/2e, pl. 53.8; rev., naked Gaul fighting from a chariot. The companion issue 448/3, pl. 53.9, has a female bust with a long, disheveled hair (rev., Artemis with spear and stag). The shield behind the male bust and the carnyx (Gallic war trumpet) behind the female bust emphasize that these are trophy images. Compare the reduced but still vividly observed head of the captive by a trophy on a companion issue, RRC 452/4 (48/47 B.C.). [BACK]

94. Trans. Chisholm and Ferguson 1981, K.23a; Braund 1985, no. 570. [BACK]

95. Cf. Prop. 6, with reference to the Sugambri in l.77, celebrating Agrippa's holding ludi quinquinnales while Augustus was away in 16, as described in Dio 54.19.1, 8; on Lollius' campaigns, see RE 2, 4.1 (1931) 660, s.v. "Sugambri" (Schönfeld). [BACK]

96. ILS 916 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 198 (Forum Clodii) on Cn. Pullius Pollio, who had prior/further experience of the West as proconsul of Gallia Narbonensis. Maurin 1986, 110. Sources for Augustus' activities of 16-13 B.C.: Halfmann 1986, 27, 158-62. He left Rome after 29 June, when he dedicated the Temple of Quirinus (Dio 54.19.4); CIL VI.385 documents the ludi votivi pro reditu of 13 B.C. [BACK]

97. Tiberius' own and inherited popularity in Gallia Narbonensis: Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 180. [BACK]

98. On some principes of Gallia Comata, see Syme 1977/1987, 992-94. He notes the many "xx Claudii" who will have received citizenship from Tiberius and Drusus, and the Aeduan Julius Calenus (grandson of C. Julius Eporedorix), one of only two Gauls known to have been tribunes in a Roman legion. ILS 7008 (Aventicum) records a public funeral for the Aeduan C. Valerius C.f. Fabius Camillus, not, contra Syme, for the Julia C. Iuli Camilli f. Festilla (probably his sister) who funded it. [BACK]

99. Habicht 1972, 68: his citizenship will have been granted by Caesar or Augustus to bind the loyalty of this near descendant of one of Caesar's worst enemies; similarly, at the cult of A.D. 9 at Ara Ubiorum one of the first priests is Segestes' son C. Iulius Segimundus (Tac. Ann. 1.57; cf. Strabo 7.291f.). Another early Aeduan priest: ILS 7014, . . . / Aed[uo]/sacerdos; Maurin 1986, 115. A later Augustan/Tiberian priest (who dedicated the amphitheater at Lugdunum), C. Julius Rufus, carefully boasts three generations of Gallic ancestry on an arch to Tiberius at Saintes; CIL XIII. 1036; Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 197; his fellow tribesmen of the Santoni, C. Julius Victor, proclaims himself Conconnetodubni f: CIL XIII.1042. Cf. Syme 1977/1987, 992-93, on these noble pedigrees. [BACK]

100. This does not vitiate my comments on historicity. I firmly maintain the accepted view, that the procession friezes of the Ara Pacis depict the celebration of a particular ceremony (its nature is a different problem) on a particular occasion. It is evident that the friezes are also meant, like the Parthenon frieze, to function as a timeless commemoration of the strength of the Augustan settlement based on the primacy of Augustus' domus . To this end persons are included in the procession whose simultaneous presences are difficult to account for, such as Agrippa and his "hostage," who should have returned only in 12 B.C., Drusus, etc. Symbolic details do seem to have been added or reworked in the course of time, between 13 and 9 B.C.; the fact that the veiled Agrippa, alone on the frieze, does not wear a laurel wreath must somehow refer to his death in 12. (This feature would have been highlighted by the original painting and gilding of the altar, and by Agrippa's placement between two veiled figures who did have wreaths, Augustus and Livia.) [BACK]

101. On the manipulation of tribal structures as structures for the enrollment of auxiliaries, and the role of militarization in assimilation, see Will on the German tribes in the period from Drusus' campaigns onward (1987, 17f.). Will notes (7) how the Batavii, for example, served in groups led by the nobilissimi popularium (Tac. Hist. 4.12.3); he also comments (46) on how a tribe would be assimilated as a gens foederata partly by citizenship grants to its leaders (here, Segestes of the Cherusci, grant from Augustus; Tac. Ann. 1.58.1). [BACK]

102. Cf. Kienast 1982, 119-20, on Augustus' propaganda image as pater orbis . [BACK]

1. Kleiner 1983, 298. [BACK]

2. Kleiner (1983, 299) adduces Aeneas' unarmed sacrifice on the Ara Pacis panel. But that panel does not narrate Aeneas' joint sacrifice with Latinus; it shows Aeneas' sacrifice of the Lavinian sow to the Dii Penates as his first act in the founding of Rome, a different episode described by Vergil ( Aen. 8.32ff. at 105-10; see 5.99-115 and 8.702-8, for example, for other sacrifices by Aeneas not in armor). [BACK]

3. RRC 28.1, 225-212 B.C.; 29.1, 225-214 B.C.; 234, den., 137 B.C.; pp. 43-44, 715 and n. 5. The first (225-212 B.C.) and third (137 B.C.), Strong 1988, fig. 3.J and P. [BACK]

4. Crawford, RRC at 715; bibl. in Zwierlein-Diehl 1973 to no. 1098, pl. 84, ca. 51-50 B.C.; Vollenweider 1984, pl. 40.1 = 1970, cat. 90. [BACK]

5. BMCRR III, pl. 99.9 (eight warriors), pl. 99.3 (four), pl. 99.5-6 (the original Roman group of two). Close-ups of the eight-warrior type: Kent et al. 1973, cat. 45, pl. 13 ("Schwurszene"); Hannestad 1986, 31, fig. 27. Crawford ( RRC ) ignores the Social War coinage. [BACK]

6. For the form of this altar and the manner in which it projects from the relief ground, compare the Augustan Merida relief; Trillmich 1986, pl. 44, 289 n. 21, citing (an Aurelian panel and) the foculus on an incense box ( acerra ) in the Ara Pacis friezes (Simon 1967, fig. 16; La Rocca 1983, fig. on p. 37); cf. the ivory acerra plaque from the Via Marsala in Kais. Aug. 1988, 372-73, cat. 205. [BACK]

7. CAESAR DIVI F. series: BMCRE I, clxvii, 160, nos. 93f., pls. 30.9f.; cf. Kais. Aug. 1988, figs. 211 and 508f., cat. 326f. at cat. 330 (Trillmich). [BACK]

8. Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 42. [BACK]

9. Hanfmann in Vermeule and Hanfmann 1957, pl. 75, fig. 29.1, n. 47. [BACK]

10. Kleiner 1983, 296. [BACK]

11. See Kais. Aug. 1988, 194-95, 200, fig. 88.a(-b). [BACK]

12. On a relief of the first century B.C. from Capua (amphitheater), an armed honorific statue (over-life-size?) in a sacred portico complex leans on a spear with upright blade; Zanker 1988, fig. 19. [BACK]

13. Later, see noted paludatus equestrian figures like the Equeus Domitiani in the Forum Romanum or the Marcus Aurelius from the Capitoline, and also the emperors on the Anaglypha Traiani and the Arch of Constantine (figs. 36, 40). [BACK]

14. Forum Julium, statue of Caesar modified from a Lysippan statue of Alexander (Stat. Silv. 1.1.84-87); see p. 275 n. 15 on battle groups. Pliny HN 34.18, under Republican portrait types, cites as an example of cuirass statues a figure of Caesar in his Forum (the ex-Alexander?); he notes that people liked to put up nude portraits armed with a spear, saying nothing about a ban in the city or within the pomerium . Spear-bearing statues of Augustus at Rome: Dio 53.27.3 and 54.1.1. I cannot explore here the numismatic record of sculptural monuments; it indicates that arches in the capital might easily bear (as, for instance, Drusus' posthumous arch de Germanis, depicted often in Claudius' coinage) depictions of a mounted general charging with a spear, or that nude figures with lances (like the so-called Sulla) could stand in the capital, as in coinage of Octavian, for example, showing such a portrait statue upon a columna rostrata (see Zanker 1988, 25). An Aemilius of the first century A.D. had an equestrian statue with spear in the vestibule of his house in Rome; see p. 218 n. 33. [BACK]

15. "Offensive" portraits at Rome of Republican notables leading cavalry charges, cuirassed and wielding lances: Portico of Metellus—Metellus' group, originally by Lysippos of Alexander and Companions at the Granikos, taken in 148 B.C. from the Sanctuary of Zeus at Dion (Vell. Pat. 1.11.3-4); Capitoline—the imitation of this group by Metellus Scipio cos. 52, with portrait heads of his ancestors Scipio Aemilianus and Scipio Nasica Serapio (Cic. Att. 6.1.17, De or. 2.261). The various turmae deriving from the Granikos group, including a version in Greek marble placed by Licinius Murena in the Sanctuary of Juno Sospita at Lanuvium: Moreno 1981, 185-86, 202-3, 282-84; Coarelli 1981, 258-60 and n. 141 on the Forum Julium Caesar statue(s). [BACK]

16. Small-scale architectural representations: see esp. Fuchs 1969; Brown 1940; Jessop-Price and Trell 1977; Hommel 1954. Maier (1985) is interested in modes of abbreviation and signification and their relation to "reality," rather than in the deployment of architectural elements in narrative relief compositions; his is a good (though not complete) complement to Fuchs's work on numismatics. The BR Capitolium: Maier, cat. R 1, comparing in detail the real Capitolium; Hommel, 102 n. 435; Ryberg 1955, 201 n. 26, comparing the Capitolium image on a panel relief of Marcus Aurelius, which carefully shows the temple's triple doors as an identifying feature but wrongly makes it tetrastyle. [BACK]

17. Fuchs 1969, 65, pl. 2.16.18. [BACK]

18. Fuchs 1969, 69, pl. 4.51.4; Zanker 1988, fig. 17a. [BACK]

19. Fuchs 1969, 22, 58-59, pl. 3.29.30. Cf. his remarks at p. 59: We have "hier nicht die realistische Wiedergabe eines visuellen Eindrucks . . . sondern nur das Ergebnis eines erheblichen Abstraktionsprozeß." [BACK]

20. BMCRE I, 153, nos. 41-43; 156, no. +; 157, no. 69, pls. 28.6-9, 29.14; Ward Perkins 1981, fig. 17. The significance of this coin is noted by Strong 1988, 110; Hölscher 1988, n. 75. [BACK]

21. Dated Claudian by Koeppel 1983a, cat. 12, p. 98f. and figs. 13-14 (description and bibliography), pp. 71f. (dating by style). See below pp. 157-58; as it is best known for its depiction of the Temple of Mars Ultor, I call it the Temple of Mars Ultor relief. This is not the place to decipher the Valle Medici reliefs, a collection of relief fragments that I do not believe to be from one monument (see Koeppel, cat. 12-23) or one time period. Koeppel has done an inestimable service in his series of articles cataloguing unattached Roman historical reliefs in the Bonner Jahrbuch (1983: Julio-Claudian; 1984: Flavian; 1985: Trajanic). Yet somehow almost all of the Julio-Claudian reliefs end up being dated to the Claudian period (from which we have no monumental historical relief of fixed date from Rome), although wide divergences in drapery style, compositional grouping, etc., are evident among the pieces so grouped. One would have liked to see greater use of the admittedly limited but invaluable coin issues that show similar scenes, as they establish at least a terminus ante quem . [BACK]

22. Simon 1967, pl. at pp. 24-25; Strong 1988, fig. 33; not discussed in Maier's survey of architectural representations. Simon (1986, 204-5) connects the panel (fig. 99) to landscape painting and relief but ignores the temple depiction. Froning (1981) cites this panel only at p. 116, as an idealized rendering of a historical event; she does not discuss architectural elements. [BACK]

23. Simon 1986, bibl. s.v. fig. 163; Augustan or Tiberian: Froning 1981, 1 nn. 2-3; late Augustan: Jucker 1980, 459. "Early imperial": Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 138; he sees (somewhat tenuously) specific reference to political ideology; comparing the sheep barn (fig. 138c), for example, to one of the new Augustan temples in Rome. [BACK]

24. Certainly these reliefs are executed by one of the best workshops associated with the court. Another resemblance to the Aeneas panel is the way a garland is looped from the pinax stand in the lioness relief; compare the way a garland is displayed on Aeneas' altar. [BACK]

25. Zanker 1988, fig. 226; Simon 1986, fig. 263; Froning 1981, 72 n. 28 (it exemplifies spatiality, a criterion of Augustan decorative relief); Jucker 1980, 459, fig. 19. [BACK]

26. Jucker 1980; figs. 1, 2 (detail); p. 461, dated 50-25 B.C. The Tuscan temple is depicted as if standing upon the city wall running across the panel; note the patterning of the walls with drafted masonry, as on other of my examples, which does not appear on any of the other buildings crowding the background. It is evidently the temple of the deity to whom the sacrifice is performed, set as it is right over the altar.

Jucker (449) is interested in the "incorrect" perspective of her temple—at a three-quarter angle with front and side run together—comparing an example at fourth-century Gjölbaschi Trysa (fig. 12), a Roman coin of the late second century B.C., Nero's Januum issue and a Caracallan type (fig. 13), the Grimani relief, and the Pompeii mask relief. However, she is not interested in the deployment of such temples in a broader composition. [BACK]

27. Naples, MN 6633; Cain 1988, 141, fig. 35, cat. 45; Kraus and Matt 1975, 45, fig./cat. 42. [BACK]

28. Jucker 1980, 459. My scheme differs from hers, which sees the Munich relief as probably contemporary with the Praeneste panel. The Pompeii panel (n. 27) incorporates a temple into a small, square panel focused on a set of New Comedy masks propped in the foreground, a common decorative assemblage (e.g., on vessels). The temple, presumably of Dionysos, is at upper left without visible support, relatively large in proportion to the panel itself; its proportions and rendering suggest the Praeneste "temple," which also borrows the framing temple motif for a nonnarrative decorative genre scene. [BACK]

29. Near Dijon. Baltimore, Walters Art Gall. 57.708, 66 cm. On each side is a banqueting couple (one, Dionysos and Ariadne), satyr, temple on a crag. Greek and Roman Metalware 1976, cat. 11. [BACK]

30. Naples, MN 145505 (signed Apelles ), Le collezioni del Museo Nazionale di Napoli 1986, silver no. 2. A sacrifice scene, at right a little temple on a crag behind a gnarled tree (cf. the Munich relief, fig. 100). [BACK]

31. Genre scenes of Dionysiac sacrifice, or of Amorini sacrificing, are common in the gem repertoire; some show the act of worship directed toward a small temple at the edge of the scene on a rocky crag. A cult figure, Priapus or Dionysos, is usually indicated standing in the shrine's door. I would date all these signets to the late Republic and early Empire. A few have been dated later; even if this is not mistaken, the persistence of the motif can be put down to the extreme traditionalism observable in run-of-the-mill gem and glass intaglio production. The following list can no doubt be amplified; note that many printed cross-references do not specify whether a temple occurs or not, and equate "prospects" with full-size images.

Woman/maenad on rock, arm up in invocation: Kat. Wien II, cat. 628 (Zwierlein-Diehl, with cross-references, 50-25 B.C.). Maenad invoking god against satyr: Kat. Wien II, cat. 1063 (50-25 B.C.). Amor sacrificing: Sena della Chiesa 1966, 317, 339; Kat. Wien II, cat. 1339 (Zwierlein-Diehl, with cross-references, early second century A.D.). Woman sacrificing: Sena della Chiesa 1966, 819 (early first century A.D.), 823; Kat. Wien II, 1099 (Zwierlein-Diehl, with cross-references, first century A.D.); Scherf et al. 1970, cat. 143 (Scherf, second-third century A.D.); Brandt 1972, cat. 2740 (Gercke, third century A.D.). Two women sacrificing: Henig 1974, 494. Worshipper with staff. Sena della Chiesa 1966, cat. 253 (early first century A.D., with parallel). Old man offers with lifted hand, boy attendant carries basket: Kat. Wien I, cat. 500 (Zwierlein-Diehl, first century A.D.). Youth offers at baldachino (Tuscan cols.) on rocky outcrop: Henig 1974, cat. 493, pl. xv, App., and cat. 60, pl. xxvi ("late 2nd or e. 3rd c. AD"). Seated Silen plays lyre: Kat. Wien I, cat. 469 (Zwierlein-Diehl, with cross-references, first century A.D.); Scherf et al. 1970, cat. 101, 102 (Scherf, with cross-references, first century A.D.). Satyr plays with baby: Brandt 1972, cat. 2301 (Brandt, with cross-references, first century B.C./A.D.). Hunter rests with dog: Sena della Chiesa 1966, 844, 845 (cites parallel; end of first century B.C.). [BACK]

32. Zwierlein-Diehl, Kat. Wien I, cat. 292. [BACK]

33. Zwierlein-Diehl, Kat. Wien I, cat. 489, with literature. [BACK]

34. Ghedini (1987) explores the identity of this temple, but not its rendering. [BACK]

35. Baratte et al. 1989, 84-85, cat. 18; Paris B.N. Cab. Méd. Dedicated to Mercury (Augustus) by Q. Domitius Tutus, inscr. Q Domitius Tutus v (otum) s (olvit) l (ibens) m (erito). Corinth is localized by the spring of Peirene, a nymph seated on Pegasus under the Acrocorinth. [BACK]

36. This beaker was dedicated by Q. Domitius Tutus, with several other pieces. The height of its relief has led people to call it Claudian, though it may very well be still Augustan. Note the distinctly "Octavianic" herm bust, appropriate for an owner with a special devotion to Mercurius Augustus, as the god is named in the expanded inscription on one of the pair of oinochoai (Baratte et al. 1989, cat. 16) dedicated with the beaker ( Mercurio Augusto Q Domitius Tutus ex voto ). Both these vases have scenes from the Iliad on the body; the Achilles ewer has under the handle a little temple on a stepped platform, garlanded just like the BR temple. The motif, though used in isolation, is clearly from the same "sketchbook'' as the Corinth beaker temple made for the same man, which is not garlanded. [BACK]

37. An obscene parody is a cast handle group (5.58 cm), Swiss priv. coll.: a grotesque dwarf maneuvers his hoselike phallus toward a little temple upon an outcrop. Dörig 1975, cat. 308 (Ortiz). [BACK]

38. Anderson 1987-88, figs. 54, 55. [BACK]

39. One panel from the superb second-story salon is a sacrifice scene where several women move quietly or stand before a temple elevated at left. Kais. Aug. 1988, 287-90, cat. 135 at p. 288 (Carettoni). [BACK]

40. Caesarian. See chap. 1, n. 42. The goddess is flanked by temples set upon crags; these buildings replace the flanking human figures seated on rocks so often placed in Classical and classicizing paintings. [BACK]

41. An ekphrasis for his friend Piso: three women with offerings, a temple of Aphrodite and its image (cf. the Ara Pacis Penates!). Gow and Page, The Greek Anthology, 2: 27-28 (Antipater no. ix) = Anth.Pal. 6.208. [BACK]

42. Jucker (1980, 461) points out, for instance, that the artist of her Bern panel obviously did all his work in Italy. [BACK]

43. With Jucker I would argue for the integrity of the relief tradition, in its depictions of nature (vegetation and terrain) and of architecture, and especially in its integration of the two; when obvious similarities in basic taste (e.g., for the bucolic) are set aside, it is clear that rather different stylistic traditions are followed by painting and stucco workshops. Ridgway's explicit equation (1983) of the deployment of landscape elements in relief with a "painterly" approach assumes its thesis as a premise (and never addresses evidence for painting itself). [BACK]

44. Simon (1986, 204-5), for instance, is the latest to connect to landscape painting the Aeneas and Mars panels, not least because of the way that they are centered upon trees and incorporate animals. Certainly, a taste for the bucolic and its fusion with elements of myth narrative or religion can also be observed in Roman painting. However, if one is looking for structural, rather than merely iconographic, sources and parallels, it becomes obvious that the basic compositional structure of these reliefs has its origins in the Hellenistic relief tradition, in a genre of late Hellenistic votive reliefs where a tree rises behind a central altar, animals are led in from the left, and a figure (in these, the divinity) stands right gesturing toward the altar; cf Copenhagen, NM 4763, and Vienna 1439 from Kyzikos; Athens, NM 1486, from Mysia; and another relief from Mysia (L. Robert, BCH 107 [1983]: 545ff, fig. 1). [BACK]

45. One long side shows Augustus in the Roman Forum; one short side shows Romulus, (Venus), Mars, and Amor before Augustus' house on the Palatine. Jucker (1980, fig. 18) discusses its relation to genre scenes of the type of her Bern panel. Hölscher in Kais. Aug. 1988, 375-78, s.v. cat. 208 a-d (figs., p. 376); Zanker 1988, 210; Simon 1986, 24-25, fig. 17; LIMC II (1984), s.v. "Apollon," no. 147b (Palagia), s.v. "Apollon/Apollo," no. 404 (Simon); Roccos 1989, 573-76. [BACK]

46. Similarly in Cain's genre of "mask reliefs" the rare temple motif is shifted from framing element (see p. 277 n. 28) to a motif in the middle of the panel, with masks around it, e.g. 1988, cat. 87, fig. 43 (Rome, ex Coll. Sarto, lost), cat. 94 (Vatican, Mag. 438, from Rome?). [BACK]

47. These fragments belong to a series from the Forum still being documented and excavated. Trillmich (1986, 279-304, fig. 2) assembles the narrative fragments into a long panel (ca. 4 X 7 Roman feet): at either end a city gate, at left a sacrifice group centered on a togate celebrant wearing a heavy crown ( corona civica? ); farthest right, a victimarius looks away from the sacrifice; the portal fragment at far right has a lictor's head and (remains of) two sets of fasces with axes. A large object in high relief has been broken off crossing the face of the lictor: Trillmich (289, 300) identifies it as an axe head, like that carried by a popa in procession on the Ravenna reliefs, except that this axe is being swung. If so, the lacuna can have been filled only by some variant of the BR victim group, adjoining as on the Villa Medici (fig. 9) relief a building, framed as there and as on the Beneventum and Leptis reliefs by members of the gathering looking down on the victim at either side. The group will have been awkwardly arranged, with the victim either squashed in very abbreviated form or else put on the wrong side of the axe swinger; parallel would be the jammed, awkwardly arranged figures in the conventional sacrifice group at left (Trillmich, 289-92, 300). [BACK]

48. Trillmich (1986, 301) calls the celebrant Agrippa. Within the conventions of this second-rate atelier he could just as well be an emperor, such as Augustus. The combination of togate emperor at sacrifice with the BR group would echo Julio-Claudian compositions in Rome similar to the Beneventum passage frieze (fig. 92; pp. 161f.). This panel also could celebrate an occasion connected with imperial building projects, military achievement, and vows. Both Augustus and Agrippa were active in Spain and will have concerned themselves with Augustus' new colony there, overseeing its construction while conducting their Spanish campaigns (cf. Trillmich, 301-3). Compare the garlanded figure friezes on the Throne of Claudius (fig. 63) or at St. Remy. [BACK]

49. Brendel 1930, 46f., pl. 67. [BACK]

50. Brendel 1930, cat. 2, pl. 70; Ryberg 1955, pl. 21 bis, fig. 36d, pl. 21, fig. 36b; Koeppel 1983a, cat. 12. [BACK]

51. Inv. 3403. Reused. Very broken; axe swinger visible and scar of missing victim, at left a personification with cornucopia; Ronke 1987, cat. 101, fig. 126, ca. A.D. 25-50. [BACK]

52. Brendel 1930, cat. 4, pl. 72; Ryberg 1955, pl. 55, fig. 83. No work on the arch (chap. 7, n. 2) makes use of Brendel's work. [BACK]

53. Brendel 1930, cat. 5, pl. 73; Ryberg 1955, pl. 46, fig. 71; Boatwright (1987) means to illustrate this at pp. 234-35, ill. 57, but prints the Arcus Novus fragments (last sentence on p. 234) instead. [BACK]

54. Brendel 1930, cat. 7, pl. 76; Ryberg 1955, pl. 56, fig. 87; Tortorella 1985, 41-43, no. II, fig. 14. Probably a nuncupatio; cf. the paludatus lictor with axes in his fasces . [BACK]

55. Ryberg 1955, 197, after Giglioli. [BACK]

56. Brendel 1930, cat. 10, pl. 79; Ryberg 1955, pl. 57, fig. 89a. Sacrifice at far right, altar group at far left; the celebrant is the empress (!) Julia Domna. At center is Septimius Severus, portrayed as divine; Roma at his side indicates the locus of the ceremony. This practice of having the empress sacrifice with/for her husband was under way by the Hadrianic period; cf. a vota publica issue of Hadrian. Ryberg (fig. 107a) and Mattingly ( BMCRE III, pls. 62.4, 89.10) identified its celebrant as Hadrian, but her breasts are clear. [BACK]

57. Brendel 1930, cat. 9, pl. 78; Strong 1988, fig. 155. [BACK]

58. Ex Coll. della Valle. Cagiano de Azevedo 1951, 112, no. 272, pl. IL 105; added by Ronke 1987, 742. [BACK]

59. Anzio, Forestiera; DAI neg. 70.3738. Ronke 1987, cat. 135, fig. 147. [BACK]

60. My addition to the list. Ryberg 1955, pl. 63, fig. 105d = BMCRE II, pl. 79.4, p. 393, no. 438, falsely described as identical to no. 411 (p. 395: attendants with a sheep and goat). [BACK]

61. Brendel 1930, cat. 15; Ryberg 1955, 179-80, 186-87, pl. 64, figs. 107-8, pl. 66, fig. 114; Hölscher 1980, 299, fig. 33. [BACK]

62. Brendel 1930, cat. 3, pl. 71; Fuchs et al. 1989, 56, 89-91, cat. 13, figs. 86-89. She dates the altar specifically to 10 B.C., after Torelli; this date is somewhat problematic for the date of the cups, if they are held to replicate the prototype composition. [BACK]

63. Pal. Ven., Loggiato. Badly broken. DAI neg. 71.247; Ronke 1987, cat. 102, fig. 127. Right of a sacrifice scene, just before a break, is the kneeling cultrarius; the rest of the group is lost. [BACK]

64. Espérandieu 1907, 370-71, no. 575 (bull and servant holding his head); 372, no. 577 (kneeling servant) is probably a fragment of a repeat depiction. Narbonne, Mus. Lamourguier, from the city walls. Early to mid-second century A.D. (compare Beneventum, fig. 92). [BACK]

65. Louvre inv. 48991, marble, .52 m height; Ronke 1987, cat. 121, fig. 136. Axe swinger and bull; may have had kneeler right of the break. Includes Victory with palm, and bearded figure with cornucopia (?). [BACK]

66. Conflates the victim-slaying and victim-led-in-procession motifs. Ill.: Ryberg 1955, pl. 62, fig. 103. [BACK]

67. Mus. Civ. inv. 153; a victimarius holds the bull's head down, but the oblivious axe swinger salutes an officer. Ronke 1987, cat. 144, fig. 151; Ghedini 1980, 88f. [BACK]

68. Pollitt 1986, fig. 216. Compare, for example, the painting of Hephaistos' workshop visited by Thetis; Havelock 1970, color pl./cat. iii. [BACK]

69. Casa di Granduca del Toscana. Naples, MN 9042; Le collezioni del Museo Nazionale di Napoli 1986, no. 81. [BACK]

70. To Zanker (1988, 120), for instance, the intensity of the BR victim group documents a new (Augustan) sensibility, which relishes the display of the actual moment of death; I would call this rather a continuing streak of High Hellenistic relish for such effects. [BACK]

71. Ronke (1987) has some new examples (see p. 280 n. 51 and p. 281 nn. 58, 59, 63 above), though she is not always aware of them. She discusses the "Pausias motif" too briefly at p. 176. [BACK]

72. Mantua, Pal. Ducale: Brendel 1930, cat. 6, pl. 74; Ryberg 1955, pl. 58, fig. 90; Hölscher 1980, 288, fig. 23. Florence, Uffizi: Brendel, cat. 6a, pl. 75; Ryberg, pl. 58, fig. 91; Höscher, fig. 22; "contaminated" by the hunting sarcophagus genre, cf half-scene at farthest left. Los Angeles, County Mus.: Brendel, cat. II (formerly Rome, Villa Bonaparte, late Coll. Castellani); Ryberg, pl. 58, fig. 92. Frascati, Villa Taverna: Brendel, cat. 12; Hölscher, 288, fig. 21; cf. Reinsberg 1985, 8f. Poggio a Caiano, Villa Reale: Brendel, cat. 13; Gabelmann 1984, no. 85, pls. 184-85, with bibl. Rome, Villa Albani, frag.: Brendel, cat. 14. Ryberg classifies these as "payment of vota " after triumph, as she does the BR sacrifice (142-43), [BACK]

73. This reading of the sequence of scenes was established by Rodenwaldt in 1935 ( Über den Stilwandel in der antike Kunst, Abh. Berlin 1935, no. 3, 3ff). See further Ryberg 1955, 163f.; Fittschen 1969, 331-33; Hölscher 1980, 288-90. See Reinsberg 1985, 1-16, on the later evolution of this tripartite canon, highlighting the Frascati sacrophagus as representing a particular influential workshop. Fittschen shows how this tripartite canon influenced the sequence of episodes on Late Antique sarcophagi portraying the lives of Romulus and Aeneas. [BACK]

74. Gabelmann 1984, 182-88; Hamberg 1945, 172-89; Goette 1988a, 419-20. [BACK]

75. The "Rinuccini sarcophagus," known in Renaissance drawings, already puzzled Dütschke (1875, 2: 129, no. 316): in this elaborate, but jumbled, scene the general seems to pour a libation right onto the bull's head, and there is no altar or temple. Yet he does wear a cuirass, with tunic, paludamentum, and sword, and does not have his head veiled; perhaps the artist was trying to convey a transferral to legendary history or to myth. Villa Rinuccini, Camerata by S. Domenico; Horster 1975, fig. 12a-b. [BACK]

76. Summation by Kleiner 1983, 290f. Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 181, Tiberius' profectio sacrifice. [BACK]

77. As noted by Ryberg, Kleiner, et al.; cf. Kleiner 1983, 294. [BACK]

78. Schrömbges 1986, 38; Hölscher 1980, 280-81; Koeppel 1969, 148; Kähler 1954b, 225-27. [BACK]

79. Ryberg 1955, 142-44, without explanation; Pollini 1978; Kleiner 1983, 295-96, by analogy to the reaction against Vitellius when he wanted to enter Rome in armor, against which see p. 139 below. He says the axes in the fasces of the lictors (actually visible in only one) place the scene outside Rome, citing the Cancelleria relief A ( profectio of Domitian), for he assumes the axe-bearing lictors there mark a division within the relief panel between "inside" and "outside" Rome. This is a tautology; and the literature is clear on the topic of paludati lictores (see below). Last, Kleiner says that Tiberius would not be armed "offensively" with a spear within Rome; but see pp. 275-76 nn. 14, 15. [BACK]

80. Pollini 1978, 285-91: Tiberius' military dress means he is outside Rome, the site is the Temple of Bellona just over the pomerium, and the Capitolium is a "vista"; and Tiberius' spear is that kept in the Temple of Bellona and dipped in blood at the outbreak of a war (fetial rites). On the military dress, see this section. The other two points: ably corrected by Kleiner (1983, 296), who notes that the sacrificant in armor traditionally has a spear and that in Roman art there are no other instances of a given sacred site being indicated by the depiction of another sacred site. [BACK]

81. Gabelmann 1986, pls. 24, 27, 30.2; Ryberg 1955, fig. 44. [BACK]

82. Kleiner 1983, 297, in contrast to his remarks against Pollini at p. 296; see n. 80. [BACK]

83. Kleiner 1983, 295; Hölscher 1980, 282 n. 59; cf. Alföldi 1935, 47-49. [BACK]

84. Cf the profectio of Marcus Aurelius (Ryberg 1967, fig. 18): the emperor paludatus is just leaving the city, its monuments directly behind him at the foot of the Via Flaminia (personified at his feet, right); at right a small armed cavalry escort with vexilla waits to take him to his troops. More texts: Livy 34.14-1, P. Sulpicius (200 B.C.): "secundum vota in Capitolio nuncupata paludatis lictoribus profectus ab urbe Brundisium venit"; Festus Ep. I.11.7, in the Latin wars the Romans attack Praeneste "nuncupatis in Capitolio votis"; Varro Ling. 6.60, s.v. "nuncupare": "quod tunc <pro> civitate vota nova suscipiuntur"; 7.37, s.v. ''paluda": "a paludamentis, haec insignia atque ornamenta militaria: ideo ad bellum cum exit imperator ac lictores mutarunt vestem et signa incinuerunt, paludatus dicitur proficisci." [BACK]

85. Compare the ludi saeculares, depicted only in Domitian's unique coin series. And take the case of the supplicationes in his honor, of which Augustus was so proud (55, totaling 890 days: RG 4.1.55); no more than a scant few of these can be dated by reference to other historical texts, and unless such a supplicatio is shown on the Ara Pacis procession frieze, we have no depictions of any of them. [BACK]

86. The Paris frieze, ca. 100-90 B.C.; pp. 56-57. The Praenestine cist, Villa Giulia 13 133: Kuttner 1991. [BACK]

87. An excellent study parallel to my investigation of the armed sacrifice is Schneider's 1990 article on "trophy dancers," who turn up in Augustan Neo-Attic relief, and triumph ritual and symbolism in ceremony and images in Republican Rome and Italy. [BACK]

88. Koeppel (1985a, 154-55, 204-12, cat. 50, figs. 35-41) follows Zanker (1970, 516f.) in assigning it to the Forum of Trajan and calls it an extispicium and nuncupatio without explanation. More informative, Tortorella (1985, 40, cat. 5, fig. 8) notes fragments in the Vatican probably from a companion relief. Ryberg 1955, pl. 45, fig. 69a-b. [BACK]

89. Ryberg 1955, pls. 43-44, figs. 66-67. [BACK]

90. Problematic is a late Antonine/early Severan relief fragment ( ex Villa Borghese), Louvre MA 1098: left of an altar the BR victim group motif, another bull being led up for sacrifice and a laureled paludatus lictor with axes in his fasces, before an architectural backdrop (a Tuscan colonnade and another construction).

Identified as a triumph ceremony; the paludamentum and axes of the lictor rule this out, however. Perhaps a nuncupatio votorum, taking place, for instance, in the Capitolium porticoes (?). Tortorella 1985, 41-43, cat. 11, fig. 14; Ryberg 1955, 158-59, fig. 87. [BACK]

91. Cf. contemporary vota suscepta coinage (no victim): Maximinus and Maximus paludati sacrifice in camp, Ryberg 1955, pl. 66, fig. 113d; Diocletian and Maximian paludati offer to images of Jove and Hercules, Ryberg, 186, pl. 66, fig. 113a. This depends on Antonine formulae for joint sacrifice by paludati, such as scene 75 of the Column of Marcus Aurelius (Ryberg, pl. 44, fig. 68). [BACK]

92. Laubscher (1975, 17, pls. 40.1-42.2) thinks that Diocletian is in civilian garb and that the subject is not vota suscepta (vs. Laubscher's n. 274: Ryberg, Vollbach, Brilliant, Vermeule, Kinch) but a victory sacrifice (Carcopino, Enslin), to account for the presence of Aion, Eirene, Oikoumene, and Homonoia in the scene. I think that this sacrifice would have looked like a conventional vota suscepta scene to its audience; it does not seem odd to trumpet the virtues of the united and "everlasting" Empire at the start of a campaign to defend that empire against the Parthians. Eirene and Homonoia (i.e., Pax and Concordia) are the virtues of civil concord in Roman political theology; Oikoumene is the civilized world that Rome is about to defend. [BACK]

93. Strong 1988, fig. 5, with the modern helmet; see now Cristofani 1985, 222-23, figs. 116-17, cat. p. 292 (ca. 400 B.C.). Lamellar cuirass, iron lance, patera. [BACK]

1. On the rite, see Künzl 1988; BR cup: 70f, fig. 51a-b. [BACK]

2. Described by Kleiner (1983, 288-89). Corrections: Kleiner: the torquatus behind Tiberius' chariot holds two laurel branches; no, he holds one, the other is held by the background figure in lower relief beside him. Kleiner: all five figures before the chariot are lictors; no, only four, the partly hidden figure on the horses' far side is an officer in caligae, tunic, paludamentum . Kleiner: only two sets of lictor's rods are visible; no, a pair is visible in very low relief near center, one crushed, the other abraded. Contra Koeppel 1983b, 105, the horses are led not by the background figure behind them but by the slave at their head. [BACK]

3. Most recently on the carrying of laurel branches by soldiers in triumphs and associated Italian, Republican, and Augustan images: Schneider 1990, 190f. [BACK]

4. His brother was legate to Tiberius in Dalmatia: "quali adiutore legatoque fratre meo . . . usus sit, ipsius patrisque [ sc. Augustus] eius [ sc. Tiberius] praedicatione testatum et amplissimorum donorum, quibus triumphans Caesar [ sc. Tiberius] donavit, signat memoria" (Vell. Pat. 2.115.1). [BACK]

5. Compare ILS 3320 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 43b, an inscription from Dalmatia by the proud recipient of a torque from (he specifies) Tiberius' Dalmatian campaign. [BACK]

6. See p. 284 n. 4 above. Vell. Pat. 2.115.1: "et amplissimorum donorum, quibus triumphans Caesar [ sc. Tiberius] donavit"; 121.3: (this triumph) "quem mihi fratrique meo inter praecipuos praecipuisque donis adornatos viros comitari contigit. [BACK]

7. Doppelfeld and Held 1974, vii. fig./cat. 22; Simon 1986, fig. 289; Franzoni 1987, 111, pl. 32.2; Kais. Aug. 1988, 566, cat. 392. CIL XIII.8648; ILS 2244 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 45. [BACK]

8. Mainz inv. S 182. Franzoni 1987, 43, pl. 12.1; Selzer et al. 1988, 128, fig. 49, cat. 30; Espérandieu 1918, no. 5790. CIL XIII.6901. [BACK]

9. Verona, Mus. Maffeiano, from Cellove d'Illari. Franzoni 1987, 51-54, cat. 30, pl. xvi. [BACK]

10. Selzer et al. 1988, cat. 45, Mainz (L. Refidius Bassus). Franzoni 1987, cat. 28, pl. xv.1, Este; cat. 54, pl. xxvi.3, Brescia; cat. 60, pl. xxix.2, Milan ( CIL V.5586); cat. 65, pl. xxxii.3 (P. Cassius). Frenz 1985, pl. 50.2, Augustan, Naples, phalerae and four torques between busts of an officer and his wife. Espérandieu 1918, nos. 5438, Brugg (C. Allius); 5811, Mainz (Q. Cornelius; CIL XIII.6938); Espérandieu 1922, 6248, Bonn (C. Marius eques; CIL XIII.8059), harness in corner of cavalry duel scene. [BACK]

11. A single torque fills a metope of a grave monument at Modena, probably next to a panel with a phalera harness. Here elements of military costume and honors are isolated as a decorative scheme. Franzoni 1987, 106 n. 11. [BACK]

12. Espérandieu 1907, 38, no. 35; Espérandieu 1910, 373; Vermeule 1960, 35, pl. 4.14; Eydoux 1962, 69, fig. 64. Over-life-size (1.55 m to the knees), local stone; chain mail, paludamentum, sleeved tunic, braccae, sword, and shield. Attributed to the mausoleum of a Vocontius who commanded under Caesar. [BACK]

13. Hannestad (1986, 80) suggests Thracian auxiliaries sent by Rhoemetalkes to Tiberius in Pannonia. [BACK]

14. See p. 109 above. [BACK]

15. Highly decorated triumphal cars were traditional; cf. App. Hist. Rom. 8.66 and Pun. 9 on the 201 B.C. triumph of Scipio Africanus (a quadriga katagegrammenos poikilos ). [BACK]

16. RIC 7; BMCRR III, pl. 59.16; BMCRE I, pl. 15.7; Kent et al. 1973, cat. 122, pl. 32. [BACK]

17. Vermeule (in Vermeule and Hanfmann 1957, 245 n. 80) cites a Claudian denarius, Trajan's quadriga on the arch at Beneventum (small frieze), and the triumph panel in the Aurelian panel relief series. [BACK]

18. Cf. Velleius' words on Tiberius' position immediately before his exile, 2.99: "Ti. Nero duobus consulatibus totidemque triumphis actis [ sc. the triumph of 8 B.C. and an earlier ovation] tribuniciae potestatis consortione acquatus Angusto, civium post unum, et hoc, quia volebat [!], eminentissimus, ducum maximus, fama fortunaque celeberrimus et vere alterum rei publicae lumen et caput." Cf. Zanker 1988, 232, on the succession imagery in this scene. [BACK]

19. Künzl 1988, 28. Juv. 10.36-42 (the pompa circensis modeled on the triumphal pompa ): the servus holds the crown and shares the chariot "sibi consul/ne placeat," lest the celebrant think too much of himself; Courtney (1980, 458, s.v.) cites Mart. Ep. 8.33.1 on the lightness of a leaf from the praetoricia corona —surely, an implied contrast to the crown's noted heft. Tert. Apol. 33.4: "hominem se esse etiam triumphans in illo sublimissimo curru admonetur, suggeritur enim ei a tergo: Respice post re! Hominem re memento!" [BACK]

20. Künzl (1988, 28, 163) notes a recently discovered marble relief at Praeneste, being published by L. Musso, said to depict the servus publicus . [BACK]

21. Spanish coins of 17-16 B.C., depicting at least three different arches, variously Augustus in quadriga or in elephant biga. [BACK]

22. This scheme is rooted in Greek athletic dedications, such as the fifth-century bronze group by Pythagoras of Rhegion at Olympia, of Cratisthenes of Cyrene and Nike sharing a chariot (Paus. 6.18.1). See chap. 2, pp. 62-63. Coins: Sulla, 82 B.C. denarius, RRC 367.1, pl. 47; Pompey, 71 B.C. aureus, RRC 402.1b, pl. 50; Octavian/Augustus, ca. 17 B.C. denarii (arch), BMCRR III, pl. 63.18-20. The servus publicus 's replacement by divinities: Höscher 1967, 82-84, ascribing the BR image to a fictitious "streng republikanische Ablehnung des Kaiserkultes" by Tiberius. Precedents go back to the fifth century B.C.; cf. a monument to their founder Battos put up by the Cyrenians at Delphi (Paus. 10.15.6). [BACK]

23. This leaning figure was by 30 B.C. a stock type in narrations of the triumphal procession; on the (probably satirical) paraphrase of a triumph by Antony and Cleopatra/Hercules and Omphale on a datable early Augustan Arretine ware matrix, the centaur chariots are pulled along by such a figure. See chap. 4, p. 97. [BACK]

24. Strong 1988, fig. 69, p. 350 nn. 6-7. [BACK]

25. The epigraphic description of a triumphal arch for Germanicus in Rome enjoins simply supraque eum ianum statua Ger(manici Caesaris po)neretur in curru triumphali (Tab.Siar. 18-19). As the text goes on to specify in detail family portraits and their placement relative to the arch, the omission of subsidiary figures (i.e., the servus publicus ) in this Tiberian commission must be deliberate. González 1984, 55ff ; the Tabula Siarensis, found near Seville in 1982, records the Senate's decrees of posthumous honors to Germanicus on 16 December A.D. 19, supplementing the Tabula Hebana. [BACK]

26. See chap. 2, n. 109. Republican triumph types with a quadriga group begin in 101. 101 B.C. denarius for Marius: rev., Marius in quadriga, three-quarters right with scepter and laurel, on the near horse Marius' eight-year-old son; RRC 326.1, pl. 43. 83 B.C. denarius for Sulla: rev., Sulla in quadriga, three-quarters left in cuirass and tunic with palm and trophy; RRC 358.1, pl. 47. 82 B.C. denarius for Sulla: Sulla in quadriga, three-quarters right, crowned by flying Victory, reins in his left hand, a caduceus (divine symbol of peace = pax, the product of victory) in his right; RRC 367.1, pl. 47. 71 B.C. aureus for Pompey: Pompey in quadriga, profile right, crowned by flying Victory, with palm, on the near horse his young son (the eldest, born between 80 and 76 B.C.); RRC 402.1b, pl. 50. 29/27 B.C. denarius for Octavian: Octavian in quadriga, profile right, branch in his right hand and reins in his left; BMCRR III, p. 13; II, pl. 60. 29/27 B.C. denarius for Octavian: quadriga group on arch, Octavian in profile right, crowned by Victory standing behind him in the chariot. 13-14 A.D. denarius and aureus for Tiberius: Tiberius in quadriga, profile right, in toga and crown with eagle-tipped scepter and branch. Note that the two Sullan issues tinker with the triumphator 's regalia, replacing elements of the costume with symbolic dress and attributes; note too that on a Sullan coin and on Octavian's quadriga issue, the triumphator holds the reins himself, when in fact the horses would have been led by a slave. [BACK]

27. Found in 1980; the square altar is inscribed TIB(e)R(ius)/C(ae)Sar. Provinciaal Museum G. M. Kam 1986, 26 and fig., cat. 105; Bloemers in Schatkamer 1989, 28-29, figs. 1-6, and Bloemers 1985 (I thank the author for bringing these articles to my attention and permitting me photographs of the pillar). [BACK]

28. Summary: Kleiner 1983, 290-93; Kienast 1982, 108 n. 165. Zanker (1988, 229) chooses the second triumph of A.D. 12, ascribing the four cup panels to a victory monument erected for it. Simon (1986, 143) (omitting BR II) dates the cup pair to the end of Augustus' reign when Tiberius was active in the Balkans. Künzl (1988 and 1989) picks A.D. 12. [BACK]

29. On these rituals and the "fuss" over Tiberius in 7 B.C., see Boatwright 1986, 16. [BACK]

30. See esp. Koeppel 1969, 130-94; Hölscher 1967, 48ff. [BACK]

1. For possible evidence in the Augustan period, there is an odd relief in the Vatican (Mus. Greg. Prof. inv. 2071) that comes from a grave monument in Luna marble from Rome, one of the class of bisellium panels (fig. 23) investigated by Schäfer 1989, s.v. pl. 30 and cat. 10. Here a figure stood, or more likely sat, in the center, just right of the present break; to him knelt a large male with arms outstretched, behind him a matron, then a woman with a Julio-Claudian low chignon, her hand on the head of a tallish togate child, behind her a woman with her hand on the head of a smaller child, behind her again a togatus standing. Plainly, the procession of men and women with their hands on children's heads is adapted from the Ara Pacis procession friezes; what is curious is that on first sight the drapery of the kneeling man seems to indicate the outline of a tunic (consider esp. the line of the back thigh), though Schäfer thinks he is togate. Could this be a garbling of the BR composition, where a tunicate Gaul kneels in just the same way before Augustus? Other Augustan bisellium reliefs show similar influence from monumental prototypes, e.g., the Palazzo Colonna relief (fig. 23a) (chap. 2, n. 4). The subject is so far unique in the repertoire of these grave monuments, which will have pushed the artist to such adaptation; Schäfer thinks it represents a defendant in a criminal proceeding before the deceased as praetor. [BACK]

2. Basic is Hassel 1966, with if., 9, pl. 1.1-2 on the passage reliefs; good plates: Rotili 1972; Strong 1988, 153, figs. 89-93. See Gauer 1974, 308-35; Fittschen 1972, 742-88; Hölscher 1980, 312 n. 172; Simon 1981; Lorenz 1973. [BACK]

3. Hassel 1966, 1f. [BACK]

4. Gauer 1974, 312-13. [BACK]

5. Not a nuncupatio: all participants are laureled, the emperor is togate, the Capitolium lacks. Not a sacrifice in Rome, which narrows the possibility of connection to Trajan's decennalia: the Genius of the Roman Senate is present (fitting, as the arch was voted by the Senate) but not the by-now familiar figure of the Genius of the Roman People, and (cf. Hassel 1966, 9) the lictors have axes in their fasces . [BACK]

6. The BR victim group does often occur in connection with vows and/or campaigns, though one cannot build a case on this point. Gauer (1974, 312) suggests the dedication of the Via Traiana in A.D. 109; cf. Hassel 1966, 9, contra Fittschen 1972, 747-48, denying any specific historical referent; followed by Rotili 1972, 97. Hölscher (1980, 312 n. 172) also takes issue with Fittschen. Simon (1981, 4.1) says only that it is a sacrifice to Jupiter. Lorenz (1973, 26) proposes A.D. 113, the inauguration of Trajan's Parthian campaign, connected somehow with the fact that this was (he says) the occasion of Trajan's first visit to the Via Traiana. [BACK]

7. Good plates: Rotili 1972, pls. 53, 55. Hassel 1966, pl. 1.2; Fittschen 1972, figs. 1-2; Simon 1981, pl. 4; Lorenz 1973, pl. 7. [BACK]

8. Hassel 1966, 23-30. [BACK]

9. Hassel 1966, pl. 1.1; Strong 1988, fig. 93. [BACK]

10. Simon 1981, 4.1. [BACK]

11. Obviously, the prominently depicted little girl and her brother are put forward as the puer alimentarius et puella alimentaria pair of alimenta propaganda, familiar in the visual, as in the epigraphic, record. See most recently Eck 1980, 266-70, on the Terracina base and the coinage and at p. 269 for the epigraphic and literary evidence; the statue group represented on the Anaglypha Traiani (figs. 37, 39), see chap. 2. [BACK]

12. Hassel 1966, 30-35, connecting esp. the Anaglypha Traiani and the Arch of Titus. [BACK]

13. Wickhoff 1912, 59. Pfanner (1983, 58f.) finds the Wickhoffian notion of a "Flavische barock" useless as a dating criterion, since "barock" and its antithesis "Klassizismus" do not succeed each other but rather coexist in Roman art. A succinct formulation of Pfanner's position (which I support) and its implications is Laubscher's contrary review (1985, 643-44). [BACK]

14. Gabelmann 1984, 128: "Mit der Wiedergabe der Barbaren in Proskynese vor dem Kaiser steht das Becher am Beginn einer langen Serie von sich zu neuen Bildtypen formierenden Unterwerfungsszenen der römischen Staatskunst"; Gabelmann 1986, 285. [BACK]

15. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glypt. inv. 553-54. See chap. 3, n. 106. [BACK]

16. Grosseto, Mus. Civ. Goette 1988a, n. 36; Stemmer 1978, 28, cat. IIa 3, pl. 14.3; Vermeule 1980b, 16 (a "masterpiece," "Neronian"). Left of the trophy, which stands over an eagle carrying a palm; at right cowers a captive with hands tied behind his back. [BACK]

17. Rome, Pal. Colonna. Restored as Fabricio Colonna. Victories construct a trophy, at its foot the captives. Vermeule 1980b, 93, fig. 53; Vermeule 1959, cat. 141; Stemmer 1978, 393. [BACK]

18. Jucker 1976, passim. Women (no children) are included in the trophy group being constituted in the exergue of the Augustan Gemma Augustea (fig. 16). [BACK]

19. Ryberg 1967, 64 n. 11; Cafiero in Rilievi storici Capitolini (1986), 14-15, fig. 4, and at pp. 12f. on provenance (arch in Via di Pietra). Hadrianic or Aurelian. One barbarian kneels in the foreground, a boy standing behind him, and two stooped barbarians stand in the background ( contra Cafiero: "4 kneeling barbarians"). The emperor's head ("Lucius Verus") does not belong. [BACK]

20. Cafiero takes the central figure as the Genius Senatus, which would probably set the scene at Rome. [BACK]

21. Gabelmann 1984, 186, cat. 88, pl. 30.2; the restoration: Petermann 1975, 218ff., pls. 81ff. (best plates); M. E. Micheli in MNR I.6 (1986), 24-27, cat. II.5. She queries the attribution to the Ludovisi sarcophagus—unnecessary, and for us irrelevant as the lid certainly belongs to some battle sarcophagus. [BACK]

22. A standing youth and seated figure on each side of the trophy, in grieving postures; seated are, left, a woman; right, a mature man. Compare the standing boy of the Torlonia relief (fig. 89); see n. 19. [BACK]

23. This somewhat recalls the Julio-Claudian frieze fragment (fig. 84) from Rome ( ex Coll. Farnese), Naples, MN 6722 (7516); Koeppel 1983a, 71, cat. 11, fig. 12. In this triumphal procession stand two Celtic captives, a man (with bracae ) and a woman, both resting a hand on the shoulder of a child in Celtic dress. See chap. 4, n. 15. The erect posture of this captive family does not vitiate my point about the posture of the Celts and their Romanized children on the Mainz fragment, for in the Julio-Claudian fragment, all the participants in the procession stand very upright even when straining forward (e.g., the ferculum bearers), so that this posture seems a mannerism of the entire frieze. Also, the artist of this minor piece evidently looked to the processions of the Ara Pacis to see how to incorporate a group of two adults with a child into a procession. [BACK]

24. This would indicate that the artist, looking for a model to depict children being honored/benefited, had used the puer (alimentarius) et puella (alimentaria) pairing established by second-century alimenta propaganda (pp. 49-50). [BACK]

25. Ryberg 1967, pl. 51, fig. 49, and p. 73 n. 3, on the other two extant reliefs of a congiarium scene that she calls Liberalitas: a damaged relief in the Villa Albani and the Constantinian panel on the Arch of Constantine. The Aurelian and Constantinian reliefs bracket the sarcophagus in date; both include figures of young children swathed in drapery standing upright before the imperial dais. [BACK]

26. Lid type, noted briefly by Koch and Sichtermann 1982, 115, citing with the Mainz lid a "late third c." sarcophagus lid from the Catacomb of Praetexta. It has a central tablet, a scene of public honor to the deceased at left, and at right a portrait bust of the deceased's wife; also cited by Micheli in MNR I.6 (1986), cat. II.5. On the catacomb sarcophagus (reused by Elia Afanasia) the deceased as lupercus presides at the whipping of a woman. A further example is the fragmentary lid of the Louvre sarcophagus of Q. Petronius Melior (A.D. 230, sodalis augustalis Claudialis, CIL XI.3367 = Dessau 1180), another third-century piece from Rome; left, a partly obliterated panel shows the deceased as consular giving an audience (format: [Audien]ce panel: procession: tabula : procession : [?? panel]). Baratte 1985, 28-29, cat. 2, ca. A.D. 250. [BACK]

27. The only typological study is Brandenburg 1980, 280-84, s.v. the Lupercal lid, which he groups with the Mainz lid as a type with "repräsentativen Öffentlichkeitscharakter," placing it in the typology of biographical structures on senatorial and generals' sarcophagi. Himmelmann's study of Late Antique sarcophagi documents a number of the relevant pieces but does not address the placement of "historical" subjects on sarcophagus lids (see nn. 29-30 below). Probably other examples are scattered in museum basements; sarcophagus lids are usually ignored when in a fragmentary state, as in much of the vast literature on the Ludovisi sarcophagus, for instance. [BACK]

28. Heintze proposed in an influential article that this is the sarcophagus of Hostilianus, son of the emperor Decius (d. A.D. 251) (1957, 69ff., pl. 13, repeated in 1974, 369ff., pls. 47-49). Contra: Fittschen (1979, 581ff.) sees it as Gallienic (ca. 260). Mid- to late third century. [BACK]

29. A similar example of intelligent borrowing directly from an official monument to decorate the lid of a magistrate's sarcophagus is a fragmentary late Antonine lid of Parian marble from the Via Ostiense (found in 1933), Rome, Pal. Cons. inv. 2311, 2829; Andreae in Helbig ⁴ I, cat. 1792; Mustilli 1936, 160, no. 6, pl. 101. Preserved are the two ends of the lid front; right and left of the customary central tabula (or possibly portrait) were careful copies of the personifications of the Hadrianeum standing before a curtained backdrop; this arrangement mimics not just the individual personifications but their arrangement in a series in the socle zone of the Hadrianeum cella. (Three are visible at left, one at right.) I cannot find this lid discussed in any work on Roman sarcophagi or in any work on the Hadrianeum provinces. [BACK]

30. Processus consularis: (1) Tunis, sarcophagus of Celsus frag.; B(randenburg and Solin 1980) 282; H(immelmann 1973) 5f., pl. 2. (2) Vatican frag.; B 282; H 5, pl. 5b. (3) Louvre, sarcophagus of P. Melior: B 282; H 5. Pompa circensis: (1) San Lorenzo lid: B 282; H 37ff., pls. 56b, 57. (2) Louvre, sarcophagus of P. Melior: B, 282; H 5, 40, pl. 5a. Cult procession: (1) Aquileia lid: B 282; H pl. 58. Procession, protagonist in wheeled throne: (1) Stockholm lid: H 32, pl. 50. (2) Terme lid; H 32, pl. 52. (3) Lateran lid: H 32, pl. 54a. (4) Turin lid: H 33, pl. 51. (5) Praetexta catacomb: H 34, pl. 55b. (6) Ostia lid: B 284. Tribunal scene: (1) Klein-Glienicke frag.; H 5, pl. 4b. (2) Louvre, sarcophagus of P. Melior (lost frag.): H 5. The iconography of the consular procession is related to that sometimes seen on the body of sarcophagi, e.g., the Naples Brothers' sarcophagus (B 282; H 5f., pl. 3; see p. 290 n. 27). Pompa circensis iconography (H 37f.) had already been developed for honorific relief; cf. the Puteoli frieze (H pl. 60). "Wagenfahrt" scenes (probably of adventus ) are also adapted from architectural relief, as on the Arch of Galerius, for example. [BACK]

1. Plutarch closes his Life of Antony (87) with a long note to show how the descendants of Antony ended up, after all, winning a place in the Julio-Claudian dynasty. His opening account, of the loyal Octavia's efforts on behalf of Antony's children by other women, stresses how high a place she won for Iullus Antonius in Augustus' favor, by ranking him third after the Claudii Nerones in the sequence just given. Plutarch's "Antonian" source is all the more to be trusted, as the first two places are given to others; this source describes specifically the period before ( a ) the exile of Tiberius and ( b ) the conspiracy and suicide of Iullus in 2 B.C., in connection with which Tiberius' wife Julia was disgraced. [BACK]

2. Louvre 1845. Megow 1987, 180, A 50, pl. 10.11. Busts of the youthful Tiberius, in tunic and laurel, and Drusus, unadorned, gaze slightly up. [BACK]

3. Kais. Aug. 1988, 565-66, s.v. cat. 391 (from Speyer) (Künzl); ZwierleinDiehl 1973, vol. 2, to cat. 1036-37. Catalogued now by Boschung 1987b; and see Grose 1989, 359 and n. 9. [BACK]

4. Kais. Aug. 1988, 559-60, cat. 385 (Künzl); Zanker 1988, 220, fig. 172, as in Bildnisse des Augustus 1972, 22. [BACK]

5. Compare Kiss 1975, nos. 302-3. Bonn inv. 4320, silvered bronze sheath plaque, owner's inscription VALIIRI. Both princes wear cuirasses with gorgoneia, sword belts, and mantles bunched on the left shoulder; contra Menzel their coiffures differ slightly, but the difference in head size is not significant at this scale and level of workmanship. Kiss 1975, 62, no. 157 (Gaius and Lucius); for physical details: Menzel 1986, 83-84, cat. 205, pl. 97, outlining the case for Tiberius and Drusus; Gonzenbach 1966, 183, 202, fig. 8.1-2. [BACK]

6. Julia is honored once only as Venus Genetrix, at Eresos on Lesbos, and without her children; Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 63 = CIL III.7156-57; IG XII, 2, 537. [BACK]

7. CIL 11.2038 = Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, 123, from Anticaria: Iuliae Aug. Drusi [fil.] div[i Aug.] matri Ti. Caesaris Aug. principis et conservatoris et Drusi Germanici [g]en[etric]is orbis M. Cornelius Proculus pontufex Caesarum . Proculus put up a statue group of Livia as Venux Genetrix with both sons. It is very unusual for such honors voted in the provinces to include someone dead as long as Drusus—Gaius, for example, does not receive portraits after the immediate commemoration of his death; Proculus must have been strongly influenced by some other statue group of this type put up under Augustus when Drusus was still alive. Compare Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 124: a bronze coin also from Baetica (Colonia Romula) couples a Divus Augustus obverse with a reverse inscribed IULIA AUGUSTA GENETRIX ORBIS, showing Livia's bust with a crescent on a globe. Purcell (1986, 92) is a bit extreme (Livia as Venus Genetrix is "common in dedications"). [BACK]

8. Livia's coiffure is not "late" (as asserted in Polacco 1955, 67, for example); the long curls on her neck simply assimilate her hairdo to that of Ceres/Venus. Winkes (1982) ("Augustus") can be refuted by his own comparative tables in figs. 13, 9. [BACK]

9. Megow 1987, 256-57, B 19 = the BMFA turquoise, pl. 10.5; 279. Some other Augustan Tiberius depictions moved late are A 41, A 42, A 38 = pl. 6.9, 6.11-12, 6.13; A 40 = pl. 7.1; A 43 = pl. 10.3. Drusus cameos moved with them: C 11, C 10 = pl. 10.8, 10.12; Leningrad Herm. 73 (Drusus or Tiberius with Augustus); Vienna, K. h. Mus. 11 (inv. IX. a. 33) (Drusus naked with shoulder mantle and laurel). On the other hand, C 7 (pl. 1.15), C 8 (pl. 1.14), and C 9 (no ill.) of Drusus are allowed to stay at 9 B.C. in correlation with posited statue types. [BACK]

10. Megow 1987, 168. [BACK]

11. Flory 1984, 311. [BACK]

12. Gabelmann 1984, 131. [BACK]

13. Fullerton 1985, 476-77. [BACK]

14. Pollini 1987. This fine study of Gaius portraits is presented as a definitive study of political propaganda; see esp. opening pages. [BACK]

15. Sutherland 1987; see secs. 9, "The mint of Lugdunum under Augustus and Tiberius," 10, "Augustus' dynastic plans," and pp. 25-27, an outline of everyone connected with Augustus. [BACK]

16. Simon 1986, 67-73. [BACK]

17. Zanker 1988, 226-29. [BACK]

18. Ibid., 229-32. [BACK]

19. On Drusus, with bibl.: Kienast 1982, 100-114, 299-301, 345-46; Bellen 1984, 385f.; Frenz 1985a, 394f.; RÖsger and Will 1985, 37f. Tiberius, Drusus, and dynastic policy: add to Kienast, SchrÖmbges 1986, 24ff. A welcome corrective is Garzetti's account, esp. in the revised and translated (1974) edition at pp. 7-8 and 11-12 on the attention given Tiberius from childhood on. [BACK]

20. Drusus' omission struck Kienast (1989, 179) in his fine discussion of the Res gestae . [BACK]

21. Passage 5.6.3 expands on the brothers as paradigms of fraternal love comparable only to the Dioscuri: Drusus on his sickbed gives detailed orders for Tiberius' reception, to give him dignity equal to his own and have him too saluted as imperator . See below on Tiberius' efforts to give Drusus triumphal dignities like his own. Passage 4.3.3 speaks of Drusus "pariter ac fratri Augustis duobus rei publicae divinis oculis mirifice respondentem." These passages and 5.6.4, like Velleius' panegyric to Drusus (2.97.2-3), were written in Tiberius' reign; meant to attract imperial favor, they testify to Tiberius' continuing interest in his brother's memory decades after Drusus' death. [BACK]

22. Courtney 1980, citing Mart. 8.52.3. [BACK]

23. The epigraphic record for Drusus' own activities is weak, but then he died young, before he could spend much manubiae . That from his Alpine wars was spent on road building, an activity to which Augustus had tried hard to divert the building instincts of his victorious fellow aristocrats; this Via Claudia was restored by his son Claudius as emperor. See Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 363a = ILS 208, from near Venetia: viam Claudiam Augustam quam Drusus pater Alpibus bello patefactis derexerat . [BACK]

24. Glen Bowersock pointed out to me the implications of the inscription from Nysa of 1 B.C. about this cult, SIG ³ , 781, on which see his 1965 book at p. 118 and n. 4. [BACK]

25. McCabe 1987, 219, a still unpublished base. On posthumous, generally Claudian portraits for Drusus see Rose 1987, s.v.; and Fuchs et al. 1989, cat. 4 and 6, s.v. the two portraits at Caere. [BACK]

26. Most recently, Fullerton 1985; Zanker 1988, s.v. figs. 167, 173. [BACK]

27. Zanker 1988, s.v. fig. 171. Though Gaius executed his part in the Troy games staged here before the troops, this marks him clearly as still one of the noble boys for whom these exhibitions were reserved. They had been staged often since Sulla's day, several times in Augustus' own reign before Gaius and Lucius were old enough to take part. On other iconographic motives for this coin type see p. 268 n. 63. [BACK]

28. Levick exemplifies this fashion, most recently in her 1976 biography of Tiberius; Kienast (1982, 107f.) gives an overview. The later adoption policy of the latter half of Augustus' reign: Kienast, 114ff. Tiberius A.D. 4-14: Schrömbges 1986, 29-37, 38-42 (the adoption day), 42-54 (Tiberius' significant building projects, the aedes of the Dioscuri and Concord and the Ara Numinis Augusti), 54f. (Tiberius' triumph of A.D. 12, arranged to be celebrated on the same day Augustus won at Philippi in 42 B.C.), and 57f. (Tiberius' status as coruler). [BACK]

29. Cf. Blamberg 1976, n. 21: ''Nor did they honor Tiberius and Drusus when these brothers became temporary heirs after the death of Agrippa in 12 BC to assure smooth succession in case Augustus died before Agrippa's sons, Gaius and Lucius, were of age." But Marcellus (d. 23 B.C.) had not been honored on Roman coinage either, although he was Augustus' nephew and married to Augustus' daughter. [BACK]

30. Fixation with "the blood of Augustus," as the best or sole guarantor of legitimacy, postdates Augustus' own reign, as one would expect. The earliest indicator is the famous quarrel of Agrippina the Younger (Augustus' granddaughter through Julia) with Tiberius, Augustus' adopted son (Tac. Ann. 4.51-52). [BACK]

31. Compare the deeply sad grave inscription of Sextus Appuleius at Luna, the family burial site (Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 206 = ILS 932): [ Sex .] Appuleio Sex. f. Gal. Sex. n. Sex. pron. Fabia Numantina nato, ultimo gentis suae . [BACK]

32. As when Agrippa was made Augustus' socer, and Tiberius (the next "in line") made into Agrippa's socer; then when Agrippa died, Tiberius was made to divorce Agrippa's daughter in order to take his place as Augustus' socer . Drusus was given the next best sort of marriage alliance, paired off to one of Augustus' nieces through his sister Octavia. The redoubtable reputation of Drusus' wife Antonia is borne out by a significant historical fact: note that although she was very young when widowed, and quite fertile, she was unique among the eligible females of Augustus' household in remaining unmarried. She must have had great strength of character to pull this off. [BACK]

33. As noted by Garzetti (1974, 13). So, who carried the mantle of the gens Claudia after the adoptions of Tiberius, Drusus II, and Germanicus? Drusus' son Claudius, of course, who must have been deliberately left unadopted to carry on the family name, as the emperors' careful marriage plans for him show. Physically unfit to be an active soldier, he was delegated this essentially religious, as well as genetic, task; Augustus and Tiberius were like traditional Republican heads of clan making dignified arrangements for their handicapped members. This mechanism was not appreciated by Wiseman (1982/1987, 91f.). [BACK]

34. Thallus ii (Gow and Page = Anth. Pal. 6.235): "Great joy to furthest west and east, Caesar, /descendant of Romulus' unconquered sons, /your heavenly birth we sing, and round the/altars we pour glad libations to the immortals. /Do you tread firm in your grandfather's steps,/and be the subject of our prayers for many a year".

As Cameron (1980, 47f. ) shows, Thallus hopes on Claudius' birthday that he will not die young (like his father) but live long like his "grandfather" ( sic ), namely Augustus; Cameron observes: "It is difficult to doubt that poets and panegyrists blurred the distinction between grandson and step-grandson" (50). The poem must have been written while Claudius was still relatively young, probably while Augustus was still alive; note that the poet does not claim Julian blood for him outright ("descendant of Romulus' unconquered sons"). Cameron nominates Thallus Antonius to Antonia's salon, which included also Crinagoras. [BACK]

35. The evidence collected by Wiseman 1982/1987, 87-91, is all to this effect, notwithstanding the author's exasperation with such notions—Seneca's mockery only documents the phenomenon. If Claudius was felt to be of the house of the Caesars, obviously his father Drusus was too. See Joseph. AJ 19.164 and Dio 60.1.3 on Claudius' accession ("seize the throne of your ancestors"); also Thallus ii (Gow and Page = Anth. Pal. 6.235; see n. 34). [BACK]

36. Only Hallett (1985, 87-88) really analyzed step-relationships as serious bonds, referring not least to Tiberius and Drusus. [BACK]

37. In 33 B.C., at the age of nine, Tiberius enters public life to pronounce the laudatio and preside over funeral games for his dead father; he is then betrothed to Agrippa's daughter; in 29 B.C. he rides Augustus' chariot horses along with Marcellus in the great triple triumph and holds a seat of honor at the games for the occasion; in 27 he assumes the toga virilis with much fanfare at the age of fifteen; in 26/25 at sixteen he is tribunus militum against the Cantabri in Spain; in 24 he is excused five years from the normal qualification for magistracy and gives three defensive speeches and a diplomatic speech to the Senate, all building his own client base; in 23 at the age of nineteen he is quaestor Ostiensis, coping with a dangerous grain shortage; in 20 he receives back the Parthian standards after pacifying Armenia; in 19 he is ornamentis praetoriis ornatus; in 16 he goes to Gaul with Augustus and remains as his governor; in 15 he begins his own conquests (Rhaeti, Vindelici) and is received into the college of priests; in 13 at twenty-nine he is consul, with Varus; in 12 he governs Illyria and beats the Pannonians and is first voted a triumph by the Senate; in 11 he is first saluted as imperator; in 9 he finally gets to celebrate an ovatio; in 8 he is consul designate for the second time, saluted again as imperator; he celebrates a triumph in 7 B.C. as consul and in 6 B.C. receives a five-year grant of tribunicia potestas, at the age of thirty-six—an extraordinary career. [BACK]

38. Although it can never be proved, and cannot bolster any other argument, I feel that Augustus did believe (with others in antiquity) that Drusus was his own son, conceived by Livia before she was divorced to marry him; sources: Flory 1988, 345-46. I also think Tiberius believed this, or at least believed Augustus' feeling. In re that notorious divorce, where a husband passed a pregnant wife to a friend, no one seems to note the precedent of the younger Cato and his friend Hortensius; see Plut. Cat. min. 25.4-5. [BACK]

39. Sources on Drusus' death: Frenz 1985a, 394-95; Bellen 1984, 385f.; Kienast 1982, 105. Seldom used is Valerius Maximus' set piece 5.6.3; see p. 292 n. 21. [BACK]

40. Dio 55.2.1-3; Suet. Claud. 1.3-4; Cons. ad L. 169-78 (death and journey of corpse to Rome), 199-220 (his funeral rites in Rome). Tac. Ann. 3.5-6 contrasts Drusus' funeral with the quieter observances for the death of Germanicus, mentioning Augustus' public restraint over the deaths of Gaius and Lucius. Tacitus' list of observances has to be fleshed out by other accounts, as he omits the agents of particular observances. [BACK]

41. Authentic: Purcell 1986, 78 and n. 3 (I thank N. Horsfall for this reference); Kienast 1982, 105 n. 150, without argument. The opposing view that the Consolatio is Tiberian or later: E. Bickel, RhM 93 (1950): 193-227, citing stylistic correspondences between phrases in the Consolatio and the phrasing of Ovid and Propertius, followed by J. Richmond, ANRW 31.4 (1981): 2768-83 (his historical logic ably corrected by Purcell). The author of the Consolatio was no genius, but I see no reason why he and greater poets like Ovid could not have been situated in the same literary culture, drawing on the same literary models; it is an acknowledged commonplace in music and the visual arts that contemporaries of widely differing abilities share formal characteristics. Against a date after Tiberius' exile but before his return: no reference to Gaius and Lucius. Against a late Augustan, Caligulan, or Claudian date: no reference to the German campaigns of Drusus' son Germanicus. Against a Tiberian date: the absence of any "prophecy" as to Tiberius' "future" accession. [BACK]

42. Ehrenberg and Jones 1976, no. 80; Vassileiou 1983 passim. [BACK]

43. Kleiner (1989, 245) points out that this was the first arch Augustus had allowed to anyone else in Rome and that it becomes the prototype for a series of arches for imperial princes. [BACK]

44. See p. 275 n. 14; Rostra Drusus: Cons. ad L. 269 (omitted by Lahusen). [BACK]

45. The cenotaph tradition definitely has Republican roots. We know (Plut. Cat. min. 11.2) that Cato the Younger put up a mnema at Aenos in Thrace to mark where his beloved brother Caepio died; this cenotaph must have been on the scale of Drusus' and Gaius', as it was made of eight talents' worth of Thasian marble. A cenotaph may also have been erected for Mark Antony's brother Caius in Macedon, where he fell fighting Brutus; Plutarch cites a mnema for him there. Cic. Fam. 4.12 tells us that S. Sulpicius in 45 B.C. set up a monument in Athens at the Academy for M. Marcellus. See pp. 298-99 nn. 64, 65, 70 below. [BACK]

46. The extraordinary funeral observances for Drusus and their parallels in later imperial funerals (Germanicus, Gaius, and Drusus the Younger): P. Herz in Ganzert 1984, 178-92; cf. chap. 4, n. 83. Frenz and Bellen's articles on observances for Drusus also discuss other imperial funerals; Frenz 1985a, 395f., Bellen 1984, 392-96. Both Gaius (cf. p. 299 n. 65) and Germanicus ( CIL VI.1, no. 911 = VI.4, fasc. 2, no. 31199; cf. González 1984, 58f.), who also died among foreigners, received a cenotaph; on their decoration, see p. 195 below. [BACK]

47. Stylow 1977, passim; at p. 490: Ti. Claudius Ti. f. Nero pont. cos. II [ imp. I ] I trib. potest. V/Nero Claudius Ti. f. Drusus Germ [ anicus ] augur cos. imp. II/murum portas turris p.s.p.f.c. (1250 m of wall, twenty-seven towers, four gates!). Syme 1979a, 1203; at p. 1206 he notes another inscription of Tiberius (A.D. 4) here, in the Forum. [BACK]

48. Distribution of copies of fine court cameos of Drusus in Tiberius' reign: Zwierlein-Diehl 1973, 2: 107-8, cat. 1036. [BACK]

49. Brit. Mus. inv. Bronze 967; CIL XIII.6796. Walker and Burnett 1981, cat. 4, pp. 49-53, pls. 4.1-2, 5.2-3 (with bibliography on the scabbard and detail of the legionary sacellum in the middle); Zanker 1988, 234, figs. 183a-b; Kais. Aug. 1988, 558-59, cat. 383a-b (Künzl); Hölscher 1967, 112f., pl. 15.1; Gabelmann 1984, 145-50, cat. 39; Klumbach 1970, 123-32; best plate: Levick 1976, fig. 11. Klumbach (128-30) describes the material, from a 1970 assay by B. F. Cook in the BM Research Lab: Roman brass, "silvered" with tin and silver lead, with decorative brass leaf appliqué; the owner's inscription AURELI = Aurelius, of the Leg. XIIII Gemana XVI, which was in Mainz until A.D. 43; he is an officer, as he uses only the gentilician name and does not add his centuria number, as is usual with ownership marks on armament (Klumbach, 132). On the piece as mass-produced from a matrix, Klumbach, 132; Gabelmann 1984, 124-25, assigning it to the sphere of largitio art (art for official gift giving); Gabelmann thinks the scheme was originally created for a cameo. Walker in Walker and Burnett 1981, like Gabelmann, adduces the IMP. X coinage (figs. 115-16). [BACK]

50. Klumbach, Walker, and others see Augustus receiving Tiberius. But any good photograph permits clear identification of the features of Tiberius and Germanicus, as we would expect, given that the emperor holds a shield inscribed Felicitas Tiberii, felicitas being the quality of the holder of successful highest auspices . [BACK]

51. Compare the location of the inscription for Tiberius on the Nijmegen pillar (fig. 119). [BACK]

52. This has always been called Vindelicia, by comparison with a line of Horace ( Carm. 4.4.20) apostrophizing the Vindelicii as axe-bearing Amazons; yet the Vindelicii belong to Drusus' youthful campaigns, while the Sheath's main scene refers to activities of Tiberius in Germany many decades later. A similar double axe turns up on the Augustan arch at Carpentras (A.D. 1-10) next to an Oriental prisoner; Espérandieu 1907, fig. on p. 180; Bedon et al. 1988, 1: 178; another one figures in a set of weapons reliefs (Villa Albani) from the later first century A.D., which refer to many European gentes; Kat. Albani 1988, inv. 1006, cat. 126, pl. 226. The historical context of the Sheath and signum, both Tiberian products from the Rhine frontier, determines the meaning of the axe for those images. [BACK]

53. An armed Tiberius stands on a weapon pile over a bound German savage; from the weapon pile protrude several axes, with flared half-moon blades and curved hafts. Künzl in Kais. Aug. 1988, 564-65, cat. 390 (Tiberius); Künzl 1983, 385-86, pl. 73.1. The signum has not entered the handbook canon, as have the Sheath and the Avenches Marcus Aurelius miniature bust, for example. The portrait is much disputed; Tiberius can be identified by comparing his bangs to recognized portraits in, among other locations, Toulouse from Beziérs, in the Uffizi from Leptis, and in Copenhagen from Nemi—note the predominantly Western provenance; Polacco 1955, pls. 21-22, 25, 27. Shape and proportions of the features agree. [BACK]

54. Kais. Aug. 1988, 523, cat. 365; Gabelmann 1984, 118-21, cat. 36-37; Zanker 1988, 226-28, fig. 179a and pp. 230-31, adducing not the BR I submission but the allegory; Schäfer 1989, 82. [BACK]

55. Compare the statuary described for the Pisa arch to Gaius and Lucius (chap. 3, nn. 90 and 92). Though it celebrated the deeds of the two young princes, they were made to flank a central and dominant Augustus. Cf. the well-known Corinth group of Gaius, Lucius, and Augustus, where the princes are nude warrior heroes who flank a togate Augustus; Simon 1986, fig./cat. 84. For doubts cast on the original disposition of the togate and nude statues upon a single base, see most recently Goette 1988b, 254-55, dating the princes to A.D. 4. the Augutus simply "late Augustan" (257-58). [BACK]

56. Schumacher 1985, 191-222, at pp. 209ff.; Eck 1984a, 131. [BACK]

57. Banti and Simonetti ( CNR IV [1977], 112) point out that Augustus put his own imperatorial acclamation number on coinage for the first time with the IMP. X types, which were also the first coins that associated someone else directly with his own glory; he did the same on the IMP. XII series, of 11 B.C., for Drusus' and Tiberius' first ovations. [BACK]

58. The next turning point is 9 B.C., when Drusus and Tiberius were permitted the formal acclamation of imperator, numbered as Augustus' thirteenth/fourteenth. See Schumacher 1985, 221-22 (table of acclamations). On Tiberius', see Dio 55.6.4. On Drusus', see the passage in Dio (unclear) and his elogium from the Forum of Augustus—his portrait stood among the other viri triumphales, inscribed imperator appelatus est in Germania; cf. Vassileiou 1983. This indicates clearly to me that this acclamation had just been, or was just about to be, awarded to Drusus at the time of his death in 9 B.C. and that it was part of the formal titulature including triumphator with which he was saluted by the Senate at his death when he was named Germanicus. [BACK]

59. Response to Augustus' new triumphal awards: Eck 1984a, 142-44. [BACK]

60. On Horace's odes, see Christ 1977, 170-75. Further in the panegyric tradition see, of course, the Consolatio ad Liviam for the death of Drusus, with its characterizations of Tiberius as well as Drusus (above at p. 185). Compare Vergil Aen. 6.854f. for Marcellus; Ovid Ars am. 1.170-228 (approximately) on Gaius Caesar. In the Greek Anthology (Gow and Page), Crinagoras 26 on Drusus, 28 on Tiberius, 27 for Drusus and Tiberius as the twin oaks of Zeus; Diodoros 1 to Tiberius, 8 to Drusus; Antipater of Thessaloniki 46. There is a tendency to take epigrams to Drusus as epigrams to Germanicus; others who reassign Crinagoras 26 ( Anth.Pal. 9.291) to Drusus are Schneider (1986, 41 n. 189), associating it with the clades Lollianae; Williams (1978, 129-32) interprets it, probably rightly, as an epitaph for Drusus that in sorrow paraphrases the language of Horace's Odes . Crinagoras works in any case largely for Augustus, Drusus, Tiberius, and Antonia. [BACK]

61. A good discussion along these lines is Künzl 1989, 77-78. [BACK]

62. Contra Künzl 1989, 77-78. Koeppel 1985b is the main spokesman for this tradition, which sees painting as the prototype for historical relief; I do not believe that in more than gross outline there is any such dependence, for the pictorial aims of painting and sculpture as they exist from the Greco-Roman world are very different. (Cf., for instance, the genres of painted and carved landscapes.) Roman relief sculpture often aims at effects of spatiality, momentariness, and chiaroscuro, which to us seem extremely painterly; but when we look at Roman action paintings they seem rather to aim at what we would call sculptural effects, especially a hard austerity in drapery. This is not the place to develop this theme; I hope to do so in a book on Republican megalographic painting. [BACK]

63. Also the four panels would imply two passages. There are not imperial double arches, only single, triple, or quadruple ( quadrifrons ) arches. The four BR panels seem so tightly structured in relation to one another that I do not think they excerpt a longer series. [BACK]

64. This monument has yet to be slotted into discussions of Roman relief and Augustan art. Simon (1986, 71, figs. 88-89: view, ruins; architectural ornament frag.) barely acknowledges it; it is omitted altogether by Zanker 1988 and by Ling (annotations to Strong's Roman Art [1988]). [BACK]

65. Most recently, Ganzert 1984, 91f. (geographic orientation), 178-92 (P. Herz on the cult and legal aspects of honors for Gaius and other Julio-Claudian princes), 171f. (reconstruction as a tower tomb on a high podium), 175f. (on date and attribution to Gaius and workshop, a team from Rome close to the Temple of Concord workshop, 7 B.C.-A.D. 10), 114f. and 118f. (P. Herz on the inscriptions), 126-27 (Ganzert on the inscriptions, esp. ART]AVAS[DES; cf. RG 27 and Dio 55.10a.7 on Gaius' crowning of Ariobarzanes the son of Artavasdes of Armenia). Pollini (1986, 134-36) sees the fact that the inscription is in Latin as strengthening the case for attribution to a team sent from Rome. [BACK]

66. Ganzert's catalogue of relief fragments (1984, 134f.) does not replace but only supplements Borchhardt 1974. Remains indicate, besides a garland frieze, at least one sacrifice and one rex datus scene (horses being led; a bull; lictors; laureled heads; a signifer; an Oriental head with long beard and open mouth; a Roman senator's hand with ring; a tree trunk, setting one of the scenes in the open air). Rex datus scenes: chap. 4, n. 61. [BACK]

67. Compare, though, the relief-decorated "Jupiter Column" at Mainz, whose socle has superb two-figure panels of deities sacrificing; Espérandieu 1907, no. 5887. [BACK]

68. Strong 1988, 197-98, figs. 127-28, bibl. at p. 356 n. 1. [BACK]

69. This column is especially apposite, being a triumphal monument with documentary panels in the same mode of historical narration as BR I:2, for example, paired with allegorical panels. These reliefs were destroyed in the restoration by Sixtus V; they are recorded in engravings by Piranesi, Enea Vico, and others. These make clear that at least one panel was a submissio scene (not in Gabelmann 1984), and two or more showed Victories with garlands. Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, fig. 363 (Piranesi 1762); Becatti 1967, fig. on p. 415 (Vico). Piranesi's plates are Il Campo Marzio dell'antica Roma (1762), "Base del colonna Antonina," and Trofeo . . . (1768), "Colonna Antonina," and "Colonna Antonina in tre momenti"; A. Bettagno, ed., Piranesi (1978), figs. 237, 351-52 (I thank Michael McCarthy for this reference). I hope to discuss the engravings and the basis in a future paper. [BACK]

70. One would like very much to know if there were historical reliefs on Drusus' tower-tomb cenotaph in Germany or on Germanicus' cenotaph in Antioch. For historical relief on tombs at Rome, consider the exedra tomb panel for a late Republican/early Augustan general ca. 35 B.C. in the Campus Martius, where the deceased figured as a kind of universal imperator (p. 61); an isolated triumphal narrative tableau is the focus for a tomb later on the (similarly curved) Monument of Philopappos, Athens. Such tombs may have influenced the design of the Arch of Titus, which doubled as a tomb. For narrative " res gestae " panels on tombs, see Pliny's description ( HN 15.82) of the tomb of one of Augustus' Praetorians, a noted strongman, carved with his personal exploits. [BACK]

71. This tower monument stands on a massive substructure; each side takes a different scene (cavalry, infantry, heroic battle; Caledonian boar hunt), like the Via Appia tomb panel, Hellenistic in style. Strong 1988, 348 n. 13. Such bases may derive ultimately from early Hellenistic royal monuments like the Mausoleum, but I think these panels are different from the Mausoleum friezes in conception and are connected with a Roman fondness for decorating monument bases, on whatever scale, with commemorative images. [BACK]

72. See p. 57. The Praeneste base (p. 260 n. 134): at least three documentary panels in contrasting styles; the San Omobono base reliefs (p. 232 n. 38): emblematic weapon friezes centered on an allegorical tableau. Similar programs structure the later column bases: Column of Trajan, weapon reliefs; funerary Column of Antoninus Pius, allegorical apotheosis panels, alternating with documentary depictions of the funeral decursio in contrasting style; Column of Marcus Aurelius, large submission scene and presumably a pendant historical relief, alternating with Victory and garland panels (fig. 121). [BACK]

73. There are tetrapylon arches in Augustan Gaul, such as Cavaillon (ca. A.D. 1-10; Gros 1979), and the attic of the Tiberian triple arch at Orange does have a battle scene on its broad face. We do not yet, however, have evidence of a certifiably imperial quadrifrons with panels in the attic before the reign of Domitian. [BACK]

74. See chap. 2, n. 55. [BACK]

75. Note how he overshadowed Tiberius in the commemoration of the return of the Parthian standards (compare the Primaporta Augustus), Drusus in the "BR baby" event (separated from the BR child on the Ara Pacis), Gaius in his mission to the East (Vicus Sandaliarius altar; see p. 221 n. 32) and in his funerary honors (Pisa arch; see p. 254 nn. 90, 92; contrast the anonymity of Tiberius, Drusus, and Gaius on the preexile coinage (pp. 179, 187-88). [BACK]

1. See pp. 75-76, above. [BACK]

2. See index to BR cups, sv. Ara Pacis. [BACK]

3. Simon 1986, fig. 285; see further pp. 225-26 nn. 68-69 below for bibliography; see p. 226 n. 69 above on the cognate Augustan and early Tiberian coinage. The Belvedere altar composition, in fact, is echoed exactly on Tiberius' accession issues, leading one to assume that these and the altar panel both depend on a more grandly scaled public composition, in painting or relief. [BACK]

4. This sort of double vision is only possible because we can look at a human being or animal in a moment of action and guess with some accuracy how that motion is going to be continued, and we can extend this sense of an immediate future to visual depictions of a human being in an action pose (as in the victim group of BR II:1: "that man is going to hit that victim on the head with that axe"). When the opportunity for such double vision is afforded, it is an example of something not possible in literary art; for while literary art can be evocative in many ways denied to visual art, especially of other works of art, it cannot give the sense that the pattern of words one sees/hears is about to shift into a different alignment of the same words. [BACK]

1. Vermeule 1963, 35. Lead content in Roman silver: Baratte et al. 1989, 22-23. [BACK]

2. See Strong 1966, 133-39; Küthmann 1959, 88- 89; Gabelmann 1974; Andreae in Baia 1983, 49 n. 6; Simon 1986, 145; Baratte et al. 1989, 65. For Künzl (1979, 211ff.) any ring-handled vessel is a "scyphus"—my profile is his "cylindrical" type (219). [BACK]

3. Techniques: Baratte et al. 1989, 23-28. Some Republican cups were left plain, with no shell; cf. Baratte et al., 65, cat. 8, from near Thorey (Chalon-sur-Saône, Mus. Denon inv. 86.3.15). Early imperial cores remounted as Late Antique chalices: Dodd 1974, fig. 52 (Swiss coll.); Boston, MFA inv. 1971.633, a core with handle rings intact, inlaid and fitted with new rim, thumb plates, and foot (fifth-seventh century A.D. Syria); Mango 1986, cat. 73. Copenhagen inv. 3143 is a stripped core. [BACK]

4. Ring handles too were employed over a wide time span, on various cup profiles; Strong 1966, 133-34. [BACK]

5. Millefiori, Met. Mus. inv. 9*1.2053 ( ex Coll. Castellani). Cut glass low skyphos, Köln inv. 35.132: Fremersdorff 1967, 62, pl. 21, citing two fragments at Cologne (pls. 309g, 20) and examples in the Vatican, from Cumae, and in London at the Victoria and Albert and Guildhall museums. Metal prototypes and Arretine ware models for glass: Grose 1989, 245f, and Toledo fragment cat. 429; J. Price in Henig 1983, 206-12, skyphoi at p. 209. Skyphos from late Republican tomb at Ancona: Mercando 1976, 16, fig. 66. (Italian glass imitations of metal of the third century B.C.: Grose 1989, 186-88.)

A special class are revivals of the third and fourth centuries A.D. in clear glass after vegetal silver of the first century A.D. Third-century cast glass skyphos with vine garland from Cologne (Mainz, RGZM); Price in Henig 1983, fig. 172. Fourth-century (ca. A.D. 360) blown glass pair from a woman's grave from Nord Rhein-Westfalen, with stylized laurel ornament (inscr. Kalos zesais ); Gallien in der Spätantike 1980, 129-30, cat. 178a. See also Glass of the Caesars 1987, 189, s.v. cat. 99. Compare Late Antique reuse of early imperial silver skyphos cores; see n. 3. [BACK]

6. Skyphos with mock-Egyptian decoration in enamel and gold wire from Stabiae: Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, 204, fig. 218; Pompeii 79 1979, pl. xiv.a-b. On this inlaid Italian ware, see Grose 1989, 342. [BACK]

7. Cologne: Bühler 1973, cat. 55a, pl. 17; cf. pp. 28-29 on inspiration from metalwork. Rome, MN, from Doganella: Bordenache Battaglia 1983, no. vii.25. Pompeii miniature: Kraus and Matt 1975, fig./cat. 194. [BACK]

8. Pergamene: Schäfer 1968, 68, pl. 36.E85. Lead-glazed ware: Jones, AJA 49 (1945): 45f.; Antiken aus rheinischem Privatbesitz 1973, s.v. cat. 112, 115, 124-27, 130; Gabelmann 1974; Green and Rawson 1981, 77, s.v. no. 71.02; King in Henig 1983, 189; Andreae 1983, 49 n. 6. Italian production: Maccabruni 1987, 169, 171-72, figs. 1-2. [BACK]

9. Cf. Rome, MN 56146, a marble skyphos 32 CM in height X 78 cm diameter, carved with pine branches and grapevines (center motif: Pan and goat/wolf and sheep), dedicated by Q. Caecilius Amandus and his son Quintus Tullius. MNR I.1 (1979), 329-30, cat. 194 (R. Paris). [BACK]

10. A major cult statue of Hercules in Rome (Custos?) had club and skyphos for attributes, reproduced on three votive altars from Rome: late Republican, MN inv. 114760; A.D. 81, Mus. Cap., Stanza dei Gladiatori; early first century A.D. Villa Albani inv. 916, dedicated to Hercules Defensor by the Papirii. The skyphos has reliefs, vine branches. Lahusen in Kat. Albani 1988, 118-20, s.v. cat. 32, pl. 57. This statue is probably copied by the bronze banqueting Hercules, Naples, MN 2828 (Pompeii), first century B.C.; Neudecker 1988, 179-80, n. 39, cat. 33.1 pl. 3.4; and cf. p. 303 n. 24. [BACK]

11. Odysseus' cup in the Baiae Polyphemos group: Andreae in Baia 1983, 49, figs. 80-85 (Claudian). Also depicted in the mosaic rendition at Nero's Golden House, the ring-handled skyphos is still identifiable in the mosaic of the fourth century A.D. at Piazza Armerina; Wilson 1983, fig. 14; Andreae 1982, figs. on pp. 93, 97-98. Odysseus and skyphos on intaglios: Scherf et al. 1970, s.v. cat. 31 (Kassel), subject unrecognized; on early imperial lamps: Bezzi Martini 1987, 70, s.v. no. 2, fig. 1 ("kantharos"); Walters 1914, 83, pl. xvii.547. If the Tiberian group at Sperlonga adhered fully to the Catania sarcophagus version, the skyphos would have lain on the ground (cf. p. 303 n. 15); Andreae 1982, figs. on pp. 115, 270. [BACK]

12. Held by banqueters in effigy; for instance: large, straight-sided skyphos (handles missing), Mus. Cons. inv. 1999, monument of C. Iulius Bathyllus (Columbarium of Livia's freedmen), late Julio-Claudian; smaller cup, Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glypt. Sc.777, Trajanic. Wrede 1977, 400-402, fig. 73; 415-16, fig. 108. [BACK]

13. Arch spandrel panel, on an early imperial historical relief from Rome (drawing): Pfanner 1980, pl. 114; Künzl 1988, fig. 20. Fragment of a small procession relief for (?) Venus Victrix, offerings carried in a large skyphos; Mus. Cap. 616; Helbig ⁴ II, cat. 1373; DAI neg. 76.2067. A banquet relief of the first century A.D. from S. Vittorino (Amiternum) has at least six skyphoi; Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, fig. 75. To the banqueting grave statues above compare the relief depictions (one skyphos in deceased's hand, one on table) from Narbo ( CIL XII.4557), Bonn (inv. 21357), Cologne ( CIL XIII.8303-4).; Espérandieu 1907-, nos. 643, 6268, 6454, 6455. [BACK]

14. Naples inv. 8615 from Herculaneum, Casa dei Cervi: a ring-handled skyphos lies among offerings to Dionysos. Tinh 1988, 70-71, fig. 136. [BACK]

15. E.g., the deep ring-handled skyphos, garland ornament in grisaille, held by the old Silen in the Villa dei Misteri Dionysiac cycle—Simon 1986, color pl. 20; a similar skyphos with repoussé garlands lies dropped from Hercules' hand in the Hercules and Omphale Naples panel, LIMC III (1986), s.v. ''Eros/Amor," no. 38. [BACK]

16. House of the Faun emblema, putto on tiger clutching large ring-handled skyphos: Kraus and Matt 1975, color pl. 82, cat. 103. Cf. the mosaics mentioned on p. 302 n. 11. [BACK]

17. Augustan blue-glass cameo plaque: Pompeii, House by the Porta Marina. A Dionysiac landscape; left, a satyr holds a skyphos. Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, figs. 225-26; Glass of the Caesars 1987, cat. 32. Cain (1988, cat. 93) cites a decorative marble relief with Hercules' club and skyphos. [BACK]

18. Brescia, garland skyphos design: Bezzi Martini 1987, 108-9, no. 7, fig. 9, with parallels. [BACK]

19. On a phiale emblema from Berthouville, early first century A.D., a maenad sleeps off her potations by a garland-decorated deep skyphos. Baratte et al. 1989, cat. 20. [BACK]

20. On the early Augustan matrix (p. 97) with the Triumph of Omphale, Hercules has a big ring-handled skyphos; Pucci 1981, fig. 14; Zanker 1988, fig. 45a. [BACK]

21. A vegetal skyphos is in the table service on the "Coupe des Ptolemées" kantharos (Paris, BN; mid-first century B.C.); Bühler 1973, cat. 18, color pl. 1; Küthmann 1959, 41; Henig 1983, 161, fig. 131. [BACK]

22. E.g., two early imperial signets in New York (Met. Mus.); Richter 1956, nos. 568—69, pl. 64. See p. 302 n. 11 above. [BACK]

23. The service of vegetal silver depicted at the Tomb of Vestorius Priscus has a pair of ring-handled skyphoi: Bianchi Bandinelli 1970, 75; Kraus and Matt 1975, fig./cat. 227; cf. fig./cat. 226, a table service in a banquet scene. See also p. 302 n. 13 and p. 303 n. 21. [BACK]

24. Andreae in Baia 1983, s.v. the Baiae Odysseus (see p. 302 n. 11). A garlanded ring-handled skyphos seems definitely part of Roman iconography of Hercules drinking. [BACK]

25. Ori di Taranto 1984, s.v. cat. 8, the Canosa dish; Oliver and Luckner 1977, 61-62, dishes from Paternò, Tivoli; Strong 1966, 152; in BR hoard: MonPiot 5 (1899): pl. xxi; Casa del Menandro: Maiuri 1938, pls. lxii-lxiii; cf. Baratte et al. 1989, 19-20. In amber, Doganella: Bordenache Battaglia 1983, 62, no. vii.12, fig. 14. Terracotta model, a clay fish lying in it, South Italy: Antike Kunstwerke aus der Sammlung Ludwig 1982, 95-96, cat. 146. Bronze, Brescia: Bezzi Martini 1987, 33-34, no. 4, figs. 4-6. As clay lamp depression, Forcello: Bezzi Martini 1987, 70, no. 2, fig. 2. In a toilette set (with mirror and open casket?) depicted on an early imperial Spanish grave monument from Coimbra: Gamer 1989, cat. BEL 1, pl. 62c. This shape remained popular throughout the Empire; cf., for instance, Baratte et al. 1989, cat. 95, 115, 116. [BACK]

26. Ori di Taranto 1984, cat. 318 (mounted, ca. 200-150 B.C., ex Tarentum), and cat. vii. 7, cxxix. 7-8, cxxx.12; Bordenache Battaglia 1983, 188-19, no. xii.6, fig. 13 a-c; Oliver 1977, 61-62 (mounted, ex Asia Minor). Cf. Dioscurides 1.2-3; Hellenistic epigram on shell carved with sleeping Eros, Gow and Page 1968, 2: 587, lv ( Anth.Pal. 9.325); later epigram on shell carved with Aphrodite, Greek Anthology, vol. 3, no. 681 (Loeb edition). [BACK]

27. Oliver 1977, s.v. cat. 34. [BACK]

28. See now Baratte et al. 1989, 67, and cat. 9, 10, 12. Küthmann 1959, 51-52; Strong 1966, 136; Henig 1983, 142; Simon 1986, s.v. figs. 272-73. Much represented in contemporary art; cf. nn. 9-10, 15, 18 above. Laurel-decorated jugs turn up on Augustan reliefs in Spain; in the garlands of the historical reliefs at Merida: Trillmich 1986, pls. 40-42; on the altar at Tarragona, inv. 7590: Gamer 1989, cat. T 1, pl. 1 b-d. [BACK]

29. Cf. the commemorative ewers, MonPiot 5 (1899): pls. iii and iv; Küthmann 1959, 53-54; Baratte et al. 1989, 38, 61-64, 81-82. Vegetal attachments in the BR hoard, MonPiot 5 (1899): pls. vii, xvii, xviii, xix. Cf. Küthmann 1959, 77-78; Strong 1966, 137; Bühler 1973, cat. 20, 21, pls. 8, 74, 23, 80, 26; Baratte et al., cat. 10 (skyphos handle); Kais. Aug. 1988, 578, cat. 404. [BACK]

30. Kais. Aug. 1988, 569-71, cat. 397 (Künzl). [BACK]

31. Baratte et al. 1989, 67. Style: Küthmann 1959, 78-80 (n. 3). Matheson (1980, 40-41, cat. 111) discusses imitation by painted blue glass, a rare first-century luxury type. Ceramic imitations: e.g., Antiken aus rheinischem Privatbesitz 1973, s.v. cat. 112, pl. 51; cat. 130, pl. 53 (superb oak garland). Lead-glazed skyphoi are characterized by vegetal decoration; Maccabruni 1987, 169. [BACK]

32. Cf. Simon 1986, 211-16. [BACK]

33. Acanthus decoration in metal and stone: Küthmann 1959, 55f; Oliver 1977, s.v. cat. 80; Zanker 1988, 183-88; Büsing 1977, 247-57 (Ara Pacis). [BACK]

34. Other artists: Strong 1966, 15f. [BACK]

35. E.g., Byvanck van Ufford 1974, 203-4 (misunderstood by Hannestad 1986, 378 n. 11, as reidentifying Tiberius' portrait ); taken up by Jucker (1978, 94) and by Gabelmann (most recently 1984, 130 n. 534). He adduces the fact that no datable Arretine ware (early imperial molded pottery closely tied to metalwork) has such high, undercut relief. True—for it would never have come out of its mold if it had had undercut relief. Gabelmann chides Hölscher (Augustan date) for not heeding literature on silver style but himself omits Küthmann (1959, 79f). Zanker (1988, 392) backs Künzl's characterizations (1969) of Augustan silver styles and rejects Gabelmann, like Simon (1986, 245). [BACK]

36. Mythological decoration in high, undercut relief, in expressive figure-style: Künzl 1969, 321-22. Vegetal and figural decoration: Küthmann 1959, 79; vegetal: Strong 1966, 136. See p. 3 above. [BACK]

1. My deep thanks to Dr. Ernst Künzl of the RGZM-Mainz and Dr. Antje Krug of the DAI-Zentraldirektion for bringing this thesis to my attention in 1990 and helping to make it accessible to me on microfiche. [BACK]

2. My 1987 dissertation was not included in her bibliography, though Pollini's 1978 dissertation was. [BACK]

3. The structure: part 1: introduction; part 2: pp. 7-23 review each scholar who wrote on the cups and pp. 24-51 turn exclusively to a description of the categories of historical art and communications analysis; part 3: pp. 58-68 describe the figures represented, pp. 69-78 briefly treat the narrative and name figures and details, and pp. 51-90 comment on individual elements that are the main signs to convey information. [BACK]

4. The illustrations consist of the central shot of each face from the original publication (pp. 7-10) and a photo montage of each side (pp. 52-55, printing by mistake the sacrifice side of the Tiberius cup twice for the triumph scene). [BACK]

5. That is to say, in the iconographic analysis of BR II:2 on pp. 86-88 the meaningful details are those that tell us this is a sacrifice by an official figure at Rome (Lictor, Flute Player, Tripod, Temple, and Sacrificial Animal), and the explanations of these signs simply briefly define Roman practice (i.e., a flute player plays at Roman sacrifices). [BACK]