III. The Rigors of Thinking
1 For Type A, with the hand laid on the head, see S. Besques, Catalogue raisonné des figurines et reliefs, vol. 3.1 (Paris, 1972) 33, no. D 178, pl. 41b; EncPhotTEL II, pl. 186 A; E. Paul, Antike Welt in Ton (Leipzig, 1959) no. 202, pl. 55. For Type B, with the chin propped up, see F. Winter, Die Typen der figürlichen Terrakotten (Berlin, 1903) 2:258, 2; Besques, 33, no. D 179 d.e (wearing a petasos), pl. 40; J. Sieveking, Die Terracotten der Sammlung Loeb (Munich, 1916) 2: pl. 79; G. Schneider-Herrmann, Eine niederländische Studiensammlung antiker Kunst (Leiden, 1975) 13, no. 16 (wearing a kausia). Type B is often wearing either the petasos or the kausia, which transforms the contemplative gesture into a motif of relaxation. This may suggest how foreign the original motif must at first have seemed. [BACK]
2 On what follows see now the important study of Caizzi (1993). [BACK]
3 For the portrait of Zeno see Schefold 1943, 108; Richter II, 186ff., figs. 1084-1105; V. Kockel, BdA 70 (1985) 71f., no. 8; Thielemann-Wrede 1989, 110f.; and, most recently, with full bibliography, von den Hoff 1994, 89ff. For the history of the copies see H. J. Kruse, AA, 1966, 386ff. The Augustan bust, from a herm, in Naples, inv. 6128, fig. 53 (Richter II, 188, figs. 1084f.), represents the most reliable copy, apart from the drapery. This is also the view of Thielemann-Wrede, while Kruse disagrees. This is especially true of the particular form of the beard, with its limp strands, which most of the copyists have altered to give the appearance of carefully curled locks. [BACK]
4 On the honorific decree see most recently C. Habicht, in Bathron, Festschrift H. Drerup (Saarbrücken, 1988) 173-75; Habicht 1988, 15f. Of earlier studies see especially U. von Wilamowitz-Möllendorf, "Antigonos von Karystos," Philologische Untersuchungen 4 (Berlin, 1881) 232, 340-44. On Zeno see RE 19 (1972) 83-121, s.v. Zenon 2 (K. von Fritz); Long 1986, 109ff. [BACK]
5 Cf. Caizzi 1993, 311ff., who I believe stresses too much the Socratic-Cynic element of poverty in Zeno's image. [BACK]
6 Cf. the statuette in the Glyptothek in Munich that has been associated with the portrait of Zeno by Thielemann-Wrede 1989, 147ff., pls. 24-25. This could indeed derive from a portrait of a Stoic, but probably not Zeno, because the draping of the mantle is different. [BACK]
7 L. Stroux, "Vergleich und Metapher in der Lehre des Zenon von Kition" (Diss., Munich, 1965); K. H. Rolke, Die bildhaften Vergleiche in den Fragmenten der Stoiker Zenon bis Panaitios (Hildesheim, 1975). [BACK]
8 On the statue of Chrysippus see Richter II, 190ff., figs. 1111ff., and, most recently, with earlier bibliography, von den Hoff 1994, 96ff. As for the copies, the herm bust in Naples (fig. 56; Richter II, figs. 1115-17) gives the best idea of the plastic forms of the head, while for pose and expression the bust in London (fig. 55; Richter, figs. 1118-20) is best. The statuette in the Palazzo Conservatori Museo Nuovo in Rome (Richter, fig. 1142) is evidently a variant, in which Chrysippus has been positioned upright on a throne, modeled on the statue of Epicurus. The statue in Paris is, happily, confirmed in this respect by a statuette recently found in Cyrene: L. Bacchielli, "Arato o Crisippo, QAL 10 (1979) 27f. On the identification of Chrysippus: the body type is identified on the basis of an inscribed headless bust in Athens. Bacchielli has reopened the discussion of the identification of the head type, but I believe that the careful evaluation of all the arguments by von den Hoff (101ff.) has settled the question in favor of Chrysippus, rather than Aratus. The most recent contribution is that of Fittschen (1992a, 21ff.), who rightly insists that the association of the securely identified statue and the head type cannot be proven. I would nevertheless adhere to this association, even though my attempts to achieve a perfect grafting through the use of casts have persuaded me that this is not possible. The identification of the head type still seems likely based on the well-known numismatic evidence, since the inscribed bust in Athens preserves enough of the neck to prove that we cannot assume a long beard of the type worn by Aratus on the coins that are supposed to depict him. In addition, the movement of the neck seems to match that of the preserved busts. Von den Hoff (99, no. 14) has been able to adduce a previously overlooked double herm, Athens, NM 537 (Richter, fig. 1145), which connects the Chrysippus type with that of Zeno. Finally, the large number of copies favors Chrysippus rather than Aratus, since Juvenal (2.4-5) explicitly mentions how numerous Chrysippus' portraits were. On all three busts, the rendering of the mantle is different and cursorily executed and therefore cannot be used to posit another statue independent of this one. It is likelier that these are simplified versions, as is also the case with the copies of other portrait types.
In the existing reconstructions, the motion of the head thrusting forward, which is attested in several of the copies, especially the busts in London (Richter, figs. 1118-20), the head in Copenhagen, National Museum (Richter, figs. 1136-38), and the coin from Soloi (Richter, fig. 1147), has been too little stressed, or not at all. I have attempted a new reconstruction, in the form of a photo montage which has now been realized with plaster casts by S. Bertolin: fig. 54a-b. Cf. Sokrates 1989, 75; Fittschen 1992a. In this experiment, the chest area of the London bust (fig. 56) could be joined almost seamlessly to the cast of the statue in Paris, though the back of the bust's head overlaps the garment folds at the nape of the neck on the statue. The discrepancy is best explained by positing that the copyist of the statue evened out both the position of the head and the fall of the drapery. As the busts demonstrate, the folds at the back of the original statue were clearly pushed back by the upward thrust of the head. These photos of the new reconstruction should be understood simply as an aid in giving a reasonable optical impression of the pose of the entire figure. In view of the numerous disparities among the individual copies of a single portrait type, I do not believe that an "implantation" which is less than perfect can be used as an argument against the compatibility of head and body types. [BACK]
9 See P. H. von Blanckenhagen. "Der ergänzende Betrachter," in Wandlungen: Studien zur antiken und neueren Kunst, Festschrift E. Homann-Wedeking (Waldsassen, 1975) 193-201. [BACK]
10 On the literary sources see Richter II, 190. R. E. Wycherley, The Athenian Agora, vol. 3, Literary and Epigraphical Sources (Princeton, 1957) 143, no. 458, considers it possible that the statue in the Gymnasium of Ptolemy is identical with that in the Kerameikos. See, most recently, von den Hoff 1994, 109ff. [BACK]
11 It is just possible, however, that the entire right hand has been subsequently restored. This is the view of H.-U. Cain, to whom I am grateful for his detailed observations of the original, and was already suspected by Bacchielli. The restorer would then have been inspired, through a learned adviser, by such literary accounts as Cic. Fin. 1.39, Pliny HN 34.88, and Sid. Apoll. Epist. 9.9.14. Only the dismantling of the statue and examination of the marble could provide a definitive answer. The only certainty is that the hand was held with palm up. Specific interpretations based on the positioning of the fingers must also, then, remain hypothetical. But in this context it can hardly mean anything other than "persuasion through argumentation" (so Scheibler, in Sokrates 1989, 75; cf. Thielemann-Wrede 1989, 127ff.) or "a speaker gesticulating in a lecture or conversation" (von den Hoff 1994, 114). Cf. Sittl 1890, 252-62; Fittschen 1988, 26 n. 157 (with a later dating); Thielemann-Wrede, 125ff.; von den Hoff, 113f. [BACK]
12 See Lippold 1912, 57; Schefold 1943, 121, 210; Richter II, 175, figs. 1018f.; Helbig 4 II, no. 2016 (von Heintze); Schefold 1980, 160ff.; Schefold 1982, 85; von den Hoff 1994, 114, 162. [BACK]
13 On the so-called Kleanthes see Lippold 1912, 86 n. 3; Schefold 1943, 146, no. 2; Richter II, 189ff.; figs. 1106ff.; Schefold 1980, 161; Thielemann-Wrede 1989, 136; von den Hoff 1994, 165. The type is preserved in only five statuettes, but since they are of different sizes, it may be only an accident that no full-size copy survives. There are other full-size philosopher statues of which many copies as statuettes are preserved. I take the bronze statuette in London to be the most faithful copy. This is the only one, for example, that preserves the folds of the garment falling over the left hip, a motif that is attested with certainty, for other, contemporary seated statues, e.g., Hermarchus (fig. 64) and Poseidippus (fig. 75). In these, of course, the hem lies between the legs, whereas here it has been pushed to the side by an involuntary movement of the left hand. The deviations of the other statuettes in this respect could derive from a simplified variant of the original. The different chairs and pillows of these statuettes are also not reliable copies of the original, since they vary so. The drapery style of the copy in the Museo Baracco looks decidedly Late Hellenistic, and this is the only copy that exaggerates the characteristics of old age. The bronze statuette can only have sat on a flat seat, perhaps a stone bench, as in the case of the philosopher in the Palazzo Spada (fig. 57) or Chrysippus. On the dating see C. Reinsberg, Studien zur hellenistischen Toreutik (Hildesheim. 1980) 135. The massive quality is comparable to that of the statue of Poseidippus (fig. 75). [BACK]
14 On the statuette of Antisthenes see L. Curtius, RM 59 (1944) 38ff.; Schefold 1943, 206; Richter II, 181, fig. 1056; V. Kockel, AA, 1986, 486, fig. 26; N. Himmelmann, in Phyromachos-Probleme, ed. B. Andreae (Mainz, 1990) 16, pls. 44-47, who rejects an association with the portrait type. Cf. pp. 174ff. [BACK]
15 On Eudoxus see A. Hekler, Die Sammlung antiker Skulpturen, Museum der bildenden Künste in Budapest (Budapest, 1929) 60f.; Schefold 1943, 157, no. 4; Richter II, 244, fig. 1679; Richter-Smith 1984, 120. [BACK]
16 On beards and shaving see RE 3 (1899) 30ff., s.v. Bart (Mau); Hahn 1989, 32ff.; Fittschen 1988, 25. [BACK]
17 This, at least, is how he appears on the one ancient portrait that identifies him by inscription, on a Roman mosaic in Sparta, which I believe could well reflect a Classical original (probably fourth century rather than fifth): Richter-Smith 1984, 81, fig. 46. Alcibiades is also shown beardless on one of the fragmentary tondi from Aphrodisias (cf. pp. 313ff.). [BACK]
18 Good examples would include the Etruscan sarcophagi and urns (R. Herbig, Die jüngeretruskischen Steinsarkophage, ASR 7 [Berlin, 1952]), East Greek grave stelai (Pfuhl-Möbius I-II), and Cypriot sculpture (J. B. Connelly, Votive Sculpture of Hellenistic Cyprus [Nicosia, 1988]). [BACK]
19 CAF III, 333ff.; RE 20.1 (1941) 380, s.v. Phoinikides (A. Körte). [BACK]
20 Cf. Hahn 1989, 36. [BACK]
21 It is unclear whether Alciphron means that the Stoic's hair was too long or merely unkempt. I gratefully acknowledge the kind advice of Mathias Gelzer in the interpretation of this and other texts. [BACK]
22 The irregular pattern of the beard is especially clear on the copies in London, British Museum 1836 (Richter II, figs. 1139-41) and in the Vatican (fig. 60; Richter, figs. 1121-22). Von den Hoff (1994, 112f.) also recognizes this feature but interprets it simply as a sign of the neglect of external appearances. [BACK]
23 The quote is from SPh II 139, 14ff. Cf. Laubscher 1982. [BACK]
24 On the Epicureans see Long 1986, 14ff.; Long-Sedley 1987, 25-157; RAC 5 (1962) 681-819, s.v. Epikur (W. Schmid); and the forthcoming article of W. Erler, in W. Uberweg's Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. 4, ed. H. Flashar (Basel and Stuttgart, 1993). More specialized studies include M. L. Clarke. ''The Garden of Epicurus," Phoenix 27 (1973) 86f.; D. Clay, "Individual and Community in the First Generation of the Epicurean School," in Studi Gigante (Naples, 1983) 255-79. [BACK]
25 On the statues of the Epicureans see Schefold 1943, 118; Richter II, 194ff., figs. 1149ff.; Richter-Smith 1984, 116. For the most complete lists of copies, with critical analysis, see von den Hoff 1994, 63ff. His detailed stylistic analysis confirms the traditional dating based on the date of death. Fittschen's recent reconstructions in Göttingen, with the help of casts, have provided a more reliable basis for assessing the overall effect of the portrait statues of Epicurus and Metrodorus: see Fittschen 1992a. A careful study of the copies was earlier undertaken in Kruse-Berdoldt 1975. [BACK]
26 See A. Long, "Pleasure and Social Utility—The Virtues of Being Epicurean," Fondation Hardt, Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique 32 (1985) 283-316. [BACK]
27 Wrede (1982, 235-45) has persuasively established the order of importance and associated it with the notions of hierarchy and orthodoxy in the Kepos. [BACK]
28 On the throne of Epicurus see Kruse-Berdoldt (1975, 150f.), who likens it to the honorary seats in the theatre; Wrede (1982), who compares it to the thrones of the gods; and B. Frischer ( The Sculpted Word [Berkeley, 1982] 199ff.), who sees a play on the fatherly role and the iconography of Herakles and Asklepios. On the theatre seats see G. M. A. Richter, The Furniture of the Greeks, Etruscans, and Romans (London, 1966) figs. 138ff., 146ff., 490, 499ff.; M. Maass, Die Prohedrie des Dionysostheaters in Athen (Munich, 1972) 60ff.; J. Travlos, Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens (New York, 1972) 544ff. The occasional depiction of men on this kind of honorary chair, on East Greek grave reliefs (e.g., Pfuhl-Möbius I, 222, no. 854, pl. 125; 275, no. 1109, pl. 167), is probably also more a token of public honors than of intellectual accomplishments. [BACK]
29 Epicurus' facial features are rendered with the finest nuances in the double herm in the Capitoline Museum, fig. 66 (Richter II, fig. 1153) and in the fragment in Copenhagen (Richter, figs. 1205-6). The turn of the head, however, could be most reliably rendered in a bust in the Capitoline (Richter, figs. 1151-52). My views here differ from those of Kruse-Berdoldt (1975). Cf. now the excellent new reconstruction of the statue by Fittschen (1992a, 15ff.), which is based upon the head of the Capitoline bust (fig. 62).
On the significance of the raised eyebrows see Giuliani 1986, 140ff. The suggestion of B. Schmaltz ( MarbWPr, 1985) that the portraits of Epicurus divide into two traditions that derive from different originals cannot be right. Cf. the counterarguments of von den Hoff (1994, 70f.). A comparison with Herakles is not, in my view, supported by the brow of the Herakles Farnese, since there it expresses something different, connoting physical exertion. Cf. Wrede 1982, 243. [BACK]
30 The Hadrianic bust in the Capitoline (Richter II, figs. 1233-35; cf. Kruse-Bertoldt 1975, 69f.), though the carving is unfortunately too hard and angular, provides the best idea of the original statue of Metrodorus (fig. 67). The inclination of the head seems to be faithfully rendered in a bust in Athens (Richter, figs. 1255-57). Schmaltz (supra n. 29) 37, pl. 14, rightly compares the head with an Attic grave stele of the fourth century, although the comparison applies only to the iconographical type and not to the style, which is closely related to that of Epicurus' portrait. This Classical formula, which seems so inappropriate to the early fourth century, also explains attempts to associate the portrait with the classicizing mode of the Late Hellenistic period. Cf. the counterarguments of von den Hoff (1994, 64f.). [BACK]
31 The portrait of Hermarchus is best represented by a Hadrianic bust in Budapest (Richter II, figs. 1306-9) and a small inscribed herm from the Villa dei Papiri, in Naples, fig. 68 (Richter, figs. 1291-93). For the full statue type cf. the statuette in Florence (Richter, figs. 1319-20).
A stylistically earlier type, closely related iconographically, has been most recently discussed by B. Freyer-Schauenburg, RM 96 (1989) 313ff., though I do not believe her identification as Democritus can be defended. Gauer (1968, 168f.) had taken it to be an earlier portrait of Hermarchus himself. But given the astonishing iconographical similarity to the genuine portrait of Hermarchus, one could also consider the possibility that it represents another of the early Epicureans. [BACK]
32 Even a slight raising or stretching of the lower arm would have to result in a tension in the musculature of the shoulder. The right elbow probably rested on the wrist of the left hand, as indicated by damage at this spot on the statue in Athens. The recently discovered copies from Dion (see p. 230) also imply this relaxed position of the arm and, in any event, invalidate the suggested reconstruction of Frischer (1982, 175, fig. 6) and the interpretation that he bases upon it. [BACK]
33 M. Guarducci, RendPontAcc 47 (1974-75) 177, fig. 13. [BACK]
34 On the process of reading see Birt 1907; Blanck 1992, 72. [BACK]
35 On the cult of the Epicureans see RAC 5 (1962) 746, s.v. Epikur (W. Schmid); Wrede 1982, 237, with further references. [BACK]
36 See I. Gallo, ''Commedia e filosofia in età ellenistica: Batone," Vichiana n.s. 5 (1976) 206-42, esp. 219. [BACK]
37 For the statuette in New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, see Schefold 1943, 124, no. 4; 211; Richter II, 199, fig. 1220; M. True, in The Gods Delight, ed. A. Kozloff and D. G. Mitten, exh. cat., Cleveland Museum of Art (Cleveland, 1988) 154, no. 26; and, most recently, the detailed analysis of von den Hoff 1994, 171ff. He dates the work correctly in the Late Hellenistic period but traces the philosopher to a genre figure of the years around 200 B.C. [BACK]
38 P. W. Lehmann, Roman Wall Paintings from Boscoreale in the Metropolitan Museum of Art (Cambridge, Mass., 1953) 34ff., fig. 27; Schefold 1943, 132f. [BACK]
39 P. C. Bol, Die Skulpturen des Schiffsfundes von Antikythera (Berlin, 1972) 24ff., pls. 10-11; R. Lullies, Griechische Plastik 4 (Munich, 1979) 129, pls. 258-59. [BACK]
40 Bronze statuette: Paris, Bibl. Nationale 853; Schefold 1982, 85; L. Beschi, I bronzetti romani di Montorio Veronese, Istituto Veneto, Memorie 33.2 (1962) 13ff., the prototype convincingly dated to the second half of the third century; Richter I, 132, figs. 711-12; Schefold 1980, 162; most recently treated in detail by von den Hoff (1994, 161ff.), who identifies the same type on the philosopher mosaic in the Villa Albani (Richter, fig. 319). I am indebted to R. von den Hoff for important observations in this context. Silver statuette: Paris, Bibl. Nationale; G. M. A. Richter, Greek Portraits, vol. 4, Coll. Latomus 54 (Brussels, 1962) 41, pls. 23-24, figs. 56-57; Schefold 1980, 162. [BACK]
41 Paris, Louvre MA 79; Richter I, 144, fig. 784. [BACK]
42 Johansen 1992, 142f., no. 58. I believe the upper body, bent forward, and the position of the arms make it clear that the statue represents a reader. [BACK]
43 The statue is in Rome, Capitoline Museum 137; Richter II, 185, figs. 1071, 1074; Schefold 1943, 122; Helbig 4 II, no. 1431; Laubscher 1982, 44 with n. 162, 62; von den Hoff 1994, 118ff., confirming the traditional dating.
On the appearance of the Cynics see RE 12 (1923) 4ff., s.v. Kynismus (Helm); P. R. Dudley, A History of Cynicism (London, 1937); M. Billerbek, Der Kyniker Demetrios (Frankfurt, 1979). That the figure was barefoot is certain, for enough of the lower leg is preserved to say that there were no sandals. On the tribon see RE 6, 2d ser. (1937) 2415ff., s.v. Tribon (Schuppe). [BACK]
44 On the relation of the Cynics to society see G. Bodei Giglioni, "Alessandro e i Cinici," in Studi ellenistici, ed. B. Virgilio (Pisa, 1984): 51-73. Since the importance of the Cynics was already in decline in the third century, the statue could be a retrospective honor for one of the early Cynics set up, for example, by the Stoics. The latter felt indebted to the founders of Cynic teaching for some aspects of their own philosophy. The statue would in that case have been a kind of didactic reminiscence. The main difficulty with this interpretation is the lack of retrospective or hagiographic elements of the kind we shall encounter in the statuettes of Diogenes and other retrospective portraits. [BACK]
45 On the "Cynic" in Paris, Louvre 544, see ABr 619-20; Hekler 1912, pl. 103; K. Fittschen, AA, 1991, 261, figs. 6, 8. The copy belongs to the later second century A.C. Certain details, such as the "moustache" and the locks of the beard might lead one to suspect that this could be an image of a contemporary individual that has merely been stylized with traits of the philosopher (cf. pp. 235ff.). On the other hand, the plastic structure of the head and especially the arrangement of the hair on the crown of the head would argue against this interpretation. [BACK]
46 See Bodei Giglioni (supra n. 44). [BACK]
47 Fittschen 1992b, pl. 17. [BACK]
48 For the Late Hellenistic copies of Menander see Richter II, figs. 1533-35, 1536-38, 1592-95. [BACK]
49 Richter II, figs. 1524, 1526, 1527; cf. Studniczka 1918 = Fittschen 1988, 207ff., pl. 105. For a similar kind of anecdotal representation see Schefold 1980, 166. [BACK]
50 Fundamental for what follows is the investigation of Fittschen (1992b), which has put the scholarship on this monument on a new and firmer footing. Cf. Schefold 1943, 110; Richter II, 238, figs. 1647-50. On Poseidippus see RE 22.1 (1953) 426ff., s.v. Poseidippos (W. Peek). [BACK]
51 E. M. Rankin, The Role of the Mageiroi in the Life of the Ancient Greeks (Chicago, 1907) 25. [BACK]
52 H. Kyrieleis, Die Bildnisse der Ptolemäer (Berlin, 1975). One should also note in this connection the portraits on Etruscan sarcophagi and urns, which derive from Greek prototypes. Fittschen (1992b) also rightly associates the ample forms of the portrait in Copenhagen, which he connects with the statue of the pseudo-Menander, with the ideal of tryphe . [BACK]
53 The Menander relief, formerly in the Stroganoff Collection, is now in the Art Museum, Princeton University. See M. Bieber, in Festschrift A. Rumpf (Cologne, 1952) 14-17. On the funerary altar of the Roman poet see fig. 113. [BACK]
54 H. Bartels, Olympia-Bericht (Berlin, 1967), 8 : 251ff., pl. 120; N. Himmelmann, Alexandria und der Realismus in der griechischen Kunst (Tübingen, 1983) 49f., pl. 30. The identification as a poet was already proposed by Bartels on the basis of the figure's beardlessness and the undergarment. [BACK]
55 R. Wendorf, The Elements of Life: Biography and Portrait Painting in Stuart and Georgian England (Oxford, 1990) 251f., fig. 69. Cf. W. Busch, Das sentimentale Bild (Munich, 1993) 417, fig. 116. On the portraits of Dr. Johnson by Reynolds, five in all, see Boswell's Life of Johnson, ed. G. Birbeck Hall (Oxford, 1934) 4 : 448ff. [BACK]
56 Fittschen 1992b. [BACK]
57 For the statuette of Moschion, Naples, Museo Nazionale 6238, see Richter II, 242, figs. 1666-67; Richter-Smith 1984, 169, fig. 130; Fittschen 1991, 262 n. 70, pls. 56, 2; 62, 4. [BACK]
58 Cf. the diptych from the cathedral treasury at Monza : Schefold 1943, 184; W. F. Volbach, Elfenbeinarbeiten der Spätantike und des frühen Mittelalters 3 (Mainz, 1976) 57, no. 68, pl. 39. [BACK]
59 For the grave stele of Hermon see E. Walter-Karydi and V. von Graeve, "Der Naiskos des Hermon: Ein spätklassisches Grabgemälde," in Kanon, Festschrift E. Berger, AntK-BH 15 (Basel, 1988) 331ff., pls. 93-95. [BACK]
60 One may also mention in this context the youthful poet Demetrios on the Pronomos Vase in Naples with a depiction of a satyr play. He sits nude on a handsome bench and is characterized by book rolls and a lyre. Buschor rightly interpreted his relaxed pose and his wide-eyed, excited facial expression with open mouth as one of poetic inspiration. In any case, we should not see him as part of the theatrical context. He is, rather, depicted as a poet, and as a particularly handsome young man (thus the nudity) with luxurious locks and in the midst of a festive and extravagant gathering. See Buschor's comments in A. Furtwängler and K. Reichhold, Griechische Vasenmalerei, vol. 3 (Munich, 1932) text to pls. 143-45. [BACK]
61 On the so-called Vergil (or Ennius) see V. Poulsen I, 44ff., nos. 5, 6; Giuliani 1986, 163ff.; K. Fittschen, AA, 1991, 255ff. Cf. two additional supposed portraits of contemporary Hellenistic poets, which may substantiate what we have said of the so-called Vergil: a beardless portrait belonging to a double herm in Naples (Guida Ruesch no. 1135; H. von Heintze, RM 67 [1961] 80ff., pls. 20, 2; 21, 2; 23; Fittschen 1988, pls. 150f.); and a herm with a likely portrait of an elderly Hellenistic poet in Rome, Palazzo dei Conservatori (Helbig 4 II, no. 1466; ABr 887-88; H. von Heintze, RM 67 [1960] 103ff., pls. 31, 33; Fittschen-Zanker II [forthcoming]). Yet another Greek poet of the second century B.C. may be identified in the ivy-wreathed head with fleshy face and dramatic turn of the head in London, BM 1852; R. P. Hinks, Greek and Roman Portrait Sculpture (London, 1935) 15, fig. 16a. [BACK]